Railway Bridge Design Assessment - Design of Plate Girders-1

Design of Plate Girders
Dr Khosru Rahman
Design of Plate Girders
Learning Objectives
To understand the purpose of plate girders and the different components and their function
To understand how plate girder stiffness is achieved
To have a basic knowledge of the important points in designing plate girders according to the design codes
Learning Outcomes
The student will be able to design and select plate girder options using the methodology as defined in the Eurocodes/BS5400
Be able to perform simple loading calculations to determine deflections, bending moments and stresses.
1.0 Design of Plate Girders
1.1 General Design Considerations
The design of structural steelwork in bridges covers

- Rolled sections (universal beams)
- Plate girders – unstiffened or with transverse web stiffeners)
Plate girders are fabricated by welding flanges to a web plate as shown in

Figure 1.1. The flanges are generally significantly thicker than the web
because of the lower buckling capability of one edge unsupported plates as
described above.
Occasionally the unsupported edges of the flange are themselves stiffened

by an outstand as illustrated in the figure but this is not often done in bridge
design.
Figure 1.1 Typical form of a plate girder showing possible
stiffener arrangements for a transversely stiffened
If the girder is to be used compositely with a concrete deck, the top flange girder.
will generally be narrower and will carry shear connectors for composite
action with the concrete slab. In such a case the width of the flange has to be
sufficient for the construction condition carrying the wet concrete before
composite action is achieved.
Cross girders may be welded or bolted between adjacent girders, for example for a rail bridge where they support the deck
that carries the track. In all cases the main girders need to be appropriately designed to resist lateral torsional buckling. In
the former case this can only occur during construction as the concrete deck, once acting compositely, will provide full
restraint to the concrete top flange. In such a case restraint is normally proved by cross bracing at appropriate intervals
bolted to outstands welded to the girders. Where the girders are connected by cross beams near the bottom of the main
girders, U-frame action whereby the cross beams provide a moment restraint stiffness can be used to prevent torsional
buckling of the girders.
The design of lateral torsional buckling restraint is illustrated in Figure 1.2. Plan bracing will also be needed between
adjacent girders. If adjacent spans are continuous rather than simply supported, cross bracing may be needed near the
supports to prevent lateral torsional buckling of the bottom flange.
Figure 1.2 Lateral torsional buckling restraint provided

by cross bracing and U-frame action.
Lateral torsional buckling occurs because the low torsional and transverse stiffness of the girder, compared to the main
vertical stiffness, allow failure by sideways and twisting deformation of the girder even when loaded vertically. The section
will be particularly prone to this form of failure if the vertical loading is applied to the compression flange providing an
increasing eccentricity of load as the girder deflects sideways. It is prevented through the measures discussed above by
preventing sideways movement of the compression flange either directly through bracing or indirectly through the U-frame
action.
Because they can be fabricated from plates of any width and thickness, plate girders can be used for much longer spans
than using beams from hot rolled sections with their restricted availability. Indeed spans of over 200m are possible, often
with haunches provided near continuous supports to increase moment capacity. Fabrication can be particularly effective
where stiffening is kept to a minimum and welding carried out automatically.
Girders are generally relatively deep to provide the moment resistance and webs therefore generally need only to be thin
to resist the applied shear. This leads to relatively thin web design. In contrast there is little benefit in having thin flanges so
these are designed to reduce buckling problems. This tends to lead to webs which require stiffening, at least over the
supports to prevent crippling caused by the high point loads and to allow the shear in the web to be transferred as
compression down the bearing stiffeners into the support. Transverse stiffeners are also often provided for longer spans to
enhance the buckling capacity of the web, principally by increasing its shear capability. In a minority of cases longitudinal
web stiffeners are also provided to increase the web buckling capacity by reducing the slenderness of the panels within the
depth of the girder as shown in Figure 1.3.
Figure 1.3 Plate girder stiffened by longitudinal and transverse

stiffeners.
However, this should be considered carefully as it significantly increases fabrication complexity both by preventing the use
of automatic welding and also by introducing a significant number of complex cutting and welding operations at the
connection between transverse and longitudinal stiffeners. It is worth noting that intermediate transverse stiffeners are
often curtailed short of the tension flange in order to provide better fatigue resistance. This is shown in Figure 1.4. Such
curtailment does not affect the buckling enhancement of the stiffening as the latter still provides out-of-plane bending
support to the web plate.
Figure 1.4 Curtailment of transverse web stiffeners to

