Design Example 05

U.S.
Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Design Example 3:
Three-Span Continuous
Horizontally Curved Composite
Steel I-Girder Bridge
Publication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 - Vol. 23
November 2012
Notice
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in
the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for use of the
information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification,
or regulation.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information to serve Government,
industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies
are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information.
FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure
continuous quality improvement.

Design Example 3: Three-Span
Continuous Horizontally Curved
Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge
Publication No. FHWA-IF-12-052 Vol. 23
November 2012
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.
2. Government Accession No.
FHWA-IF-12-052 Vol. 23
4. Title and Subtitle
Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 3: Three-Span
Continuous Horizontally Curved Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge
3. Recipients Catalog No.
7. Author(s)
Julie Rivera, P.E. and Brandon Chavel, Ph.D., P.E.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
HDR Engineering, Inc.
11 Stanwix Street
Suite 800
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Office of Bridge Technology
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, D.C. 20590
8. Performing Organization Report No.
5. Report Date
November 2012
6. Performing Organization Code
10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.
13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Technical Report
March 2011 November 2012
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes

16. Abstract
Horizontally curved steel bridges present many unique challenges. Despite their challenges, curved girder bridges have become
widespread and are commonly used at locations that require complex geometries and have limited right-of-way, such as urban
interchanges. Some of the important issues that differentiate curved steel girders from their straight counterparts include the
effects of torsion, flange lateral bending, their inherent lack of stability, and special constructibility concerns. Also, the complex
behavior of horizontally curved bridges necessitates the consideration of system behavior in the analysis.
This design example illustrates the design calculations for a curved steel I-girder bridge, considering the Strength, Service,
fatigue and Constructibility Limits States in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Designs specifications. Calculations
are provided for design checks at particular girder locations, a bolted field splice design, a cross frame member design, shear
connector design, and a bearing stiffener design.
17. Key Words

Curved I-Girder Bridge, Bridge Design, LRFD,
Constructibility, Bolted Field Splice, Cross Frame
19. Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)
18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public through
the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA
22161.
20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified
21. No of Pages
22. Price
Reproduction of completed pages authorized

Design Example 3: Three-Span Continuous
Horizontally Curved Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii
FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 3
2.0 OVERVIEW OF LRFD ARTICLE 6.10 ............................................................................... 5
3.0 DESIGN PARAMETERS ..................................................................................................... 7
4.0 GENERAL STEEL FRAMING CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................... 8
4.1 Span Arrangement ........................................................................................................... 8
4.2 Girder Spacing ................................................................................................................. 8
4.3 Girder Depth .................................................................................................................... 9
4.4 Cross-Section Proportions ............................................................................................... 9
4.5 Cross Frames .................................................................................................................. 11
4.6 Field Section Sizes ......................................................................................................... 12
5.0 FINAL DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 15
5.1 AASHTO LRFD Limit States ........................................................................................ 15
5.1.1
Service Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.2 and 6.5.2).................................................... 15
5.1.2
Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.3 and 6.5.3) .............................. 15
5.1.3
Strength Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.4 and 6.5.4) .................................................. 15
5.1.4
Constructibility Limit State .................................................................................. 15
5.1.5
Extreme Event Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.5 and 6.5.5)........................................ 16
5.2 Loads .............................................................................................................................. 16

5.2.1
Noncomposite Dead Load..................................................................................... 16
5.2.2
Deck Placement Sequence .................................................................................... 16
5.2.3
Superimposed Dead Load ..................................................................................... 16
5.2.4 Future Wearing Surface ........................................................................................ 19

5.2.5
Live Load .............................................................................................................. 19
5.3 Centrifugal Force Computation ..................................................................................... 20

5.4 Load Combinations ........................................................................................................ 22
6.0 ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 24
6.1 Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis ................................................................. 25
6.1.1
Bearing Orientation ............................................................................................... 25
6.1.2
Live Load Analysis ............................................................................................... 26
6.2 Analysis Results ............................................................................................................. 26

7.0 DESIGN ............................................................................................................................... 36
7.1 General Design Considerations...................................................................................... 36
7.1.1
Flanges .................................................................................................................. 36
7.1.2
Webs ..................................................................................................................... 36
7.1.3
Shear Connectors .................................................................................................. 36
7.1.4
Details (Stiffeners, Cross Frames, Fatigue Categories) ........................................ 37
7.1.5
Wind Loading ....................................................................................................... 38

7.1.5.1
Loading ............................................................................................... 38
7.1.5.2
Analysis............................................................................................... 38
7.1.5.3
Construction ........................................................................................ 39
7.1.6
Steel Erection ........................................................................................................ 39
7.1.7
Deck Placement Sequence .................................................................................... 39
7.2 Section Properties .......................................................................................................... 40

7.2.1
7.2.2
Section G4-1 Properties Span 1 Positive Moment ............................................. 41

7.2.1.1
Effective Width of Concrete Deck ...................................................... 42
7.2.1.2
Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-1 ............................................ 42
7.2.1.3
Plastic Moment Neutral Axis: Section G4-1 ...................................... 43
Section G4-2 Properties Support 2 Negative Moment ...................................... 44

7.2.2.1
7.2.3
Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-2 ............................................ 44
Check of Minimum Negative Flexure Concrete Deck Reinforcement ................. 47
7.3 Girder Check: Section G4-3, Shear at End Support (Article 6.10.9) ............................ 48
7.3.1
Applied Shear........................................................................................................ 49
ii
7.3.2 Shear Resistance ................................................................................................... 49

7.4 Girder Check: Section 4-1, Constructibility (Article 6.10.3) ........................................ 51
7.4.1
Constructibility of Top Flange .............................................................................. 52

7.4.1.1
Deck Overhang Bracket Load ............................................................. 52
7.4.1.2
Curvature Effects ................................................................................ 53
7.4.1.3
Top Flange Lateral Bending Amplification ........................................ 54
7.4.1.4
Flexure in Top Flange (Article 6.10.3.2.1) ......................................... 56
7.4.2
Constructibility of Bottom Flange ........................................................................ 59
7.4.3
Constructibility Shear Strength, Web ................................................................... 60
7.4.4
Constructibility of Deck ........................................................................................ 60
7.5 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4) ................................ 61
7.5.1
Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2) .......................................................... 61
7.5.2
Web Bend-Buckling.............................................................................................. 63
7.6 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Fatigue Limit State (Article 6.10.5) ................................ 63
7.6.1
Fatigue in Bottom Flange...................................................................................... 64
7.6.2
Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs ................................................................ 66
7.7 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Strength Limits State (Article 6.10.6) ............................. 68
7.7.1
Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2)...................................................................................... 68

7.7.1.1
Strength I Flexural Stress in Top and Bottom Flange......................... 69
7.7.1.2
Top Flange Flexural Resistance in Compression................................ 70
7.7.1.3
Bottom Flange Flexural Resistance in Tension .................................. 71
7.7.2
Web Flexural Resistance....................................................................................... 72
7.7.3
Concrete Deck Stresses ......................................................................................... 72
7.8 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Constructibility (Article 6.10.3) ...................................... 72

7.8.1
Constructibility of Top Flange .............................................................................. 74
7.8.2
Constructibility of Bottom Flange ........................................................................ 74

7.8.2.1
Bottom Flange Lateral Bending Amplification .................................. 74
7.8.2.2
Flexure in Bottom Flange (Article 6.10.3.2.1).................................... 75
7.9 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4) ................................ 77
7.9.1
Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2) .......................................................... 78
7.9.2
Web Bend-Buckling.............................................................................................. 78
iii
7.10 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Fatigue Limit State (Article 6.10.5) ................................ 81
7.10.1 Fatigue in Top Flange ........................................................................................... 81
7.10.2 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs ................................................................ 83
7.11 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6) .............................. 85
7.11.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2)...................................................................................... 85
7.11.1.1
Strength I Flexural Stress in Top and Bottom Flange......................... 85
7.11.1.2
Top Flange Flexural Resistance in Tension ........................................ 89
7.11.1.3
Bottom Flange Flexural Resistance in Compression .......................... 89
7.11.2 Web Shear Strength (Article 6.10.9)..................................................................... 90

7.11.2.1
Applied Shear...................................................................................... 91
7.11.2.2
Shear Resistance ................................................................................. 92
7.12 Bolted Field Splice ......................................................................................................... 93

7.12.1 General .................................................................................................................. 93
7.12.2 Resistance Calculation for the Service Limit State and Constructibility.............. 95
7.12.3 Resistance Calculations for the Strength Limit State ........................................... 96
7.12.3.1
Bolt Shear Resistance (Article 6.13.2.7) ............................................. 96
7.12.3.2
Bearing Resistance on Connected Material (Article 6.13.2.9) ........... 97
7.12.3.3
Tensile Resistance (Article 6.13.2.10) ................................................ 98
7.12.4 Constructibility Checks ......................................................................................... 98

7.12.4.1
Constructibility of Top Flange ............................................................ 99
7.12.4.2
Constructibility of Bottom Flange .................................................... 100
7.12.4.3
Constructibility of Web..................................................................... 102
7.12.5 Service Limit State, Top and Bottom Flange...................................................... 104

7.12.5.1
Top Flange Critical Bolt Shear ......................................................... 106
7.12.5.2
Bottom Flange Critical Bolt Shear .................................................... 107
7.12.6 Strength Limit State ............................................................................................ 109

7.12.6.1
Flange Splice General Calculations .................................................. 109
7.12.6.2
Bolt Shear in Top Flange .................................................................. 112
7.12.6.3
Bolt Shear in Bottom Flange............................................................. 113
7.12.6.4
Web Splice Design ............................................................................ 114
7.12.6.4.1 Design Shear ............................................................................. 114
iv
7.12.6.4.2 Design Moment and Design Horizontal Force Component ...... 115
7.12.6.4.3 Block Shear Rupture (Article 6.13.4) ....................................... 116
7.12.6.4.4 Flexural Yielding....................................................................... 118
7.12.6.4.5 Shear Yielding and Shear Rupture (Article 6.13.5.3) ............... 118
7.12.6.4.6 Shear in Web Splice Bolts at Strength Limit State ................... 119
7.12.6.4.7 Bearing Resistance of Web ....................................................... 119
7.12.6.5 Top Flange (Controlling Flange) Splice Plate Design ...................... 120
7.12.6.6
Bottom Flange (Noncontrolling Flange) Splice Plate Design .......... 123
7.12.6.7
Bearing Resistance at Bolt Holes (Bottom Flange) .......................... 125
7.13 Cross Frame Member and Connection ........................................................................ 125

7.13.1 Cross Frame Diagonal Design ............................................................................ 125
7.13.2 Cross Frame Fatigue Check ................................................................................ 128
7.13.3 Cross Frame Welded Connection ....................................................................... 129
7.14 Shear Connector Design .............................................................................................. 131
7.14.1 Shear Connector Design for Strength Girder G4, Span 1 ................................ 131
7.14.1.1
End of Span to Maximum Positive Moment Location ..................... 132
7.14.1.2
Maximum Positive Moment Location to Adjacent Interior Support 134
7.14.2 Shear Connector Design for Fatigue Girder G4, Span 1 ................................. 136
7.14.2.1
Maximum Positive Moment Location .............................................. 136
7.14.2.2
Interior Support Location (Support 2) .............................................. 139
7.15 Bearing Stiffener Design.............................................................................................. 141

7.15.1 Projecting Width ................................................................................................. 141
7.15.2 Bearing Resistance .............................................................................................. 142
7.15.3 Axial Resistance.................................................................................................. 142
8.0 SUMMARY OF DESIGN CHECKS AND PERFORMANCE RATIOS ......................... 146
8.1 Maximum Positive Moment Region, Span 1 (Section G4-1) ...................................... 146
8.2 Interior Support, Maximum Negative Moment (Section G4-2) .................................. 146
8.3 End Support (Section G4-3)......................................................................................... 147
9.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 148
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Typical Bridge Cross-Section ......................................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Framing Plan ................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 3: Girder Elevation ............................................................................................................ 14
Figure 4: Deck Placement Sequence............................................................................................ 18
Figure 5: Vehicular Centrifugal Force Wheel-Load Reactions .................................................... 20
Figure 6: Sketch of I-girder Cross-Section at Section G4-1 ........................................................ 41
Figure 7: Sketch of I-girder cross-section at Section G4-2.......................................................... 44
Figure 8 Deck Overhang Bracket Loading .................................................................................. 52
Figure 9 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Elevation View ................................................. 94
Figure 10 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Top Flange...................................................... 95
Figure 11 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Bottom Flange ................................................ 95
Figure 12 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Web Splice Plate...................................... 117
Figure 13 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Top Flange Outer Splice Plate ................. 123
Figure 14 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Top Flange Inner Splice Plates ................ 123
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Girder G1 Unfactored Shears by Tenth Point ................................................................. 27
Table 5 Girder G1 Unfactored Major-Axis Bending Moments by Tenth Point .......................... 31
Table 9 Selected Girder G4 Unfactored Major-Axis Bending Moments .................................... 35
Table 10 Selected Girder G4 Unfactored Shears by Tenth Point ................................................ 35
Table 11 Section G4-1: Steel Only Section Properties ................................................................ 42
Table 12 Section G4-1: 3n=22.68 Long-term Composite Section Properties ............................. 43
Table 13 Section G4-1: n=7.56 Short-term Composite Section Properties ................................. 43
Table 14 Section G4-2: Steel Only Section Properties ................................................................ 45
Table 15 Section G4-2: 3n=22.68 Composite Section Properties with Transformed Deck ........ 46
Table 16 Section G4-2: n=7.56 Composite Section Properties with Transformed Deck ............ 46
Table 17 Section G4-2: Long-term (3n) Composite Section Properties with Longitudinal Steel
Reinforcement ............................................................................................................................... 47
Table 18 Section G4-2: Short-term (n) Composite Section Properties with Longitudinal Steel
Reinforcement ............................................................................................................................... 47
vii
FOREWORD
It took an act of Congress to provide funding for the development of this comprehensive
handbook in steel bridge design. This handbook covers a full range of topics and design
examples to provide bridge engineers with the information needed to make knowledgeable
decisions regarding the selection, design, fabrication, and construction of steel bridges. The
handbook is based on the Fifth Edition, including the 2010 Interims, of the AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications. The hard work of the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) and
prime consultant, HDR Engineering and their sub-consultants in producing this handbook is
gratefully acknowledged. This is the culmination of seven years of effort beginning in 2005.
The new Steel Bridge Design Handbook is divided into several topics and design examples as
follows:
Bridge Steels and Their Properties

Bridge Fabrication
Steel Bridge Shop Drawings
Structural Behavior
Selecting the Right Bridge Type
Stringer Bridges
Loads and Combinations
Structural Analysis
Redundancy
Limit States
Design for Constructibility
Design for Fatigue
Bracing System Design
Splice Design
Bearings
Substructure Design
Deck Design
Load Rating
Corrosion Protection of Bridges
Design Example: Three-span Continuous Straight I-Girder Bridge
Design Example: Two-span Continuous Straight I-Girder Bridge
Design Example: Two-span Continuous Straight Wide-Flange Beam Bridge
Design Example: Three-span Continuous Straight Tub-Girder Bridge
Design Example: Three-span Continuous Curved I-Girder Beam Bridge
Design Example: Three-span Continuous Curved Tub-Girder Bridge
These topics and design examples are published separately for ease of use, and available for free
download at the NSBA and FHWA websites: http://www.steelbridges.org, and
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge, respectively.
The contributions and constructive review comments during the preparation of the handbook
from many engineering processionals are very much appreciated. The readers are encouraged to
submit ideas and suggestions for enhancements of future edition of the handbook to Myint Lwin
at the following address: Federal Highway Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.,
Washington, DC 20590.
M. Myint Lwin, Director

Office of Bridge Technology
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Horizontally curved steel bridges present many unique challenges. Despite their challenges,
curved girder bridges have become widespread and are commonly used at locations that require
complex geometries and have limited right-of-way, such as urban interchanges. Some of the
important issues that differentiate curved steel girders from their straight counterparts include the
effects of torsion, flange lateral bending, their inherent lack of stability, and special
constructibility concerns. Also, the complex behavior of horizontally curved bridges necessitates
the consideration of system behavior in the analysis.
Curved steel girder bridges have been built in the United States since the 1950s. Currently
(2011), curved-girder bridges represent a significant percentage of the total steel bridge market.
Horizontally curved girders typically offer certain advantages over kinked or chorded girders.
Some of these advantages include:
Overall simplification of the structure by allowing curved girders to follow the roadway
alignment
Use of longer spans and reduced number of intermediate permanent supports
Continuity over several spans permitting simplified framing, efficient use of material,
increased vertical clearance, and fewer joints
Simplified forming of the deck with a constant deck overhang
Simpler reinforcing bar schedule
Improved aesthetics
However, horizontally curved girder bridges require special attention during design and
construction. Fabrication can require additional labor or material, and shipping costs may be
greater than for a straight girder. Due to torsional behavior during lifting of the girders during
erection, additional lifting points and temporary supports may be required, leading to increased
costs. Nevertheless, curved girder bridges are typically more economical than kinked or chorded
girder bridges that are on a horizontally curved alignment.
Another unique concern of curved girder bridges is the classification of its cross frames as
primary load-carrying members according to the governing design specifications. Also, flange
level lateral bracing may need to be considered as primary members. As such, these elements
require greater attention during bridge inspections.
Starting with the 3rd Edition, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications [1] provide a
unified design approach for both straight and horizontally curved girders within a single design
specification. It should be noted that kinked (chorded) girders exhibit the same behavior as
curved girders and should be treated as horizontally curved girders with respect to the AASHTO
specifications.
The example calculations provided herein comply with the current AASHTO LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications (5th Edition, 2010), but the analysis described herein was not performed as
part of this design example. The analysis results and general superstructure details contained
within this design example were taken from the design example published as part of the National
Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 12-52 published in 2005, titled
AASHTO-LRFD Design Example: Horizontally Curved Steel I-Girder Bridge, Final
Report[2].
2.0 OVERVIEW OF LRFD ARTICLE 6.10

The design of I-section flexural members is covered within Article 6.10 of the AASHTO Fifth
Edition of the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications [1], referred to herein as AASHTO LRFD (5th
Edition, 2010). The provisions of Article 6.10 are organized to correspond to the general flow of
the calculations necessary for the design of I-section flexural members. Each of the sub-articles
are written such that they are largely self-contained, thus minimizing the need for reference to
multiple sub-articles to address any of the essential design considerations. Many of the
individual calculations and equations are streamlined, and selected resistance equations are
presented in a more general format as compared to earlier LRFD Specifications (prior to the 3rd
Edition). The provisions of Article 6.10 are organized as follows:
6.10.1
6.10.2
6.10.3
6.10.4
6.10.5
6.10.6
6.10.7
6.10.8
General
Cross-Section Proportion Limits
Constructibility
Service Limit State
Fatigue and Fracture Limit State
Strength Limit State
Flexural Resistance - Composite Sections in Positive Flexure
Flexural Resistance - Composite Sections in Negative Flexure and Noncomposite
Sections
6.10.9 Shear Resistance
6.10.10 Shear Connectors
6.10.11 Stiffeners
Section 6 also contains four appendices relevant to the design of flexural members. It should be
noted that Appendices A and B are not applicable to horizontally curved I-girder bridges since
they relate to straight I-sections only. The other two appendices are applicable and are as
follows:
Appendix C - Basic Steps for Steel Bridge Superstructures
Appendix D - Fundamental Calculations for Flexural Members
Flow charts for flexural design of steel girders according to the provisions, along with an outline
giving the basic steps for steel-bridge superstructure design, are provided in Appendix C.
Appendix C can be a useful reference for horizontally curved I-girder design. Fundamental
calculations for flexural members are contained within Appendix D.
General discussion of Article 6.10 is provided in Example 1 of the Steel Bridge Design
Handbook for a straight I-girder bridge. This section will highlight several of the provisions of
the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010) as they relate to horizontally curved I-girder design.
In the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010), flange lateral bending stress is included in the design
checks. The provisions of Articles 6.10 provide a unified approach for consideration of majoraxis bending and flange lateral bending for both straight and curved bridges. Flange lateral
bending is caused by the torsional behavior of a curved bridge, resulting in cross frame forces
which impart a lateral load on the flanges. Other sources of flange lateral bending are wind
loads, temporary support brackets for deck overhangs, and flange level lateral bracing systems.
In addition to providing adequate strength, the constructibility provisions of Article 6.10.3 ensure
that nominal yielding does not occur and that there is no reliance on post-buckling resistance for
main load-carrying members during critical stages of construction. The AASHTO LRFD (5th
Edition, 2010) specifies that for critical stages of construction, both compression and tension
flanges must be investigated, and the effects of flange lateral bending should be considered when
deemed necessary by the Engineer. For noncomposite flanges in compression, constructibility
design checks ensure that the maximum combined stress in the flange will not exceed the
minimum yield strength, that the member has sufficient strength to resist lateral torsional and
flange local buckling, and that web bend-buckling will not occur. For noncomposite flanges in
tension, constructibility design checks make certain that the maximum combined stress will not
exceed the minimum yield strength of the flanges during construction.
3.0 DESIGN PARAMETERS

The following data apply to this design example:
Specifications:
Structural Steel:
Concrete:
Slab Reinforcing Steel:
2010 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications [1], Customary

U.S. Units, Fifth Edition
AASHTO M270, Grade 50 (ASTM A709, Grade 50) steel with Fy =
50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi
fc = 4.0 ksi, = 150 pcf
AASHTO M31, Grade 60 (ASTM A615, Grade 60) with Fy = 60 ksi
The bridge has spans of 160.0 feet 210.0 feet 160.0 feet measured along the centerline of the
bridge. Span lengths are arranged to give similar positive dead load moments in the end and
center spans. The radius of the bridge is 700 feet at the centerline of the bridge. The out-to-out
deck width is 40.5 feet, and there are three 12-foot traffic lanes. All supports are radial with
respect to the bridge centerline. There are four I-girders in the cross section.
The total deck thickness is 9.5 inches, with a 0.5-inch integral wearing surface assumed.
Therefore, the structural thickness of the concrete deck is taken as 9.0 inches. The deck haunch
thickness is taken as 4.0 inches and is measured from the top of the web to the bottom of the
deck. That is, the top flange thickness is included in the haunch. The width of the haunch is
assumed to be 20 inches for load computation purposes. The haunch thickness is considered in
section property computations, but the haunch concrete area is not considered.
Concrete railings are each assumed to weigh 495 plf. Permanent steel stay-in-place deck forms
are used between the girders; the forms are assumed to weigh 15.0 psf since it is assumed
concrete will be in the flutes of the deck forms. An allowance for a future wearing surface of
30.0 psf is incorporated in this design example.
The bridge is designed for HL-93 live load in accordance with Article 3.6.1.2. Live load for
fatigue is taken as defined in Article 3.6.1.4. The bridge is designed for a 75-year fatigue life,
and single-lane average daily truck traffic (ADTTSL) in one direction is assumed to be 1,000
trucks per day.
The bridge site is assumed to be located in Seismic Zone 1, so seismic effects are not considered
in this design example. Steel erection is not explicitly examined in this example, but sequential
placement of the concrete deck is considered.
Bridge underclearance is limited such that the total bridge depth may not exceed 120 inches at
the low point on the cross section. The roadway is superelevated 5 percent.
The girders in this example are composite throughout the entire span, including regions of
negative flexure, since shear connectors are provided along the entire length of each girder.
Shear connectors are required throughout the entire length of a curved continuous composite
bridge according to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.1.
4.0 GENERAL STEEL FRAMING CONSIDERATIONS

Detailing guidelines can be found on the website for the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge
Collaboration, with particular attention given to the Collaboration standard entitled Guidelines
for Design Details [3]. Three other detailing references offering guidance are the Texas Steel
Quality Councils Preferred Practices for Steel Bridge Design, Fabrication, and Erection [4],
the Mid-Atlantic States Structural Committee for Economic Fabrication (SCEF) Standards, and
the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration Guidelines for Design for Constructibility [5].
4.1 Span Arrangement
Careful consideration of the layout of the steel framing is an important part of the design process
and involves evaluating alternative span arrangements and their corresponding superstructure
and substructure costs in order to determine the most economical solution. Often, site-specific
features will influence the span arrangement required. However, in the absence of these issues,
choosing a balanced span arrangement for continuous steel bridges (end spans approximately
80% of the length of the center spans) will provide an efficient design. The span arrangement for
this design example has spans of 160-210-160 feet, which is a reasonably balanced span
arrangement.
4.2 Girder Spacing
When developing the bridge cross-section, the designer typically evaluates the number of girder
lines required relative to the overall cost. Specifically, the total cost of the superstructure is a
function of steel quantity, details, and erection costs. Developing an efficient bridge crosssection should also give consideration to providing an efficient deck design, which is generally
influenced by girder spacing and overhang dimensions. Specifically, with the exception of an
empirical deck design, girder spacing significantly effects the design moments in the deck slab.
Larger deck overhangs result in a greater load on the exterior girder. Larger overhangs will
increase the bending moment in the deck, caused by the cantilever action of the overhang,
resulting in additional deck slab reinforcing for the overhang region of the deck.
In addition, wider deck spans between top flanges can become problematic for several reasons.
Some owners have very economical deck details standards that may not be suited, or even
permitted, for wider decks spans. At the same time, wider deck spans are progressively more
difficult to form and construct.
The bridge cross-section in this design example consists of four I-girders spaced at 11 feet on
center with 3.75-foot deck overhangs. The deck overhangs are 34 percent of the adjacent girder
spacing. Reducing the girder spacing below 11 feet would lead to an increase in the size of the
deck overhangs which would, in turn, lead to larger loading on the exterior girders, particularly
the girder on the outside of the curve. Wider girder spacing would increase the deck thickness
with a corresponding increase in dead load. The bridge cross-section is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Typical Bridge Cross-Section

4.3
Girder Depth
Article 2.5.2.6.3 sets the maximum span-to-depth ratio, Las/D, to 25 where the specified
minimum yield stress is not greater than 50 ksi. In checking this requirement, the arc girder
length, Las, for spans continuous on both ends is defined as eighty percent of the longest girder in
the span (girder length is taken as the arc length between bearings). The arc girder length of
spans continuous on only one end is defined as ninety percent of the longest girder in the span.
The longest arc span length (either end or interior span) controls. The maximum arc length
occurs at the center span of the outside girder, G4, and is 214.95 feet. Therefore, the
recommended girder depth is computed as follows:
0.8(214.95)/25 = 6.88 ft = 82.5 in.
Therefore, a web depth of 84 inches is selected.
4.4 Cross-Section Proportions
Proportion limits for webs of I-girders are specified in Article 6.10.2.1. Provisions for webs with
and without longitudinal stiffeners are presented. For this design example, a longitudinally
stiffened web is not anticipated. Therefore, the web plate must be proportioned such that the
web plate thickness (tw) meets the following requirement:
D
tw
150
Eq. (6.10.2.1.1-1)
Rearranging:
t w min.
D
150
84
150
0.56 in.
Based on preliminary designs, a web thickness of 0.625 inches is found to be sufficient for a
transversely stiffened web and is used in the field sections over the interior piers. A 0.5625-inch
thick web is used in positive-moment regions.
For illustration purposes, the proportions of girder G4 in Span 1 at the maximum positive
moment location are checked. These plate sizes are applicable to the section defined later in this
example as Section G4-1. The flanges are selected as follows:
Top flange (compression flange): 1.0 in. x 20 in.
Bottom flange (tension flange): 1.5 in. x 21 in.
The flanges must satisfy the provisions of Article 6.10.2.2:
bf
2t
Eq. (6.10.2.2-1)
12 . 0
f
20
Top flange:
21
7 12 . 0
2(1.5)
bf
84
2(1)
Bottom flange:
10 12 . 0
Eq. (6.10.2.2-2)
14
in.
Both flanges OK
Eq. (6.10.2.2-3)
t f 1 .1t w
1.0 in. 1.1(0.5625) = 0.619 in.

0.1
I yc
0 .1
Both flanges OK
I yc
I yt
Both flanges OK
Eq. (6.10.2.2-4)
10
1 ( 20 )
12
667
1,158
667 in.
0 . 576 10
I yt
1 . 5 ( 21 )
12
1,158 in.
OK
10
In addition to the flange proportions required by Article 6.10.2.2, Article C6.10.3.4 provides a
guideline for minimizing problems during construction that arise from the fact that economical
composite girders normally have smaller top flanges than bottom flange. Such girders typically
result in more than half the web depth being in compression in regions of positive flexure during
deck placement. These conditions can lead to, for example, out-of-plane distortions of the
compression flanges and web during construction. The relation given by Eq. (C6.10.3.4-1)
should be satisfied to minimize such problems during construction. L is taken as the length of
the shipping piece, say 123 ft, which is the length of Field Section 1 of G4 as shown in Figure 3.
b fc
Eq. (C6.10.3.4-1)
85
20 in.
123(12)
85
17 . 4 in.
OK
Therefore, all section properties for this location are satisfied. Section proportion checks for the
other design locations are not shown. All subsequent sections satisfy these limits.
4.5 Cross Frames
The chosen cross frame spacing of 20 feet is within the maximum spacing allowed by Eq.
(6.7.4.2-1). Reduction of the cross frame spacing reduces cross frame forces since the load
transferred between girders is a function of the curvature. Reduction of cross frame spacing also
reduces flange lateral bending moments and transverse deck stresses. By reducing flange lateral
bending, flange sizes can be reduced, but at the expense of requiring more cross frames. The
design herein uses a spacing of approximately 20 feet measured along the centerline of the
bridge.
In the analytical model used to analyze the bridge, cross frames are composed of single angles
with an area of 5.0 square inches. Cross frames with an "X" configuration with top and bottom
chords are used for intermediate cross frames and at interior supports. A K configuration is
assumed at the simple end supports with the K pointing up (see Figure 1). The K
configuration is advantageous at end supports because the top member, typically a channel or W
shape, can support the deck edge beam. Also, as support members to the top beam at the
midpoint, the diagonals help to distribute the deck load to the bearings while at the same time
reducing the bending moment.
Figure 2 shows the selected framing plan for this design example. Cross frames are spaced at
approximately 20 feet measured along the centerline of the bridge, which results in 8 panels in
the end spans and 11 panels in the center span. Critical girder sections are identified in Figure 2.
These sections will be referred to frequently in the following narratives, tables, and calculations.
Although not shown in Figure 2, transverse stiffeners are provided at three equal spaces between
cross frame locations.
11
4.6 Field Section Sizes

The lengths of field sections are generally dictated by shipping weight and length restrictions.
Generally, the weight of a single shipping piece is restricted to 200,000 lbs. The piece length is
limited to a maximum of 140 feet, with an ideal piece length of 120 feet. However, shipping
requirements are typically dictated by state or local authorities, in which additional restrictions
may be placed on piece weight and length. Handling issues during erection and in the
fabrication shop also need to be considered as they may govern the length of field sections.
Therefore, the Engineer should consult with contractors and fabricators regarding any specific
restrictions that might influence the field section lengths.
Field section lengths should also be determined with consideration given to the number of field
splices required as well as the locations of field splices. It is desirable to locate field splices as
close as possible to dead load inflection points so as to reduce the forces that must be carried by
the field splice. Field splices located in higher moment regions can become quite large, with cost
increasing proportionally to their size. The Engineer must determine what the most cost
competitive solution is for the particular span arrangement. For complex and longer span
bridges, the fabricators input can be helpful in reaching an economical solution.
The final girder field section lengths for this example are shown in the girder elevation in Figure
3. There is one field splice in each end span and two field splices in the center span, resulting in
five field sections in each girder line or 20 field sections for the entire bridge. For this layout,
the field sections weigh approximately 30,000 to 45,000 pounds. The longest field section, the
center field section of G4, is approximately 137 feet in length. Field sections in this length and
weight range can generally be fabricated, shipped, and erected without significant issues.
To verify that the shipping width is practical, the out to out width of the flanges taking into
account the sweep should be computed. In this example, the shipping width for Field Section 3
(the center field section) of G4 taking into account the sweep is approximately 6 feet, which is
reasonable for shipping.
12
Figure 2: Framing Plan
13
Figure 3: Girder Elevation
14
5.0 FINAL DESIGN

5.1 AASHTO LRFD Limit States
5.1.1 Service Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.2 and 6.5.2)
To satisfy the service limit state, restrictions on stress and deformation under regular conditions
are specified to ensure satisfactory performance of the bridge over its service life. As specified
in Article 6.10.4.1, optional live load deflection criteria and span-to-depth ratios (Article 2.5.2.6)
may be invoked to control deformations.
Steel structures must also satisfy the requirements of Article 6.10.4.2 under the Service II load
combination. The intent of the design checks specified in Article 6.10.4.2 is to prevent
objectionable permanent deformations caused by localized yielding and potential web bendbuckling under expected severe traffic loadings, which might impair rideability. The live-load
portion of the Service II load combination is intended to be the design live load specified in
Article 3.6.1.1. For a permit load situation, a reduction in the specified load factor for live load
under the Service II load combination should be considered for this limit state check.
5.1.2 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.3 and 6.5.3)
To satisfy the fatigue and fracture limit state, restrictions on stress range under regular service
conditions are specified to control crack growth under repetitive loads and to prevent fracture
during the design life on the bridge (Article 6.6.1). Material toughness requirements are also
addressed (Article 6.6.2).
For checking fatigue in steel structures, the fatigue load specified in Article 3.6.1.4 applies, and
the Fatigue I or Fatigue II load combination is used, as applicable. Fatigue resistance of details
is discussed in Article 6.6. A special fatigue requirement for webs (Article 6.10.3) is also
specified to control out-of-plane flexing of the web that might potentially lead to fatigue cracking
under repeated live loading.
5.1.3 Strength Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.4 and 6.5.4)
At the strength limit state, it must be ensured that adequate strength and stability are provided to
resist the statistically significant load combinations the bridge is expected to experience over its
design life. The applicable Strength load combinations (discussed later) are used to check the
strength limit state.
5.1.4 Constructibility Limit State
Although not specified as a separate limit state, constructibility is one of the basic design
objectives of LRFD. The bridge must be safely erected and have adequate strength and stability
during all phases of construction. Specific design provisions are given in Article 6.10.3 of the
AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010) to help ensure constructibility of steel I-girder bridges,
particularly during the specified deck-casting sequence. The constructibility checks are typically
15
made on the steel section only under the factored noncomposite dead loads using the appropriate
strength load combinations.
5.1.5 Extreme Event Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.5 and 6.5.5)
At the extreme event limit state, structural survival of the bridge must be ensured during a major
earthquake or flood, or when struck by a vessel, vehicle, or ice flow. Extreme event limit states
are not covered in this design example.
5.2 Loads
5.2.1 Noncomposite Dead Load
The steel weight is applied as body forces to the fully erected noncomposite structure in the
analysis. A steel density of 490 pounds per cubic foot is assumed. The entire concrete deck is
assumed to be placed at one time for the strength limit state design checks.
5.2.2 Deck Placement Sequence
Staging of the steel erection is considered in addition to the sequential placement of the deck.
The deck is considered to be placed in the following sequence for the constructibility limit state
design checks, which is also illustrated in Figure 4. The concrete is first cast from the left
abutment to the dead load inflection point in Span 1. The concrete between dead load inflection
points in Span 2 is cast second. The concrete beyond the dead load inflection point to the
abutment in Span 3 is cast third. Finally, the concrete between the points of dead load
contraflexure over the two piers is cast. In the analysis, earlier concrete casts are made
composite for each subsequent cast.
For the constructibility limit state design checks, the noncomposite section is checked for the
moments resulting from the deck placement sequence or the moments computed assuming the
entire deck is cast at one time, whichever is larger.
The deck load is assumed to be applied through the shear center of the interior girders in the
analysis. However, the weight of the fresh concrete on the overhang brackets produces
significant lateral force on the flanges of the exterior girders. This eccentric loading and
subsequent lateral force on the flanges must be considered in the constructibility limit state
design checks.
5.2.3 Superimposed Dead Load
The concrete railing loads are applied along the edges of the deck elements in the threedimensional analysis. These superimposed dead loads are applied to the composite structure in
the analysis.
The superimposed dead load is considered a permanent load applied to the long-term composite
section. For computing flexural stresses from permanent loading, the long-term composite
16
section in regions of positive flexure is determined by transforming the concrete deck using a
modular ratio of 3n (Article 6.10.1.1.1b). In regions of negative flexure, the long-term
composite section is assumed to consist of the steel section plus the longitudinal reinforcement
within the effective width of the concrete deck (Article 6.10.1.1.1c), except as permitted
otherwise for the service limit state (see Article 6.10.4.2.1).
17
Figure 4: Deck Placement Sequence
18
5.2.4 Future Wearing Surface

The future wearing surface is applied uniformly over the deck area and is applied to the
composite structure.
The future wearing surface is considered a permanent load applied to the long-term composite section.
Flexural stresses are computed in the same manner described previously for the superimposed dead load.
5.2.5 Live Load

Live loads are assumed to consist of gravity loads (vehicular live loads, rail transit loads and
pedestrian loads), the dynamic load allowance, centrifugal forces, braking forces and vehicular
collision forces. Live loads illustrated in this example include the HL-93 vehicular live load and
a fatigue load, which include the appropriate dynamic load allowance and centrifugal force (see
Section 5.3) effects.
Influence surfaces are utilized to determine the live load force effects in this design example.
More details regarding influence surfaces and the live load analysis associated with the 3D
analysis model are provided in Section 6.1.2 of this example.
Live loads are considered to be transient loads applied to the short-term composite section. For
computing flexural stresses from transient loading, the short-term composite section in regions of
positive flexure is determined by transforming the concrete deck using a modular ratio of n
(Article 6.10.1.1.1b). In regions of negative flexure, the short-term composite section is assumed
to consist of the steel section plus the longitudinal reinforcement within the effective width of the
concrete deck (Article 6.10.1.1.1c), except as permitted otherwise for the fatigue and service
limit states (see Articles 6.6.1.2.1 and 6.10.4.2.1).
When computing longitudinal flexural stresses in the concrete deck (see Article 6.10.1.1.1d), due
to permanent and transient loads, the short-term composite section should be used.
Design Vehicular Live Load (Article 3.6.1.2)
The design vehicular live load is designated as the HL-93 and consists of a combination of the
following placed within each design lane:
a design truck or design tandem.
a design lane load.
The design vehicular live load is discussed in detail within Example 1 of the Steel Bridge Design
Handbook.
Fatigue Load (Article 3.6.1.4)
The vehicular live load for checking fatigue consists of a single design truck (without the lane
load) with a constant rear-axle spacing of 30 feet (Article 3.6.1.4.1). The fatigue live load is
discussed in detail within Example 1 of the Steel Bridge Design Handbook.
19
5.3 Centrifugal Force Computation

The centrifugal force is determined according to Article 3.6.3. The centrifugal force has two
components, the radial force and the overturning force. The radial component of the centrifugal
force is assumed to be transmitted from the deck through the end cross frames or diaphragms and
to the bearings and to the substructure.
The overturning component of centrifugal force occurs because the radial force is applied at a
distance above the top of the deck. The center of gravity of the design truck is assumed to be 6
feet above the roadway surface according to the provisions of Article 3.6.3. The transverse
spacing of the wheels is 6 feet per Figure 3.6.1.2.2-1. The overturning component causes the
exterior (with respect to curvature) wheel line to apply more than half the weight of the truck and
the interior wheel line to apply less than half the weight of the truck by the same amount. Thus,
the outside of the bridge is more heavily loaded with live load. The effect of superelevation,
which reduces the overturning effect of centrifugal force, can be considered as permitted by
Article 3.6.3. Figure 5 shows the geometric relationship between the centrifugal force and the
superelevation. The dimensions denoted by s and h in Figure 5 are both equal to 6 feet.
Figure 5: Vehicular Centrifugal Force Wheel-Load Reactions

Article 3.6.3 states that the centrifugal force shall be taken as the product of the axle weights of
the design truck or tandem and the factor C, taken as:
C f
gR
Eq. (3.6.3-1)
20
where: f = 4/3 for load combinations other than fatigue and 1.0 for fatigue
v = highway design speed (ft/sec)
g = gravitational acceleration: 32.2 ft/sec2
R = radius of curvature of traffic lane (ft)
Use the average bridge radius, R = 700 ft in this case. For the purpose of this design example,
the design speed is assumed to be 35 mph = 51.3 ft/sec.
2
4
51 . 3
C
0 . 156
3 32 . 2 700
The factor C is applied to the axle weights. Per Figure 3.6.1.2.2-1, the total weight of the design
truck axles is 72 kips.
The radial force is computed as follows:
Truck in on lane = 1.2(0.156)(72) = 13.48 kips
Truck in two lanes = 1.0(0.156)(72)(2) = 22.46 kips
Truck in three lanes = 0.85(0.156)(72)(3) = 28.64 kips
All three cases have been adjusted by the appropriate multiple presence factor given in Table
3.6.1.1.2-1. The centrifugal force due to trucks in two lanes is used since the two lanes loaded
case controls for major-axis bending. The force will be applied to the deck in the radial
direction. The force is resisted by the shear strength of the deck and is transferred to the bearings
through the cross frames at the bearings.
The overturning force is computed by taking the sum of the moments about the inside wheel and
setting the sum equal to zero. First, the location of the vehicle center of gravity is determined
taking into account the 5% cross slope of the deck (see Figure 1 and Figure 5). For 5% cross
slope, the angle is equal to:
5
arctan
2 . 862
100
Referring to Figure 5 and measuring from the inside wheel, vehicle gravity acts at a horizontal
distance equal to:
s
2
cos - h sin
6
2
cos 2 . 862
6 sin 2 . 862
2.70
ft
In Figure 5, the right wheel is on the inside of the curve, and its reaction is denoted as R CR. The
left wheel is on the outside of the curve, and its reaction is denoted as RCL. Take the sum of the
moments about the inside wheel:
W 2.70 ft 0.156
6 ft R CL 6 ft
21
where: W = axle load

RCL = reaction of the outside wheel
Solve for RCL:
R
CL
0.61W
Compute RCR, which is the force on the inside wheel:

R
CR
W (1 . 0 0 . 61 ) 0 . 39 W
The RCL and RCR terms were computed with respect to the axle load. Therefore, the wheel loads
in each lane that are applied to the influence surfaces are adjusted by two times these factors
(since there are two wheels per axle), or 1.22 applied to the outside wheel and 0.78 applied to the
inside wheel of each axle. The result is that the outermost girder will receive slightly higher load
and the innermost girder will receive slightly lower load. Thus, it is also necessary to compute
the condition with no centrifugal force, i.e., a stationary vehicle, and select the worst case. The
inside of the bridge will be more heavily loaded for the stationary vehicle case. The designer
may wish to consider the effect of superelevation, particularly if the superelevation is significant,
since superelevation causes an increase in the vertical wheel loads toward the inside of the bridge
and an unloading of the vertical wheel loads toward the outside of the bridge.
Article 3.6.3 specifies that lane load is neglected in computing the centrifugal force since the
spacing of vehicles at high speeds is assumed to be large, resulting in a low density of vehicles
following and/or preceding the design truck.
5.4 Load Combinations
Table 3.4.1-1 is used to determine load combinations for strength according to Article 3.4.
Strength I loading is used for design of most members for the strength limit state. However,
Load Combinations Strength III and V and Service I and II from Table 3.4.1-1 are also checked
for temperature and wind loadings in combination with vertical loading.
The following load combinations and load factors are typically checked in a girder design similar
to this design example. In some design instances, other load cases may be critical, but for this
example, these other load cases are assumed not to apply.
From Table 3.4.1-1 (minimum load factors of Table 3.4.1-2 are not considered here):
Strength I
Strength III
Strength V
Service I
Service II
x [1.25(DC) + 1.5(DW) + 1.75((LL + IM) + CE + BR) + 1.2(TU)]

x [1.25(DC) + 1.5(DW) + 1.4(WS) + 1.2(TU)]
x [1.25(DC) + 1.5(DW) + 1.35((LL + IM) + CE + BR) + 0.4(WS) + 1.0(WL) +
1.2(TU)]
x [DC + DW + (LL + IM) + CE + BR + 0.3(WS) + WL + 1.2(TU)]
x [DC + DW + 1.3((LL + IM) + CE + BR) + 1.2(TU)]
22
Fatigue I
Fatigue II
x [1.5((LL + IM) + CE)]

x [0.75((LL + IM) + CE)]
where:
DC
DW
LL
IM
CE
WS
WL
TU
BR
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
Load modifier specified in Article 1.3.2

Dead load: components and attachments
Dead load: wearing surface and utilities
Vehicular live load
Vehicular dynamic load allowance
Vehicular centrifugal force
Wind load on structure
Wind on live load
Uniform temperature
Vehicular braking force
In addition to the above load combinations, a load combination is included for the
constructibility limit state defined in Article 3.4.2 as follows:
Construction: x [1.25(D) + 1.5(C) + 1.25(WC)]
where:
D = Dead load
C = Construction loads
WC = Wind load for construction conditions from an assumed critical direction.
Magnitude of wind may be less than that used for final bridge design.
In this design example, it has been assumed that there is no equipment on the bridge during
construction and the wind load on the girders is negligible.
For the purpose of this example, it has been assumed that the Strength I load combination
governs for the strength limit state, so only Strength I loads are checked in the sample
calculations for the strength limit state included herein. Also, the load modifier, , is assumed to
be 1.0 throughout this example unless noted otherwise.
23
6.0 ANALYSIS
Article 4.4 of the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010) requires that the analysis be performed
using a method that satisfies the requirements of equilibrium and compatibility and utilizes
stress-strain relationships for the proposed materials. Article 4.6.1.2 provides additional
guidelines for structures that are curved in plan. The moments, shears, and other force effects
required to proportion the superstructure components are to be based on a rational analysis of the
entire superstructure. Equilibrium of horizontally curved I-girders is developed by the transfer of
load between the girders, thus the analysis must recognize the integrated behavior of structural
components.
Furthermore, in accordance with Article 4.6.1.2, the entire superstructure, including bearings, is
to be considered as an integral structural unit in the analysis. Boundary conditions should
represent the articulations provided by the bearings and/or integral connections used in the
design.
In most cases, small deflection elastic theory is acceptable for the analysis of horizontally curved
steel girder bridges. However, curved girders, especially I-girders, are prone to deflect laterally
when the girders are insufficiently braced during erection, and this behavior may not be
appropriately recognized by small deflection theory.
In general, three levels of analysis exist for horizontally curved girder bridges: approximate
methods of analysis, 2D (two-dimensional) methods of analysis, and 3D (three-dimensional)
methods of analysis. The V-load method is an approximate analysis method that is typically
used to analyze curved I-girder bridges. This method was developed based on the understanding
of the distribution of forces through the curved bridge system. The two primary types of 2D
analysis models are the traditional grid (or grillage) model and the plate and eccentric beam
model. In a 2D grid model, the girders and cross frames are modeled using beam elements, with
nodes in a single horizontal plane. In a plate and eccentric beam model, the girders and cross
frames are modeled using beam elements, with nodes in a single horizontal plane, and the deck is
modeled with plate elements offset a vertical distance from the steel superstructure elements. A
3D model recognizes the depth of the superstructure, as the girders are modeled using a plate or
shell element for the web and all cross frame members are modeled using truss type elements.
Two planes of nodes are typically used on each girder, one in the plane of the top flange and the
second in the plane of the bottom flange. Further details regarding these methods of analysis can
be found in the Steel Bridge Design Handbook topic on Structural Analysis.
It should be noted that when an I-girder bridge meets the requirements of Article 4.6.1.2.4b, the
effects of curvature may be ignored in the analysis for determining the major-axis bending
moments and shears. If the requirements of Article 4.6.1.4b are satisfied, the I-girders may be
analyzed as individual straight girders with a span length equal to the arc length, but flange
lateral bending effects should be considered via approximate methods, and cross frame member
forces shall be determined via rational methods.
24
6.1 Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

A three-dimensional finite element analysis is used to analyze the superstructure in this design
example. The girder webs are modeled using plate elements. The top and bottom flanges are
modeled with beam elements. The girder elements connect to nodes that are placed in two
horizontal planes, one plane at the top flange and one plane at the bottom flange. The horizontal
curvature of the girders is represented by straight elements that have small kinks at the nodes,
rather than by curved elements. Nodes are placed at the top and bottom flanges along the girders
at each cross frame location and typically at the third points of each cross frame bay.
The composite deck is modeled using a series of eight-node solid elements attached to the girder
top flanges with beam elements, which represent the shear studs.
Bearings are modeled with dimensionless elements called foundation elements. These
dimensionless elements can provide six different stiffnesses, with three for translation and three
for rotation. If a guided bearing is orientated along the tangential axis of a girder, a stiffness of
zero would be assigned to the stiffness in the tangential direction. The stiffness of the bearing,
and supporting structure if not explicitly modeled, would be assigned to the direction orthogonal
to the tangential axis.
Cross frame members are modeled with individual truss elements connected to the nodes at the
top and bottom flange of the girders.
6.1.1 Bearing Orientation
The orientation and lateral restraint of bearings affect the behavior of most girder bridges for
most load conditions. This is particularly true for curved and skewed girder bridges.
In this example, the bearings at the piers are assumed fixed against translation in both the radial
and tangential directions. The bearings at the abutments are assumed fixed against radial
movement but free in the tangential direction. The pier stiffness in the tangential direction is
considered and is simulated in the analysis by using a spring with a spring constant based on the
stiffness of the pier in the tangential direction. In the radial directions, the piers and abutments
are assumed perfectly rigid.
The lateral restraints resist the elastic lengthening of the girders due to bending. The result is
large lateral bearing forces, which in turn cause an arching effect on the girders that reduces the
apparent bending moments due to gravity loads. If the reduced moments were used in the girder
design, the bearings would have to function as assumed for the life of the bridge to prevent
possible overstress in the girders. To avoid this situation, the lateral bearing restraints are
assumed free for the gravity load analyses used to design the girders. However, the proper
bearing restraints are assumed in the analyses to determine cross frame forces and lateral bearing
forces for the design of these elements.
25
6.1.2 Live Load Analysis

The use of live load distribution factors is typically not appropriate for horizontally curved steel
I-girder bridges because these structures are best analyzed as a system. Therefore, influence
surfaces are most often utilized to more accurately determine the live load force effects in curved
girder bridges. Influence surfaces are an extension of influence lines, such that an influence
surface not only considers the longitudinal position of the live loads but also the transverse
position.
Influence surfaces provide influence ordinates over the entire deck. The influence ordinates are
determined by applying a series of unit vertical loads, one at a time, at selected longitudinal and
transverse positions on the bridge deck surface. The magnitude of the response for the unit
vertical load is the magnitude of the ordinate of the influence surface for the particular response
at the point on the deck where the load is applied. The entire influence surface is created by
curve fitting between calculated ordinates. Specified live loads are then placed on the surface,
mathematically, at the critical locations (maximum and minimum effects), as allowed by the
governing specification. The actual live load effect is determined by multiplying the live load by
the corresponding ordinate. In the case of an HL-93 truck load, a different ordinate will probably
exist for each wheel load. The total HL-93 truck live load effect is the summation of all the
wheel loads times their respective ordinate.
The fatigue load, which consists of a single design truck without a lane load, is analyzed in a
similar manner as the HL-93 truck load.
In curved girder bridges, influence surfaces are generally needed for all force results, such as
major-axis bending moments, minor-axis bending moments, girder shear, reactions, torques,
deflections, cross frame forces, lateral bracing forces, etc.
Unless noted otherwise, all live load force effects in this example are computed using influence
surfaces developed using the three-dimensional analysis. The dynamic load allowance (impact)
is included in the analysis and is applied in accordance with Article 3.6.2 for strength, service,
and fatigue as required. Multiple presence factors are also included within the analysis, and thus
are incorporated into the analysis results. Also, as appropriate, centrifugal force effects are
included in the analysis by applying adjustment factors to the wheel loads as shown in Section
6.3 of this design example.
6.2 Analysis Results
This section shows the results from the three-dimensional analysis of the superstructure.
Analysis results are provided for the moments and shears for all four girders. All analysis results
are unfactored. Live load results include multiple presence factors, dynamic load allowance
(impact), and centrifugal force effects.
26
Table 1 Girder G1 Unfactored Shears by Tenth Point

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
15.62
31.25
46.87
62.49
78.11
93.74
109.36
124.98
140.61
156.23
0.00
20.50
41.01
61.51
82.02
102.52
123.03
143.53
164.04
184.54
205.05
0.00
15.62
31.25
46.87
62.49
78.11
93.74
109.36
124.98
140.61
156.23
DC1STEEL
(kip)
14
9
5
1
-2
-5
-9
-14
-20
-28
-40
41
25
17
10
4
0
-5
-10
-16
-26
-41
40
28
20
14
9
6
1
-1
-5
-9
-14
Girder G1 Unfactored Shears

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
66
17
13
109
-31
45
6
9
87
-21
26
2
5
69
-27
9
2
2
55
-36
-9
0
-1
43
-46
-29
-4
-5
34
-58
-49
-8
-9
27
-73
-70
-12
-13
25
-89
-98
-14
-18
22
-106
-127
-23
-24
20
-125
-159
-35
-30
12
-146
159
35
31
148
-12
116
22
23
124
-24
83
11
15
104
-31
50
8
9
83
-33
24
4
4
66
-37
0
0
0
51
-52
-25
-4
-4
41
-66
-51
-7
-10
33
-81
-80
-12
-15
29
-102
-119
-21
-23
25
-121
-160
-36
-31
12
-152
158
35
31
154
-11
126
24
23
121
-18
96
16
17
107
-21
72
10
14
91
-25
50
7
9
75
-30
30
4
6
62
-34
9
1
2
48
-44
-8
-1
-1
38
-55
-26
-3
-6
31
-69
-45
-7
-9
24
-86
-66
-17
-13
29
-108
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
45
-11
33
-5
27
-8
23
-12
19
-16
13
-20
9
-27
8
-33
8
-37
7
-41
4
-48
49
-4
39
-7
36
-9
29
-9
24
-12
19
-19
15
-24
11
-29
9
-36
7
-40
4
-51
52
-4
43
-5
39
-5
33
-8
28
-11
24
-15
17
-19
13
-23
9
-27
8
-33
9
-45
Note: Live load results include multiple presence factors, dynamic load allowance (impact), and
centrifugal force effects.
27

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
15.87
31.75
47.62
63.50
79.37
95.25
111.12
126.99
142.87
158.74
0.00
20.83
41.67
62.50
83.34
104.17
125.01
145.84
166.68
187.51
208.35
0.00
15.87
31.75
47.62
63.50
79.37
95.25
111.12
126.99
142.87
158.74
DC1STEEL
(kip)
16
10
6
1
-2
-6
-10
-15
-21
-28
-37
37
24
17
11
5
0
-6
-11
-17
-26
-37
37
28
21
15
10
7
2
-1
-6
-10
-16

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
71
7
15
109
-12
47
8
9
73
-13
26
7
5
59
-24
9
0
2
49
-33
-11
-2
-2
39
-42
-30
-4
-5
32
-52
-51
-7
-9
25
-63
-71
-10
-13
17
-75
-92
-15
-18
8
-89
-116
-16
-24
1
-108
-139
-16
-29
4
-138
139
16
30
138
-4
109
15
22
101
-9
78
14
16
84
-22
52
8
9
70
-27
26
3
5
58
-33
0
0
0
45
-46
-26
-3
-5
34
-56
-51
-8
-10
28
-68
-79
-12
-15
19
-84
-109
-17
-22
12
-97
-139
-15
-30
4
-148
139
15
30
148
-4
117
16
23
101
-7
93
13
19
89
-14
71
11
13
77
-21
50
8
9
66
-27
31
5
5
56
-34
11
1
2
47
-42
-7
-2
-1
38
-51
-27
-5
-6
29
-60
-48
-7
-9
20
-76
-71
-7
-15
12
-111
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
41
-3
23
-3
19
-7
15
-9
12
-12
12
-15
9
-19
5
-21
1
-25
0
-31
1
-44
44
-1
28
-3
20
-5
20
-8
16
-9
12
-13
11
-16
8
-20
5
-23
4
-25
1
-47
47
-1
31
-1
27
-4
23
-7
20
-9
17
-12
13
-13
11
-16
8
-20
5
-24
3
-43
28

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
16.13
32.25
48.38
64.50
80.63
96.75
112.88
129.01
145.13
161.26
0.00
21.16
42.33
63.49
84.66
105.82
126.99
148.15
169.32
190.48
211.65
0.00
16.13
32.25
48.38
64.50
80.63
96.75
112.88
129.01
145.13
161.26
DC1STEEL
(kip)
18
12
7
1
-3
-7
-12
-17
-23
-31
-42
42
28
19
13
6
0
-6
-13
-19
-29
-42
42
31
23
17
12
8
3
-1
-6
-12
-18

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
78
8
16
113
-17
53
9
10
84
-18
29
6
6
64
-28
8
0
1
51
-37
-12
-2
-2
41
-45
-34
-5
-6
32
-54
-56
-8
-9
26
-67
-77
-10
-15
19
-81
-98
-17
-18
11
-95
-123
-17
-25
3
-114
-151
-17
-31
6
-143
150
17
32
143
-6
114
16
24
109
-14
84
16
15
90
-24
56
8
11
75
-27
28
4
4
60
-34
0
0
0
46
-47
-28
-4
-5
36
-60
-56
-9
-11
28
-73
-84
-13
-17
20
-90
-115
-17
-25
16
-103
-150
-17
-31
6
-153
151
17
31
153
-6
124
17
25
108
-6
99
15
20
95
-15
77
12
15
83
-22
55
9
10
69
-28
35
5
7
57
-35
13
1
3
48
-42
-7
-2
-1
39
-52
-29
-5
-5
30
-65
-53
-8
-11
23
-84
-77
-8
-16
17
-112
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
40
-4
23
-3
19
-7
15
-9
12
-12
11
-15
8
-19
5
-21
3
-25
0
-31
1
-44
44
-1
28
-4
20
-7
20
-7
16
-9
12
-13
11
-16
8
-19
5
-23
4
-27
1
-47
47
-1
31
-3
27
-5
23
-7
20
-9
17
-12
13
-13
11
-16
8
-19
5
-24
4
-41
29

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20*
21*
22*
23*
24*
25*
26*
27*
28*
29*
30*
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
16.38
32.75
49.13
65.51
81.89
98.26
114.64
131.02
147.39
163.77
0.00
21.49
42.99
64.48
85.98
107.47
128.97
150.46
171.96
193.45
214.95
0.00
16.38
32.75
49.13
65.51
81.89
98.26
114.64
131.02
147.39
163.77
DC1STEEL
(kip)
23
16
11
3
-4
-10
-18
-24
-30
-36
-45
44
33
25
18
9
0
-9
-17
-26
-33
-44
45
36
30
24
18
10
4
-3
-11
-16
-23

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
92
23
18
143
-37
69
11
13
119
-33
44
5
10
99
-33
10
3
2
79
-42
-19
-2
-3
58
-58
-47
-7
-9
40
-77
-74
-13
-14
25
-96
-101
-18
-18
17
-114
-121
-20
-23
14
-132
-134
-26
-27
13
-148
-144
-36
-28
9
-159
142
36
29
159
-9
131
27
27
150
-24
107
17
21
137
-26
77
12
15
114
-30
38
7
7
90
-41
-1
0
0
65
-65
-38
-7
-7
45
-88
-76
-12
-15
35
-110
-109
-18
-21
27
-132
-127
-26
-25
24
-146
-141
-36
-29
7
-159
144
36
28
169
-7
134
28
25
140
-15
121
22
21
130
-15
101
17
19
116
-17
74
12
15
98
-26
47
8
8
81
-40
19
3
2
59
-57
-10
-1
-4
45
-78
-44
-7
-8
36
-98
-69
-12
-12
30
-117
-92
-23
-18
36
-142
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip)
(kip)
53
-11
41
-9
36
-8
29
-11
21
-19
16
-25
9
-33
4
-40
3
-45
3
-49
3
-55
55
-3
47
-5
45
-7
37
-8
31
-13
23
-23
15
-31
9
-36
7
-44
5
-48
3
-56
60
-3
49
-3
47
-3
41
-5
35
-9
29
-16
21
-21
13
-29
8
-36
8
-43
9
-53
* Exact analysis results for DC1 shears in Span 3 of Girder 4 are not provided in the NCHRP
example referenced by this design example. For this design example, DC1 shears in Span 3 of
Girder 4 are based on Span 1 Girder 4 shears, as the bridge is symmetrical.
30
Table 5 Girder G1 Unfactored Major-Axis Bending Moments by Tenth Point

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
15.62
31.25
46.87
62.49
78.11
93.74
109.36
124.98
140.61
156.23
0.00
20.50
41.01
61.51
82.02
102.52
123.03
143.53
164.04
184.54
205.05
0.00
15.62
31.25
46.87
62.49
78.11
93.74
109.36
124.98
140.61
156.23
Girder G1 Unfactored Major-Axis Bending Moments

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
(kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft)
0
0
0
0
0
0
178
889
184
188
1415
-381
295
1478
288
311
2409
-718
351
1767
327
375
3003
-1006
348
1754
316
373
3249
-1245
284
1438
260
313
3192
-1448
156
804
161
189
2875
-1605
-42
-184
6
-6
2201
-2003
-322
-1553
-229
-274
1465
-2569
-716
-3348
-564
-619
770
-3305
-1333
-5897
-1169
-1167
883
-5274
-1333
-5897
-1169
-1167
883
-5274
-569
-2719
-447
-505
842
-2755
-123
-648
-78
-94
1694
-1796
157
709
141
176
2655
-1485
331
1554
293
347
3273
-1481
384
1812
335
400
3498
-1462
323
1513
272
338
3297
-1488
159
717
150
182
2678
-1528
-131
-688
-87
-103
1705
-1871
-575
-2733
-433
-489
906
-2700
-1302
-5781
-1124
-1130
885
-5113
-1302
-5781
-1124
-1130
885
-5113
-726
-3371
-560
-617
776
-3236
-323
-1555
-237
-277
1464
-2544
-42
-187
0
-5
2196
-1980
154
797
160
187
2866
-1567
283
1433
262
313
3186
-1420
347
1750
315
373
3247
-1222
350
1761
323
372
3003
-988
294
1473
282
309
2420
-706
177
881
183
184
1436
-376
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip-ft) (kip-ft)
0
0
529
-116
873
-200
1049
-252
1103
-291
1067
-327
955
-412
741
-512
463
-621
181
-764
185
-991
185
-991
232
-624
588
-484
917
-369
1085
-329
1144
-360
1089
-327
924
-371
597
-497
261
-620
180
-956
180
-956
191
-744
468
-612
744
-505
956
-405
1068
-323
1107
-284
1052
-251
880
-204
543
-112
0
0
31