improve fatigue response.
In longer span girders it is possible to vary the cross section in the longitudinal direction to match more closely the
variation of moment and / shear along the span. Flange thickness can be varied with full strength butt welding providing a
smooth external flange surface. Flange width can also be varied. The possibility of a haunched girder has already been
mentioned. Rather than vary the web thickness, it is more normal to vary transverse stiffener spacing or introduce a
longitudinal stiffener over part of the span, for example in the compression region over a continuous support. With
modern fabrication it is also possible to use different yield strength steels for different sections along the bridge to achieve
a variation in capability. In all cases the benefit of better matching the resistance of the structure to the applied loading
needs to be weighed against any increased fabrication complexity and hence cost that might ensue.
Where holes are required in the girder web to accommodate services, it is necessary to provide some form of stiffening
around the openings. A rule of thumb design approach is to replace the material removed from the depth by the area of
the stiffeners but the designer must ensure that the remaining web section is capable of carrying the applied shear. Figure
1.5 illustrates such openings.
Figure 1.5 Plate girder with openings in the web.

It is possible to define a range of practical dimensional proportions that are typical of bridge construction. Plate girders
with spans up to around a 1000 metres have been used as suspension structures but one notorious example, the Tacoma
Narrows bridge with a span of 853 metres, failed disastrously because of its flexibility to wind excitation in 1940. Box
girders are now generally accepted as more appropriate for the longer spans because of their inherent torsional stiffness.
More modest plate girder suspended spans of up to 400 metres are not unusual. Cable stayed composite plate girder
bridges have been constructed with spans up to about 500 metres. Composite plate girders without additional support are
used for many bridge structures over a range of more modest spans as a competitor to prestressed concrete structures.
Overall girder depths range between one tenth to one twentieth of the span with the larger vales used for longer
spans. Flange widths will tend to be between a third and a fifth of the girder depth. As has been noted previously
flange plates are usually designed to be stocky to preclude loss of strength by buckling. They would normally be
designed as at least semi-compact, a definition for slenderness used in Eurocode 3 although not in BS5400 Part
3, which restricts section classifications to compact and non-compact. In terms of the Eurocode this means
applying a limit of to the flange outstand width where is the flange thickness and e is .
This can be compared with a limit of for a compact section in BS5400 Part 3 and a limit for any flange
outstand of in the latter.
The terms compact and semi-compact and non - compact define the moment that a girder can carry prior to buckling and
also its ability to redistribute moment along the span prior to ultimate collapse.
In modern codes there are four classes of section.
• Class 1 sections, generally called compact are able to reach their plastic moment Mp value and to attain sufficient
rotation prior to buckling to allow redistribution of moments and hence the use of plastic collapse analysis.
• Class 2 sections, compact, are also able to reach the Mp value but have limited rotational capacity.
• Class 3 sections, semi-compact, are able to reach their first yield moment My (a moment which at least achieves
My the extreme fibre of the girder) prior to buckling.
• Class 4 sections, slender girders (the equivalent of non-compact in BS5400) will not reach My and require design
rules which either define a limit stress lower than the yield stress or which define a reduced effective section either
through an effective width concept or by using an artificial reduced thickness. Figure 1.6 illustrate the response of
girders with the four classes of cross section.
Figure 1.6 Moment rotation behaviour of girders