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
15.87
31.75
47.62
63.50
79.37
95.25
111.12
126.99
142.87
158.74
0.00
20.83
41.67
62.50
83.34
104.17
125.01
145.84
166.68
187.51
208.35
0.00
15.87
31.75
47.62
63.50
79.37
95.25
111.12
126.99
142.87
158.74

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
0
0
0
0
0
0
206
962
139
201
1210
-185
340
1585
247
330
1996
-376
404
1875
312
392
2444
-570
397
1840
322
389
2632
-772
322
1488
271
321
2582
-986
177
820
149
189
2325
-1196
-38
-182
-23
-17
1813
-1635
-334
-1533
-247
-291
1203
-2146
-733
-3262
-494
-644
605
-2683
-1324
-5605
-817
-1186
556
-4053
-1324
-5605
-817
-1186
556
-4053
-597
-2681
-419
-526
652
-2177
-143
-676
-95
-109
1351
-1347
159
700
145
173
2070
-931
355
1600
284
355
2505
-760
416
1879
333
410
2668
-664
347
1550
293
344
2521
-764
162
714
139
178
2060
-927
-150
-708
-106
-120
1355
-1375
-602
-2690
-412
-513
688
-2142
-1297
-5504
-811
-1151
552
-3942
-1297
-5504
-811
-1151
552
-3942
-742
-3274
-495
-640
649
-2644
-336
-1539
-248
-295
1236
-2139
-39
-185
-25
-14
1835
-1640
176
816
148
187
2344
-1214
321
1485
264
320
2600
-992
395
1833
318
388
2650
-775
403
1865
314
389
2458
-572
338
1575
248
328
2017
-379
203
950
135
196
1240
-189
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip-ft) (kip-ft)
0
0
373
-43
581
-87
681
-132
715
-179
695
-228
631
-280
507
-335
331
-391
148
-455
112
-560
112
-560
167
-369
400
-301
591
-241
703
-184
739
-143
703
-185
585
-243
396
-308
179
-364
109
-549
109
-549
164
-447
339
-387
509
-332
633
-279
699
-228
719
-177
685
-131
588
-87
383
-43
0
0
32

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
16.13
32.25
48.38
64.50
80.63
96.75
112.88
129.01
145.13
161.26
0.00
21.16
42.33
63.49
84.66
105.82
126.99
148.15
169.32
190.48
211.65
0.00
16.13
32.25
48.38
64.50
80.63
96.75
112.88
129.01
145.13
161.26

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
0
0
0
0
0
0
248
1090
163
226
1388
-301
406
1775
281
366
2296
-581
478
2080
349
429
2814
-845
468
2024
355
422
3038
-1105
379
1622
294
345
2993
-1365
206
873
156
196
2703
-1628
-48
-237
-44
-20
2143
-2126
-388
-1708
-292
-326
1435
-2711
-842
-3570
-568
-702
727
-3254
-1517
-6112
-931
-1283
750
-4594
-1517
-6112
-931
-1283
750
-4594
-694
-2960
-485
-578
699
-2517
-183
-803
-122
-129
1454
-1560
164
708
149
179
2255
-1160
390
1696
307
377
2837
-1015
461
2006
362
439
3026
-914
380
1646
317
367
2851
-1020
167
721
145
183
2259
-1165
-191
-832
-134
-140
1459
-1591
-700
-2965
-476
-562
727
-2461
-1486
-5999
-923
-1244
733
-4458
-1486
-5999
-923
-1244
733
-4458
-852
-3586
-569
-698
747
-3200
-389
-1714
-293
-330
1450
-2685
-47
-240
-40
-27
2153
-2120
206
870
155
195
2711
-1623
378
1619
287
344
3002
-1360
468
2017
352
420
3044
-1100
476
2065
350
426
2811
-837
403
1759
281
362
2299
-572
244
1071
156
220
1408
-298
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip-ft) (kip-ft)
0
0
389
-71
600
-133
700
-195
733
-256
708
-316
639
-381
508
-452
339
-525
169
-608
209
-732
209
-732
173
-421
371
-344
541
-272
659
-207
696
-160
657
-209
535
-276
368
-352
184
-419
203
-711
203
-711
183
-595
345
-519
511
-448
641
-377
711
-313
735
-253
697
-192
599
-132
395
-68
0
0
33

10th
Point
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
20*
21*
22*
23*
24*
25*
26*
27*
28*
29*
30*
Span
Length
(ft)
0.00
16.38
32.75
49.13
65.51
81.89
98.26
114.64
131.02
147.39
163.77
0.00
21.49
42.99
64.48
85.98
107.47
128.97
150.46
171.96
193.45
214.95
0.00
16.38
32.75
49.13
65.51
81.89
98.26
114.64
131.02
147.39
163.77

Dead Load
LL+I
DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
0
0
0
0
0
0
328
1364
287
288
2009
-529
558
2305
463
483
3570
-1059
678
2775
542
586
4636
-1582
675
2744
527
586
5134
-2076
546
2192
425
479
5084
-2546
293
1136
241
269
4575
-2966
-69
-374
-24
-32
3498
-3745
-532
-2263
-375
-411
2286
-4502
-1108
-4482
-814
-846
1135
-5092
-1917
-7272
-1537
-1478
1368
-6726
-1917
-7272
-1537
-1478
1368
-6726
-940
-3811
-675
-713
1078
-3926
-277
-1151
-155
-165
2307
-2610
208
881
214
257
3687
-2110
531
2224
474
537
4842
-1924
635
2658
554
629
5192
-1768
518
2173
452
526
4832
-1940
210
888
225
260
3765
-2147
-284
-1174
-163
-177
2337
-2377
-945
-3805
-648
-689
1130
-3812
-1871
-7126
-1474
-1432
1309
-6519
-1871
-7126
-1474
-1432
1309
-6519
-1108
-4482
-806
-854
1140
-4897
-532
-2263
-381
-405
2272
-4379
-69
-374
-24
-32
3470
-3676
293
1136
243
267
4553
-2915
546
2192
429
475
5070
-2505
675
2744
529
584
5127
-2044
678
2755
540
588
4643
-1557
558
2305
460
486
3607
-1051
328
1364
286
289
2054
-531
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fatigue LL+I
Pos.
Neg.
(kip-ft) (kip-ft)
0
0
695
-143
1192
-289
1497
-436
1611
-580
1560
-715
1396
-843
1072
-957
657
-1060
249
-1161
351
-1315
351
-1315
280
-852
749
-737
1207
-620
1484
-495
1579
-395
1487
-500
1225
-631
767
-759
317
-844
336
-1259
336
-1259
271
-1124
665
-1032
1069
-937
1393
-827
1560
-703
1612
-569
1503
-428
1209
-285
716
-144
0
0
*Exact analysis results for DC1 moments in Span 3 of Girder 4 are not provided in the NCHRP
example referenced by this design example. For this design example, DC1 moments in Span 3
of Girder 4 are based on Span 1 Girder 4 moments, as the bridge is symmetrical.
34
Table 9 Selected Girder G4 Unfactored Major-Axis Bending Moments

Girder G4 Unfactored Moments Used in Example Calculations*
Dead Load
LL+I
Fatigue LL+I
Concrete Casts
Location
10th Point DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
Pos.
Neg.
#1
#2
(kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft) (kip-ft)
Section G4-1
4.2
661
2682
510
583
5125
1603
-603
3932
-3035
Section G4-2
10
-1917
-7272
-1537
-1478
-6726
351
-1315
Field Splice 2
11.8**
-382
-1585
-250
-237
2054
-2772
664
-759
-1910
-169
* Values not shown are not critical and/or are not used in the example calculations.
** Actual Field Splice 2 location is at 10th Point 12, but the values at 10th Point 11.8 are conservatively used for design.
Table 10 Selected Girder G4 Unfactored Shears by Tenth Point

Girder G4 Unfactored Shears Used in Example Calculations (1)
Dead Load
LL+I
Fatigue LL+I
Concrete Casts
Location
10th Point DC1STEEL DC1CONC
DC2
DW
Pos.
Neg.
Pos.
Neg.
#1
#2
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
(kip)
Section G4-1
4.2
-5
-23.8
-4
-2.9
-61.3
20
-20
Section G4-2
10
-45
-144
-36
-28
-159
3
-55
Section G4-3
0
23
92
23
19
143
(2)
Field Splice 2
27
112
19
22
139
7
92
11.8
(1) Values not shown are not critical and/or are not used in the example calculations.
(2) Actual Field Splice 2 location is at 10th Point 12, but the values at 10th Point 11.8 are conservatively used for design.
35
7.0 DESIGN
7.1 General Design Considerations
7.1.1 Flanges
The size of curved I-girder flanges is a function of girder depth, girder radius, cross frame
spacing, and minimum specified yield stress of the flange. Article 6.10.8.2.2 defines a compact
flange width-to-thickness ratio limit such that the tip stress in a discretely braced noncomposite
compression flange may reach the yield stress prior to the onset of local buckling. Article
6.10.8.2.2 also defines a noncompact flange width-to-thickness ratio limit which determines if
the type of buckling will be elastic or inelastic. At the strength limit state, the bending stress in
discretely braced noncompact compression and tension flanges needs to satisfy the expressions
given by Eqs. (6.10.7.2.1-1) and (6.10.7.2.1-2) respectively. For a compact section at the
strength limit state, the section must satisfy the provisions of Article 6.10.7.1.1.
The smaller flange plate should be used to compute the strength resistance of a partially braced
flange between brace points when the flange size changes within a panel. The largest major-axis
bending stress at or in between brace points should be used in conjunction with the flange lateral
bending stress at the more critical brace point and the smallest flange size within the panel to
compute the nominal flange stress.
For the constructibility limit state, Article 6.10.3 requires that noncomposite top flanges in
compression be designed as discretely braced flanges prior to hardening of the concrete to ensure
that no yielding occurs, which tends to lead to the use of wider flanges. Lateral bending in top
flanges is not considered after the deck has hardened for any limit state since the hardened
concrete deck is assumed to continuously brace the top flange along the length of the girder.
7.1.2 Webs
According to the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010), webs are investigated for elastic bendbuckling at the constructibility and service limit states without consideration of post-buckling
shear or bending strength. Bend-buckling must be considered for both the noncomposite and
composite cases since the effective slenderness changes when the neutral axis shifts.
7.1.3 Shear Connectors
Shear connectors are to be provided throughout the entire length of the bridge in cases of curved
continuous structures according to Article 6.10.10.1. The required pitch of the shear connectors
is determined for fatigue and checked for strength. Three 7/8-inch diameter by 6-inch shear studs
per row are assumed in the design. The fatigue strength specified in Article 6.10.10.2 is used for
the design of the shear connectors.
The design longitudinal shear range in each stud is computed for a single passage of the factored
fatigue truck. The analysis is made assuming that the heavy wheel of the truck is applied to both
the positive and negative shear sides of the influence surfaces. This computation implicitly
36
assumes that the truck direction is reversed. In addition to major-axis bending shear, Article
6.10.10.1.2 requires that the radial shear due to curvature or radial shear due to causes other than
curvature (whichever is larger) be added vectorially to the bending shear for the fatigue check.
The deck in the regions between points of dead load contraflexure is considered fully effective in
computing the first moment for determining the required pitch for fatigue. This assumption
requires tighter shear connector spacing in these regions than if only the longitudinal reinforcing
is assumed effective, as is often done. There are several reasons the concrete is assumed
effective. First, known field measurements indicate that it is effective at service loads. Second,
the horizontal shear force in the deck is considered effective in the analysis and the deck must be
sufficiently connected to the steel girders to be consistent with this assumption. Third, maximum
shear range occurs when the truck is placed on each side of the point under consideration. Most
often this produces positive bending so that the deck is in compression, even when the location is
between the point of dead load contraflexure and the pier. The point of dead load contraflexure is
obviously a poor indicator of positive or negative bending when moving loads are considered.
The strength check for shear connectors requires that a radial shear force due to curvature be
considered. The tension force in the concrete deck in the negative-moment region is given as
0.45fc in Article 6.10.10.4.2. This value is a conservative approximation to account for the
combined contribution of both the longitudinal reinforcing steel and the concrete that remains
effective in tension based on its modulus of rupture. For both fatigue and strength checks, the
parameters used in the equations are determined using the deck within the effective flange width.
7.1.4 Details (Stiffeners, Cross Frames, Fatigue Categories)
In this example, there are intermediate transverse web stiffeners at three even spaces between
cross frame locations. Intermediate stiffeners are typically fillet welded to the web and to the
compression flange. Article 6.10.11.1.1 states that single-sided stiffeners on horizontally curved
girders should be attached to both flanges. When utilized on a curved girder, the intermediate
stiffeners are fillet welded to the tension flange. The termination of the stiffener-to-web weld
adjacent to the tension flange is typically stopped a distance of 4tw from the flange-to-web weld.
The base metal adjacent to the stiffener weld to the tension flange is checked for fatigue.
Condition 4.1 from Table 6.6.1.2.3-1 applies, which corresponds to the base metal at the toe of
transverse stiffener-to-flange fillet welds, and Category C is the indicated fatigue category.
Where the stiffener is fillet welded to the compression flange and the flange undergoes a net
tension, the flange must also be checked for Category C. When the girder is curved, the flange
lateral bending creates an additional stress at the tip of the stiffener-to-flange weld away from the
web. Thus, the total stress range is computed from the sum of the lateral and major-axis bending
stress ranges.
Transverse web stiffeners used as connection plates at cross frames are fillet welded to the top
and bottom flange. When flanges are subjected to a net tensile stress, fatigue must be checked at
these points. This detail is also Condition 4.1 from Table 6.6.1.2.3-1, so the applicable fatigue
category is Category C.
Base metal at the shear stud connector welds to the top flange must be checked for fatigue
whenever the flange is subjected to a net tensile stress. Condition 8.1 from Table 6.6.1.2.3-1
37
relates to the base metal at stud-type shear connectors that are attached by fillet or automatic stud
welding, and Category C is the indicated fatigue category.
In this design example, cross-frame angles are fillet welded to gusset plates. Condition 7.1 from
Table 6.6.1.2.3-1 applies, which corresponds to Category E or E, depending on the thickness of
the welded portion of the cross frame member. The welds could be balanced on the two sides of
the angles to reduce the eccentricity in that plane.
7.1.5 Wind Loading
7.1.5.1 Loading
Article 3.8 provides the wind loading to be used for design. Article 3.8.1 requires that various
wind directions be examined in order to determine the extreme force effects in the various
elements of the structure. The governing wind force on the curved bridge in this example equals
the wind intensity times the projected area of the bridge; in other words, the wind is applied
along the chord length. It should be noted that the total force along the chord length is less than
that computed if the wind were assumed to be applied perpendicular to the bridge along the arc
length. Depending on how the analysis model is set up, the wind force at each node may need to
be separated into a transverse and longitudinal component. For simplicity, many designers
choose to apply the wind force perpendicular to the girder at each node, which is a conservative
approach.
Since there are nodes at the top and bottom of the girder, it is possible to divide the wind force
between the top and bottom flange. The tributary area for the top of the windward girder equals
half of the girder depth plus the height of the exposed deck and railing concrete times the
average spacing to each adjacent node. The tributary area for the bottom of the girder is simply
half of the girder depth times the average spacing to each adjacent node.
Since the bridge is superelevated, the girders on the inside of the curve extend below the bottom
of girder G4. Each successive girder extends approximately 6 inches lower. This exposed area
is included in the load computation if the wind is applied from the G4 side of the bridge. If wind
is applied from the G1 side of the bridge, an additional upward projection due to superelevation
is manifest in the railing on the opposite side near G4 and is used in computing the wind loading.
When the girders are being erected, wind load may be applied across the ends of the girders,
which are temporarily exposed. An erection analysis is not included in this example.
7.1.5.2 Analysis
The completed bridge has an exposed height of approximately 10.5 feet. The design wind
intensity is 50 psf, so the total wind force applied to the projected length (chord length) of the
bridge is computed as follows:
wWS = (10.5)(50) = 525 lb/ft
38
According to the provisions of Article 3.8.1.3, wind on the live load is specified as 100 pounds
per linear foot.
wWL = 100 lb/ft
However, wind load is not analyzed in this design example.
7.1.5.3 Construction
In addition to the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010) load combinations, each critical phase of
construction must also be examined as required by Article 6.10.3.1. When investigating
construction loads, a load factor of 1.25 is used for the wind load as specified in Article 3.4.2.
7.1.6 Steel Erection
Erection is one of the most significant issues pertaining to curved girder bridges. Curved I-girder
bridges often require more temporary supports than a straight I-girder bridge of the same span.
The temporary supports are needed to provide stability and deflection control. Erection of
girders in this design example is assumed to be performed by assembling and lifting pairs of
girders with the cross frames between the girders bolted into place.
The first lift is composed of two pairs of girders, G1-G2 and G3-G4, in Span 1. The positive
moment sections of each pair are spliced to the corresponding pier sections before lifting. Prior
to erection, each pair of girders is fit up with cross frames and the bolts are tightened. These
assemblies are assumed to be accomplished while the girders are fully supported, which
simulates the no-load condition that was used in the shop, so that strain due to self-weight is
negligible. Each girder pair is then erected. Cross frames between girders G2 and G3 are then
erected and their bolts are tightened. This procedure is repeated in Span 3. The sections in Span
2 are similarly fit up in pairs and erected. Finally, the bolts in the splices in Span 2 are installed
and tightened and the cross frames between girders G2 and G3 in Span 2 are installed.
According to the provisions of Article 2.5.3, one feasible erection sequence should be defined in
the contract documents when the designer has assumed a particular sequence that induces certain
stresses under dead load or when the bridge is of unusual complexity. A curved girder bridge is
a good candidate for including an erection sequence in the contract documents. Although it is
not the responsibility of the designer to consider all potential conditions during the construction
of the bridge, sufficient conditions should be considered during a study of the erection scheme to
ensure that it is feasible. A detailed steel erection analysis is not included in this example.
7.1.7 Deck Placement Sequence
The deck is assumed to be placed in four casts.
abutment and ending at the point of dead load
between points of dead load contraflexure. The
load contraflexure to the abutment. The fourth
sequence is illustrated in Figure 4.
The first cast is in Span 1 commencing at the

contraflexure. The second cast is in Span 2
third cast is in Span 3 from the point of dead
cast is over both piers. The deck placement
39
The unfactored moments from the deck staging analysis are presented in Table 9. DC1STEEL
moments are due to the steel weight based on the assumption that it was placed at one time.
DC1CONC moments are due to the deck weight assumed to be placed on the bridge at one time.
The concrete cast moments are due to the particular deck cast. DC2 and DW are superimposed
dead loads placed on the fully composite bridge. Included in the DC2 and concrete cast
moments are the moments due to the deck haunch and the stay-in-place forms. Reactions are
accumulated sequentially in the analysis so that uplift can be checked at each stage.
Accumulated deflections by stage are also computed.
In each analysis stage of the deck placement, prior casts are assumed to be composite. The
modular ratio for the deck is assumed to be 3n to account for creep. A somewhat smaller
modular ratio may be desirable for the staging analyses since full creep usually takes
approximately three years to occur. A modular ratio of n should be used to check the deck
stresses.
7.2 Section Properties
The calculation of the section properties for Sections G4-1 and G4-2 is illustrated in this section.
In computing the composite section properties, the structural slab thickness, or total thickness
minus the thickness of the integral wearing surface, should be used. In this example, the total
slab thickness is 9.5 inches with a 0.5-inch integral wearing surface; therefore, the structural
thickness of the deck slab is 9.0 inches.
For all section property calculations, the haunch depth of 4.0 inches is considered in computing
the section properties, but the area of the haunch concrete is not included. Since the actual depth
of the haunch concrete may vary from its theoretical value to account for construction tolerances,
many designers ignore the haunch concrete depth in all calculations. For composite section
properties including only longitudinal reinforcement, a haunch depth is considered when
determining the vertical position of the reinforcement relative to the steel girder. For this
example, the longitudinal reinforcement steel area is assumed to be equal to 8.0 in.2 per girder
and is assumed to be placed 4.0 inches from the bottom of the deck.
The composite section must consist of the steel section and the transformed area of the effective
width of the concrete deck. Therefore, compute the modular ratio n (Article 6.10.1.1.1b):
n
Eq. (6.10.1.1.1b-1)
Ec
where Ec is the modulus of elasticity of the concrete determined as specified in Article 5.4.2.4.
A unit weight of 0.150 kcf is used for the concrete in the calculation of the modular ratio.
1.5
E c 33,000
K1 w
E c 33,000
(1.0) (0.150)
Eq. (5.4.2.4-1)
f 'c
1.5
4.0 3,834 ksi
40
29,000
3,834
7.56
Even though Article C6.10.1.1.1b permits n to be taken as 8 for concrete with fc equal to 4.0 ksi,
n = 7.56 will be used in all subsequent computations in this design example.
7.2.1 Section G4-1 Properties Span 1 Positive Moment
Section G4-1 is located near the mid-span of Span 1 and is as shown in Figure 6. For this
section, the longitudinal reinforcement is conservatively neglected in computing the composite
section properties as is typically assumed in design.
Figure 6: Sketch of I-girder Cross-Section at Section G4-1
41
7.2.1.1 Effective Width of Concrete Deck

As specified in Article 6.10.1.1.1e, the effective flange width is to be determined as specified in
Article 4.6.2.6. According to Article 4.6.2.6, the deck slab effective width for an interior
composite girder may be taken as one-half the distance to the adjacent girder on each side of the
component; and for an exterior girder it may be taken as one-half the distance to the adjacent
girder plus the full overhang width. Therefore, the deck slab effective width, beff, for girder G4
is:
b eff
11 . 0
2
3 . 75 9.25 ft 111 in.
7.2.1.2 Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-1

In the calculation of the section properties that follow in Table 11 to Table 13, d is measured
vertically from a horizontal axis through the mid-depth of the web to the centroid of each
element of the I-girder. Section properties are calculated for the noncomposite (steel only)
section, composite section using 3n, and composite section using n.
Table 11 Section G4-1: Steel Only Section Properties
42
Table 12 Section G4-1: 3n=22.68 Long-term Composite Section Properties
Table 13 Section G4-1: n=7.56 Short-term Composite Section Properties
7.2.1.3 Plastic Moment Neutral Axis: Section G4-1

Per Article 6.11.6.2.2 for sections in positive flexure, the ductility requirements of Article
6.10.7.3 must be satisfied for compact and noncompact sections, to protect the concrete deck
from premature crushing. This requires the computation of the plastic neutral axis, in accordance
with Article D6.1. The longitudinal deck reinforcement is conservatively neglected. The
location of the plastic neutral axis for the I-girder is computed as follows:
Pt = Fyt bt tt
Pw = Fyw D tw
Pc = Fyc bc tc
Ps = 0.85 fc beff ts
Prb = Prt = 0 kips
= (50)(21.0)(1.5)
= (50)(84.0)(0.5625)
= (50)(20.0)(1.0)
= (0.85)(4.0)(111)(9.0)
= 1,575 kips
= 2,363 kips
= 1,000 kips
= 3,397 kips
43
Pt + Pw + Pc > Ps + Prb + Prt

1,575 + 2,363 + 1,000 = 4,938 kips > 3,397 kips
Therefore, the plastic neutral axis (PNA) is in the top flange, per Case II of Table D6-1.
Compute the PNA in accordance with Case II:
Y
t c P w P t P s P rt P rb
1
2
Pc
1.0 2 , 363 1 , 575 3 , 397 0 0
2
1,000
Y 0.77 in. downward
from the top of the top flange
(PNA
location)
7.2.2 Section G4-2 Properties Support 2 Negative Moment

Section G4-2 is located at Support 2 and is as shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Sketch of I-girder cross-section at Section G4-2

The effective width of concrete deck is the same for Section G4-2 as calculated for Section G4-1,
beff = 111 in.
7.2.2.1 Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-2
For members with shear connectors provided throughout their entire length that also satisfy the
provisions of Article 6.10.1.7, Articles 6.6.1.2.1 and 6.10.4.2.1 permit the concrete deck to be
considered effective for negative flexure when computing stress ranges and flexural stresses
acting on the composite section at the fatigue and service limit states, respectively. Therefore,
44
section properties for the long-term (3n) and short-term (n) composite section, including the
concrete
deck,
are
determined
in
45
Table 15 and Table 16, respectively, for later use in the calculations for Section G4-2 at these
limits states. Longitudinal reinforcement could have been included in these section property
calculations but was ignored due to its minimal effect on the moment of inertia. The concrete
deck should not be considered effective for negative flexure at the strength limit state. For this
scenario, longitudinal reinforcement but not the concrete is used to compute the section
properties
as
shown
in
46
Table 17 and Table 18.

Although not required by the AASHTO LRFD (5th Edition, 2010), for stress calculations
involving the application of long-term loads to the composite section in regions of negative
flexure, the area of the longitudinal reinforcement is conservatively adjusted in this example for
the effects of concrete creep. Creep effects are accounted for by dividing the area of longitudinal
reinforcement
by
3
(i.e.
8.00
in.2/3
=
2.67
in.2)
as
shown
in
47
Table 17 for the long-term (3n) composite section properties of the steel section with
longitudinal reinforcement. The concrete is assumed to transfer the force from the longitudinal
deck reinforcement to the rest of the cross-section, and concrete creep acts to reduce that force
over time. However, the short-term (n) composite section properties, as shown in Table 18,
consider the full area of longitudinal reinforcement. The concrete is assumed to be cracked in
both
48
Table 17 and Table 18 and therefore is not included. The centroid of the longitudinal steel
reinforcement is assumed to be located 4.0 inches from the bottom of the deck slab.
In the calculation of the section properties that follow in Table 14 to Table 18, d is measured
vertically from a horizontal axis through the mid-depth of the web to the centroid of each
element of the I-girder.
Table 14 Section G4-2: Steel Only Section Properties
49
Table 15 Section G4-2: 3n=22.68 Composite Section Properties with Transformed Deck
Table 16 Section G4-2: n=7.56 Composite Section Properties with Transformed Deck
50
Table 17 Section G4-2: Long-term (3n) Composite Section Properties with Longitudinal
Steel Reinforcement
Table 18 Section G4-2: Short-term (n) Composite Section Properties with Longitudinal
Steel Reinforcement
7.2.3 Check of Minimum Negative Flexure Concrete Deck Reinforcement

To control concrete deck cracking in regions of negative flexure, Article 6.10.1.7 specifies that
the total cross-sectional area of the longitudinal reinforcement must not be less than 1 percent of
the total cross-sectional area of the deck. The minimum longitudinal reinforcement must be
provided wherever the longitudinal tensile stress in the concrete deck due to either the factored
construction loads or Load Combination Service II exceeds fr. is to be taken as 0.9 and fr shall
be taken as the modulus of rupture of the concrete determined as follows:
For normal weight concrete:
For lightweight concrete: fr is calculated as specified in Article 5.4.2.6.
f r 0 . 24
'
fc
51
It is further specified that the reinforcement is to have a specified minimum yield strength not
less than 60 ksi and a size not exceeding No. 6 bars. The reinforcement should be placed in two
layers uniformly distributed across the deck width, and two-thirds should be placed in the top
layer. The individual bars must be spaced at intervals not exceeding 12 inches.
Article 6.10.1.1.1c states that for calculating stresses in composite sections subjected to negative
flexure at the strength limit state, the composite section for both short-term and long-term
moments is to consist of the steel section and the longitudinal reinforcement within the effective
width of the concrete deck. Referring to the cross-section shown in Figure 1:
Adeck = (entire width of 9 thick deck) + (triangular portion of overhang)
A
deck
9.0
12
0.01 4,498
44.98
40.5
40.5
1 4 .0
28 / 2
2
3 1 . 24 ft
3.75
12
2 12
4,498 in.
44.98 in.
1.11 in. /ft 0 . 093 in. /in.
0.093 111 10 . 32 in.
per exterior girder
Therefore, the assumption of 8.00 in.2 of longitudinal deck reinforcement is conservative for the
purpose
of
section
property
calculations
and
is
left
as
shown
in
52
Table 17 and Table 18. When the reinforcement is detailed, #6 bars at 6 inches placed in the top
layer and #4 bars spaced at 6 in the bottom layer could be specified. Therefore, the total area of
deck reinforcement steel in the given effective width of concrete deck would be:
A
111
0 . 44 0 . 44 0 . 20 0 . 20
11 . 84 in.
12
1 0 . 32 in.
Also, approximately two-thirds of the reinforcement is in the top layer:
0 . 44 0 . 44
1 . 28
0 . 69
2
3
The use of the longitudinal reinforcement computed above is also addressed within the deck
constructibility checks shown later in this design example. It should be noted that the area of
longitudinal reinforcement shown above is required in the positive moment region and even at
the location of maximum positive moment in the case of this example because of the presence of
negative moment at these locations during the placement of the deck.
7.3 Girder Check: Section G4-3, Shear at End Support (Article 6.10.9)
According to the provisions of Article 6.10.9.1, at the strength limit state, straight and curved
web panels shall satisfy:
Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
Vu vVn
where:
v = resistance factor for shear = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Vn = nominal shear resistance determined as specified in Articles 6.10.9.2 and 6.10.9.3
for unstiffened and stiffened webs, respectively
Vu = shear in the web at the section under consideration due to the factored loads
Since the web at Support 1 is an end panel, Article 6.10.9.3.3 applies, and the nominal shear
resistance shall be taken as:
V n V cr CV
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1)
where: C = ratio of the shear-buckling resistance to the shear yield strength

Vcr = shear-buckling resistance
Vp = plastic shear force
7.3.1 Applied Shear
The unfactored shears for G4 at Support 1 are shown below. These results are directly from the
three-dimensional analysis as reported in Table 10.
Steel Dead Load:
Concrete Deck Dead Load:
VDC1-STEEL
VDC1-CONC
= 23 kips
= 92 kips
53
Composite Dead Load:

VDC2
Future Wearing Surface Dead Load: VDW
Live Load (including IM + CF):
VLL+IM
= 23 kips
= 19 kips
= 143 kips
The maximum Strength I factored shear is computed as:

V u 1 . 25 23 92 23 1 . 50 19 1 . 75 143
451 kips
7.3.2 Shear Resistance

Compute the plastic shear force:
V p 0 . 58 F yw Dt
0 . 58 50
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-2)
84 0 . 5625 1,370
kips
To determine the ratio C, the shear-buckling coefficient must first be computed as follows:
k 5
5
do
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-7)
At this particular location, the transverse stiffener spacing is assumed to be 82 inches. Therefore,
do = 82 in.
k 5
5
82
84
1 0 .2
Check the following relation in order to select the appropriate equation for computing C:
D
tw
84
0 . 5625
149 . 3 1 . 40
Ek
F yw
1 . 40
29 , 000 (10 . 2 )
50
108
Since the above relation is true, the ratio C is computed using Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6) as follows:
C
1 . 57
D
t
w
Ek
yw
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
54
29 , 000 10 . 2
0 . 416
50
84

0 . 5625
1 . 57
The nominal shear resistance is then computed in accordance with Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1):
V n V cr 0 . 416
1, 370
5 70 kips
Using the above results, check the requirement of Article 6.10.9.1,

V u 451 kips
v V n (1 . 0 )( 570 ) 570 kips
Vu vVn
OK (Ratio = 0.791)
Therefore, the web is satisfactory for shear at Support 1. It should be noted that the sample
calculation shown above is for a web end panel, but for interior web panels, the provisions of
Article 6.10.9.3.2 shall apply.
7.4 Girder Check: Section 4-1, Constructibility (Article 6.10.3)
For critical stages of construction, the provisions of Articles 6.10.3.2.1 through 6.10.3.2.3 shall
be applied to the flanges of the girder. However, in many cases, such as in this design example,
6.10.3.2.3 does not apply since neither flange is continuously braced during construction. Web
shear shall be checked in accordance with Article 6.10.3.3.
As specified in Article 6.10.3.4, sections in positive flexure that are composite in the final
condition, but noncomposite during construction, are to be investigated during the various stages
of deck placement. The effects of forces from deck overhang brackets acting on the fascia
girders are also to be considered. Wind load effects on the noncomposite structure prior to and
during casting are also an important consideration during construction. The presence of
construction equipment may also need to be considered. Lastly, potential uplift at bearings
should be investigated at each critical construction stage. For this design example, the effects of
wind load on the structure and the presence of construction equipment are not considered.
Calculate the maximum flexural stresses in the flanges of the steel section due to the factored
loads resulting from the application of steel self-weight and Cast #1 of the deck placement
sequence. Cast #1 yields the maximum positive moment for the noncomposite Section G4-1. As
specified in Article 6.10.1.6, for design checks where the flexural resistance is based on lateral
torsional buckling, fbu is to be determined as the largest value of the compressive stress
throughout the unbraced length in the flange under consideration, calculated without
consideration of flange lateral bending. For design checks, such as this I-girder, where the
flexural resistance is based on yielding, flange local buckling or web bend-buckling, fbu may be
determined as the corresponding stress values at the section under consideration. From
Figure 2, brace points adjacent to Section G4-1 are located at intervals of approximately 20 feet,
and the largest stress occurs within this unbraced length.
55
In accordance with Article 3.4.2.1, when investigating Strength I, III, and V during construction,
load factors for the weight of the structure and appurtenances, DC and DW, shall not be taken to
be less than 1.25. Also, as discussed previously, the factor is taken equal to 1.0 in this
example. As shown in Table 9, the unfactored moments due to steel self-weight and Cast #1 are
661 kip-ft and 3,932 kip-ft, respectively, for a total of 4,593 kip-ft. Therefore, for
Construction Strength I:
General:
f bu
Top Flange:
f bu
Bot. Flange:
f bu
DC
S nc
1.0(1.25)(
4 ,593)(12)
2,477
1.0(1.25)(
4 ,593)(12)
3,093
27 . 81 ksi
22 . 27 ksi
Section G4-1 must be checked for steel weight and for Cast #1 of the concrete deck on the
noncomposite section as discussed above. The factored steel stresses during the sequential
placement of the concrete are not to exceed the nominal resistances specified in Article
6.10.3.2.1 for compression and Article 6.10.3.2.2 for tension flanges. The effect of the overhang
brackets on the flanges must also be considered according to Article C6.10.3.4 since G4 is an
exterior girder.
7.4.1 Constructibility of Top Flange
7.4.1.1 Deck Overhang Bracket Load
During construction, the weight of the deck overhang wet concrete is resisted by the deck
overhang brackets. Other loads supported by the overhang bracket during construction include
the formwork, screed rail, railing, worker walkway, and the deck finishing machine.
The deck overhang construction loads are typically applied to the noncomposite section and
removed once the concrete deck has become composite with the steel girders. The deck
overhang bracket imparts a lateral force on the top and bottom flanges, resulting in lateral
bending of the flanges. The lateral bending of both flanges must be considered as part of the
constructibility check. Also, it should be noted that if the bottom of the bracket does not bear on
the web near the junction of the web and bottom flange, additional checks for out-of-plane
bending of the web may be warranted.
Since G4 is an exterior girder, half of the overhang weight is assumed placed on the girder and
the other half is placed on the overhang brackets. The overhang bracket loading is shown in
Figure 8.
56
Figure 8 Deck Overhang Bracket Loading

The bracket loads are assumed to be applied uniformly although the brackets are actually spaced
at about 3 feet along the girder.
The unbraced length, Lb, of the top flange is 20 feet. Assume that the average deck thickness in
the overhang is 10 inches. The weight of the deck finishing machine is not considered.
Compute the vertical load on the overhang brackets.
Deck
1
2
10
150
12
3 . 75
234
lb/ft
Deck forms + screed rail = 240 lb/ft (assumed)

Uniform load on brackets = 234 + 240 = 474 lb/ft
Compute the lateral force on the flange due to the overhang brackets.
= arctan(3.75 ft/7.00 ft) = 28
F
474 tan( 28 )
1000
0.252
kips/ft
The lateral force, F, is used to compute the flange lateral bending moment on top flange due to
the deck overhang bracket. The flange lateral moment at the brace points due to the overhang
forces is negative in the top flange of girder G4 on the outside of the curve because the stress due
57
to the lateral moment is compressive on the convex side of the flange at the brace points. The
opposite would be true on the convex side of the girder G1 top flange on the inside of the curve
at the brace points. In the absence of a more refined analysis, the equations given in Article
C6.10.3.4 may be used to estimate the maximum flange lateral bending moments in the
discretely braced compression flange due to the lateral forces from the brackets. Assuming the
flange is continuous with the adjacent unbraced lengths that are approximately equal, the flange
lateral bending moment due to a statically equivalent uniformly distributed lateral bracket force
may be estimated as:
M
F L b
Eq. (C6.10.3.4-2)
12
2
0 . 252 ( 20 )

8.4
12
kip - ft (unfactore
d)
7.4.1.2 Curvature Effects

In addition to the lateral bending moment due to the overhang brackets, lateral bending due to
curvature must also be considered, which can either be taken from the analysis results or
estimated by the approximate V-load equation given in Article C4.6.1.2.4b. The V-load equation
assumes the presence of a cross frame at the point under investigation and a constant major-axis
moment over the distance between the brace points. Although the use of the V-load equation is
not theoretically pure for locations between brace points, it may conservatively be used. Note
that throughout this example, the web depth, D, is conservatively used in this equation.
Referring to Table 9, the moment due to the steel weight plus Cast #1 is used for M: 661 + 3,932
= 4,593 kip-ft.
M
lat
Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1)
NRD
where: M = major-axis bending moment (kip-ft)

= unbraced length (ft)
N = a constant taken as 10 or 12 in past practice
R = girder radius (ft)
D = web depth (ft)
Therefore,
M
lat
4 , 593 ( 20 ) 2
10(716.5)(
7)
36 . 6
kip - ft
Although the flange lateral bending stresses are always additive to the major-axis bending
stresses, it is helpful to understand the correct flange lateral moment sign when checking analysis
results. The flange lateral moment at the brace points due to curvature is negative in the top
58
flange of all four girders whenever the top flange is subjected to compression because the stress
due to the lateral moment is compressive on the convex side of the flange at the brace points.
The opposite is true whenever the top flange is subjected to tension.
The total factored lateral bending moment due to the combination of overhang brackets and
curvature is therefore:
M
tot_lat
8 . 4 ( 36 . 6 ) (1 . 25 ) 56 . 3 kip - ft
(factored)
7.4.1.3 Top Flange Lateral Bending Amplification

According to Article 6.10.1.6, lateral bending stresses determined from a first-order analysis may
be used in discretely braced compression flanges for which:
L
1.2L
C bR
p
Eq. (6.10.1.6-2)
f bu F yc
Lp is the limiting unbraced length specified in Article 6.10.8.2.3 determined as:
1.0r
E
t
F yc
29 , 000
1 . 0 ( 4 . 81 )
50
9 . 65
12
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-4)
ft
where rt is the effective radius of gyration for lateral torsional buckling specified in Article
6.10.8.2.3 determined as:
rt
b fc
1 D ctw
12 1
3 b fc t fc
20
1 47 . 03 ( 0 . 5625 )
12 1
3
20 (1 )
4 . 81 in.
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-9)
Since the stresses remain reasonably constant over the section, the moment gradient factor, C b, is
taken as 1.0. Article C6.10.1.10.2 indicates that the web load-shedding factor, Rb, is taken as 1.0
for constructibility.
Check the relation given in Eq. (6.10.1.6-2):
L
20 ft 1 . 2 ( 9 . 65 )
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )
27 . 81
15 . 5 ft
50
Because Eq. (6.10.1.6-2) is not satisfied, Article 6.10.1.6 requires that second-order elastic
compression-flange lateral bending stresses be determined. The second-order compression-
59
flange lateral bending stresses may be determined by amplifying the first-order values. First
compute the first-order compression-flange lateral bending stress acting at the tip of the flange:
S top_flange
f 1
1 . 0 ( 20 )
66 . 7 in.
tot_lat
S top_flange
56 . 3 (12 )
66 . 7
10 . 13
ksi (factored)
The first-order values shall be amplified as follows:
0 . 85
f bu
1
F cr
f f 1
1
(second
- order analysis)
Eq. (6.10.1.6-4)
where: fbu =
Fcr
top flange stress calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending;

in this particular case, top flange stress at the Construction Strength I limit state
= elastic lateral torsional buckling stress for the flange under consideration
determined using Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8)
2
F cr
C bR b E
Lb
rt
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( )( 29 , 000 )
20 (12
4 . 81
115
ksi
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8)
The amplification factor (AF) is then determined as follows:
0 . 85
AF
27 . 81
1
115
1 . 12 1.0 OK
Therefore, the total flange stress due to lateral bending, including the amplification factor is:
f (AF) f 1 1 . 12 ( 10 . 13 ) 11.35
ksi
7.4.1.4 Flexure in Top Flange (Article 6.10.3.2.1)

During construction, the top flange at Section G4-1 is a discretely based compression flange, so
the provisions of Article 6.10.3.2.1 apply. The article indicates that if the section has a slender
web, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1) is not checked when f is zero, and for sections with compact or
60
noncompact webs, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) is not checked. In this case, the web is slender (as
demonstrated later) and f is not zero, so all three equations must be checked.
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1)
f bu f f R h F yc
f bu
1
3
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2)
f f F nc
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3)
f bu f F crw
where: f = resistance factor for flexure = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)

Rh = hybrid factor specified in Article 6.10.1.10.1 (1.0 at homogeneous Section G4-1)
Fcrw = nominal elastic bend-buckling resistance for webs determined as specified in
Article 6.10.1.9
Fnc = nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange determined as specified in
Article 6.10.8.2 (i.e. local or lateral torsional buckling resistance, whichever
controls). The provisions of Article A6.3.3 shall not be used to determine the
lateral torsional buckling resistance of top flanges of curved I-girder bridges, per
Article 6.10.3.2.1.
First, check that the factored flange stress does not exceed the yield resistance given by Eq.
(6.10.3.2.1-1), using the previously calculated values of flange stresses:
f bu f 27 . 81 11 . 35 39.16 ksi f R h F yc 1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 50 ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.783)
Secondly, check that the factored top flange stress does not exceed the buckling resistance given
by Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2). The nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange, Fnc, is taken as
the smaller of the local buckling resistance (Article 6.10.8.2.2) and the lateral torsional buckling
resistance (Article 6.10.8.2.3).
Determine the local buckling resistance of the compression flange. First, check the flange
slenderness.
f
b fc
2 t fc
pf 0 . 38
rf 0 . 56
20
2 (1 )
E
F yc
E
F yr
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-3)
10
0 . 38
0 . 56
29 , 000
50
29 , 000
0 . 7 ( 50 )
9 . 15
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-4)
16 . 12
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-5)
61
Since pf < f < rf, the flange is noncompact and the nominal flexural resistance is determined
using Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-2).
Rb is taken as 1.0 for constructibility checks per Article 6.10.3.2.1, and Rh is taken as 1.0 per
Article 6.10.1.10.1. Therefore, Fnc for the local buckling resistance is calculated as:
F nc 1
F yr
1
R h F yc
f pf

pf
rf
R R F
b
h
yc
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-2)

0 . 7 ( 50 ) 10 9 . 15
1 - 1
(1 . 0 )( 1 . 0 )( 50 ) 48 . 17 ksi
1 . 0 ( 50 ) 16 . 12 9 . 15

Determine the lateral torsional buckling resistance of the compression flange. First, compare the
unbraced length, Lb, to the limiting unbraced lengths Lp and Lr.
Lb = 20 ft = unbraced length
Lp = 9.65 ft (calculated previously in top flange lateral bending amplification)
Lr is the limiting unbraced length to achieve the onset of nominal yielding in either flange under
uniform bending with consideration of compression-flange residual stress effects and is
determined as follows:
r t
29 , 000
( 4 . 81 )
E
F yr
0 . 7 ( 50 )
12
36 . 2 ft.
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-5)
Since Lp < Lb < Lr, use Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-2) to calculate the lateral torsional buckling resistance.
F nc C b 1
1 . 0 1
F yr
1
R h F yc
L b L p
L L
p
r
R R F R R F
b
h
yc
b
h
yc
0 . 7 ( 50 ) 20 9 . 65
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 44 . 15 ksi
1
1 . 0 ( 50 ) 36 . 2 9 . 65
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-2)
(controls)
Therefore, check Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2) as follows:

f bu
1
3
f 27 . 81
1
3
(11 . 35 ) 31.59
ksi f F nc 1 . 0 ( 44 . 15 ) 44.15 ksi
OK
(Ratio= 0.716)
Thirdly, check Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) since the web is slender, as shown below. The slenderness is
checked according to Article 6.10.6.2.3 for noncomposite sections:
62
2D
5 .7
tw
2 ( 47 . 03 )
0 . 5625
Eq. (6.10.6.2.3-1)
F yc
29 , 000
167 . 2 5 . 7
50
137 . 3
slender web, noncompact section
Because the web is slender, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) is checked to prevent web bend-buckling from
occurring during construction.
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3)
f bu f Fcrw
where the nominal web bend-buckling, Fcrw, is taken as:

Fcrw
0 . 9 Ek
D
tw
Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-1)
but Fcrw cannot exceed RhFyc and Fyw/0.7 per Article 6.10.1.9.1 for webs without longitudinal
stiffeners.
First, compute the bend-buckling coefficient, k, in which Dc is the depth of web in compression.
Since the girder is noncomposite for this check, Dc is the distance from the inner edge of the
compression flange to the neutral axis.
k
9
Dc
Fcrw
9
47.03
84
0 . 9 ( 29 , 000 )( 28 . 7 )
84
0 . 5625
28 . 7
= bend-buckling coefficient
33 . 6 ksi 1.0(50.0)
50.0 ksi
Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-2)
50
0.7
71 . 4 ksi
Therefore, use Fcrw = 33.6 ksi to check Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3):

f bu 27.81 ksi f F crw 1.0(33.6)
33.6 ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.828)
The compression flange proportions satisfy the criteria given in Article 6.10.3.2.1.
It should be noted that the web bend-buckling resistance (Fcrw) is generally checked against the
maximum compression flange stress due to factored loads without consideration of flange lateral
bending, as shown in the previous calculation. Since web bend-buckling is a check of the web,
63
the maximum flexural compression stress in the web could be calculated and used for
comparison against the bend-buckling resistance. However, the precision associated with
making the distinction between the stress in the compression flange and the maximum
compressive stress in the web is typically not warranted.
7.4.2 Constructibility of Bottom Flange
For critical stages of construction, the following requirement must be satisfied for discretely
braced tension flanges according to Article 6.10.3.2.2.
Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1)
f bu f f R h F yt
The factored Construction Strength I tensile flange stress due to steel self-weight and Cast #1,
calculated without consideration of the lateral bending, fbu, in the bottom flange was calculated
previously as:
f bu 22 . 27 ksi
The total lateral bending moment due to overhang brackets and curvature effects, factored for
constructibility, is 56.3 kip-ft as previously calculated. Therefore, the lateral bending stress in
the bottom flange is as follows:
f
tot_lat
S bot_fl
56 . 3 (12 )
2
(1 . 5 )( 21 ) / 6
6 . 13 ksi
Therefore,
f bu f 22 . 27 6 . 13 28.40 ksi f R h F yt 1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 50 ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.568)
7.4.3 Constructibility Shear Strength, Web

Panels of webs with transverse stiffeners are investigated for constructibility, with or without
longitudinal stiffeners, and must satisfy the requirement provided in Article 6.10.3.3 during
critical stages of construction. This calculation is similar to the shear strength check at the
strength limit state and therefore is not shown.
7.4.4 Constructibility of Deck
The concrete deck is checked for constructibility according to Article 6.10.3.2.4, which states
that the longitudinal tensile stress in the composite concrete deck due to factored loads shall not
exceed fr during critical stages of construction unless longitudinal reinforcement is provided
according to Article 6.10.1.7. Article 6.10.1.7 states that whenever the tensile stress in the deck
exceeds fr, longitudinal reinforcement equal to at least one percent of the total cross-sectional
area of the deck must be placed in the deck.
64
By inspection, it is observed that Cast #2 will cause negative moment near mid-span of Span 1.
In practice, multiple locations would be checked to determine where the one percent longitudinal
reinforcement is no longer required. For the purpose of this example, the deck tensile stress will
be checked only at the location of G4-1 due to Cast #2. The major-axis moment at G4-1 due to
Cast #2 is -3,035 kip-ft, as shown in Table 9. This location is appropriate to check since it lies
within the Cast #1 composite section, which is 100 feet long and assumed to be hardened for
Cast #2. See Figure 4 for the placement sequence diagram.
According to Article 6.10.1.1.1d, the short-term modular ratio, n, is used to calculate longitudinal
flexural stresses in the concrete deck due to all permanent and transient loads.
Assume no creep: n = 7.56.
Calculate the factored Construction Strength I tensile stress at the top of the structural slab:
f deck 1 . 25
( 3 , 035 ) 12 ( 28 . 25 ) 1
0 . 58 ksi
294 ,158
7 . 56
Assume the compressive strength of the hardened concrete from Cast #1 is 3,000 psi at the time
Cast #2 is made. The modulus of rupture is:
f r 0 . 24
f ' c 0 . 24
3 0 . 42 ksi
Therefore,
f r 0 . 9 0 . 42
0 . 38 ksi 0.58 ksi
where = 0.9 from Article 5.5.4.2.1. Since fdeck > fr, one percent longitudinal reinforcement is
required at this section. The reinforcement is to be 60.0 ksi or higher strength, a #6 bar or smaller
and spaced at not more than 12 inches according to Article 6.10.1.7. The required reinforcement
should be placed in two layers uniformly distributed across the deck width, and two-thirds
should be placed in the top layer. As discussed under Section Properties earlier in this example,
#6 bars spaced at 6 inches in the top layer and #4 bars spaced at 6 inches in the bottom layer
satisfy theses requirements.
The longitudinal reinforcement selected above would be continued into the negative moment
region, over the pier, and terminated in the next span at a point where it is no longer required,
determined in a similar fashion as the steps described above.
If it is desired to lower the concrete stress at a given location, the deck placement sequence could
be modified.
7.5 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4)
65
Article 6.10.4 contains provisions related to the control of elastic and permanent deformations at
the Service Limit State. For the sake of brevity, only the calculations pertaining to permanent
deformations will be presented for this example.
7.5.1 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2)
Article 6.10.4.2 contains criteria intended to control permanent deformations that would impair
rideability. As specified in Article 6.10.4.2.1, these checks are to be made under the Service II
load combination.
Article 6.10.4.2.2 states that flanges of composite sections must satisfy the following
requirements:
Top flange of composite sections:
f f 0 . 95 R h F yf
Bottom flange of composite sections: f f
f
2
0 . 95 R h F yf
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-2)
However, according to Article C6.10.4.2.2, under the load combinations specified in Table 3.4.11, Eqs. (6.10.4.2.2-1) and (6.10.4.2.2-2) need only be checked for compact sections in positive
flexure. For sections in negative flexure and noncompact sections in positive flexure, these two
equations do not control and need not be checked. Composite sections in all horizontally curved
girder systems are to be treated as noncompact sections at the strength limit state, in accordance
with Article 6.10.6.2.2. Therefore, for Section G4-1, Eqs. (6.10.4.2.2-1) and (6.10.4.2.2-2) do
not need to be checked but are demonstrated below for illustrative purposes only.
The term ff is the flange stress at the section under consideration due to the Service II load
combination calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending. The f term, the flange
lateral bending stress, in Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-2) shall be determined in accordance with Article
6.10.1.6. A resistance factor is not included in these equations because Article 1.3.2.1 specifies
that the resistance factor be taken equal to 1.0 at the service limit state.
It should be noted that in accordance with Article 6.10.4.2.2, redistribution of negative moment
due to the Service II loads at the interior-pier sections in continuous span flexural members using
the procedures specified in Appendix B shall not apply to horizontally curved I-girder sections.
The applicability of the Appendix B provisions to horizontally curved I-girder sections has not
been demonstrated; hence the procedures are not permitted for this type of girder.
Check the flange stresses due to the Service II loads at Section G4-1. is always specified to
equal 1.0 at the service limit state (Article 1.3.2):
0 . 95 R h F
yf
0 . 95 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 47 . 50 ksi
Top Flange:
66
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
f f 0 . 95 R h F yf
1.0( 6 61 2,682)
f f 1.0
2,477
f f 22 . 51 ksi 0.95R
1.0(510
583)
6,900
F yf 47.50 ksi
1.3(5,125)
12 22 . 51 ksi
18,102
OK
(Ratio
0.474)
Bottom Flange:
ff
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
0 . 95 R h F yf
Compute f similarly to how it was calculated for the top flange constructibility checks. First
determine the flange lateral moment, Mlat, due to the Service II load combination:
M
lat
Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1)
NRD
1 . 0 661
2 , 682 510 583 ) 1 . 3 ( 5 ,125 ) ( 20 )

10(716.5)(
7)
88 . 5 kip - ft
The factored Service II flange stress is:

f
lat
S bot_fl
88 . 5 (12 )
110 . 3
9.63 ksi
Therefore:
ff
ff
1.0( 6 61 2,682)
1.0
2
3,093
f
2
40 . 30 ksi 47.50
ksi
1.0( 5 10 583)
3,835
OK
(Ratio
1.3(5,125)
4,187
9.63
40 . 30 ksi
12
2
0.848)
7.5.2 Web Bend-Buckling

With the exception of composite sections in positive flexure in which the web satisfies the
requirement of Article 6.10.2.1.1 (D/tw 150), web bend-buckling of all sections under the
Service II load combination is to be checked as follows:
f c F crw
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4)
67
The term fc is the compression-flange stress at the section under consideration due to the Service
II loads calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending, and Fcrw is the nominal elastic
bend-buckling resistance for webs determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.9.
At Section G4-1:
D
tw
80
0 . 5625
142 . 2 150
Because Section G4-1 is a composite section subject to positive flexure satisfying D/t w 150,
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4) need not be checked. An explanation as to why these particular sections are
exempt from the above web bend-buckling check is given in Article C6.10.1.9.1.
7.6 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Fatigue Limit State (Article 6.10.5)
Article 6.10.5 indicates that details in I-girder section flexural members must be investigated for
fatigue as specified in Article 6.6.1. For horizontally curved I-girder bridges, the fatigue stress
range due to major-axis bending plus lateral bending shall be investigated. As appropriate, the
Fatigue I and Fatigue II load combinations specified in Table 3.4.1-1 and the fatigue live load
specified in Article 3.6.1.4 shall be employed for checking load-induced fatigue in I-girder
sections. The Fatigue I load combination is used when investigating infinite load-induced
fatigue life, and the Fatigue II load combination is used when investigating finite load-induced
fatigue life.
According to Table 3.6.2.1-1, the dynamic load allowance for fatigue loads is 15 percent.
Centrifugal force effects are considered and are included in the fatigue moments. For the
purpose of this design example, the 75-year single lane ADTT is assumed to be 1,000 trucks per
day.
7.6.1 Fatigue in Bottom Flange
At Section G4-1, it is necessary to check the bottom flange for the fatigue limit state. The base
metal at the transverse stiffener weld terminations and interior cross frame connection plate
welds at locations subject to a net tensile stress must be checked for fatigue. This detail
corresponds to Condition 4.1 in Table 6.6.1.2.3-1 and is classified as a Category C fatigue detail.
Only the bottom flange is checked herein, as a net tensile stress is not induced in the top flange
by the fatigue loading at this location.
According to Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1), the factored fatigue stress range, (f), must not exceed the
nominal fatigue resistance, (F)n. In accordance with Article C6.6.1.2.2, the resistance factor, ,
and the load modifier, , are taken as 1.0 for the fatigue limit state.
f F n
Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1)
68
From Table 6.6.1.2.3-2, the 75-year (ADTT)SL equivalent to infinite fatigue life for a Category
C fatigue detail is 745 trucks per day. Therefore, since the assumed (ADTT)SL for this design
example of 1,000 trucks per day is greater than this limit of 745 trucks per day, the detail must be
checked for infinite fatigue life using the Fatigue I load combination. Per Article 6.6.1.2.5, the
nominal fatigue resistance for infinite fatigue life is equal to the constant-amplitude fatigue
threshold:
F n
F TH
Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-1)
where (F)TH is the constant-amplitude fatigue threshold and is taken from Table 6.6.1.2.5-3.
For a Category C fatigue detail, (F)TH = 12.0 ksi, and therefore:
F n
12.0 ksi
As shown in Table 9, the unfactored negative and positive moments due to fatigue, including
centrifugal force effects and the 15 percent dynamic load allowance, at Section G4-1 are -603
kip-ft and 1,603 kip-ft, respectively. As shown in Table 13, the short-term composite section
properties (n = 7.56) used to compute the stress at the bottom of the web (top of the bottom
flange, where the weld in question is located) are:
INA(n) = 294,158 in.4
dBOT OF WEB = dBOT OF STEEL tf_BOT FLANGE = 70.25 in. 1.5 in. = 68.75 in.
Therefore, the unfactored stress range at the bottom of the web due to vertical loads only is:
f range_vert
603 1,603 12

294,158
68.75
6 . 19 ksi
The flange lateral bending stress at the connection plate must also be considered according to
Article C6.10.5.1. The connection plates are assumed to be 6 inches wide. To compute the
flange lateral bending stress range at the top of the bottom flange due to curvature, it is first
necessary to compute the flange lateral moment of inertia:
I flg
1 . 5 ( 21 )
1,158 in.
12
Using Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1), compute the range of flange lateral moment at the connection plate:
M
lat
NRD
603
1,603
20
10 716 . 5 7
17 . 59 kip - ft
Compute the distance from the centerline of the web to the edge of the connection plate, and then
compute the stress at this point:
69
c 6
f lat
0 . 5625
2
6 . 3 in.
17 . 59 6 . 3
1,158
12 1 . 15
ksi
Per Table 3.4.1-1, the load factor, , for the Fatigue I load combination is 1.5. The total factored
stress range at the edge of the connection plate due to both major-axis bending stress and flange
lateral bending stress is therefore:
f
1.5 6 . 19
1 . 15
11 . 01
ksi
Checking Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1),

f
11 . 01
ksi F
12.00
ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.918)
7.6.2 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs

In accordance with Article 6.10.5.3, interior panels of stiffened webs must satisfy:
Eq. (6.10.5.3-1)
V u V cr
where: Vu =
shear in the web at the section under consideration, due to unfactored permanent
loads plus the factored fatigue load (Fatigue I live load factor)
Vcr = shear buckling resistance determined from Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1)
Satisfaction of Eq. (6.10.5.3-1) is intended to control elastic flexing of the web, and the member
is assumed to be able to sustain an infinite number of smaller loadings without fatigue cracking
due to this effect. The live load shear in the special requirement is supposed to represent the
heaviest truck expected to cross the bridge in 75 years.
Only interior panels of stiffened webs are investigated because the shear resistance of end panels
of stiffened webs and the shear resistance of unstiffened webs are limited to the shear buckling
resistance at the strength limit state.
The unfactored shears at Section G4-1 are shown below. These results are taken directly from
the three-dimensional analysis as reported in Table 10:
Steel Dead Load:
Future Wearing Surface Dead Load:
Total Permanent Load
VDC1-STEEL
VDC1-CONC
VDC2
VDW
=
=
=
=
=
-5 kips
-23.8 kips
-4 kips
-2.9 kips
-35.7 kips
70
Fatigue Live Load + Impact:
VFAT
= -20 kips
Therefore, the Fatigue I shear in the web is:

V u 35 . 7 1 . 5 20 - 65 . 7 kips
Next, compute the shear-buckling resistance:

V cr CV
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1)

V p 0 . 58 F yw Dt
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-2)
V p 0 . 58 50 84
0 . 5625 1,370
kips
To determine the ratio C, the shear-buckling coefficient, k, must first be computed as follows:
k 5
5
do
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-7)
do = 82 in.
k 5
5
82
84
1 0 .2
D
tw
84
0 . 5625
149 . 3 1 . 40
Ek
F yw
1 . 40
29 , 000 (10 . 2 )
50
108
71
Ek
yw
D
tw
1 . 57
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
29 , 000 10 . 2
0 . 416
50
84
0 . 5625
1 . 57
The shear-buckling resistance is then computed in accordance with Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1):

V cr 0 . 416
1, 370
570 kips

V u 65 . 7 kips
V cr 5 70 kips
V u V cr
OK
Therefore, the web is satisfactory for fatigue at the maximum positive moment location.
7.7 Girder Check: Section G4-1, Strength Limits State (Article 6.10.6)
7.7.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2)
According to Article 6.10.6.2.2, sections in horizontally curved steel girder bridges shall be
considered as noncompact sections and shall satisfy the requirements of Article 6.10.7.2.
Furthermore, both compact and noncompact sections in positive flexure must satisfy the ductility
requirement specified in Article 6.10.7.3. The ductility requirement is intended to protect the
concrete deck from premature crushing. The section must satisfy:
D
0.42 D
Eq. (6.10.7.3-1)
Where Dp is the distance from the top of the concrete deck to the neutral axis of the composite
section at the plastic moment, and Dt is the total depth of the composite section. Reference the
section property computations for the location of the neutral axis of the composite section at the
plastic moment. At Section G4-1:
D p 9.0 4 . 0 1 . 0 0.77 12.77 in.
D t 1 . 5 84 . 0 4 . 0 9.0 98.50 in.
0.42D
0.42 98.50
41 . 37 in. 12.77 in.
OK (Ratio = 0.309)
72
Noncompact sections in positive flexure must satisfy the provisions of Article 6.10.7.2. At the
strength limit state, the compression flange must satisfy:
Eq. (6.10.7.2.1-1)
f bu f F nc
where:
fbu = flange stress calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending determined
as specified in Article 6.10.1.6
f = resistance factor for flexure = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Article 6.10.7.2.2
As explained in Article C6.10.7.2.1, flange lateral bending is not considered for the compression
flanges at the strength limit state because the flanges are continuously supported by the concrete
deck.
At the strength limit state, the tension flange must satisfy:
f bu
1
3
Eq. (6.10.7.2.1-2)
f f F nt
where:
f = flange lateral bending stress determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.6
Fnt = nominal flexural resistance of the tension flange determined as specified in
Article 6.10.7.2.2
Additionally, the maximum longitudinal compressive stress in the concrete deck at the strength
limit state shall not exceed 0.6fc. The longitudinal compressive stress in the deck is to be
determined in accordance with Article 6.10.1.1.1d, which allows the permanent and transient
load stresses to be computed using the short-term section properties (i.e. modular ratio taken as
n).
7.7.1.1 Strength I Flexural Stress in Top and Bottom Flange
The unfactored bending moments at Section G4-1 are shown below. These results are directly
from the three-dimensional analysis as reported in Table 9. The live load moment includes the
centrifugal force and dynamic load allowance effects.
Noncomposite Dead Load:
Live Load (including IM and CF):
MDC1
MDC2
MDW
MLL+IM
=
=
=
=
661 + 2,682 = 3,343 kip-ft

510 kip-ft
583 kip-ft
5,125 kip-ft
73
Compute the factored flange flexural stresses at Section G4-1 for the Strength I limit state,
without consideration of flange lateral bending. As discussed previously, the factor is taken
equal to 1.0 in this example. Therefore:
For Strength I, the bending stresses due to vertical loads are as follows:
Top Flange (compression):
( DC1 M
f bu
S nc
DC1
( DC2
DC2
DW M
S 3n
DW
( LL M
Sn
LL
)
(12 )
1 . 25 ( 510 ) 1 . 5 ( 583 ) 1 . 75 ( 5 ,125 )

1 . 25 ( 3 , 343 )

(12 )( 1 ) 28 . 82 ksi
18 ,102
2 , 477
6 , 900
74
Bottom Flange (tension):

( DC1 M
f bu
S nc
DC1
( DC2
DC2
DW M
DW
S 3n
( LL M
LL
Sn
)
(12 )
1 . 25 ( 510 ) 1 . 5 ( 583 ) 1 . 75 ( 5 ,125 )

1 . 25 ( 3 , 343 )

(12 )( 1 ) 46 . 65 ksi
4 ,187
3 , 093
3 , 835
As required to check the discretely braced tension flange, the lateral bending stress must also be
calculated for the bottom flange. Using the moments shown above, the unfactored lateral
bending moment and corresponding lateral bending stress are calculated as follows:
M
lat
lat_DC1
NRD
lat_DC2
lat_DW
lat_LL
Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1)
3 , 343 ( 20 )
f _DC1
4 . 07 kip - ft
f _DC2
4 . 65 kip - ft
f _DW
40 . 87 kip - ft
f _LL
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
5 ,125 ( 20 )
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
lat
S bot_flange
26 . 66 kip - ft
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
583 ( 20 )
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
510 ( 20 )
, where
lat_DC1
S bot_fl
lat_DC2
S bot_fl
M
lat_DW
S bot_fl
M
lat_LL
S bot_fl
S bot_flange
26 . 66 (12 )
110 . 3
4 . 07 (12 )
110 . 3
4 . 65 (12 )
110 . 3
40 . 87 (12 )
110 . 3
(1.5)(21)
6
110.3 in.
2 . 90 ksi
0 . 44 ksi
0 . 51 ksi
4 . 45 ksi
Therefore, the total factored lateral bending stress in the bottom flange is:
f 1 . 25 ( 2 . 90 0 . 44 ) 1 . 5 ( 0 . 51 ) 1 . 75 ( 4 . 45 ) 12.73 ksi
7.7.1.2 Top Flange Flexural Resistance in Compression

Per Article 6.10.7.2.2, the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange of noncompact
composite sections in positive flexure shall be taken as:
F nc R b R h F yc
Eq. (6.10.7.2.2-1)
where:
Rb = web load-shedding factor determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.10.2
Rh = hybrid factor determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.10.1.
For a homogenous girder, the hybrid factor, Rh, is equal to 1.0. In accordance with Article
6.10.1.10.2, the web load-shedding factor, Rb, is equal to 1.0 for composite section in which the
web satisfies the requirement of Article 6.10.2.1.1, such that D/tw 150.
75
D
tw
84
0 . 5625
149 . 3 150
Therefore:
F nc 1.0 1.0
50.00
50.00 ksi
For Strength I:
Eq. (6.10.7.2.1-1)
f bu f F nc
f bu 28.82
ksi f F nc 1.0
50.00
50.00 ksi
OK
(Ratio = 0.576)
7.7.1.3 Bottom Flange Flexural Resistance in Tension

Article 6.10.7.2.2 states that the nominal flexural resistance of the tension flange of noncompact
composite sections shall be taken as:
Eq. (6.10.7.2.2-2)
F nt R h F yt
Therefore:
F nt 1.0
50.00 50.00
ksi
For Strength I:
f bu
f bu
1
3
1
3
Eq. (6.10.7.2.1-2)
f f F nt
f 46 . 65
1
3
(12 . 73 ) 50.89 ksi f F nt 1.0
50.00
50.00 ksi
(Ratio =1.018)
Say OK for the purpose of this design example.