with different classes of cross section.
In all cases both the webs and flanges of a girder have to adhere to the individual classification limits for a girder to fall
within a particular class.
The web thickness cannot be simply defined in terms of a standard range. Because of the range of stiffening options a web
might have a depth to thickness ratio ranging from between 80 and 500. Longitudinal stiffening can be considered for webs
with slenderness ratios larger than about 200.
1.1 Plate Girder Design Rules
In all following sections where strength is defined, the design must incorporate appropriate safety factors. With the partial
safety factor format used in modern limit state design codes these are applied both to the load and resistance side of the
equation. Reference should be made to the appropriate code to establish appropriate values and use. The equations given
below are also only a guide and should not be used out of the context of the code. The descriptions below are intended to
outline the key factors in the design process but should not be used in isolation from the full code requirements.
A simple and often effective design basis for a girder is to design the flange to carry all the moment and the web to carry all
the shear. Even where a more complex basis is used for the final design, this can be a very effective method for initial
sizing. This approach recognises the inherent capabilities of the two elements. This approach is permitted by Eurocode 3
Part 1.1. The required area of the flange can be readily obtained for a given cross section by dividing the moment by the
distance between the flange centre lines (allowing of course for appropriate safety factors). As this involves knowing the
flange thickness, a minor iteration might be required. The design of the web will depend on its slenderness, although if
only transversely stiffened the shear stress can be assumed to be uniform down the depth.
1.1 Plate Girder Design Rules
In Eurocode 3 Part 1.1, web buckling is only considered where the web slenderness, d/tw exceeds 69e. Prior to this value
the full yield stress may be used. Beyond this value Eurocode 3 Part 1.1 allows two design methods for plate girder design.
These are the simple post-critical method and the tension field approach. The latter has already been mentioned in the
context of panels in shear earlier in this work. For the latter design method to be used within Eurocode 3 Part 1.1
transverse stiffeners must be present with spacing between the web depth and three times the web depth. BS5400 places
no such restriction on the equivalent design approach. Because the tension field approach allows for the full post-critical
behaviour of the girder higher collapse loads are provided than by the simple post-critical method.
1.2 Simple post-critical method within Eurocode Part 1.1
In this approach the shear buckling resistance (Vba.Rd in Eurocode 3) can

be determined simply from three equations which are applicable
depending on the slenderness of the web. These equations provide a
design shear stress (tba) which can be multiplied by the web area to
provide the shear strength.
Figure 1.7 shows the design curve for tba as a function of .
Equations are provided in the code which, for stiffener spacings of

greater than the web depth, correspond to that given previously for
critical shear buckling.
Equations for zones AB, BC and CD are given in the code which are Figure 1.7 Simple post-critical design curve for shear buckling
according to Eurocode 3 Part 1.1.
termed stocky or thick, intermediate and slender or thin respectively.
1.3 Tension field method within Eurocode 3 Part 1.1
While tension field behaviour has been described in the context of an individual shear panel the behaviour of a girder web
exhibits additional features. The diagonal tension field band that occurs after the critical buckling stress is reached anchors
off top and bottom flanges and also off the transverse stiffeners on either side of the web panel being considered. The
degree of anchorage is dependent on the transverse stiffness of the flanges as well as the adequacy of the stiffener design.
A third an additional component of resistance comes from the bending deformation of the flange (out-of-plane) which
must occur for the girder to fail in shear. This third component is normally evaluated by assuming a plastic collapse
mechanism to occur in the flanges for an effective section of the flange plus an effective depth of web.
The equation representing the capacity of the web in shear in the code is: (1.1)
where tbb is the shear strength of the panel and the second term provides the tension field contribution.
If the web is stocky, , the web will reach shear yield. If of higher slenderness the web will reach its elastic buckling
stress according to equations which are reproduced in Figure 1.8.
It can be seen that Figures 1.8 and 1.7 are similar in form but the former provides lower strengths for thin webs because it
makes no allowance for post-critical reserve which in this method is evaluated as a separate tension field action.
Figure 1.8 Strength corresponding to web buckling not

allowing for tension field.
Calculation of the tension field effect is relatively complex. The angle of the tension field band f is unknown and in principle
could be established by an iterative procedure which maximises the resistance. However, studies have shown that if a value
of is used where q is the angle of the web panel diagonal where d is the web panel depth and a is the
transverse stiffener spacing) a reasonable and conservative value is obtained for the tension field strength contribution.
sbb is the level of tension field stress in the tension band which is the material yield stress reduced to allow for the shear
stress present tbb. Using the Mises yield criterion produces:
(1.2)
where fy is the yield strength of the web material and bb is the above elastic critical buckling stress.
Finally the width g of the tension field band is evaluated by a consideration of the flange plastic mechanism. It is a function
of the positioning of the flange hinges which is itself dependent on the plastic moment of resistance of the flange reduced
to allow for coexistent axial force in each flange due to the bending moment in the girder. The full equation is to be found
in the code.
1.4 Interaction between shear and bending in Eurocode 3 Part 1.1
The presence of bending stresses in the girder web will

reduce its shear carrying capacity. These influence both
elastic buckling capacity and the extent of the tension field as
well as the flange plastic resistance as mentioned above. For
the simple post-critical method, interaction between moment
and shear can be considered as limited as shown in Figure
1.9.
For moments less than the moment resistance of the flanges

alone (the simple design basis mentioned at the start of this
section), there is no need to allow for interaction and the full
shear resistance calculated from the simple post-critical
method can be used. If flanges are not semi-compact there
would be a need to define an effective width to allow for
buckling prior to the calculation of Mf which is the moment Figure 1.9 Interaction between bending moment and shear force
for the simple post-critical method of Eurocode 3 Part 1.1.
provided by the two flanges alone.
Using the simplified approach of ignoring the web contribution to moment resistance and designing the flange as semi-
compact in combination with the simple post-critical method for shear therefore leads to an effective and simple, if
slightly conservative, design approach. If the web is designed to carry moment then when the applied shear is less than
half the shear resistance produced by the simple post-critical method, there is no need to reduce the moment capacity of
the girder including the web. However, for the region of the interaction curve where the shear is higher, the relationship:
(1.3)
should be used to define the interaction. This gives the design moment capacity as a function of the design shear value,
the simple post-critical shear resistance and the moment capacities of the girder including the web and of the flanges.
If the web is more slender than given by the moment capacity needs to be reduced to allow for web
buckling due to the in-plane compression.
For the tension field approach there is a greater interaction

between shear and bending in the girder. For moments less
than the moment resistance of the flanges alone, a shear
capacity including the web tension field but excluding the
plastic moment flange contribution can be carried. This can
be evaluated by giving the flanges a zero plastic moment of
resistance in the shear capacity equation. It can be seen
from Figure 1.10 that this is conservative.
At the other end of the interaction shear may be ignored as

long as the shear force is less than half the tension field
shear capacity of the girder ignoring the flange out-of-plane
bending contribution. The governing equation for
intermediate interaction is:
Figure 1.10 Interaction between bending moment and shear force
for the tension field method of Eurocode 3 Part 1.1.
(6.4)
1.5 Bending resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3
The bending resistance of a girder in BS5400 depends on whether the girder is designed as a compact section. For the
section to be compact both the flange and web must satisfy the code limits:
For the flange, (1.5)
Where the subscript zero refers to the flange outstand.

For the web, the depth of the web compression zone must satisfy the following slenderness requirement:
(1.6)
In this case the design moment can be evaluated from the yield stress and the plastic section modulus of the girder. The
yield stress should be reduced to allow for lateral torsional buckling where relevant. The code provides an equation linking
the lateral torsional buckling slenderness of the girder to the allowable stress shown in Figure 1.11.
The lateral torsional buckling slenderness is a function of the unrestrained length of girder and is defined for a range of
section shapes within the code.
Figure 1.11 Allowable stress as a function of lateral torsional

buckling slenderness.
The design resistance (with allowance for safety factors) is MD : (6.6)
For compact sections, the value of slc in Equation 1.6 is equal to sli from Figure 1.11. For a non-compact section, the width
of the flange outstand must still be limited as given by Equation 1.7:
(1.7)
The section is governed by elastic rather than plastic behaviour and the limit stress is reduced below yield even if lateral
torsional buckling does not occur. The governing equations are:
(1.8)
where Zxc and Zxt are the elastic section moduli for compressive and tensile extreme fibres allowing for a reduced web
thickness for slender webs as defined below. slc is the lesser of syc or where D is the full girder depth and yt is the
depth of the web tension zone.
The full thickness of the web can be considered to act if :
(1.9)
For higher web slendernesses, a reduced web thickness should be used in evaluation the elastic section moduli. This is
evaluated as a linear interpolation between the above and the slenderness vale for an effective web thickness of zero
given by Equation 1.10.
(1.10)
1.6 Shear resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3
If the web of the girder is only stiffened with transverse stiffeners and there are no longitudinal stiffeners, the shear
resistance is calculated using a tension field approachwhich is very similar to that adopted by Eurocode 3 above. If the
girder has longitudinal stiffeners a completely different approach is adopted for the web design.
As for the Eurocode, the three components of response, critical bucking shear, web tension field and flange contribution is
allowed for in the design process.
The code adds the three components which are presented as a design shear stress in the form of a series of graphs. It is
possible to use the related equations. The shear resistance VD is related to the design shear stress (with allowance for
safety factors) by the equation:
(1.11)
where dw is the web depth (allowing for the presence of any openings) and tl is the shear strength defined by the graphs
in the code. An example of one of the code graphs is given in Figure 1.12.
If the web of the girder is only stiffened with transverse stiffeners and there are no longitudinal stiffeners, the shear
resistance is calculated using a tension field approachwhich is very similar to that adopted by Eurocode 3 above. If the
girder has longitudinal stiffeners a completely different approach is adopted for the web design.
As for the Eurocode, the three components of response, critical bucking shear, web tension field and flange contribution is
allowed for in the design process.
The code adds the three components which are presented as a design shear stress in the form of a series of graphs. It is
possible to use the related equations. The shear resistance VD is related to the design shear stress (with allowance for
safety factors) by the equation:
(1.11)
where dw is the web depth (allowing for the presence of any openings) and tl is the shear strength defined by the graphs
in the code. An example of one of the code graphs is given in Figure 1.12.
The limiting stress is given as a function of the web slenderness
and a parameter mfw that allows for the transverse bending strength of the flange contributing to shear capacity.
(1.12)
where bfe is an effective width of flange equal to half the girder width but
The graph of Figure 1.12 corresponds to an mfw value of 0, which corresponds to a zero flange contribution. This has
relevance to the interaction between shear and bending described in the next section. A series of graphs is presented in
the code for a range of values of mfw and the actual value should be found for design by linear interpolation between
them.
Figure 1.12 Limiting shear strength in BS 5400 Part 3 for mfw = 0.