In practice, the flange thickness could be increased at this field section to eliminate the overstress
in the bottom flange.
According to the provisions of Article 6.10.1.6, lateral bending stresses in discretely braced
flanges shall satisfy the following requirement:
f 0 . 6 F yf
Eq. (6.10.1.6-1)
76
Although this check also applies to both the top flange and the bottom flange before the deck has
cured, it is only demonstrated in this example for the bottom flange in the final condition at the
strength limit state.
f 12.71 ksi 0.6F
yf
0.6 50
30 ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.424)
7.7.2 Web Flexural Resistance

Article C6.10.1.9.1 states that composite sections subjected to positive flexure need not be
checked for web bend-buckling in its final composite condition when the web does not require
longitudinal stiffeners, as is the case for this design example.
7.7.3 Concrete Deck Stresses
According to Article C6.10.7.2.1, the maximum longitudinal compressive stress in the concrete
deck at the strength limit state is not to exceed 0.6fc. This limit is to ensure linear behavior of
the concrete, which is assumed in the calculation of steel flange stresses. The longitudinal
compressive stress in the deck is to be determined in accordance with Article 6.10.1.1.1.d, which
allows the permanent and transient load stresses to be computed using the short-term section
properties (n = 7.56 composite section properties). Referring to Table 13 of the section property
calculations, the section modulus to the top of the concrete deck is:
S deck
294,158
9 .0 4 .0
84
2
1 0 , 413 in.
26 . 75
Calculate the Strength I factored longitudinal compressive stress in the deck at this section,
noting that the concrete deck is not subjected to noncomposite dead loads. The stress in the
concrete deck is obtained by dividing the stress acting on the transformed section by the modular
ration, n.
1.25(510)
f deck 1.0
1.5 583
10,413
f deck 1.60 ksi 0.6f'
1 . 75 5 ,125
12
7 . 56
0.6 4.0
2.40 ksi
1 . 60 ksi
OK
7.8 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Constructibility (Article 6.10.3)

The bottom flange at Section G4-2, as it is a discretely braced flange in compression, shall
satisfy the requirements of Eqs. (6.10.3.2.1-1), (6.10.3.2.1-2), and (6.10.3.2.1-3) for critical
stages of construction. Generally these provisions will not control because the size of the bottom
flange in negative flexure regions is normally governed by the Strength Limit State. In regard to
construction loads, the maximum negative moment reached during the deck placement analysis,
77
plus the moment due to the self-weight, typically does not significantly exceed the calculated
noncomposite negative moments assuming a single stage deck placement. Nonetheless, the
constructibility check is performed herein for completeness, and to illustrate the constructibility
checks required for a negative moment region. For this constructibility check, it is assumed that
the concrete deck has not yet hardened at Section G4-2. The following equations must be
satisfied at the compression flange:
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1)
f bu f f R h F yc
f bu
1
3
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2)
f f F nc
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3)
f bu f F crw
Additionally, the top flange, which is considered discretely braced for constructibility (i.e. the
deck is not hardened), must satisfy the requirement specified in Article 6.10.3.2.2.
Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1)
f bu f f R h F yt
To illustrate this constructibility check, it is assumed that the unfactored major-axis bending
moment due to the deck placement is -7,272 kip-ft and moment due to steel self-weight is -1,917
kip-ft (see Table 9).
Calculate the factored major-axis flexural stresses in the flanges of the steel section due to the
factored load resulting from the steel self-weight and the assumed deck placement sequence.
For Construction Strength I:
Top Flange:
f bu
Bot. Flange:
f bu
1.0(1.25)[
(-1,917)
(-7,272)](
12)
(-7,272)](
12)
6,689
1.0(1.25)[
(-1,917)
7,377
20 . 61 ksi
18 . 68 ksi
For this example and for illustration purposes, the V-load equation is used to compute the flange
lateral bending moments due to curvature.
M
LAT
N R D
( 1, 917 ) ( 7 , 272 ) 20
10 716 . 5 7
73 . 3 kip - ft
Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1)
Combine the factored flange lateral bending moment computed using the V-load equation with
the lateral moment due to the overhang brackets which was computed in earlier calculations.
The factored flange lateral bending moment and flange lateral bending stress are computed as:
78
TOT_LAT
1 . 25 73 . 3 8 . 4 102 kip - f t
Top Flange:
Bot. Flange:
TOT _ LAT
S
M
TOT _ LAT
(102)(12)
(2.50)(28)
(102)(12)
(3.00)(27)
3 . 75 ksi
3 . 36 ksi
7.8.1 Constructibility of Top Flange

For critical stages of construction, the following requirement must be satisfied for discretely
braced tension flanges according to Article 6.10.3.2.2.
Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1)
f bu f f R h F yt
The tensile flange stress for Construction Strength I, calculated without consideration of the
lateral bending, fbu, in the top flange is:
f bu 20 . 61 ksi
(factored, calculated previously)
The total lateral bending stress due to overhang brackets and curvature effects in the top flange
is:
f 3 . 75 ksi
(factored, calculated previously)
The resistance is calculated as follows:

f R h F yt 1.0 1.0
50.0
50.0 ksi
Therefore,
f bu f 20 . 61 3 . 75 24.36 ksi f R h F yt 50.0 ksi
OK
(Ratio = 0.487)
7.8.2 Constructibility of Bottom Flange

7.8.2.1 Bottom Flange Lateral Bending Amplification
As checked for the top flange in the positive moment region, the bottom flange in the negative
moment region must also be checked to determine if a first-order or second-order analysis is
appropriate for computing lateral bending stresses since the bottom flange is in compression.
According to Article 6.10.1.6, lateral bending stresses determined from a first-order analysis may
be used in discretely braced compression flanges for which:
79
1.2L
C bR
p
Eq. (6.10.1.6-2)
f bu F yc
Lp is the limiting unbraced length specified in Article 6.10.8.2.3 determined as:
1.0r
E
t
F yc
29 , 000
1 . 0 ( 7 . 43 )
50
1 4.9
12
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-4)
ft
rt
b fc
1 D ctw
12 1
3 b fc t fc
27
1 ( 39 . 56 )( 0 . 625 )
12 1
3
27 ( 3 )
7 . 43 in.
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-9)
Cb is conservatively taken as 1.0 for this computation. Article C6.10.1.10.2 indicates that the
web load-shedding factor, Rb, is taken as 1.0 for constructibility.
Check the relation given in Eq. (6.10.1.6-2):
L
20 ft 1 . 2 (14 . 9 )
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )
18 . 68
29 . 3 ft
50
Because Eq. (6.10.1.6-2) is satisfied, Article 6.10.1.6 allows the flange lateral bending stress to
be determined directly from a first-order elastic analysis. Therefore, no amplification is required,
and as computed earlier for Construction Strength I, the total flange stress due to lateral bending
is:
f 3 . 36
ksi
7.8.2.2 Flexure in Bottom Flange (Article 6.10.3.2.1)

During construction (as well as in the final condition), the bottom flange at Section G4-2 is a
discretely based compression flange, so the provisions of Article 6.10.3.2.1 apply. Each of the
following requirements shall be satisfied. The article indicates that if the section has a slender
web, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1) is not checked when f is zero, and for sections with compact or
noncompact webs, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) is not checked. In this case, the web is noncompact (as
demonstrated later), so only the first two equations must be checked.
80
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1)
f bu f f R h F yc
f bu
1
3
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2)
f f F nc
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3)
f bu f F crw
where: f = resistance factor for flexure = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)

Rh = hybrid factor specified in Article 6.10.1.10.1 (1.0 at homogeneous Section G4-2)
Fcrw = nominal elastic bend-buckling resistance for webs determined as specified in
Article 6.10.1.9
Article 6.10.8.2 (i.e. local or lateral torsional buckling resistance, whichever
controls). The provisions of Article A6.3.3 shall not be used to determine the
lateral torsional buckling resistance of top flanges of curved I-girder bridges, per
Article 6.10.3.2.1.
Checking Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1) using the previously calculated values of factored flange stresses:
f bu f 18 . 68 3 . 36 22.04 ksi f R h F yc 1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 50 ksi
OK (Ratio = 0.441)
Secondly, check Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2). The nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange,
Fnc, is taken as the smaller of the local buckling resistance (Article 6.10.8.2.2) and the lateral
torsional buckling resistance (Article 6.10.8.2.3).
Determine the local buckling resistance of the compression flange. First, check the flange
slenderness.
f
b fc
2 t fc
pf 0 . 38
27
2 (3)
E
F yc
4 .5
0 . 38
29 , 000
50
9 . 15
Since f < pf, the flange is compact and the nominal flexural resistance is determined using Eq.
(6.10.8.2.2-1).
Rb is taken as 1.0 for constructibility checks per Article 6.10.3.2.1, and Rh is taken as 1.0 per
Article 6.10.1.10.1. Therefore, Fnc for the local buckling resistance is calculated as:
F nc R b R h F yc
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-1)
81
(1 . 0 )( 1 . 0 )( 50 ) 50 . 00 ksi
Determine the lateral torsional buckling resistance of the compression flange, noting that the
unbraced length, Lb, at this location is 20 ft.
Lp = 14.9 ft (calculated previously)
r t
29 , 000
( 7 . 43 )
F yr
0 . 7 ( 50 )
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-5)
56 . 0 ft.
12
F nc C b 1
F yr
1
R h F yc
L b L p
L L
p
r
R R F R R F
b
h
yc
b
h
yc
0 . 7 ( 50 ) 20 14 . 9
1 . 0 1 1
1 . 0 ( 50 ) 56 . 0 14 . 9
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 48 . 14 ksi
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-2)
(controls)
Therefore, check Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2) as follows:

f bu
1
3
f 18 . 68
1
3
( 3 . 36 ) 19.80
ksi f F nc 1 . 0 ( 48 . 14 ) 48.14
ksi
OK
(Ratio = 0.411)
Thirdly, determine if Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) must be checked. The slenderness is checked according
to Article 6.10.6.2.3 for noncomposite sections:
2D
tw
5 .7
2 ( 39 . 56 )
0 . 625
Eq. (6.10.6.2.3-1)
F yc
126 . 6 5 . 7
29 , 000
50
137 . 3
Because the web is noncompact, Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) need not be checked.

7.9 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4)
Article 6.10.4 contains provisions related to the control of elastic and permanent deformations at
the Service Limit State.
82
7.9.1 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2)

Article 6.10.4.2 contains criteria intended to control permanent deformations that would impair
rideability. As specified in Article 6.10.4.2.1, these checks are to be made using the Service II
load combination.
As stated previously for the Service limit state check of Section G4-1, Article 6.10.4.2.2 requires
that flanges of composite sections satisfy the following relations:
Top flange of composite sections:
Bottom flange of composite sections:
f f 0 . 95 R h F yf
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-2)
ff
0 . 95 R h F yf
However, according to Article C6.10.4.2.2, under the load combinations specified in Table 3.4.11, Eqs. (6.10.4.2.2-1) and (6.10.4.2.2-2) need only be checked for compact sections in positive
flexure. For sections in negative flexure and noncompact sections in positive flexure, these two
equations do not control and need not be checked. Composite sections in all horizontally curved
girder systems are to be treated as noncompact sections at the strength limit state, in accordance
with Article 6.10.6.2.2. Therefore, for Section G4-2, Eqs. (6.10.4.2.2-1) and (6.10.4.2.2-2) do
not need to be checked and are not demonstrated in this example.
7.9.2 Web Bend-Buckling
With the exception of composite sections in positive flexure in which the web satisfies the
requirement of Article 6.10.2.1.1 (D/tw 150), web bend-buckling of all sections under the
Service II load combination is to be checked as follows:
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4)
f c F crw
The term fc is the compression-flange stress at the section under consideration due to the Service
II loads calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending, and Fcrw is the nominal elastic
bend-buckling resistance for webs determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.9. Because Section
G4-2 is a section in negative flexure, it must be checked for Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4).
Determine the nominal web bend-buckling resistance, Fcrw, for Section G4-2 in accordance with
Article 6.10.1.9.1, as follows:
F crw
0.9 E k
D
t
w
Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-1)
However, Fcrw shall not exceed the smaller of RhFyc and Fyw/0.7. The bend-buckling coefficient,
k, is computed as:
83
D c
/D
Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-2)
where:
Dc = depth of the web in compression in the elastic range (in.). For composite sections,
Dc shall be determined as specified in Article D6.3.1.
In accordance with Article 6.10.4.2.1, for members with shear connectors provided throughout
the entire length of the girder that also satisfy Article 6.10.1.7, the concrete deck may be
assumed to be effective for both positive and negative flexure, provided that the corresponding
longitudinal stresses in the concrete deck at the section under consideration are smaller than 2fr,
where fr is the modulus of rupture of concrete specified in Article 5.4.2.6. Article 6.10.1.7 is in
regard to the minimum of one percent of longitudinal reinforcement provided in the concrete
deck and is satisfied for Section G4-2 in this design example.
f r 0 . 24
Article 5.4.2.6
f c
Therefore,
2 f r 2 0 . 24
0.960
ksi
In accordance with Article 6.10.1.1.1d, the longitudinal flexural stresses in the concrete deck due
to all permanent and transient loads are to be computed using the short-term modular ratio, n.
The calculated stress on the transformed section is divided by n to obtain the longitudinal stress
in the concrete deck. Since the deck is not subjected to noncomposite dead loads, the
longitudinal stress in the deck at Section G4-2 is due to DC2, DW, and LL+I moments only. The
unfactored major-axis bending moments at Section G4-2 are (see Table 9):
MDC1
MDC2
MDW
MLL+IM
= -1,917 + (-7,272) = -9,189 kip-ft

= -1,537 kip-ft
= -1,478 kip-ft
= -6,726 kip-ft
The longitudinal compressive stress in the deck is computed using the short-term section
properties (n = 7.56 composite section properties) in accordance with Article 6.10.1.1.1d.
Referring to Table 16 of the section property calculations and noting that the total depth of the
composite Section G4-2 is 100 inches, the section modulus to the top of the concrete deck is:
S deck
539,403
100 . 00 63.40
1 4 , 738 in.
Calculate the Service II factored longitudinal compressive stress in the deck at this section,
noting that the concrete deck is not subjected to noncomposite dead loads. The stress in the
84
concrete deck is obtained by dividing the stress acting on the transformed section by the modular
ration, n.
1.00( 1,537) 1.00 1,478 1 . 30 6 , 726
f deck 1.0
12 1 . 266 ksi
14,738 7 . 56
f deck 1.266
ksi 2f
0.960
ksi
Since fdeck is greater than 2fr, for this Service limit state check, the concrete deck cannot be
assumed to be effective for negative flexure and the flexural stresses in the steel section caused
by the Service II load combination shall be computed using the section consisting of the steel
girder and the longitudinal reinforcement within the effective width of the concrete deck. Refer
to
85
Table 17 and Table 18 for the composite section properties with longitudinal steel reinforcement.
The major-axis bending stress in the top and bottom flange for the Service II load combination
are computed as follows (ft = tension flange, fc = compression flange):
For Service II:
Top Flange:
1.00( 9 ,189)
f t 1.0
6,689
1.00( 1,537)
6,944
1.00( 1,478)
6,944
1.30( 6 ,726)
12 36 . 38 ksi
7,146
1.30( 6 ,726)
12 33 . 76 ksi
7,523
Bottom Flange:
1.00( 9 ,189)
f c 1.0
7,377
1.00( 1,537)
7,429
1.00( 1,478)
7,429
In order to compute Fcrw, it is first necessary to determine Dc, the depth of the web in
compression. In accordance with Article D6.3.1, for composite sections in negative flexure, Dc
shall be computed for the section consisting of the steel girder plus the longitudinal
reinforcement. As explained in Article CD6.3.1, for composite sections in negative flexure, the
distance between the neutral axis locations for the steel and composite sections is small, and the
location of the neutral axis for the composite section is largely unaffected by the dead-load
stress. Therefore, Dc is simply computed for the section consisting of the steel girder plus the
longitudinal reinforcement. In this example, the section properties from Table 18 are used to
compute Dc as follows, where the thickness of the bottom flange is 3 in.:
D c 44 . 55 3 . 00 41.55
in.
Compute the bend-buckling coefficient, k:

k
D c
/D
4 1 .55
/ 84
36 . 78
Therefore, the nominal web bend-buckling resistance, Fcrw, is computed as:

F crw
0.9 E k
D
tw
0.9
29,000 36.78
84
0.625
5 3 . 14 ksi min
F yc , F yw /0.7
50.0 ksi
Therefore use Fcrw = 50.0 ksi.

Verify Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4):
86
f c 33.76
ksi F crw 5 0 . 0 ksi
OK
(Ratio = 0.675)
7.10 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Fatigue Limit State (Article 6.10.5)
Article 6.10.5 indicates that details in I-girder section flexural members must be investigated for
fatigue as specified in Article 6.6.1. For horizontally curved I-girder bridges, the fatigue stress
range due to major-axis bending plus lateral bending shall be investigated. As appropriate, the
Fatigue I and Fatigue II load combinations specified in Table 3.4.1-1 and the fatigue live load
specified in Article 3.6.1.4 shall be employed for checking load-induced fatigue in I-girder
sections. The Fatigue I load combination is used when investigating infinite load-induced
fatigue life, and the Fatigue II load combination is used when investigating finite load-induced
fatigue life.
According to Table 3.6.2.1-1, the dynamic load allowance for fatigue loads is 15%. Centrifugal
force effects are considered, and included in the fatigue moments. As discussed previously, the
75-year single lane ADTT is assumed to be 1,000 trucks per day.
7.10.1 Fatigue in Top Flange
At Section G4-2, it is necessary to check the top flange for the fatigue limit state. The base metal
at the transverse stiffener weld terminations and interior cross frame connection plate welds at
locations subject to a net tensile stress must be checked as a Category C fatigue detail per
Condition 4.1 in Table 6.6.1.2.3-1. Only the top flange is checked herein, as a net tensile stress
is not induced in the bottom flange by the fatigue loading at this location. Also, it should be
noted that lateral bending stress in the top flange is not a concern for the fatigue limit state since
the deck is in place and continuously braces the top flange.
According to Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1), the factored fatigue stress range, (f), must not exceed the
nominal fatigue resistance, (F)n. In accordance with Article C6.6.1.2.2, the resistance factor, ,
and the load modifier, , are taken as 1.0 for the fatigue limit state.
f F n
Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1)
From Table 6.6.1.2.3-2, the 75-year (ADTT)SL equivalent to infinite fatigue life for a Category
C fatigue detail is 745 trucks per day. Therefore, since the assumed (ADTT)SL for this design
example of 1,000 trucks per day is greater than this limit of 745 trucks per day, the detail must be
checked for infinite fatigue life using the Fatigue I load combination. Per Article 6.6.1.2.5, the
nominal fatigue resistance for infinite fatigue life is equal to the constant-amplitude fatigue
threshold:
F n
F TH
Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-1)
where (F)TH is the constant-amplitude fatigue threshold and is taken from Table 6.6.1.2.5-3.
For a Category C fatigue detail, (F)TH = 12.0 ksi, and therefore:
87
F n
12.0 ksi
As shown in Table 9, the unfactored negative and positive moments due to fatigue, including
centrifugal force effects and the 15 percent dynamic load allowance, at Section G4-2 are -1,315
kip-ft and 351 kip-ft, respectively.
In accordance with Article 6.6.1.2.1, for flexural members that utilize shear connectors
throughout the entire length that also have concrete deck reinforcement satisfying the provisions
of Article 6.10.1.7, it is permissible to compute the flexural stresses assuming the concrete deck
to be effective for both positive and negative flexure at the fatigue limit state.
As required by Articles 6.10.10.1, shear connectors are necessary along the entire length of
horizontally curved continuous composite bridges. Also, earlier calculations in this design
example show that the deck reinforcement is in compliance with Article 6.10.1.7. Therefore, the
concrete deck is assumed effective in computing the major-axis bending stresses for the fatigue
limit state at Section G4-2. From Table 16, the short-term composite section properties (n =
7.56) used to compute the stress at the top of the web (bottom of the top flange, where the weld
in question is located) are:
INA(n) = 539,403 in.4
dTOP OF WEB = dTOP OF STEEL tf_TOP FLANGE = 26.10 in. 2.50 in. = 23.60 in.
Per Table 3.4.1-1, the load factor, , for the Fatigue I load combination is 1.5. The factored stress
range at the top of the web is computed as follows:
f
1 , 315 351 12
1.5
23.60
1 . 31 ksi
539,403
Checking Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1),

f
1 . 31
ksi F
12.0 ksi
OK
(Ratio
0.109)
7.10.2 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs

In accordance with Article 6.10.5.3, interior panels of stiffened webs must satisfy:
V u V cr
Eq. (6.10.5.3-1)
where: Vu =
shear in the web at the section under consideration, due to unfactored permanent
loads plus the factored fatigue load (Fatigue I live load factor)
Vcr = shear buckling resistance determined from Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1).
88
Satisfaction of Eq. (6.10.5.3-1) is intended to control elastic flexing of the web, and the member
is assumed to be able to sustain an infinite number of smaller loadings without fatigue cracking
due to this effect. The live load shear in the special requirement is supposed to represent the
heaviest truck expected to cross the bridge in 75 years.
Only interior panels of stiffened webs are investigated because the shear resistance of end panels
of stiffened webs and the shear resistance of unstiffened webs are limited to the shear buckling
resistance at the strength limit state.
The unfactored shears at Section G4-1 are shown below. These results are directly from the
three-dimensional analysis as reported in Table 10.
Steel Dead Load:
Total Permanent Load
VDC1-STEEL
VDC1-CONC
VDC2
VDW
Fatigue Live Load (incl. IM + CF): VLL+IM
=
=
=
=
=
-45 kips
-144 kips
-36 kips
-28 kips
-253 kips
= -55 kips
Therefore, the Fatigue I shear in the web is:

V u 253 1 . 5 ( 55 ) 336 kips
Next, compute the shear-buckling resistance:

V cr CV
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1)

V p 0 . 58 F yw Dt
0 . 58 50
Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-2)
84 0 . 625 1,523
kips
k 5
5
do
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-7)
89
do = 82 in.
k 5
5
82
84
10.2
D
tw
84
0 . 625
134 . 4 1 . 40
Ek
F yw
1 . 40
29 , 000 (10 . 2 )
50
108
C
Ek
F
D yw
tw
1 . 57
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
1 . 57
29 , 000 (10 . 2 )
0 . 514
50
84
0 . 625
2
The shear-buckling resistance is then computed in accordance with Eq. (6.10.9.3.3-1):

V cr 0 . 514
1, 523
783 kips

V u | 3 36 | kips
V cr 783 kips
V u V cr
OK
Therefore, the web is satisfactory for fatigue at the maximum negative moment location.
7.11 Girder Check: Section G4-2, Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6)
7.11.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2)
According to Article 6.10.6.2.3, composite sections in negative flexure in horizontally curved
steel girder bridges shall satisfy the requirements of Article 6.10.8.
Composite sections in negative flexure must satisfy the provisions of Article 6.10.8.1. At the
strength limit state, the compression flange must satisfy:
90
f bu
1
3
Eq. (6.10.8.1.1-1)
f f F nc
where:
fbu = flange stress calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending determined
as specified in Article 6.10.1.6
f = resistance factor for flexure = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Article 6.10.8.2
Per Article 6.10.8.1.3 for continuously braced flanges, at the strength limit state, the tension
flange must satisfy:
Eq. (6.10.8.1.3-1)
f bu f R h F yf
It should be noted that flange lateral bending is not considered for the tension flange at the
strength limit state because the flange is continuously supported by the hardened concrete deck.
7.11.1.1
Strength I Flexural Stress in Top and Bottom Flange
The unfactored bending moments at Section G4-2 from the analysis are shown below (see Table
9). The live load moment includes the centrifugal force and dynamic load allowance effects.
MDC1
MDC2
MDW
MLL+IM
=
=
=
=
-1,917 + (-7,272) = -9,189 kip-ft

-1,537 kip-ft
-1,478 kip-ft
-6,726 kip-ft
Compute the factored flange flexural stresses at Section G4-2 for the Strength I limit state,
without consideration of flange lateral bending. As discussed previously, the factor is taken
equal to 1.0 in this example. In accordance with Article 6.10.1.1.1c, the flexural stresses are
computed using section properties based on a composite section consisting of the steel section
and the longitudinal reinforcement within the effective width of the concrete deck (refer to
91
Table 17 and Table 18). Therefore:

For Strength I, the bending stresses due to vertical loads are as follows:
Top Flange (tension):
( DC1 M
f bu
S nc
DC1
( DC2
DC2
DW M
DW
S 3n
( LL M
LL
Sn
)
(12 )
1 . 25 (1, 537 ) 1 . 5 (1, 478 ) 1 . 75 ( 6 , 726 )

1 . 25 ( 9 ,189 )

(12 )( 1 ) 47 . 52 ksi
7 ,146
6 , 689
6 , 944
Bottom Flange (compression):

( DC1 M
f bu
S nc
DC1
( DC2
DC2
DW M
DW
S 3n
( LL M
LL
Sn
)
(12 )
1 . 25 (1, 537 ) 1 . 5 (1, 478 ) 1 . 75 ( 6 , 726 )

1 . 25 ( 9 ,189 )

(12 )( 1 ) 44 . 14 ksi
7 , 377
7 , 429
7 , 523
As required to check the discretely braced compression flange, the lateral bending stress must
also be calculated for the bottom flange. Using the moments shown above, the unfactored lateral
bending moment and corresponding first-order lateral bending stress are calculated as follows:
M
lat
lat_DC1
lat_DC2
lat_DW
lat_LL
NRD
Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1)
9 ,189 ( 20 )
6 , 726 ( 20 )
73 . 28 kip - ft
f _DC1
12 . 26 kip - ft
f _DC2
11 . 79 kip - ft
f _DW
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
2
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
53 . 64 kip - ft
lat
S bot_flange
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
1 , 478 ( 20 )
10 ( 716 . 5 )( 7 )
1 , 537 ( 20 )
f _LL
, where
lat_DC1
S bot_fl
lat_DC2
S bot_fl
M
lat_DW
S bot_fl
M
lat_LL
S bot_fl
S bot_flange
73 . 28 (12 )
364 . 5
12 . 26 (12 )
364 . 5
11 . 79 (12 )
364 . 5
53 . 64 (12 )
364 . 5
(3.0)(27)
6
3 64 . 5 in.
2 . 41 ksi
0 . 40 ksi
0 . 39 ksi
1 . 77 ksi
As investigated for the bottom flange constructibility checks for Section G4-2, the bottom flange
for the strength limit state may be subject to lateral bending amplification. The flange lateral
bending stress, f, may be determined directly from first-order elastic analysis if the following
relation is satisfied:
92
1.2L
C bR
p
Eq. (6.10.1.6-2)
f bu F yc
The limiting unbraced length, Lp, was computed previously in the constructibility check as 14.9
ft. Per Article 6.10.1.10.2, Rb shall be taken as 1.0 if the web satisfies:
2D
tw
Eq. (6.10.1.10.2-2)
rw
For the strength limit state and in accordance with Article D6.3.1, for composite sections in
negative flexure, Dc shall be computed for the section consisting of the steel girder plus the
longitudinal reinforcement. Referring to Table 18, Dc is taken as:
Dc = 44.55 - 3.0 = 41.55 in.
Therefore,
2D
tw
2 ( 41 . 55 )
0 . 625
133 . 0
Compute the limiting slenderness ratio for a noncompact web:
rw 5 . 7
E
F yc
29 , 000
5 .7
50
137 . 3
Eq. (6.10.1.10.2-5)
Eq. (6.10.1.10.2-2) is satisfied:

2D
tw
133 . 0 rw 137 . 3
Therefore, Rb = 1.0. Check Eq. (6.10.1.6-2) assuming Cb = 1.0:

L b 20 ft 1.2 14.9
1.0 1 . 0
44.14 50
19.0 ft
Since Eq. (6.10.1.6-2) is not satisfied, the second-order elastic compression-flange lateral
bending stresses must be considered. The first-order values shall be amplified as follows:
93
0 . 85
f bu
1
F cr
f f 1
1
(second
Eq. (6.10.1.6-4)
- order analysis)
where: fbu =
Fcr
bottom flange stress calculated without consideration of flange lateral bending;

in this particular case, bottom flange stress at the Strength I limit state
= elastic lateral torsional buckling stress for the flange under consideration
determined using Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8)
2
F cr
C bR b E
Lb
rt
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8)
rt
b fc
27
1 D ctw
12 1
3 b fc t fc
7 . 41 in.
1 ( 41 . 55 )( 0 . 625 )
12 1
3
27 ( 3 )
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-9)
Using Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8), compute the elastic lateral torsional buckling stress, Fcr:
2
F cr
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( )( 29 , 000 )
20 (12 )
7 . 41
272 . 8 ksi
The amplification factor (AF) is then determined as follows:
0 . 85
AF
44 . 14
1
272 . 8
1 . 01 1.00 OK
Therefore, the total factored lateral bending stress at the bottom flange, including the
amplification factor, is:
f 1 . 01 1 . 25 ( 2 . 41 0 . 40 ) 1 . 5 ( 0 . 39 ) 1 . 75 (1 . 77 ) 7 . 27 ksi
94
7.11.1.2
Top Flange Flexural Resistance in Tension
As stated previously, the continuously braced top flange must satisfy:

Eq. (6.10.8.1.3-1)
f bu f R h F yf
For Strength I:
f bu 47.52 ksi f R h F yf 1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 50 ksi
7.11.1.3
OK (Ratio = 0.950)
Bottom Flange Flexural Resistance in Compression
The nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange, Fnc, is taken as the smaller of the
local buckling resistance (Article 6.10.8.2.2) and the lateral torsional buckling resistance (Article
6.10.8.2.3).
Per Article 6.10.8.2.2, if f pf, then the local buckling resistance of the compression flange
shall be taken as:
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-1)
F nc R b R h F yc
where:
Rb = web load-shedding factor determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.10.2
Rh = hybrid factor determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.10.1.
Compute the slenderness ratio for the compression flange:
f
b fc
2 t fc
27
2 (3 .0 )
4 . 50
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-3)
Compute the limiting slenderness ratio for a compact flange:

pf 0 . 38
29 , 000
50
9 . 15
Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-4)
f 4 . 50 pf 9 . 15
Therefore, F nc R b R h F yc
For a homogenous girder, the hybrid factor, Rh, is equal to 1.0. As shown earlier, the web loadshedding factor, Rb, is equal to 1.0. Therefore, Fnc for the local buckling resistance is calculated
as:
95
F nc 1.0 1.0
50.00
50.00 ksi
Next, determine the lateral torsional buckling resistance of the compression flange, noting that
the unbraced length, Lb, is 20 ft.
Lp = 14.9 ft
r t
(calculated previously in bottom flange lateral bending amplification for

constructibility)
( 7 . 43 )
E
F yr
29 , 000
0 . 7 ( 50 )
12
Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-5)
56 . 0 ft.
Cb is conservatively assumed as 1.0.
F nc C b 1
F yr
1
R h F yc
L b L p
L L
p
r
R R F R R F
b
h
yc
b
h
yc
0 . 7 ( 50 ) 20 14 . 9
1 . 0 1 1
1 . 0 ( 50 ) 56 . 0 14 . 9
Eq. (6.10.8.8.3-2)
1 . 0 (1 . 0 )( 50 ) 48 . 14 ksi
(controls)
Therefore, use the lateral torsional buckling resistance to check Eq. (6.10.8.1.1-1) since it is less
than the local buckling resistance.
For Strength I:
f bu
f bu
1
3
1
3
Eq. (6.10.8.1.1-1)
f f F nc
f 4 4 . 14
1
3
(7.27)
46.56 ksi f F nc 1 . 0 48.14
48 . 14 ksi
OK (Ratio=0.967)
7.11.2 Web Shear Strength (Article 6.10.9)

According to the provisions of Article 6.10.9.1, at the strength limit state, straight and curved
web panels shall satisfy:
Vu vVn
Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
96
where:
v = resistance factor for shear = 1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Vn = nominal shear resistance determined as specified in Articles 6.10.9.2 and 6.10.9.3
for unstiffened and stiffened webs, respectively
Vu = shear in the web at the section under consideration due to the factored loads
Since the web at Support 1 is an interior panel, Article 6.10.9.3.2 applies, and the nominal shear
resistance shall be taken as:
Vn
0 . 87
V p C
(1 C )
2
do
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-2)
where:
do
Vn
Vp
C
=
=
=
=
transverse stiffener spacing

nominal shear resistance of the web panel
plastic shear force
ratio of the shear-buckling resistance to the shear yield strength
The above shear resistance applies provided that the following proportional requirement is
satisfied:
2 Dt
( b fc t fc b ft t ft )
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-1)
2 .5
Checking the above equation for Section G4-2:

2 ( 84 )( 0 . 625 )
( 27 )( 3 . 0 ) ( 28 )( 2 . 5 )
0 . 70 2 . 5
OK
Therefore, the equation for Vn shown above applies for the web panel of Section G4-2.
7.11.2.1
Applied Shear
The unfactored shears for Girder G4 at Support 2 are shown below. These results are taken
directly from the three-dimensional analysis as reported in Table 10.
Steel Dead Load:
VDC1-STEEL
VDC1-CONC
VDC2
= -45 kips
= -144 kips
= -36 kips
97
Future Wearing Surface Dead Load: VDW

VLL+IM
= -28 kips
= -159 kips
The maximum Strength I factored shear is computed as:

V u 1 . 25 45 144 36 1 . 50 28 1 . 75 159
7.11.2.2
602 kips
Shear Resistance

V p 0 . 58 F yw Dt
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-3)
0 . 58 ( 50 )( 84 )( 0 . 625 ) 1,523 kips
k 5
5
do
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-7)
do = 82 in.
k 5
5
82
84
1 0 .2
Check the following relation in order to determine the appropriate equation for computing C:
D
tw
84
0 . 625
134 . 4 1 . 40
Ek
F yw
1 . 40
29 , 000 (10 . 2 )
50
108
C
1 . 57
D
t
w
Ek
yw
Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
98
29 , 000 10 . 2
0 . 514
50
84
0 . 625
1 . 57
The nominal shear resistance is then computed in accordance with Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-2):
Vn
0 . 87
Vp C
do
1 , 523
0 . 87 1
0 . 514
0 . 514
1,244
2
82
84

V u 602
kips
v V n (1 . 0 )( 1 , 244 ) 1,244 kips
kips
Vu vVn
OK (Ratio = 0.484)
Therefore, the web of Section G4-2 is satisfactory for shear at Support 2.

7.12 Bolted Field Splice
7.12.1 General
This section will show the design of a bolted field splice in accordance with the provisions of
Article 6.13.6. The design computations will be illustrated for the Field Splice #2 on Girder G4.
First, single bolt capacities are computed for slip resistance (Article 6.13.2.8) and shear
resistance (Article 6.13.2.7), and then the bearing resistance on the connected material is
computed (Article 6.13.2.9). The tensile resistance (Article 6.13.2.10) of a single bolt is also
computed for completeness but is not used in this example. The field splice is then checked for
constructibility, the service limit state, and the strength limit state.
All bolts used in the field splice are 0.875-inch diameter ASTM A325 bolts. Table 6.13.2.4.2-1
shows that a standard hole diameter size for a 0.875-inch diameter bolt is 0.9375 inch. The
connection is designed assuming that a Class B surface condition is provided and that the surface
is unpainted and blast-cleaned. Also, it is assumed that the bolt threads are excluded from the
shear planes in all connections.
Article 6.13.6.1.4a requires at least two rows of bolts on each side of the joint. Thus, four rows
of four bolts are selected for each flange, and two vertical rows of 23 bolts per web are selected
for the web splice plate. Oversize or slotted holes in either the member or the splice plates are
not permitted. The elevation view of the bolted field splice being investigated is shown in Figure
9, and views of the top and bottom flange splice plates are shown in Figure 10 and Figure 11,
respectively.
99
Figure 9 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Elevation View
100
Figure 10 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Top Flange
Figure 11 Bolted Field Splice in Span 2 of G4 Bottom Flange

7.12.2 Resistance Calculation for the Service Limit State and Constructibility
For slip-critical connections, the factored resistance, Rr, of a bolt at the Service II load
combination is taken as:
101
Rr = Rn
Eq. (6.13.2.2-1)
where: Rn = the nominal resistance as specified in Article 6.13.2.8

The nominal slip resistance of a bolt in a slip-critical connection shall be taken as:
R
where: Ns
Pt
Kh
Ks
K h K s N s Pt
=
=
=
=
Eq. (6.13.2.8-1)
number of slip planes per bolt

minimum required bolt tension specified in Table 6.13.2.8-1
hole size factor specified in Table 6.13.2.8-2
surface condition factor specified in Table 6.13.2.8-3
For all bolts in this connection:

Ns = 2 since each connection has two slip planes.
Pt = 39 kips for A325, 0.875-inch bolts.
Kh = 1.0 since standard size holes are used.
Ks = 0.50 since a Class B surface preparation is assumed for this design example.
Therefore, the slip resistance of a single bolt for service and constructibility checks is:
R
(1 . 0 )( 0 . 50 )( 2 )( 39 ) 39 kips/bolt
7.12.3 Resistance Calculations for the Strength Limit State

The factored resistance, Rr, of a bolted connection at the strength limit state shall be taken as
Rr = Rn
Eq. (6.13.2.2-2)
where: = resistance factor for bolts specified in Article 6.5.4.2

The nominal resistance of the bolted connection must be computed for three types of strength:
shear, bearing, and tension, where applicable.
Article 6.13.6.1.4a states that the factored flexural resistance of the flanges at the point of the
splice at the strength limit state must satisfy the applicable provisions of Article 6.10.6.2, which
relate to flexure. The girder satisfies the provisions of Article 6.10.6.2 at the splice location;
however, the checks at this particular location are not included in this example.
7.12.3.1
Bolt Shear Resistance (Article 6.13.2.7)
The nominal shear resistance, Rn, of a high-strength bolt at the strength limit state where threads
are excluded from the shear plane is computed as follows:
R
0 . 48 A b F ub N s
Eq. (6.13.2.7-1)
102
where: Ab = area of bolt corresponding to the nominal diameter

Fub = specified minimum tensile strength of the bolt per Article 6.4.3
Ns = number of shear planes per bolt
Rn = 0.48(0.601)(120)(2) = 69.2 kips/bolt
The factored shear resistance at the strength limit state shall be taken as:
Rr = sRn
Eq. (6.13.2.2-2)
where: s = shear resistance factor for bolts in shear from Article 6.5.4.2
Rr = 0.8(69.2) = 55.4 kips/bolt
7.12.3.2
Bearing Resistance on Connected Material (Article 6.13.2.9)
The nominal bearing resistance of interior and end bolt holes at the strength limit, Rn, is taken as
one of the following two terms, depending on the bolt clear distance and the clear end distance.
(1) With bolts spaced at a clear distance between holes not less than 2.0d and with a clear
end distance not less than 2.0d:
R
2 . 4 dtF
Eq. (6.13.2.9-1)
(2) If either the clear distance between holes is less than 2.0d or the clear end distance is less
than 2.0d:
R
where: d
t
Fu
Lc
1 . 2 L c tF u
=
=
=
=
Eq. (6.13.2.9-2)
nominal diameter of the bolt (in.)

thickness of the connected material (in.)
tensile strength of the connected material specified in Table 6.4.1-1 (ksi)
clear distance between holes or between the hole and the end of the member in the
direction of the applied force
In the case of the web, the end distance is 2.0 inches. For simplicity, assume the bolt hole
diameter is 1 inch (actual bolt hole diameter is 0.875 + 0.0625 = 0.9375), creating a clear end
distance of 1.5 inches, which is less than 2.0d. Therefore, Eq. (6.13.2.9-2) applies. The thinner
of the two webs is used for the thickness, t. The nominal bearing resistance for the end row of
bolts in the web is:
Rn = 1.2(1.0)(0.5625)(65) = 43.87 kips/bolt
The factored resistance is:
103
Rr = bbRn
Eq. (6.13.2.2-2)
where: bb = shear resistance factor for bolts bearing on material (Article 6.5.4.2)
Rr = 0.8(43.87) = 35.1 kips/bolt
The bearing resistance above is computed for the thinnest element, the web, but it can
conservatively be used for the flanges as well.
For interior rows of bolts, Eq. (6.13.2.9-1) applies, and the nominal bolt resistance is computed
as:
Rn = 2.4dtFu
Eq. (6.13.2.9-1)
Rn = 2.4(0.875)(0.5625)(65) = 76.78 kips/bolt

Therefore, the factored bearing resistance is:
Rr = 0.8(76.78) = 61.42 kips/bolt
Again, the bearing resistance above is computed for the thinnest element, the web, but it can
conservatively be used for the flanges as well.
7.12.3.3
Tensile Resistance (Article 6.13.2.10)
The nominal tensile strength of a bolt, Tn, independent of any initial tightening force, shall be
taken as:
T n 0 . 76 A b F ub
Eq. (6.13.2.10.2-1)
T n 0 . 76 ( 0 . 601 )( 120 ) 54.8 kips/bolt
The tensile bolt strength is not used in this example.

7.12.4 Constructibility Checks
According to Article 6.13.6.1.4a, connections must be proportioned to prevent slip during the
erection of the steel and during the casting of the concrete deck. Since Cast #1 causes a negative
moment at the splice location that is larger than the moment assuming a single placement of the
entire deck, Steel + Cast #1 controls. For constructibility, the load factor is 1.25 according to the
provisions of Article 3.4.2.
Article 6.13.6.1.4c requires that lateral bending effects be considered in the design of curved
girder splices. Since the flange is discretely braced for this case, flange lateral bending must be
considered. To account for the effects of flange lateral bending, the flange splice bolts will be
designed for the combined effects of shear and moment using the traditional elastic vector
104
method. The shear on the bolts is caused by the flange force calculated from the average majoraxis bending stress in the flange, and the moment on the bolt group is caused by the flange lateral
bending moment.
7.12.4.1
Constructibility of Top Flange
To check constructibility of the top flange, first compute the polar moment of inertia of the top
flange bolt pattern, shown in Figure 10. The bolt pattern consists of the 16 bolts in the flange on
one side of the connection.
I p 2 4 3 .5
6 .5
2 4 1 . 5
4 .5
616 in.
Compute the unfactored major-axis bending moment and the unfactored flange lateral moment.
Using the results listed in Table 9, the major-axis moment for Steel + Cast #1 is computed as
follows:
Major-Axis Moment
382 1 , 910
2,292 kip ft
Using the major-axis bending moments from Table 9 and Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1), compute the
flange lateral bending moment for Steel + Cast #1
M
lat
382
20
. 5 7
1, 910
10 716
18 . 3 kip ft
The section properties of Field Section 3 of Girder 4 are used to compute the bending stresses
since Field Section 3 is the smaller of the two girder sections connected by the splice. The
calculations of the section properties are not shown here, but they are computed as demonstrated
earlier in this example for other girder sections.
The flange stress due to major-axis bending can be computed at the midthickness of the flange.
Herein, this flange stress is computed by taking the average of the stress at the top of the top
flange and the top of the web. It is conservative to use only the flange stresses at the outer edge
of the flange and not at the midthickness. The Construction Strength I factored major-axis
bending stresses are computed as follows:
f top
flg
2 , 292

12 1 . 25 15 . 2 ksi
2 , 262
2 , 292
f top web
12 1 . 25 14 . 9 ksi
2 , 308
Compute the force in the top flange using the average major-axis bending stress in the flange.
The gross section of the flange is used to check for slip.
105
15 . 2 14 . 9
F top
17 . 0 1 . 0 256 kips
2
Compute the longitudinal force in each bolt resulting from the major-axis bending stress by
dividing by the number of bolts on one side of the top flange splice:
F Long
vert
256
16.0 kips/bolt
16
Compute the factored longitudinal component of force in the critical bolt due to the flange lateral
moment, noting that the transverse distance from the centroid of the bolt group to the critical bolt
is 6.5 inches:
F Long
lat
18 . 3 6 . 5
616
12 1 . 25
2 . 90 kips/bolt
Therefore, the total longitudinal force is computed as:

F Long
tot
16 . 0 2 . 90 18 . 9 kips/bolt
Compute the factored transverse component of force in the critical bolt due to the flange lateral
bending moment, noting that the longitudinal distance from the centroid of the bolt group to the
critical bolt is 4.5 inches:
F Trans
18 . 3 4 . 5
616
12 1 . 25
2 . 01 kips/bolt
Compute the resultant force on the critical bolt:

F
18 . 9
2 . 01
19 . 0 kips/bolt
Check Ru Rr, where Rr equals the factored slip resistance of one bolt (calculated previously):
Ru = 19.0 kips/bolt < Rr = 39 kips/bolt OK
7.12.4.2
Constructibility of Bottom Flange
As stated previously, Cast #1 causes a negative moment at the splice location that is larger than
the moment assuming a single placement of the entire deck, so Steel + Cast #1 controls for
constructibility, and the appropriate load factor is 1.25 per Article 3.4.2.
Similar to the check of the top flange, the section properties of Field Section 3 of Girder 4 are
used to compute the bending stresses at the bottom flange (section property calculations not
106
shown). The Construction Strength I factored major-axis bending stresses are computed as
follows:
f bot
2 , 292

12 1 . 25
3 , 029
flg
11.35 ksi
2 , 292

12 1 . 25 10.89 ksi
3 ,157
f bot web
Compute the force in the bottom flange using the average major-axis bending stress in the flange.
The gross section of the flange is used to check for slip.
11 . 35 10 . 89
21 1 . 5 350 kips
F bot
Compute the longitudinal force in each bolt resulting from the major-axis bending stress by
dividing by the number of bolts on one side of the bottom flange splice:
F Long
vert
350
24
14 . 58 kips/bolt
Compute the polar moment of inertia of the bottom flange bolt pattern shown in Figure 11. The
bolt pattern consists of the 24 bolts in the flange on one side of the connection.
I p 2 6 1 .5
4 .5
2 4 2 . 5
5 .5
8 .5
1,140
in.
Compute the factored longitudinal component of force in the critical bolt due to the flange lateral
moment, noting that the transverse distance from the centroid of the bolt group to the critical bolt
is 8.5 inches:
F Long
lat
18 . 3 8 . 5
1,140
12 1 . 25
2 . 05 kips/bolt
Therefore, the total longitudinal force is computed as:

F Long
tot
14 . 58 2 . 05 16 . 6 kips/bolt
Compute the factored transverse component of force in the critical bolt due to the flange lateral
bending moment, noting that the longitudinal distance from the centroid of the bolt group to the
critical bolt is 4.5 inches:
F Trans
18 . 3 4 . 5
1,140
12 1 . 25 1 . 08
kips/bolt
107
Compute the resultant force on the critical bolt:

F
16 . 6
1 . 08
16 . 6 kips/bolt
Check Ru Rr, where Rr equals the factored slip resistance of one bolt (calculated previously):
Ru = 16.6 kips/bolt < Rr = 39 kips/bolt OK
7.12.4.3
Constructibility of Web
Article 6.13.6.1.4a directs the designer to check the bolted splice to prevent slip in the bolts
during the erection of the steel and during the casting of the concrete deck. A pattern of two
rows of 7/8 in. diameter bolts spaced vertically at 3.5 in. are selected for the web splice. There
are 46 bolts on each side of the web splice. The pattern is shown in Figure 9. Although not
illustrated here, the number of bolts in the web splice could be decreased by spacing a group of
bolts closer to the mid-depth of the web (where flexural stress is relatively low) at the maximum
specified spacing for sealing (see Article 6.13.2.6.2), and by spacing the remaining two groups of
bolts near the top and bottom of the web at a closer spacing. Note that there are 3.5 inches
between the inside of the flanges and the first bolt to provide sufficient assembly clearance. In
this example, the web splice is designed under the conservative assumption that the maximum
moment and shear at the splice will occur under the same loading condition.
Compute the polar moment of inertia of the web bolts about the centroid of the bolt group on one
side of the connection.
I p 2 2 3 .5
46 1 . 5
7 .0
2 4 ,898
10 . 5
in
14 . 0
17 . 5
21 . 0
24 . 5
28 . 0
31 . 5
35 . 0
38 . 5
An alternate equation to compute Ip is provided in Article C6.13.6.1.4b.

Compute the factored Construction Strength I shear at the splice due to Steel plus Cast #1 and
Cast #2, as this is the governing shear for constructibility. The unfactored shears are taken from
Table 10, and Cast #2 is conservatively included in the calculation.
V 1 . 25
27
7 92
158 kips
Compute the factored moment, Mv, due to the eccentricity of the factored shear about the
centroid of the connection (refer to the web bolt pattern in Figure 9).
M
3
1
V e 158 2 . 125
47 . 7 kip - ft
2
12
108
Determine the portion of the major-axis bending moment resisted by the web, Muw, and the
horizontal force resultant in the web, Huw, using the equations provided in Article C6.13.6.1.4b.
Muw and Huw are assumed to be applied at the middepth of the web. Using the factored majoraxis bending stresses calculated previously, the average factored bending stresses in the top and
bottom flanges for Steel plus Cast #1 are computed as follows:
Top flange:
15 . 2 14 . 9
F cf
15.05 ksi (T)
2
Bottom flange:
f ncf
(controlling flange)
11 . 35 10 . 89
11 . 12 ksi (C)
where: Fcf = design stress for controlling flange at the point of splice specified in Article
6.13.6.1.4c; positive for tension, negative for compression
fncf = flexural stress due to the factored loads at midthickness of the noncontrolling
flange at the point of splice concurrent with fcf; positive for tension, negative for
compression
Since the absolute stress in the top flange is greater than the absolute stress in the bottom flange,
the top flange is the controlling flange.
Using these bending stresses, compute Muw and Huw:
M
uw
uw
twD
R h F cf R
12
twD
2
R h F cf
cf
cf
f ncf
Eq. (C6.13.6.1.4b-1)
Eq. (C6.13.6.1.4b-2)
f ncf
where: Rcf = the absolute value of the ratio of Fcf to the maximum flexural stress, fcf, due to
the factored loads at the midthickness of the controlling flange at the point of
splice, as defined in Article 6.13.6.1.4c
Rh = hybrid factor, equal to 1.0 in this example
As indicated in Article C6.13.6.1.4b, the ratio Rcf is equal to 1.0 in this case since the equations
for Muw and Huw are being used to check slip.
M
uw
uw
0 . 5625 ( 84 )
12
0 . 5625 84
2
1
1 . 0 (15 . 05 ) 1 . 0 ( 11 . 12 )
721 kip ft
12
1 . 0 15 . 05 1 . 0 11 . 12
92 . 8 kips
The total moment on the web splice is computed as follows:
109
tot
uw
47 . 7 721 769 kip - ft
Compute the vertical bolt force due to the factored shear by dividing the shear by the number of
bolts on one side of the web splice:
V
Fs
158
46
3.43 kips/bolt
Compute the bolt force due to the horizontal force resultant by dividing the horizontal force by
the number of bolts on one side of the web splice:
FH
H
N
uw
92 . 8
46
2 . 02 kips/bolt
Compute the horizontal and vertical components of the force on the extreme bolt due to the total
moment on the splice:
F Mv
F Mh
tot
Ip
tot
Ip
3
769 12
2
24 , 898
769 12
0 . 56 kips/bolt
38 . 5
24 , 898
14 . 27 kips/bolt
Compute the resultant bolt force:

Fr
Fs
F Mv
F H F Mh
3 . 43
0 . 56
2 . 02 14 . 27
16 . 77 kips/bolt
Check Ru Rr, where Ru = Fr, and Rr equals the slip resistance of one bolt (calculated
previously):
R
F r 16 . 77 kips/bolt
39 kips/bolt
OK
The preceding check is conservative since the maximum factored moment after Cast #1 is
assumed to be concurrent with the maximum factored shear after Cast #2.
7.12.5 Service Limit State, Top and Bottom Flange
According to the provisions of Article 6.13.6.1.4c, bolted connections for flange splices shall be
designed as slip-critical connections for the flange design force. As a minimum, for checking
slip of the flange splice bolts, the design force for the flange under consideration must be taken
110
as the Service II design stress, Fs, times the smaller gross flange area on either side of the splice.
Fs is calculated as follows:
Fs
fs
R
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-5)
where: fs = maximum flexural stress due to Load Combination Service II at the midthickness of
the flange under consideration for the smaller section at the point of the splice (ksi)
Rh = 1.0 for homogeneous girders
Compute the flexural stresses for the top and bottom flanges (at the flange midthickness) for both
the negative and positive live load bending cases and using the load factors for the Service II
load combination from Table 3.4.1-1. The section properties of Field Section 3 of Girder 4 are
used to compute the flange stresses; however, as noted earlier, the section property calculations
are not shown for this particular section.
Negative live load bending case
DC M
fs
f s, top
flg
f s, bot
flg
DC 1 STEEL
DC 1 CONC
I NC
1 . 0 1, 967 49 . 02

111 , 996
DC
DC 2
DW M
I LongTerm
DW
( M )
1 . 0 250 237
47 . 48
120 , 299
1 . 0 1, 967 36 . 23 1 . 0 250 237

111 , 996
120 , 299
37 . 77
LL I M
LL I
I ShortTerm
(M )
1 . 30 2 , 772
44 . 66
12 26.9 ksi (T)
135 , 580
1 . 30 2 , 772
40 . 59
12
135 , 580
22 . 4 ksi (C)
Positive live load bending case
DC M
fs
f s, top
flg
f s, bot
flg
DC 1 STEEL
DC 1 CONC
I NC
1 . 0 1, 967 49 . 02

111 , 996
DC
DC 2
DW M
I LongTerm
DW
( M )
1 . 0 250 237
31 . 05
210 , 369
1 . 0 1, 967 36 . 23 1 . 0 250 237

111 , 996
210 , 369
54 . 20
LL I M
LL I
I ShortTerm
1 . 30 2 , 054
( M )
15 . 96
12 9.5 ksi (T)
293 , 406
1 . 30 2 , 054
69 . 29
293 , 406
12
1 . 6 ksi (C)
The negative live load bending case governs since it results in the larger absolute flange stresses.
It should be noted that the total moment associated with the positive live load bending case
results in overall negative moment at the splice location.
111
It is also necessary to include the force resultant in the bolt group due to the flange lateral
bending stress. Apply only the noncomposite dead load lateral moment to the top flange since
this moment is locked-in when the deck hardens. No other loads deflect the top flange in the
transverse direction after the deck hardens since the deck acts as a diaphragm between girders.
The lateral moment due to all loadings is applied to the bottom flange.
Determine the unfactored lateral moments using Eq. (C4.6.1.2.4b-1):
M
lat _ DC 1
lat _ DC 2
lat _ DW
lat _ LL
lat _ LL
7.12.5.1
382
20
. 5 7
1, 585
10 716
250 20
10 716
. 5 7
237 20
10 716
10 716
1.99 kip ft
1.89 kip ft
10 716 . 5 7
2 , 054 20
15.69 kip ft
. 5 7
2 , 772 20
. 5 7
22 . 11 kip ft
16 . 38 kip ft
Top Flange Critical Bolt Shear
Determine the force on the critical bolt, which is taken as the bolt farthest from the centroid of
the bolt group. See Figure 9 for location of the critical bolt in the top flange bolt group. The
shear force in the critical bolt has two sources shear force induced by lateral bending and shear
force induced by major-axis bending. Each must be computed, and then the force resultant is
determined. The lateral bending induced shear force for the critical bolt due to noncomposite
dead load has two components and is calculated as follows:
P long
where: M =
x =
y =
Ip =
Mx
Ip
P lat
My
Ip
lateral bending moment (kip-in)

transverse distance from centroid of bolt group to critical bolt
longitudinal distance from centroid of bolt group to critical bolt
bolt group polar moment of inertia
Compute the factored lateral bending moment due to noncomposite dead load (DC1) only since
only DC1 applies to the top flange, as discussed previously:
112
M 1 . 0 15 . 69
12
188.3 kip in.
(the sign is not needed in these calculations)
The bolt group polar moment of inertia was computed previously as:
I p 616 in.
The longitudinal and lateral components of the lateral bending induced shear force are computed
as follows:
P long
P lat
188 . 3 6 . 50
616
188 . 3 4 . 50
616
1.99 kips
1.38 kips
The controlling flange force due to major-axis bending is equal to the maximum of the top flange
flexural stresses, fs, multiplied by the gross area of the flange. Since the girder is homogeneous,
Fs = fs. The longitudinal force in each bolt resulting from flexure is determined by dividing the
controlling flange force by the number of bolts on one side of the top flange splice.
P long_vert
bend
Fs A
top _ fl
26.9 17 1
16
28.6 kips/bolt
The total force on the critical bolt is the resultant of the controlling flange force due to majoraxis bending and the shear forces due to lateral bending. Therefore, the total force resultant on
the critical bolt is:
F crit
7.12.5.2
28.6
1.99
1 . 38
3 0 . 6 kips
Bottom Flange Critical Bolt Shear
Determine the force on the critical bolt, which is taken as the bolt farthest from the centroid of
the bolt group. See Figure 9 for location of the critical bolt in the bottom flange bolt group. The
calculations for the bottom flange are similar to the previous calculations for the top flange. The
lateral bending induced shear force for the critical bolt due to Service II dead load and live load
is calculated as follows:
P long
Mx
Ip
P lat
My
Ip
Compute the factored lateral bending moment due to all loadings, as discussed previously:
113
M 1 . 0 15 . 69 1 . 99 1 . 89 1 . 30 22 . 11 12
579 . 8 kip in.
(the sign is not needed in these calculations)

The bolt group polar moment of inertia was computed previously as:
I p 1 ,140 in.
as follows:
P long
P lat
579 . 8 8 . 50
1,140
579 . 8 4 . 50
1,140
4 . 32 kips
2 . 29 kips
The controlling flange force due to major-axis bending is equal to the maximum of the bottom
flange flexural stresses, fs, multiplied by the gross area of the flange. Since the girder is
homogeneous, Fs = fs. The longitudinal force in each bolt resulting from flexure is determined
by dividing the controlling flange force by the number of bolts on one side of the bottom flange
splice.
P long_vert
bend
Fs A
bot _ fl
- 22.4
21 1 . 5
24
29 . 4 kips/bolt
The total force on the critical bolt is the resultant of the controlling flange force due to majoraxis bending and the shear forces due to lateral bending. Therefore, the total force resultant on
the critical bolt is:
F crit
29.4
4 . 32
2 . 29
3 3 .8 kips
The critical bolt shear force is greater for the bottom flange than for the top flange, so the bottom
flange controls. For slip-critical connections, the factored resistance, Rr, was calculated
previously as 39 kips/bolt.
F crit 3 3 .8 kips R
39 kips/bolt
OK
It should be noted that by including the effects of the flange lateral bending stress, the resultant
force in the top and bottom flange bolts increases from 28.6 kips/bolt to 30.6 kips/bolt (7.0%)
and 29.4 kips/bolt to 33.8 kips/bolt (15.0%), respectively.
114
7.12.6 Strength Limit State