1.7 Interaction between shear and bending in BS5400 Part 3
The basis of this interaction is not dissimilar to that in the Eurocode. It is, however, in the form of a multi-linear interaction
diagram, rather than the curves of the Eurocode. The diagram is presented in the code as four linear equations
represented by Figure 1.13.
As for the Eurocode, significant levels of bending and shear are allowed to co-exist with no interaction. In this context
BS5400 caters for slightly less interaction than the Eurocode. If the applied shear is less than half the shear capacity of the
web, not allowing for the flange moment contribution - the graph corresponding to mfw = 0, the girder can carry its full
moment capacity (flange and web). If the shear is equal to the web shear capacity, the moment capacity is that of the
flanges alone.
Figure 1.13 Interaction between bending moment and shear force for the tension field
method of BS5400 Part 3.
1.7 Interaction between shear and bending in BS5400 Part 3
There is a linear interpolation between these two values. If the applied moment is equal to the bending resistance of the
flanges alone, the shear capacity is limited to the shear capacity of the web without the flange moment contribution (mfw
= 0) and if less than half this vale the full shear capacity is available. Again there is linear interpolation between these two
limits as shown. One of the limits therefore corresponds to the case where the flange carries all the bending and the web
all the shear.
1.8 Web crippling
Occasionally bridge girders are subjected to significant local concentrated loading that can induce high localised
compressive stresses in the web. A good example of this occurs if the girder is launched over a rolling support. In this case
the web may be subjected to very severe local patch loading at sections which are not strengthened by transverse
stiffeners. In such circumstances it is necessary to check the web for local web crippling, the resistance to which is a
function of the load length, the spacing of the stiffeners and the depth of the panel (in some circumstances). Different
buckling behaviour occurs depending on the relationship of these parameters. Both the Eurocode and BS5400 have
sections dealing with this form of buckling phenomenon.
1.9 Transverse web stiffeners
Intermediate transverse stiffeners at regular spacing along the web of a plate girder are used to increase the buckling
capacity of the web. Stiffeners provided at support points require a different design approach and these are considered in
the next section. The design of intermediate transverse stiffeners in box girders adheres to similar requirements. In general
transverse stiffener cross sections are made of hot rolled sections and are either flats or bulb flats, angles or T-sections.
The latter are used where the depth of the stiffener needs to be great enough to permit longitudinal stiffeners to pass
through cut-outs in them. Longitudinal stiffeners would normally be either bulb flats or angles and would be welded to the
transverse stiffeners. It is an important principle that the main longitudinal load carrying elements, e.g. the longitudinal
stiffeners are continuous to avoid eccentricities in the longitudinal load path.
As mentioned above the Eurocode requires stiffeners to be spaced at between one and three times the web depth. While
BS5400 Part 3 imposes no such restriction it is a sensible range for normal design application. If the stiffener spacing were
any closer it is likely that increased fabrication cost would more than offset the savings in web material achieved through
using a thinner web and if more widely spaced the enhancement to web buckling capacity would be limited.
Transverse stiffeners have two main functions in terms of the web. Firstly they will increase the out-of-plane buckling
resistance of the web by acting as a nodal line preventing out-of-plane deformation. Secondly they provide anchorage for
tension field forces thereby enhancing ultimate web shear strength. They can also carry limited direct loading from the
deck into the web (not relevant for composite plate girders) and can also help to prevent the flange buckling into the web.
The Eurocode and BS5400 differ in their design approach. The Eurocode provides an inertia requirement (a stiffness) to
prevent buckling of the web distorting the stiffener out of the plane of the web and a column (strut) requirement to
ensure that the stiffener can carry the resolved tension field force. In contrast, BS5400 converts the web buckling loading,
via a critical buckling equivalence, into an equivalent compressive loading and bases the stiffener design on the ultimate
collapse of an eccentrically loaded strut. There is evidence that the latter approach is over conservative in its
representation of a lateral beam load as a compressive column load because of the P-D effect the latter introduces in the
non-linear response of the column. Non-linear analyses carried out by Professor John Harding suggests that a simple beam
model with a beam spanning between the flanges, loaded by a uniform load which is a function of the in-plane stress state
in the web, provides an accurate design alternative. This leads to the use of a beam column model when the other load
components are included.
Looking first at the Eurocode 3 Part 1.1 design method, the equations for the inertia of the stiffener are given in terms of
the web depth, web thickness and stiffener spacing and are also dependent on the panel aspect ratio. The strut approach
uses the resolved tension field force NS acting at the centre line of the web. It is therefore an eccentric load if the stiffener
is only on one side of the web plate as is the norm for intermediate stiffeners. The stiffener and an associated width of
web plate (15etw on either side of the stiffener section) are designed as a strut section using the column rules in the code.
The load applied to this section is:
(1.13)
where tbb is the shear buckling resistance without any allowance for tension field and Vsd is the design value of the shear
force.
In BS5400 Part 3, the effective strut is defined as the stiffener section comprised of the stiffener together with a total
effective width of web equal to 32 times the web thickness. A strut equation combining moment and axial load is provided
and used in combination with the column design curve in the code which is a function of the l/r of the effective section
where l is the length of the stiffener.
There are a number of load components applied to the stiffener which include the resolved tension field force, the axial
force representing through equivalence the destabilising influence of web panel buckling, any moment applied through U-
frame action and compressive loads from direct loading to the flange or through cross frames and due to any curvature of
the flange. The approach is too complex to present in detail here, but the first two load actions will be described.
The tension field force, which acts at the mid-plane of the web, is defined as Ftw which is the smaller of:
(1.14)
where ls is the length of the transverse stiffener, t is the average shear stress present in the web and t0 is a reference shear
buckling stress:
(1.15)
but is equal to zero if the square root term is negative. a is the panel length, b is the panel width (web depth between
flanges) and s1 is the average longitudinal stress in the panel (+ve if compressive). The equation references web panel
width because the same transverse stiffener design equations are used in the design of transverse stiffeners in
longitudinally stiffened webs.
Again the approach is not dissimilar to Eurocode where the force results from the increased web capacity above a certain
critical buckling stress.
The axial force representing the destabilising action, acting at the centroid of the effective strut, is given by:
(1.16)
where amax is the maximum transverse stiffener spacing to satisfy the web design (can be taken as ‘a’), ks is a numerical
parameter which is a function of the strut slenderness with a maximum value of 0.4 for very slender struts, and sR
represents the destabilising stresses present in the web (with an allowance for web longitudinal stiffeners if present).
(1.17)
where åAs is the total area of longitudinal web stiffening, ttR is the lower of t or t0, s1 is the average value of web
longitudinal stress (compression +ve) and sb is the maximum stress due to bending alone.
A simpler design requirement for the effective area of the stiffener is provided in the code if the only load component is
the destabilising web action (i.e. the last component above).
1.10 End post or load bearing support stiffener design
End pots have to transfer significant shear loads from the web into
the support bearings. They also have to anchor any tension field
forces in the absence of an adjacent web panel. Because of the
magnitude of the compressive load carried they would normally be
located on both sides of the web to avoid eccentricity. A grouping of
four stiffeners, two on either side and close to the bearing on both
sides of the web may be used to provide a strong H section column
over the bearing. Possible arrangements of bearing stiffeners are Figure 1.14 Possible arrangements for end posts.
shown in Figure 1.14.
BS5400 defines a range of forces and moments which the end post In addition to providing a similar approach including
section have to resist. These include direct loads, the destabilising definition of a tension field behaviour that allows the
geometry of the mechanism to be defined, the Eurocode
force from the web buckling and a moment produced by the suggests the option of designing the final web panel by the
eccentric tension field force. The code provides strength, stiffness simple post-critical procedure even if the remaining panels
and yield requirements. Again the requirements are too complex to are designed using the tension field approach so that the
be presented here in detail. tension field components are not present. In order that the
end panel shear strength is the same as the remainder of the
adjacent girder so that it does not present a weak link in the
load transfer path, the end panel is closed up with a closer
stiffener spacing than elsewhere.
2.0 Partial Factors
2.1 Introduction
Partial factors are applied to loads and materials, and the partial factors depend on the level of safety implemented in
the structural code. In buildings, partial factors are presented in BS 5950-1 and –3 and in Eurocodes 3-1 and 4-1.
In bridges, partial factors are presented in BS 5400-3 and –5 and in Eurocodes 3-2 and 4-2.
Partial factors for loads are used to multiply the applied (working) loads, and partial factors for materials are used to
reduce design strengths of the materials (i.e. steel and concrete and shear connectors), taking account of their
variability in strength. These partial factors are presented in Table 2.
In BS 5400-3, the partial factors for dead loads take account of the variability in weight and dimensions of the
components, which means that the surface material and concrete attract a higher partial factor than for steel. The
partial factor for imposed load is taken as 1.5 for HA loading.
2.0 Partial Factors
2.2 Partial Factor for Material Strength
For materials strengths, the partial factor for steel is