Bolted splices are designed at the strength limit state to satisfy the requirements specified in
Article 6.13.1. In basic terms, Article 6.13.1 indicates that a splice shall be designed for the
larger of (a) the average of the factored applied stresses and the factored resistance of the
member or (b) 75 percent of the factored resistance of the member. The intent of this provision
is to provide reasonably sized connections. Where the section changes at the splice, the smaller
of the two connected sections shall be used.
7.12.6.1
Flange Splice General Calculations
The effective area, Ae, of a flange when it is in tension is computed using Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-2).
The net area, An, is calculated using the provisions of Article 6.8.3.
A
F
u u

F
y yt
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-2)
Where: u = resistance factor for tension, fracture in net section, specified in Article 6.5.4.2
y = resistance factor for tension, yielding in gross section, specified in Article 6.5.4.2
There are 4 bolts per row in the top flange splice, and although 15/16-inch bolt holes are
specified, 1-inch holes are conservatively assumed in the splice design calculations. The net area
of the top flange is computed as follows:
An = [17.0 4(0.875 + 0.125)](1.0) = 13 in.2
The gross area of the top flange is computed as follows:
Ag = (17.0)(1.0) = 17.0 in.2
The effective area of the top flange is then computed using Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-2):
0 . 8 65
13 14.2 in.
A e
0 . 95 50
Since the effective area does not exceed the gross area, use the computed effective area, A e =
14.2 in.2
In accordance with Article 6.13.6.1.4c, the effective area is used to compute the force in the
flange when the flange is subject to tension, and the gross area is used when a flange is subject to
compression.
According to the provisions of Article 6.13.6.1.4a, the flexural stresses due to the factored loads
at the strength limit state shall be determined using the gross section properties. The factored
bending stresses for Strength I at the midthickness of the flanges are computed as follows:
115
Negative live load bending case

f
DC M

f top
flg
f top
flg
f bot
flg
f bot
flg
DC 1 STEEL
DC 1 CONC
I NC
1 . 25 1, 967 49 . 02

111 , 996
DC
DC 2
DW M
I LongTerm
DW
LL I M
I ShortTerm
( M )
1 . 25 250 1 . 5 237 47 . 48
(M )
1 . 75 2 , 772
120 , 299
LL I
44 . 66
12
135 , 580
35.3 ksi (T)
1 . 25 1, 967 36 . 23

111 , 996
1 . 25
250
1 .5
237
37 . 77
120 , 299
1 . 75 2 , 772
40 . 59
12
135 , 580
29 . 5 ksi (C)
Positive live load bending case

f
DC M

f top
flg
f top
flg
f bot
flg
f bot
flg
DC 1 STEEL
DC 1 CONC
I NC
1 . 25 1, 967 49 . 02

111 , 996
DC
1 . 25
DC 2
DW M
I LongTerm
250
DW
LL I M
I ShortTerm
( M )
1 .5
237
31 . 05
210 , 369
LL I
( M )
1 . 75 2 , 054
15 . 96
12
293 , 406
1 1 . 8 ksi (T)
1 . 25 1, 967 36 . 23 1 . 25 250 1 . 5 237

111 , 996
210 , 369
54 . 20
1 . 75 2 , 054
69 . 29
293 , 406
12
1 . 4 ksi (C)
The negative live load bending case governs since it results in the larger absolute flange stresses.
It should be noted that the total moment associated with the positive live load bending case
results in overall negative moment at the splice location. For the negative live load bending case,
the top flange is the controlling flange since it has the largest ratio of the flexural stress to the
corresponding flange resistance (based on calculations not shown here). Splice plates and their
connections on the controlling flange need to be proportioned to provide a minimum resistance
taken as the design stress times the smaller effective flange area, Ae, on either side of the splice.
Article 6.13.6.1.4c defines the design stress, Fcf, for the controlling flange as:
116
f cf
R
F cf
f F yf
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-1)
0 . 75 f F yf
where fcf is the maximum flexural stress due to the factored loads at the midthickness of the
controlling flange at the splice, the top flange in this case. The hybrid factor R h is taken as 1.0
since all plates have the same yield strength, and is taken as 1.0.
35 . 3
1 . 0 1 . 0 50
1 .0
F cf
42.65 ksi
0 . 75 f F yf 0 . 75 1 . 0 1 . 0 50
37.5 ksi
Therefore, Fcf = 42.65 ksi controls.

The area of the smaller top flange is used to ensure that the design force does not exceed the
strength of the smaller flange. The design force in the top flange is:
F cf A
42 . 62 14 . 2 606 kips (T)
Splice plates and their connections on the noncontrolling flange at the strength limit state must
be proportioned to provide a minimum resistance taken as the design stress, Fcnf, times the
smaller of the effective flange area, Ae, on either side of the splice. The bottom flange is the
noncontrolling flange in this case. Fncf is calculated as follows:
F ncf R
f ncf
cf
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-3)
0 . 75 f F yf
where: Rcf = the absolute value of the ratio of Fcf to fcf for the controlling flange
Fncf = flexural stress due to factored loads at the midthickness of the noncontrolling
flange at the splice concurrent with fcf
Rh = 1.0 for a homogeneous girder
R
cf
F cf
f cf
F ncf 1 . 208
42 . 65
35 . 3
29 . 5
1 .0
1 . 208
35 . 64 ksi
0 . 75 f F yf 0 . 75 1 . 0 1 . 0 50
37.5 ksi
Therefore, Fncf = 37.5 ksi.
117
The minimum design force for the noncontrolling flange, FncfAe, is computed as follows:
FncfAe = 37.5(21.0)(1.5) = 1,181 kips (C)
In the above equation, the effective flange area, Ae, is taken equal to the smaller gross flange
area, Ag, on either side of the splice. The gross flange area is used since the flange is subjected
to compression.
7.12.6.2
Bolt Shear in Top Flange
For the top flange splice plates, use a 0.5 x 17 outer plate and two 0.625 x 7 inner plates.
The difference in thickness of the two top flanges being joined is in., so a in. thick fill plate
is required. As permitted by Article 6.13.6.1.5, fillers need not be extended beyond the splice
material and developed provided that the factored resistance at the bolts in shear at the strength
limit state is reduced by the following factor:
R
1
1
Eq. (6.13.6.1.5-1)
where: Af = sum of the area of the fillers on the top and bottom of the connected plate (in.2)
Ap = smaller of either the connected plate area or the sum of the splice plate areas on
the top and bottom of the connected plate (in.2)
= Af/Ap
Compute the above terms as follows:
A
17 0 . 25
4 . 25 in .
Area of top flange splice plates = (17)(0.5)+2(7)(0.625) = 17.25 in.2

Area of connected plate = (17)(1.0) = 17.0 in.2 (controls)
Ap = 17.0 in.2

4 . 25
17 . 0
0 . 25
2 0 . 25
0 . 25
0 . 83
Therefore, reduce the bolt design shear strength by 0.83 for the strength limit state check only.
118
Flange lateral bending is not considered in the top flange after the deck has hardened and the
flange is continuously braced. The factored bolt shear resistance, Rr, was previously computed
as 55.4 kips/bolt. Therefore, the required number of bolts is computed as follows:
No. bolts
606
16
required
3 7 . 9 kips/bolt
7.12.6.3
F cf A
R R
e
r
R R
606
0 . 83 55 . 4
13.2 bolts,
use 16 bolts
0 . 83 55 . 4 46.0 kips/bolt
OK
Bolt Shear in Bottom Flange
For the bottom flange, flange lateral bending must be considered since the flange is discretely
braced. The following dead and live load values have been taken directly from the analysis:
Steel Dead Load
Concrete Deck Dead Load
Composite Dead Load
Future Wearing Surface Dead Load
Live Load (including IM + CF)
Lateral Bending Moment

-2.9 kip-ft
-12.1 kip-ft
-1.89 kip-ft
-1.81 kip-ft
-16.8 kip-ft
The Strength I total factored lateral bending moment is:

Mlat = 1.25(2.9 + 12.1 + 1.89) + 1.5(1.81) + 1.75(16.8) = 53.2 kip-ft
as follows:
P long
P lat
53 . 2 8 . 50
1,140
53 . 2 4 . 50
1,140
12
12
4 . 76 kips/bolt
2 . 52 kips/bolt
The total force on the critical bolt is the resultant of the shear force due to major-axis bending
and the shear forces due to lateral bending. The shear force in each bolt due to major-axis
bending is equal to the minimum design force, FncfAe, divided by the number of bolts:
P vert
bend
1 ,181
24
49 . 21 kips/bolt
The total force resultant on the critical bolt is therefore:
119
F crit
4 . 76
49 . 21 2 . 52
2
54 . 0 kips R
The factored shear resistance at the strength limit state, Rr, was calculated previously as 55.4
kips/bolt.
R
54.0 kips/bolt
55.4 kips/bolt
OK
It should be noted that a fill plate is not required for the bottom flange splice. Therefore, no
reduction in the bolt design shear strength is necessary.
7.12.6.4
Web Splice Design
7.12.6.4.1
Design Shear
As demonstrated for the flange splice design, the design shear is based on a portion of the
applied stress and/or a portion of the factored resistance per Article 6.13.1 in order to ensure
reasonably sized connections. The web splice is designed based on the conservative assumption
that the maximum moment and shear at the splice occur simultaneously.
In order to determine the design shear, Vuw, first determine the factored shear, Vu. Using the
values from Table 10, the factored shear at the splice for Strength I is computed as:
Vu = 1.25(27 + 112 + 19) + 1.5(22) + 1.75(139) = 474 kips
The factored shear resistance of the 0.5625 in. web at the splice (the smaller web) was
determined to be 617 kips according to the provisions of Article 6.10.9.1. Although not shown,
the calculations are similar to the calculations shown earlier for computing the shear resistance of
the web at Sections G4-2 and G4-3.
Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
V u v V n 617 kips
As needed to determine the design shear Vuw, compute half the factored shear resistance as
follows:
0 . 5 v V n 0 . 5 617
309 kips
V u 474 kips
Therefore, according to Article 6.13.6.1.4b, since Vu > 0.5vVn, the design shear is computed as
follows:
V uw
V u
vVn
2
474
617
2
546 kips
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4b-2)
In the checks that follow, design shear is shown not to exceed the factored block shear rupture
resistance of the web splice plates specified in Article 6.13.4 or the factored shear resistance of
the web splice plates specified in Article 6.13.5.3.
120
7.12.6.4.2
Design Moment and Design Horizontal Force Component
First, compute the moment, Muv, due to the eccentricity of the design shear from the centerline of
the splice to the centroid of the web splice bolt group as follows:
M
uv
V uw e
uv
546
3
1
2 . 125
165 kip ft
2
12
Determine the portion of the major-axis bending moment resisted by the web, Muw, and the
horizontal design force resultant in the web, Huw, according to the provisions of Article
C6.13.6.1.4b. Muw and Huw are assumed to act at the middepth of the web. As stated earlier,
negative live load bending condition controls, so only this condition will be investigated.
As computed earlier for the flange splice design, the negative live load bending stresses are as
follows:
fcf = 35.3 ksi
Fcf = 42.65 ksi
fncf = -29.5 ksi
Rcf = 1.208
Using these bending stresses, compute the portion of the flexural moment assumed to be resisted
by the web and the horizontal design force resultant in the web:
M
uw
uw
uw
uw
twD
R h F cf R
12
twD
2
R h F cf
0 . 5625 ( 84 )
12
0 . 5625 84
cf
cf
f ncf
Eq. (C6.13.6.1.4b-1)
Eq. (C6.13.6.1.4b-2)
f ncf
1
1 . 0 ( 42 . 65 ) 1 . 208 ( 29 . 5 )
2 ,158 kip ft
12
1 . 0 42 . 65 1 . 208
29 . 5 166 kips
The total moment on the web splice is computed as follows:

M
tot
uv
uw
165 2 ,158 2 , 323 kip - ft
121
7.12.6.4.3
Block Shear Rupture (Article 6.13.4)
Block shear rupture resistance normally does not govern for typical web splice plates, but the
check is illustrated here for completeness. The assumed block shear failure plane for the web
splice plate is shown in Figure 12.
According Article 6.13.4, the factored resistance of the combination of parallel and
perpendicular planes shall be taken as:
R
bs R
0 . 58 F u A vn
bs
Fu A
tn
bs R
0 . 58 F
vg
bs
Fu A
tn
Eq. (6.13.4-1)
where: Rp =
Avg =
Avn =
Ubs =
reduction factor for holes taken equal to 1.0 for bolt holes drilled full size
gross area along the plane resisting shear stress (in.2)
net area along the plane resisting shear stress (in.2)
reduction factor for block shear rupture resistance taken equal to 1.0 when the
tension stress is uniform
Atn = net area along the plane resisting tension stress (in.2)
bs = resistance factor for block shear specified in Article 6.5.4.2
First, compute the area terms, based on the assumed block shear failure planes shown in Figure
12:
A
vg
2 81 0 . 375
vn
2 79 22 . 5 0 . 875 0 . 125
tn
2 3 2 1 . 5 0 . 875 0 . 125
60.75 in.
0 . 375
42.38 in.
0 . 375
2 . 63 in.
Compute the factored resistance as follows:

R
r1
0 . 80 1 . 0 0 . 58 65
42 . 38 1 . 0 65 2 . 63 1,415
r2
0 . 80 1 . 0 0 . 58 50
60 . 75 1 . 0 65 2 . 63
V uw 546
kips R
1,415
kips
kips ( controls
1 , 546 kips
OK
122
Figure 12 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Web Splice Plate
123
7.12.6.4.4
Flexural Yielding
It is also necessary to check for flexural yielding on the gross section of the web splice plates at
the strength limit state. The flexural stress is limited to fFy. From Figure 9, the web splice plate
length is 81 in. Therefore, the section modulus and gross area are computed as follows:
S web
PL
Gross
2 0 . 375
81
820 in.
Area
2 0 . 375
81
60.75
in.
Using the design moment and horizontal force resultant computed previously at this location, the
bending stress in the splice plate is computed as follows:
fg
uv
M
S PL
f g 36.73
uw
H
A
uw
165
2 ,158
12
820
ksi f F y 1 . 0 50
50 ksi
166
60 . 75
36.73 ksi
OK
The splice plates are therefore adequate for flexure.

7.12.6.4.5
Shear Yielding and Shear Rupture (Article 6.13.5.3)
According to the provisions of Article 6.13.5.3, the factored shear resistance, Rr, of the
connection element shall be taken as the smaller value based on shear yielding or shear rupture.
For shear yielding, the factored shear resistance of the connection element is computed as
follows:
R
v 0 . 58 F y A
1 . 0 0 . 58
Eq. (6.13.5.3-1)
vg
50 60 . 75
1 , 762 kips
For shear rupture, the factored resistance of the connection element is computed as follows:
R
vu 0 . 58 R p F u A
0 . 80 0 . 58 1 . 0 65
Eq. (6.13.5.3-2)
vn
42 . 38
1 , 278 kips
(controls)
Therefore, the lesser of the factored shear resistances is checked against the design shear as
follows:
Vuw = 546 kips < Rr = 1,278 kips OK
124
7.12.6.4.6
Shear in Web Splice Bolts at Strength Limit State
Compute the vertical bolt force by dividing the design shear by the number of web splice bolts
on one side of the connection:
Fs
V uw
N
546
1 1 . 87 kips/bolt
46
Compute the bolt force due to the horizontal design force resultant by dividing the horizontal
force by the number of web splice bolts on one side of the connection:
FH
uw
166
3 . 61 kips/bolt
46
Compute the horizontal and vertical components of the force on the extreme bolt due to the total
moment on the splice. The polar moment of inertia is 24,898 in.2 (calculation not shown).
F Mv
F Mh
tot
Ip
tot
Ip
2 , 323 12 1 . 5
24 , 898
2 , 323 12
1 . 68 kips/bolt
38 . 5
24 , 898
43 . 10 kips/bolt
Compute the resultant bolt force:

Fr
Fs
sR
F Mv
55 . 4 kips
F r 48 . 64 kips/bolt
7.12.6.4.7
F H F Mh
11 . 87
1 . 68
(calculated previously)
5 5 . 4 kips/bolt
3 . 61 43 . 10
48 . 64 kips/bolt
Eq. (6.13.2.2-2)
OK
Bearing Resistance of Web
As shown in Figure 9, 0.375 in. thick splice plates are used. As permitted in Article 6.13.6.1.5, a
fill plate is not included since the difference in thickness of the web plates on either side of the
splice is only 1/16 in.
Checking the provision of Article 6.13.2.6.2, the spacing of the bolts for sealing is less than the
maximum permissible spacing:
s 4 4 t 7 . 0 in .
Eq. (6.13.2.6.2-1)
125
s 3 in . 4 4 0 . 375
5.5in.
OK
It is necessary to check the bearing resistance at the web splice bolt holes at the strength limit
state. The assumption is that at the strength limit state, the bolts have slipped and gone into
bearing. The bearing strength of the web controls since the web thickness is less than the sum of
the two splice plate thicknesses. The bearing strength of the outermost hole in the thinner web at
the splice, calculated using the clear edge distance, will conservatively be checked against the
maximum resultant force acting on the extreme bolt in the connection. This check is
conservative since the resultant force acts in the direction of an inclined distance that is larger
than the clear edge distance. Should the bearing strength be exceeded, it is recommended that
the edge distance be increased slightly in lieu of increasing the number of bolts or thickening the
web. Another option would be to calculate the bearing strength based on the inclined distance or
resolve the resultant force in the direction parallel to the edge distance. In cases where the
bearing strength of the web splice plate controls, the smaller of the clear edge or end distance on
the splice plates can be used to compute the bearing strength of the outermost hole.
Again conservatively assuming a hole diameter of 1.0 inch, the clear distance between the edge
of the hole and the edge of the field piece is computed as follows:
L c 2 .0
1 .0
2
1.5 in.
Since the clear end distance is less than 2.0d, the nominal bearing resistance at the bolt holes is
computed as follows:
R
1 . 2 L c tF u
1 . 2 1 . 5 0 . 5625
Eq. (6.13.2.9-2)
65
65.81
kips/bolt
The factored bearing resistance is computed as:

Eq. (6.13.2.2-2)
bb R
0 . 8 65 . 81 52.6
kips/bolt
The maximum force on the extreme bolt was computed previously for strength as:
F r 48.64
7.12.6.5
kips/bolt
52.6
kips/bolt
OK
Top Flange (Controlling Flange) Splice Plate Design
The width of the outside splice plate should be as wide as the width of the narrowest flange at the
splice. Therefore, 17 inches is selected for the width of the outer plate. See Figure 9 for the
plate sizes and bolt patterns.
126
The following plate sizes are selected for the top flange splice plates, and the gross and net areas
are computed. Again, the bolt holes are assumed to be 1.0 inch for design purposes.
Outer plate: 17 in. x 0.5 in.
Inner plates: 2-7 in. x 0.625 in.
A g 17
A g 2 7 0 . 625
0 . 5
8.50 in.
8 . 50 4 1 . 0 0 . 5 6.50 in.
8.75
8 . 75 4 1 . 0 0 . 625
in.
6.25 in.
The effective area for the tension flange, Ae, of each splice plate as specified in Article
6.13.6.1.4c is to be sufficient to prevent yielding of each splice plate under its calculated portion
of the minimum flange design force.
As shown earlier, negative bending controls at Splice 2, so the top flange is in tension.
Therefore, the effective areas of the outer and inner splice plates are computed as follows:
A
F
u
u

F
y yt
Outer
plate : A
Inner
plates
:A
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-2)
0 . 8 65

6 . 5 7.12 in.
0 . 95 50
0 . 8 65

6 . 25 6.84 in.
0 . 95 50
As specified in Article C6.13.6.1.4c, if the areas of the inner and outer splice plates are within 10
percent, then the flange design force at the strength limit state may be divided equally to the
inner and outer plates and their connections. Double shear may then be assumed in designing the
bolts. If the areas differ by more than 10 percent, the flange design force is to be proportioned to
the inner and outer plates by the ratio of the area(s) of the splice plate under consideration to the
total area of the splice plates. In that case, the shear strength of the bolts would be checked
assuming the maximum calculated splice plate force acts on a single shear plane.
At Splice 2, the top flange is subjected to tension. The design force, FcfAe, for the top flange was
computed previously to be 606 kips. Flange lateral bending need not be considered in the top
flange after the deck has hardened. The capacity of the splice plates to resist tension is computed
according to Article 6.8.2.1.
In accordance with Article 6.13.5.2, the factored tensile resistance, Pr, is taken as the lesser of the
values given by Eqs. (6.8.2.1-1) and (6.8.2.1-2).
P r y P ny y F y A
P r 0 . 95 50
8 . 50
(yielding on gross section)
8 . 75
Eq. (6.8.2.1-1)
819 kips
127
or
(fracture on net section)
P r u P nu u F u A n R p U
Eq. (6.8.2.1-2)
where: An = 6.5 + 6.25 = 12.75 in.2 < 0.85Ag = 0.85(8.5 + 8.75) = 14.66 in.2
Rp = reduction factor for holes taken equal to 1.0 for bolt holes drilled full size
U = reduction factor to account for shear lag taken equal to 1.0 when force effects are
transmitted to all elements
P r 0 . 80 65 12 . 75 1 . 0 1 . 0 663 kips
Controlling flange is OK.
606 kips
Note that per Article 6.13.5.2, the net area, An, used in Eq. (6.8.2.1-2) shall not be taken greater
than 85 percent of the gross area of the plate.
Next, check the inner and outer plates for adequate resistance against block shear rupture
according to Article 6.13.4. The factored resistance of the combination of parallel and
perpendicular planes is taken as:
R
bs R
0 . 58 F u A vn
bs
Fu A
tn
bs R
0 . 58 F
vg
bs
Fu A
tn
Eq. (6.13.4-1)
First, compute the area terms, based on the assumed block shear failure planes of the top flange
splice plates shown in Figure 13 and Figure 14:
A
vg
2 2 9 0 . 5 2 2 9 0 . 625
vn
2 2 9 3 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 5 2 2 9 3 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 625
tn
2 3 2 1 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 5 2 3 2 1 . 5 1 . 0 0 . 625
24 . 75 in.
16 . 88
in.
7 . 88 in.
Compute the factored resistance as follows:

R
r1
0 . 8 1 . 0 0 . 58 65 16 . 88 1 . 0 65
7 . 88
9 19 kips
r2
0 . 8 1 . 0 0 . 58 50
24 . 75 1 . 0 65 7 . 88
984 kips
(controls)
Ru = 606 kips < Rr = 919 kips OK
128
Figure 13 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Top Flange Outer Splice Plate
Figure 14 Assumed Block Shear Failure Planes for Top Flange Inner Splice Plates
7.12.6.6
Bottom Flange (Noncontrolling Flange) Splice Plate Design
According to Article 6.13.6.1.4c, flange splice plates subjected to compression at the strength
limit state are to be checked only for yielding on the gross section of the plates. Therefore, check
129
the bottom flange which is in compression, the noncontrolling flange in this case. The design
force, FncfAe, was computed previously to be 1,181 kips.
The following plate sizes are selected for the bottom flange splice plates, and the gross areas are
computed.
Outer plate: 21 in. x 0.75 in.
A
21 0 . 75 15 . 75 in.
Inner plates: 2-9.5 in. x 0.875 in.
2 9 . 5 0 . 875
1 6 . 63
in.
The factored resistance in compression is taken as:

R
c Fy A
Eq. (6.13.6.1.4c-4)
where: c = resistance factor for compression as specified in Article 6.5.4.2

As = gross area of splice plate
R
0 . 9 50
15 . 75
16 . 63 1,457
kips 1,181 kips
OK
Since the splice plates are on a partially braced flange and subjected to compression, check for
yielding on the gross section of the splice plates under their portion of the minimum design
force, FncfAe, plus the factored flange lateral bending moment.
The flange design force, FncfAe, was computed previously to be 1,181 kips (compression). The
flange lateral moment for strength was computed previously to be -53.2 kip-ft (factored).
The gross section modulus in the lateral direction of the inner and outer splice plates together is:
S lat
0 . 75
0 . 875
21
0 . 875 2
118.9 in.
Check for flexural yielding on the gross section of the flange splice plates at the strength limit
state due to flexure and flange lateral bending. The flexural stress is limited to fFy.
fg
41.84
1,181
15 . 75
16 . 63
53 . 2 12
118 . 9
ksi f F y 1 . 0 50
41 . 84 ksi
50 ksi
OK
If the difference in area of the inner splice plates had not been within 10 percent of the area of
the outside splice plate, the factored design force would then be proportioned to the inner and
outer splice plates accordingly (see Article C6.13.6.1.4c).
130
7.12.6.7
Bearing Resistance at Bolt Holes (Bottom Flange)
Check bearing of the bolts on the connected material under the minimum design force. The
design bearing strength, Rn, is computed using the provisions of Article 6.13.2.9. The bottom
flange governs the bearing strength of the connection as the bottom flange has a larger design
force.
According to specifications, the bearing strength for the end and interior rows of bolts is
computed using Eq. (6.13.2.9-1) or Eq. (6.13.2.9-2). Calculate the clear distance between holes
and the clear end distance and compare to 2.0d to determine the equation to be used to compute
the bearing strength (where "d" is the diameter of the bolt).
The center-to-center distance between the bolts in the direction of the forces is 3.0 in. Therefore:
Clear distance between holes = 3.0 1.0 = 2.0 in.
For the four bolts adjacent to the edge of the splice plate, the edge distance is 2 in. as shown in
Figure 11. Therefore, the clear distance between the edge of the holes and the end of the splice
plate is:
Clear
end distance
L c 2 .0
1 .0
2
1 . 5 in .
The value 2.0d is equal to 1.75 in. Since the clear end distance is less than 2.0d, use Eq.
(6.13.2.9-2) to compute the nominal bearing resistance at the strength limit state. Note that t is
the thickness of the connected material, the bottom flange thickness.
R
1 . 2 L c tF u 1 . 2 1 . 5 1 . 5 65 175.5 kips/bolt
F ncf A
1,181 kips 16 bolts 175 . 5 2,808 kips
Eq. (6.13.2.9-2)
OK
Although not included here, similar calculations show that bearing of the bolts on the top flange
is less than the computed resistance as well.
7.13 Cross Frame Member and Connection
7.13.1 Cross Frame Diagonal Design
Evaluation of the cross frame analysis results shows that the diagonal member between G4 and
G3 at Support 2 has the largest force. The largest factored load of the Load Combinations
examined is -88 kips (compression). Compression members are designed according to Article
6.9. According to Article 6.7.4.1, cross frames in horizontally curved bridges are considered
primary members.
Using the girder spacing and web height, determine the effective length of the diagonal member:
131
11
13 ft
Use a L8x8x3/4 single angle with a yield stress of 50 ksi and with the following properties taken
from the AISC Steel Construction Manual [6].
rxx = ryy = 2.46 in.
rzz = 1.57 in.
As = 11.5 in.2
Check the slenderness provision of Article 6.9.4.2.1 for the cross frame diagonal member:
b
t
Eq. (6.9.4.2.1-1)
Fy
where: k = plate buckling coefficient, 0.45 for outstanding legs of single angles, from
Table 6.9.4.2.1-1
b = the full width of the outstanding leg for a single angle (in.)
t = plate thickness (in.)
b
8
0 . 75
10 . 7 0 . 45
29 , 000
50
10 . 8
OK. Member is nonslender.
Check the limiting slenderness ratio of Article 6.9.3. As a primary member, the angle must
satisfy the following:
K
r
120
where: K = effective length factor specified in Article 4.6.2.5 as 1.0 for single angles
regardless of end connection (in.)
= unbraced length (in.)
r = minimum radius of gyration (in.)
K
r
1 . 0 13 12
1 . 57
99 120
OK
In an actual design, an additional iteration of the analysis would be necessary since the cross
frame member area used in the model was 5.0 in.2 and the design area is 11.5 in2. Since the cross
frames are truss members in the 3D analysis, the area of the cross frame elements affects the
structure rigidity, which in turn alters the girder moments and shears as well as cross frame
forces.
Having satisfied the basic slenderness provisions, the angle is then checked for the strength limit
state in accordance with Article 6.9.4.4 regarding single-angle members.
132
Single angles are commonly used as members in cross frames of steel girder bridges. Since the
angle is typically connected through one leg only, the member is subjected to combined axial
load and flexure. In other words, the eccentricity of the applied axial load induces moments
about both principal axes of the angle. As a result, it is difficult to predict the nominal
compressive resistance of these members. The provisions of Article 6.9.4.4 provide a simplified
approach by permitting the effect of the eccentricities to be neglected when the single angles are
evaluated as axially loaded compression members for flexural buckling only using an appropriate
specified effective slenderness ratio, (K/r)eff, in place of (K/rs) in Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1). By
following this approach, the single angles shall be designed as axially loaded compression
members for flexural buckling only according to the provisions of Articles 6.9.2.1, 6.9.4.1.1, and
6.9.4.1.2. It should be noted that according to Article 6.9.4.4, the actual maximum slenderness
ratio of the angle, not the effective slenderness ratio, shall not exceed the limiting slenderness
ratio specified in Article 6.9.3 as checked above. Also, per Article 6.9.4.4, single angles
designed using (K/r)eff shall not be checked for flexural-torsional buckling.
Compute the effective slenderness ratio per Article 6.9.4.4 based on the criteria for equal-leg
angles. First, check the /rx limit of 80:
rx
13 12
2 . 46
63 . 4 80
where: rx = radius of gyration about the geometric axis of the angle parallel to the connected leg
(Although not relevant for equal-leg angles, the term rx may actually equal ryy when
unequal-leg angles are used.)
Therefore, compute the effective slenderness ratio as follows:
K
72 0 . 75
rx
r eff
13 12
K
72 0 . 75
2 . 46
r eff
Eq. (6.9.4.4-1)
120
In accordance with the provisions for single-angle members in Article 6.9.4.4 and using the
effective slenderness ratio, (k/r)eff, the factored resistance of the angle in compression shall be
taken as:
Pr c Pn
Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
where: Pn = nominal compressive resistance determined using the provisions of Article 6.9.4.1.1
c = resistance factor for compression as specified in Article 6.5.4.2
To compute Pn, first compute Pe and Po. Pe is the elastic critical buckling resistance determined
as specified in Article 6.9.4.1.2 for flexural buckling, which is the applicable buckling mode for
133
single angles. Po is the equivalent nominal yield resistance equal to QFyAg, where Q is the
slender element reduction factor determined as specified in Article 6.9.4.2. Q is taken as 1.0 in
this case according to Article 6.9.4.2.1 since the angle member is nonslender per Eq. (6.9.4.2.11).
2
Pe
E
K
rs
Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1)
where (Kl/r)eff is used in place of (Kl/rs) in the denominator.