1.05 and for concrete is 1.5. An additional
multiplication factor of x1.1 is introduced in BS 5400-3
and –5 to take account of possible uncertainties in the
design model (rather than the materials strengths).
Therefore, the global factor of safety is in the region of

1.8. Partial factors in the range of 1.0 to 1.2 are also
applied at the serviceability limit state (see below) –
unlike in building design, where serviceability checks
are based on working loads.
3.0 Design Strength
3.1 Design Strength of Materials
The design strength of materials is obtained by dividing the

characteristic strength by a partial safety factor (as above). For
building design, the partial factor for steel is taken as 1.0 and for
concrete as 1.5.
For bridge design to BS 5400-5, the partial factors are 1.05x1.1 and
1.5x1.1 for steel and concrete respectively (taking account of the
multiplication factor of 1.1 noted above).
For shear connectors, a partial factor of 1.25 is used to obtain their

design resistance (or their design resistance is 0.8 x characteristic
resistance).
The design strengths of materials reduced by appropriate partial

factors, as presented in Table 3(a). These resistances are used in
plastic design.
3.0 Design Strength
3.2 Material Properties

4.0 Global Analysis for Load Effects
Global analysis of a structure should be carried out elastically to determine load effects (i.e., bending moments, shears
etc.). Plastic analysis of the structure (i.e. redistribution of moments due to plastic hinge formation) is not allowed.
Section Properties
The section properties to be used in global analysis should be calculated for the gross section.
4.2 Stress Analysis
Longitudinal Stress in beams

Longitudinal stresses will be developed due to bending and due to axial force. The distribution of longitudinal stress
between the flange and web of a beam may be calculated on the assumption that plane sections remain plain, but
using an effective section.
Shear stresses
Shear force due to vertical loads will induce a shear stress in webs.
Shear lag
For certain types or proportions of bridges, the effect of shear lag at the SLS can increase locally the elastic stresses
near supports of concentrated loads.
4.3 Design of Beams
Longitudinal Stress in beams

Beams are defined as members with solid webs, subject primarily to bending; these include members of rolled section,
plate girders, and composite members.
Ultimate Limit Stata (ULS)

All beams should be designed to provide adequate strength to resist the design loads, using the partial factors that are
appropriate to the ULS. The following need to be considered.
- Material strength
- Limitations on shape on account of local buckling of individual elements (i.e., webs and flanges)
- Plastic moment capacity of compact sections
- Effective sections (reductions for compression buckling and holes)
- Lateral torsional buckling
- Web buckling (governed by depth to thickness ratio of web and panel size)
- Combined effects of bending and shear
4.3 Design of Beams
Serviceability Limit States (SLS)