2
Pe
E
2
r eff
P o QF y A
29 , 000
11 . 5
2
120
2 29 kips
1 . 0 50 11 . 5 575 kips
Since
Pe
Po
229
575
0 . 40 0 . 44
the nominal axial resistance in compression is computed as:

Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-2)
P n 0 . 877 P e
P n 0 . 877 229
201 kips
Compute the factored axial resistance of the angle in compression as follows:

P r c P n 0 . 90 201
P u 88 kips
181
kips
P r 181 kips
OK
7.13.2 Cross Frame Fatigue Check

The fatigue of the cross frame member is checked assuming that the diagonal is connected to a
gusset plate with fillet welds. The maximum range of unfactored fatigue force in any diagonal in
the bridge is 17 kips. This maximum range will be used for the fatigue design.
The Fatigue I loading combination is used since an infinite fatigue life will be checked. Table
3.4.1-1 requires that a factor of 1.50 be applied to the force range for checking Fatigue I.
134
Factored fatigue force range = 17(1.50) = 25.5 kips

To account for shear lag effects in the single angle cross frame member, the factored fatigue
force range should be divided by the effective area. The effective area is calculated in
accordance with Article 6.8.2.2 and the associated commentary, where the effective area is
computed as:
A
where:
eff
1
A
L
x = connection eccentricity (in.)

L = maximum length of longitudinal welds (in.)
The length of the longitudinal weld on each side of the angle is taken as 9.0 inches, based on
calculations in the following section. Therefore the effective area and factored fatigue stress
range are computed as:
A
eff
2.26
1
11.5
9.0
8 . 61 in.
Factored fatigue stress range =
25 . 5
8 . 61
2 . 96 ksi
Condition 7.1 from Table 6.6.1.2.3-1 applies, which corresponds to the base metal in a
longitudinally loaded component attached by fillet welds. The angle thickness is less than 1 in.,
therefore Category E applies. The constant-amplitude fatigue threshold is 4.5 ksi as specified for
a Category E detail in Table 6.6.1.2.5-3, thus the factored fatigue resistance is 4.5 ksi, and per
Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-1), the factored fatigue stress range of 2.96 ksi is acceptable.
7.13.3 Cross Frame Welded Connection
According to Article C6.13.3.2.4b, the factored resistance of fillet-welded connections subjected
to shear along the length of the weld is taken as the lesser of the factored resistance of the base
metal or weld metal. A 5/16" fillet weld (w = 5/16") and E70XX electrodes are assumed.
According to the provisions of Article 6.13.3.2.4b, the resistance of the welded connection is
taken as the product of the effective area of the weld and the factored resistance, R r, of the
welded connection in terms of stress. More commonly, the effective throat (0.707w) is
multiplied by the factored resistance, Rr, to get strength in terms of force per length.
The factored resistance of the weld metal is:
R
0 . 6 e 2 F exx
Eq. (6.13.3.2.4b-1)
135
0 . 6 0 . 80
70
33.6 ksi
Weld failure rarely occurs in the base metal. However, as explained in Article C6.13.3.2.4b,
since overstrength weld metal is used, the capacity can be governed by the weld leg and the
shear fracture resistance of the base metal. The factored resistance of the base metal is:
R
u 0 . 6 F u
0 . 80 0 . 6 65
31.2 ksi
(controls)
Therefore, the base metal governs in this case, and the factored resistance of the welded
connection per length of weld is:
0 . 707 wR
0 . 707 0 . 3125
31 . 2
6.89 kips/in.
Therefore, the length of weld required to resist the Strength I factored axial load is computed as:
88
6.89
12.8 in.
It is also necessary to check fatigue on the weld metal. Fatigue due to shear stress on the throat
of the weld metal is checked for Category E according to Table 6.6.1.2.3-1, for which the
constant amplitude fatigue threshold is 4.5 ksi. The Fatigue I factored force range was computed
previously as 25.5 kips. The Fatigue I shear stress on the weld is computed as:
25.5 kips
12.8 in.
1.99 kips/
1.99 kips/in.
0.707
0.3125
in.
in.
9.01 ksi 4.5 ksi
No good for trial weld length.
Recalculate the necessary weld length, using the constant amplitude fatigue threshold of 4.5 ksi:
4.5 0.707
0 . 3125
0 . 994 kips/
in.
Therefore, the length of weld required to satisfy the fatigue force range is:
25.5
0.994
2 5 . 7 in.
(controls)
It is generally preferable to weld the angle all around to the gusset plate to provide the best seal
against moisture. The gusset plate must be sized appropriately to allow for the minimum
required weld length to be provided.
136
The gusset plate should be of at least the same thickness as the angle, have at least the same
equivalent net area, and have sufficient capacity to transfer resultant cross frame forces to the
girder. The gusset plate is bolted to the connection plate. The connection plate is welded to the
girder web and flanges. The angle diagonal is attached near the bottom of G4. The bottom
chord carries 40 kips out of the connection, so the resultant force is approximately 48 kips (88
kips - 40 kips) that is transferred into the girder through bolts. Also, the welds between the
connection plate and bottom flange must be able to transfer 48 kips of shear.
7.14 Shear Connector Design
Shear connectors are to be provided throughout the entire length of a curved continuous
composite bridge according to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.1. In order to demonstrate the
design of shear connectors, the required number of shear connectors will be determined for
Girder 4 of Span 1. The following calculations illustrate the design for the strength and the
fatigue limit states.
7.14.1 Shear Connector Design for Strength Girder G4, Span 1
Compute the number of shear connectors required for the strength limit state in Span 1 according
to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.4.
The factored shear resistance of a single connector, Qr, at the strength limit state is taken as:
Q
sc Q
where: Qn =
sc =
Eq. (6.10.10.4.1-1)
nominal shear resistance of a single shear connector determined as specified in

Article 6.10.10.4.3 (kips)
resistance factor for shear connectors specified in Article 6.5.4.2
Shear connectors that are 6 in. long by 7/8 in. diameter are selected for design. Compute the
nominal resistance of one shear connector embedded in the concrete deck using Article
6.10.10.4.3.
Q
0 .5 A
f 'c E c A
sc
sc
Fu
Eq. (6.10.10.4.3-1)
where: Asc = cross-sectional area of a stud shear connector

Ec = modulus of elasticity of the deck concrete = 3,834 ksi (calculated previously)
Fu = specified minimum tensile strength of a stud shear connector determined as
specified in Article 6.4.4 (ksi)
A
sc
0 . 875
4
0 . 5 0 . 60
0.60 in.
4 3 , 834
37.2 kips
137
A sc F u 0 . 60 60 36 kips
(controls)
Therefore, use Qn = 36 kips.

Compute the nominal shear force, P, according to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.4.2. For the
shear connector design, Span 1 is divided into two regions: 1) the portion between the end of the
span and the location of maximum positive live load moment and 2) the portion between the
maximum positive live load moment and the adjacent interior support.
7.14.1.1
End of Span to Maximum Positive Moment Location
Between the end of Span 1 and the location of maximum positive live load plus impact moment,
the span is treated as a simple span, and Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-1) is applicable. For this portion of
Span 1, the total nominal shear force and required pitch are computed in the following
calculations.
The total nominal shear force in this portion of the span is computed as follows:
P
where: Pp =
Pp
Fp
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-1)
total longitudinal force in the concrete deck at the point of maximum positive live
load plus impact moment (kips) taken as the lesser of either:
P 1 p 0 . 85 f ' c b s t s
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-2)
or
P 2 p F yw Dt
Fp =
R=
F yt b ft t ft F yc b fc t fc
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-3)
total radial force in the concrete deck at the point of maximum positive live load
plus impact moment (kips) taken as:
Fp P p
bs =
Lp =
Lp
R
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-4)
effective width of the concrete deck (in.)

arc length between an end of the girder and an adjacent point of maximum
positive live load plus impact moment (ft)
minimum girder radius over the length, Lp (ft)
The effective width of the concrete deck, bs, is calculated according to Article 4.6.2.6.1 for an
exterior girder, calculated previously as 111 in. Conservatively, since G4 is an exterior girder
with an overhang less than half of the girder spacing, the width of the deck could have been
138
assumed to be equal to the interior girder effective width so that all girders would have the same
stud spacing. That approach is not taken here.
P 1 p 0 . 85 4 111
P 2 p 50 84
0 . 5625
3,397
kips
50 21 1 . 5 50 20 1 . 0 4,938 kips
The total longitudinal force in the deck, Pp, is the lesser of P1p or P2p; therefore, Pp is taken to be
3,397 kips.
The arc length, Lp, between the end of the girder and the point of maximum positive live load
plus impact moment is 73 feet. The total radial shear force in the concrete deck, Fp, at the point
of maximum positive live load plus impact moment is computed as follows.
73
F p 3 , 397
346.1 kips
716 . 5
Therefore, the total nominal shear force in this portion of the span is:
P
3 , 397
346 . 1
3,415 kips
The minimum number of shear connectors, n, over the region under consideration is taken as:
n
P
Q
P
sc Q
3 , 415
0 . 85 36
Eq. (6.10.10.4.1-2)
n
112
Compute the required pitch, p, with 3 studs per row.

No. of rows
73 12
38
112
3
37 . 3
, say 38 rows
23.7 in.
The shear connector pitch for strength is less critical than for fatigue in this region, which is
demonstrated later in this example.
139
7.14.1.2
Maximum Positive Moment Location to Adjacent Interior Support
Between the maximum positive live load plus impact moment and the adjacent interior support,
the span is treated as a continuous span that is composite for negative flexure in the final
condition, and Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-5) is applicable. For this portion of Span 1, the total nominal
shear force and required pitch are computed in the following calculations.
The total nominal shear force in this portion of the span is computed as follows:
P
PT
FT
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-5)
where: PT = total longitudinal force in the concrete deck between the point of maximum
positive live load plus impact moment and the centerline of an adjacent interior
support (kips) taken as:
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-6)
PT Pp Pn
Pn =
total longitudinal force in the concrete deck over an interior support (kips) taken
as the lesser of either:
P 1 n F yw Dt
F yt b ft t ft F yc b fc t fc
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-7)
or
P 2 n 0 . 45 f ' c b s t s
FT =
total radial force in the concrete deck between the point of maximum positive live
load plus impact moment and the centerline of an adjacent interior support (kips)
taken as:
FT P T
Ln =
R=
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-8)
Ln
R
Eq. (6.10.10.4.2-9)
arc length between the point of maximum positive live load plus impact moment
and the centerline of an adjacent interior support (ft)
minimum girder radius over the length, Ln (ft)
The following two terms were computed previously and are applicable here as well:
Pp = 3,397 kips
bs = 111 in.
Using the plate girder dimensions at Support 2 (Field Section 2), compute P1n as follows:
140
P 1 n 50 84
0 . 625
P 2 n 0 . 45 4 111
50 28
2 . 5
50 27
3 10,175
kips
1,798 kips
The total longitudinal force in the deck over the interior support, Pn, is the lesser of P1n or P2n;
therefore, Pn is taken to be 1,798 kips.
Therefore, the total longitudinal force in the concrete deck in the region under consideration is:
P T 3 , 397 1 , 798 5,195 kips
Next, compute the arc length, Ln, and the total radial force in the concrete deck, FT, in the region
under consideration. The total arc length along girder G4 in Span 1 is 163.8 ft.
L
163 . 8 73 90.8 ft
90 . 8
F T 5 ,195
658 kips
716 . 5
The total nominal shear force in this portion of the span is:
P
5 ,195
658
5,237 kips
The minimum number of shear connectors, n, over the region under consideration is taken as:
n
P
Qr
Eq. (6.10.10.4.1-2)
sc Q n
5 , 237
0 . 85 36
171.1
, say 172
Compute the required pitch, p, with 3 studs per row.

No. of rows
90 . 8 12
58
172
3
57 . 3 ,
say 58 rows
19 . 1 in.
The shear connector pitch for strength is less critical than for fatigue in this region, which is
demonstrated later in this example.
141
7.14.2 Shear Connector Design for Fatigue Girder G4, Span 1

To demonstrate the fatigue requirements for shear connectors, fatigue will be checked at the
maximum positive moment location and at the first interior support (Support 2).
7.14.2.1
Maximum Positive Moment Location
Determine the required pitch of the shear connectors for fatigue at this section according to the
provisions of Article 6.10.10.1.2. The pitch, p, of shear connectors must satisfy the following:
nZ
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-1)
V sr
where: n
Zr
= number of shear connectors in a cross-section

= shear fatigue resistance of an individual shear connector determined as specified
in Article 6.10.10.2 (kips)
= horizontal fatigue shear range per unit length (kips/in.)
Vsr
The 75-year single lane Average Daily Truck Traffic (ADDTT)SL is assumed to be 1,000 trucks
per day. Where the projected 75-year (ADDT)SL is greater than or equal to 960 trucks per day,
the fatigue resistance for an individual stud shear connector, Zr, is defined in Article 6.10.10.2 as
follows:
Z r 5 .5 d
Eq. (6.10.10.2-1)
The Fatigue I load combination shall be used for this case according to Article 6.10.10.2. As
stated earlier, shear connectors that are 6 in. long by 7/8 in. diameter are selected for design, with
3 studs per row. The fatigue resistance of one shear connector is computed as follows:
Z r 5 . 5 0 . 875
4.21
kips
The fatigue resistance for 3 shear connectors is:

nZ
3 4 . 21 12.63 kips/row
From Table 10, the unfactored shear force range due to one fatigue truck is:
20 20 40 kips
The Fatigue I factored shear force range is:

V f 1 . 5 40
60 kips
142
According to the provisions of Article 6.6.1.2.1, the live load stress range may be calculated
using the short-term composite section assuming the concrete deck to be effective for both
positive and negative flexure. The structural deck thickness, ts, is 9.0 inches; the modular ratio,
n, equals 7.56; and the effective flange width is 111 inches (calculated previously).
In order to compute the longitudinal shear range, first compute the transformed deck area as
follows:
Transforme
d deck area
Area
n
111 9
7 . 56
132.1 in.
Compute the first moment of the transformed short-term area of the concrete deck, Q, with
respect to the neutral axis of the uncracked live load short-term composite section. Determine
the distance from the center of the deck to the neutral axis. Section properties are taken from
Table 13. The neutral axis of the short-term composite section is 16.25 in. measured from the
top of the top flange.
Moment arm of the deck = Neutral axis - tflg + haunch + ts/2
Moment
arm of the deck 16 . 25 1 4
Q 132 . 1 23 . 75 3 ,137 in.
9
2
2 3 . 75 in.
Compute the longitudinal fatigue shear range per unit length, Vfat:
V fat
Vf Q
I
60 3 ,137
294 ,158
0 . 64 kips/in.
(factored)
It is also necessary to compute Ffat, the radial fatigue shear range per unit length. Article
6.10.10.1.2 directs the designer to compute Ffat by taking the larger of two computed values from
Eqs. (6.10.10.1.2-4) and (6.10.10.1.2-5). The first equation is an approximation based on the
stress in the flange and the radius of curvature. The second equation is a more exact calculation
based on the actual cross frame force from the analysis. As explained in Article C6.10.10.1.2,
the first equation typically governs unless torsion is caused by effects other than curvature, such
as skew. In this example, the two equations are expected to yield similar results since all the
torsion is due to curvature. As permitted in Article 6.10.10.1.2, for straight or horizontally
curved bridges with skew not exceeding 20 degrees, the radial fatigue shear range from Eq.
(6.10.10.1.2-5) may be taken equal to zero. Therefore, in this case, Ffat2 = 0 and Ffat = Ffat1.
F fat 1
bot
f lg
wR
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-4)
where: flg = range of longitudinal fatigue stress in the bottom flange without consideration of
flange lateral bending (ksi)
143
= distance between brace points (ft)

w = effective length of deck (in.) taken as 48.0 in.
The stress range flg is based on the range of fatigue moment taken from Table 9:
Unfactored fatigue moment range =
603 1 , 603 2 , 206 kip - ft
The section properties are again taken from Table 13. Using the load factor of 1.5 for Fatigue I,
the range of longitudinal fatigue stress in the bottom flange is computed as follows:
2 , 206
f lg (1 . 5 )
12 9 . 48 ksi
4 ,187
(factored)
Abot = (21)(1.5) = 31.5 in.2

F fat 1
31 . 5 9 . 48
48 716
20
.5
0.17 kips/in.
Ffat = Ffat1 = 0.17 kips/in. (factored)

The positive and negative longitudinal shears due to major-axis bending are due to the fatigue
vehicle located in Span 1 with the back axle on the left and then on the right of the point under
consideration. This means that the truck actually has to turn around to produce the computed
longitudinal shear range. The positive and negative radial shear ranges are produced by loading
first in Span 1 and then in Span 2. Again, this is not a realistic loading case to combine with the
longitudinal shear case but has been done to be practical and to be conservative. Combining the
longitudinal and radial fatigue shear ranges vectorially, the total horizontal fatigue shear range
per unit length is computed as follows:
V sr
V fat
V sr
0 . 64
F fat
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-2)
0 . 17
0.66 kips/in.
Compute the required shear connector pitch for fatigue for 3 studs per row.
p
nZ
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-1)
V sr
12 . 63
0 . 66
19.1 in./row
144
As shown earlier, the number of shear connectors was also checked for the strength limit state
according to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.4. The required pitch for fatigue, 19.1 in./row,
governs.
7.14.2.2
Interior Support Location (Support 2)
Using the same procedure illustrated at the maximum positive moment location, fatigue
requirements for shear connectors are investigated at the first interior support (Support 2).
Determine the required pitch of the shear connectors for fatigue at this section according to the
provisions of Article 6.10.10.1.2. As before, the pitch, p, of shear connectors must satisfy the
following:
p
nZ
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-1)
V sr
The calculation of the fatigue resistance, nZr, is the same as performed at the maximum positive
moment location. For 3 shear connectors per row, nZr = 12.63 kips/row.
From Table 10 at Section G4-2, the unfactored shear force range due to one fatigue truck is:
3 55 58 kips
The Fatigue I factored shear force range is:

V f 1 . 5 58
87 kips
According to the provisions of Article 6.6.1.2.1, the live load stress range may be calculated
using the short-term composite section assuming the concrete deck to be effective for both
positive and negative flexure. The structural deck thickness, ts, is 9.0 inches; the modular ratio,
n, equals 7.56; and the effective flange width is 111 inches (calculated previously).
Compute the first moment of the transformed short-term area of the concrete deck, Q, with
respect to the neutral axis of the uncracked live load short-term composite section. Determine
the distance from the center of the deck to the neutral axis. Section properties are taken from
Table 16. The neutral axis of the short-term composite section is 26.10 in. measured from the
top of the top flange.
Moment arm of the deck = Neutral axis - tflg + haunch + ts/2
Moment
arm of the deck 26 . 10 2 . 5 4
9
2
32 . 10 in.
Transformed deck area = 132.1 in.2 (computed previously)
145
Q 132 . 1 32 . 10 4 , 240 in.
Compute the longitudinal fatigue shear range per unit length, Vfat:
V fat
Vf Q
I
87 4 , 240
539 , 403
(factored)
0 . 68 k/in.
Compute the radial shear range, Ffat, based on Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-4). As explained previously, per
Article 6.10.10.1.2 the radial fatigue shear range from Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-5) may be taken equal to
zero in this case. Therefore, in this case, Ffat2 = 0 and Ffat = Ffat1.
F fat 1
bot
f lg
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-4)
wR
The stress range flg is based on the range of fatigue moment taken from Table 9:
Unfactored fatigue moment range =
1 , 315 351 1 , 666 kip - ft
The section properties are again taken from Table 16. Using the load factor of 1.5 for Fatigue I,
the range of longitudinal fatigue stress in the bottom flange is computed as follows:
1, 666
f lg (1 . 5 )
12 3 . 52 ksi
8 , 508
(factored)
Abot = (27)(3.0) = 81.0 in.2

F fat 1
81 . 0 3 . 52
48 716
20
.5
0.17 kips/in.
Ffat = Ffat1 = 0.17 kips/in. (factored)

Combining the longitudinal and radial fatigue shear ranges vectorially, the total horizontal
fatigue shear range per unit length is computed as follows:
V sr
V fat
V sr
0 . 68
F fat
0 . 17
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-2)
0.70 kips/in.
Compute the required shear connector pitch for fatigue for 3 studs per row.
p
nZ
V sr
Eq. (6.10.10.1.2-1)
146
12 . 63
0 . 70
18 . 0 in./row
As shown earlier, the number of shear connectors was also checked for the strength limit state
according to the provisions of Article 6.10.10.4. The required pitch for fatigue, 18.0 in./row,
governs.
7.15 Bearing Stiffener Design
Bearing stiffeners are designed as columns to resist the reactions at bearing locations. According
to Article 6.10.11.2.1, bearing stiffeners must be placed on the webs of built-up sections at all
bearing locations. At bearing locations on rolled shapes and at other locations on built-up
sections or rolled shapes subjected to concentrated loads, where the loads are not transmitted
through a deck or deck system, either bearing stiffeners must be provided or else the web must
be investigated for the limit states of web crippling or web local yielding according to the
provisions of Article D6.5 (Appendix D to Section 6). It should be noted that the provisions of
Article D6.5 should be checked whenever girders are incrementally launched over supports.
Bearing stiffeners must extend the full depth of the web and as closely as practical to the outer
edges of the flanges. Each stiffener must be either milled to bear against the flange through
which it receives its load or attached to that flange by a full penetration groove weld. Typical
practice is for the bearing stiffeners to be milled to bear plus fillet welded to the appropriate
flange, regardless of whether or not a cross frame or diaphragm is connected to the stiffeners.
Full penetration groove welds are costly and often result in welding deformation of the flange.
The design of bearings stiffeners at Support 1 for Girder G4 is illustrated in this example. Grade
50 (Fys = 50 ksi) steel is selected for the bearing stiffeners.
Girder G4 has the largest total reaction at the simple end support (Support 1). Unfactored
reactions are shown below. These results are directly from the three-dimensional analysis as
presented in Table 10.
Steel Dead Load:
RDC1-STEEL
RDC1-CONC
RDC2
RDW
RLL+IM
=
=
=
=
=
23 kips
92 kips
23 kips
19 kips
143 kips
The Strength I factored reaction is computed as:

R
1 . 25 23 92 23 1 . 50 19 1 . 75 143
451 kips
7.15.1 Projecting Width

The width, bt, of each projecting stiffener element must satisfy:
147
b t 0 . 48 t p
Eq. (6.10.11.2.2-1)
F ys
Use a bearing stiffener thickness of 0.75 inches.

b t 0 . 48 0 . 75
29 , 000
50
8 .7
Select two 7.0-inch wide by 0.75-inch thick stiffeners, one stiffener on each side of the web.
7.15.2 Bearing Resistance
According to Article 6.10.11.2.3, the factored bearing resistance for the fitted ends of bearing
stiffeners is taken as:
R sb r
b R
where: (Rsb)n =
(Rsb)n =
b
Apn
Fys
A
pn
sb
Eq. (6.10.11.2.3-1)
nominal bearing resistance for the fitted ends of the bearing stiffeners (kips)
1 .4 A
pn
Eq. (6.10.11.2.3-2)
F ys
= resistance factor for bearing specified in Article 6.5.4.2

= area of the projecting elements of the stiffener outside of the web-to-flange
fillet welds but not beyond the edge of the flange (in2)
= specified minimum yield strength of the stiffener (ksi)
2 7 1 0 . 75
9.0 in.
(Assume 1 in. for the stiffener clip.)
The nominal bearing resistance is:
R sb n 1 . 4 9 50
630 kips
The factored bearing resistance is:
R sb r 1 . 0 630
630 kips R
451 kips
OK
7.15.3 Axial Resistance

Determine the axial resistance of the bearing stiffener according to Article 6.10.11.2.4. This
article directs the Engineer to Article 6.9.2.1 for calculation of the factored axial resistance, P r.
The yield strength is Fys, the radius of gyration is computed about the midthickness of the web,
and the effective length is 0.75 times the web depth (Kl = 0.75D).
148
Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
Pr c Pn
where: Pn = nominal compressive resistance determined using the provisions of Article 6.9.4
c = resistance factor for compression as specified in Article 6.5.4.2
As indicated in Article 6.9.4.1.1, Pn is the smallest value of the applicable modes of buckling,
and in the case of bearing stiffeners, torsional buckling and flexural-torsional buckling are not
applicable. Therefore, Pn is computed for flexural buckling only.
To compute Pn, first compute Pe and Po. Pe is the elastic critical buckling resistance determined
as specified in Article 6.9.4.1.2 for flexural buckling. Po is the equivalent nominal yield
resistance equal to QFyAg, where Q is the slender element reduction factor, taken equal to 1.0 for
bearing stiffeners per Article 6.9.4.1.1
2
Pe
E
K
rs
Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1)
Compute the effective length of the bearing stiffener according to Article 6.10.11.2.4.
K 0 . 75 ( 84 ) 63 in.
Compute the radius of gyration about the midthickness of the web.

rs
Is
A
According to the provisions of Article 6.10.11.2.4b, for stiffeners welded to the web, a portion of
the web shall be included as part of the effective column section. For stiffeners consisting of two
plates welded to the web, the effective column section shall consist of the two stiffener elements,
plus a centrally located strip of web extending 9tw on each side of the outer projecting elements
of the group. The area of the web that is part of the effective section is computed as follows:
A
2 9 0 . 5625
0 . 5625
5 . 7 in.
Conservatively, continue to use the area at the base of the stiffener to compute the axial
resistance.
A
pn
9.0 in.
(computed previously)
The total area of the effective section is therefore:
149
5 . 7 9 . 0 14 . 7 in.
Next, compute the moment of inertia of the effective section, conservatively neglecting the web
strip:
0 . 75 7 . 0 0 . 5625 7 . 0
12
193 in.
Compute the radius of gyration:

193
rs
3.62 in.
14 . 7
The elastic critical buckling resistance is computed as follows:

Pe
29 , 000
63
3 . 62
14 . 7
13,892
kips
The equivalent nominal yield resistance is computed as follows, with As used for Ag:
P o QF y A
1 . 0 50 14 . 7 735 kips
Since
Pe
Po
13 , 892
735
18 . 9 0 . 44
the nominal axial compression resistance is computed as:
Pn
0 . 658
Po
Pe
Pn
0 . 658
18 . 9
P
o
735
Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-1)
719
kips
The factored resistance of the bearing stiffeners is computed as follows:

P r c P n 0 . 90 719
647 kips
150
P u 451 kips P r 647 kips
OK
The bearing stiffeners selected for Girder G4 at Support 1 satisfy the requirements for design.
151
8.0 SUMMARY OF DESIGN CHECKS AND PERFORMANCE RATIOS

The results for this design example at each limit state are summarized below for the maximum
positive moment and maximum negative moment locations. The results for each limit state are
expressed in terms of a performance ratio, defined as the ratio of a calculated value to the
corresponding resistance.
8.1 Maximum Positive Moment Region, Span 1 (Section G4-1)
Constructibility
Flexure (STRENGTH I)
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1) Top Flange
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2) Top Flange
Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-3) Top Flange
Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1) Bottom Flange
0.783
0.716
0.828
0.568
Service Limit State

Permanent Deformations (SERVICE II)
Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1) Top Flange
0.474
0.848
Fatigue Limit State

Flexure (FATIGUE I)
0.918

Ductility Requirement Eq. (6.10.7.3-1)
Eq. (6.10.7.2.1-1) Top Flange
Eq. (6.10.1.6-1) Bottom Flange
0.309
0.576
1.018
0.424
8.2 Interior Support, Maximum Negative Moment (Section G4-2)

Constructibility
Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1) Top Flange
0.487
0.441
0.411
Service Limit State (SERVICE II)

Web Bend-Buckling - Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4)
0.675
Fatigue Limit State

Flexure (FATIGUE I)
Eq. (6.6.1.2.2-1) Top Flange
0.109

152

Eq. (6.10.8.1.3-1) Top Flange
Shear (STRENGTH I) Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
0.967
0.950
0.484
8.3 End Support (Section G4-3)

Strength Limit State (STRENGTH I)
Shear Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
0.791
153
9.0 REFERENCES
1. AASHTO (2010). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.
2. Kulicki, J., Wassef, W., Smith, C, and Johns, K., (2005). AASHTO-LRFD Design
Example: Horizontally Curved Steel I-Girder Bridge, Final Report, National
Cooperative Highway Research Project 12-52, Transportation Research Board,
Washington, D.C.
3. AASHTO/NSBA, (2006). G1.4-2006: Guidelines for Design Details, AASHTO/NSBA
Steel Bridge Collaboration.
4. Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), (2009). Preferred Practices for Steel
Bridge Design, Fabrication, and Erection, Texas Steel Quality Council.
5. AASHTO/NSBA, (2003). G12.1-2003: Guidelines for Design for Constructibility,
AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration.
6. AISC (2011). Steel Construction Manual, 14th Edition, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Chicago, IL.
154

Design Example 05

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design Example 05

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

Design Example 05

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U.S.

Federal Highway Administration

Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Technical Report Documentation Page

3. Recipients Catalog No.

8. Performing Organization Report No.

10. Work Unit No.

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

15. Supplementary Notes

17. Key Words

18. Distribution Statement

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Reproduction of completed pages authorized

Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Service Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.2 and 6.5.2).................................................... 15

Strength Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.4 and 6.5.4) .................................................. 15

Constructibility Limit State .................................................................................. 15

Extreme Event Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.5 and 6.5.5)........................................ 16

5.2 Loads .............................................................................................................................. 16

Noncomposite Dead Load..................................................................................... 16

Deck Placement Sequence .................................................................................... 16

Superimposed Dead Load ..................................................................................... 16

5.2.4 Future Wearing Surface ........................................................................................ 19

Live Load .............................................................................................................. 19

5.3 Centrifugal Force Computation ..................................................................................... 20

Bearing Orientation ............................................................................................... 25

Live Load Analysis ............................................................................................... 26

6.2 Analysis Results ............................................................................................................. 26

Shear Connectors .................................................................................................. 36

Details (Stiffeners, Cross Frames, Fatigue Categories) ........................................ 37

Wind Loading ....................................................................................................... 38

Steel Erection ........................................................................................................ 39

Deck Placement Sequence .................................................................................... 39

7.2 Section Properties .......................................................................................................... 40

Section G4-1 Properties Span 1 Positive Moment ............................................. 41

Effective Width of Concrete Deck ...................................................... 42

Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-1 ............................................ 42

Plastic Moment Neutral Axis: Section G4-1 ...................................... 43

Section G4-2 Properties Support 2 Negative Moment ...................................... 44

Elastic Section Properties: Section G4-2 ............................................ 44

Check of Minimum Negative Flexure Concrete Deck Reinforcement ................. 47

7.3.2 Shear Resistance ................................................................................................... 49

Constructibility of Top Flange .............................................................................. 52

Deck Overhang Bracket Load ............................................................. 52

Curvature Effects ................................................................................ 53

Top Flange Lateral Bending Amplification ........................................ 54

Flexure in Top Flange (Article 6.10.3.2.1) ......................................... 56

Constructibility of Bottom Flange ........................................................................ 59

Constructibility Shear Strength, Web ................................................................... 60

Constructibility of Deck ........................................................................................ 60

Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2) .......................................................... 61

Fatigue in Bottom Flange...................................................................................... 64

Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs ................................................................ 66

Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2)...................................................................................... 68

Strength I Flexural Stress in Top and Bottom Flange......................... 69

Top Flange Flexural Resistance in Compression................................ 70

Bottom Flange Flexural Resistance in Tension .................................. 71

Web Flexural Resistance....................................................................................... 72