Beams should also be designed to ensure that no yielding or permanent deformation takes place under the lower
design loads that are appropriate to SLS.
Fatigue
If stress or range of stress is applied repeatedly to an element of a structure, it may fail prematurely by fatigue at a
stress below (and sometimes well below) its static strength.
Brittle fracture
To avoid brittle fracture at low temperatures, steel material needs to have sufficient ‘notch toughness’. This is achieved
by specifying a suitable grade of steel; suitable grades for most steel bridges are available in BS EN 10025.
4.0 Tutorial - Calculation of Second Moment of Area
Bridge I Bridge II
Bridge I
311.5mm
Span = 8.84m
31.4mm
UDM = 4796kg/m
18.6mm
633mm
Bridge I – LM 71
250kN 250kN 250kN 250kN

80kN/m 0.8m 1.6m 1.6m 1.6m 0.8m 80kN/m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.86m
Bridge I – LM 71
250kN 250kN 250kN 250kN

80kN/m 0.8m 1.6m 1.6m 1.6m 0.8m 80kN/m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.86m
Bridge I – LM 71
250kN 250kN 250kN 250kN

1.6m 1.6m 1.6m 0.8m 80kN/m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.86m
Bridge I
Axial Load
1ton = 1000kg
Bridge I – Moving Load Position 1
2.21m
16.5t 16.5t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 16.5t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 16.5t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 16.5t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 16.5t 10t

2.6m 3.6m 0.82m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 10t 10t

3.6m 2.6m 0.82m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
16.5t 10t 10t

3.6m 2.6m 0.82m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m 1.82m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t 10t

2.6m 3.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t 10t 10t

2.6m 3.6m 2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t 10t

3.6m 2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t 10t
2.6m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
10t
2.21m
0.42m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 0.42m
8.84m
Tutorial - Calculation of Second Moment of Area
Tutorial – Matlab Code

Railway Bridge Design Assessment - Design of Plate Girders-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Railway Bridge Design Assessment - Design of Plate Girders-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Plate Girders

1.1 General Design Considerations

The design of structural steelwork in bridges covers

Plate girders are fabricated by welding flanges to a web plate as shown in

Occasionally the unsupported edges of the flange are themselves stiffened

1.1 General Design Considerations

Figure 1.2 Lateral torsional buckling restraint provided

1.1 General Design Considerations

1.1 General Design Considerations

Figure 1.3 Plate girder stiffened by longitudinal and transverse

1.0 General Design Considerations

Figure 1.4 Curtailment of transverse web stiffeners to

1.0 General Design Considerations

Figure 1.5 Plate girder with openings in the web.

1.0 General Design Considerations

1.0 General Design Considerations

In modern codes there are four classes of section.

1.0 General Design Considerations

Figure 1.6 Moment rotation behaviour of girders

1.1 Plate Girder Design Rules

1.1 Plate Girder Design Rules

1.2 Simple post-critical method within Eurocode Part 1.1

In this approach the shear buckling resistance (Vba.Rd in Eurocode 3) can

Figure 1.7 shows the design curve for tba as a function of .

Equations are provided in the code which, for stiffener spacings of

1.3 Tension field method within Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

1.3 Tension field method within Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

Figure 1.8 Strength corresponding to web buckling not

1.3 Tension field method within Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

1.4 Interaction between shear and bending in Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

The presence of bending stresses in the girder web will

For moments less than the moment resistance of the flanges

1.4 Interaction between shear and bending in Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

1.4 Interaction between shear and bending in Eurocode 3 Part 1.1

For the tension field approach there is a greater interaction

At the other end of the interaction shear may be ignored as

1.5 Bending resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

For the flange, (1.5)

Where the subscript zero refers to the flange outstand.

1.5 Bending resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

Figure 1.11 Allowable stress as a function of lateral torsional

1.5 Bending resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

The design resistance (with allowance for safety factors) is MD : (6.6)

1.5 Bending resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

The full thickness of the web can be considered to act if :

1.6 Shear resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

1.6 Shear resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

1.6 Shear resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

The limiting stress is given as a function of the web slenderness

1.6 Shear resistance of plate girders in BS5400 Part 3

Figure 1.12 Limiting shear strength in BS 5400 Part 3 for mfw = 0.

1.7 Interaction between shear and bending in BS5400 Part 3

1.7 Interaction between shear and bending in BS5400 Part 3

1.8 Web crippling

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.9 Transverse web stiffeners

1.10 End post or load bearing support stiffener design

2.2 Partial Factor for Material Strength

For materials strengths, the partial factor for steel is