Load-Consistent Effective Width for the Analysis of

Composite Steel-Concrete Bridge Decks

S.Carbonari(1), L.Dezi(1), F.Gara(1), G.Leoni(2)

(1) D.A.C.S.,

(2) Dip.

Universit Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy

ProCAm, Universit di Camerino, Ascoli Piceno, Italy

Typical composite bridge decks

19.5 m

3.0

13.5 m

3.0

widely spaced beams

Viaducts in Mestre - Venice, Italy

var.
2.9 - 5.5

26.5 m

12.5 m
closely spaced beams and
cantilivered cross beams

Serra Cazzola Viaduct - Sicily, Italy

Refined analyses
Analyses with shell finite elements

- Analyses with plane (or solid) finite elements provide

very accurate solutions
- The results are not synthetic and have to be postprocessed

Refined analyses
Analyses with suitable beam finite elements
- Analyses with one-dimensional
(beam) finite elements provide accurate
synthetic solutions
- Such elements are not included in the
library of commercial computer
programs

10
9

+ shcs
p UDL
125 KN/m,

3L/4

L/2

L/4

10
9

Beam 1

Beam 2

2B

EC4-1

Regular design
Effective width method

Although not specified, the effective widths proposed are valid only for
external vertical loads.
For other kinds of actions (e.g., concrete shrinkage, thermal action and
prestressing), no specific suggestions are given.
This may induce some designers to believe that the effective slab
width depends on the deck geometry and to use wrong formulas. In some
cases, this may lead to non conservative results as for prestressing actions
(Dezi et al. 2006 J. Struct .Engrg. ASCE)

In this paper
simplified method for the verification of twin-girder and single-box
girder steel-concrete composite decks based on the definition of new
effective widths consistently with the load case (uniformly distributed
loads, traffic loads, support settlements and shrinkage).

Parametrical analysis
Effective width formulas
Validation of the method

Parametrical analysis
Effective width formulas
Validation of the method

Parametrical analysis
Analytical model

One-dimensional model (beam model)

The Newmarks model (composite beam with flexible shear connection)

was modified by introducing a warping of the slab that varies along the
deck proportionally to a shear-lag function
warping function

Three parabolic branches

This allows the description of the
warping for any spacing of the beams
Behaviour of materials
Steel
Slab reinforcement
Prestressing cable
Shear connection

linear elastic

Concrete

linear visco-elastic

Parametrical analysis
Analytical model
One-dimensional finite element (Dezi et al. 2005)
f1

f3
*

wc1
ws1
1

wc3

f2
*

ws3

wc2

Le

ws2
v2

v1

*
w1, f1

Le

Le
w3, f3

v1
w2, f2

v2
2

13 dof

Longitudinal displacements
and SL function

Vertical displacement

The model used permits calculating the variation in time of displacements,

stress resultants, and stress distribution in the concrete slab and in the steel
beam, and is particularly straightforward in the calculation of the effective
slab width.

Parametrical analysis
Analytical model - validation
21000

2400

1000

Es 210000 MPa
Ec 32490 MPa
= 0.15
12 kN/mm2

220

60
15
80
1300

6000

9000

6000

73500

73500

50 f.e.
405 dof

5800 dof

The model was validated by refined finite element analyses

performed by using shell elements.

Parametrical analysis
Analytical model - validation
UDL

Longitudinal forces
p 125 KN/m

1 2

73500

Ftot 42000 KN
54390

c [MPa]
1

0.0
3.0

0.0

2.0
1

0.0
2.0

0.0
2.0

3
4

0.0
0.0
-2.0

.0

-4.0

6.0

-6.0

9.0

c [MPa]

0.0
3.0

19110
2 3 4

-8.0
0.0

6.0

-2.0

3.0

-4.0

0.0

-6.0
-8.0

Parametrical analysis
Schemes Simply supported and fixed beams
Continuous beams
Actions

Loads (vertical, longitudinal, udl and concentrated, )

Thermal action and concrete shrinkage
Prestressing (internal tendons, external cables, support settlement)

Geometry Steel beam geometry (web height, plate width and thickness)
Slab geometry (span length, slab width, reinforcement ratio)
Spacing of the twin girders
Stiffness

Shear connection stiffness

Parametrical analysis
Main results
Beff

Beff

Beff B
2B1
2B

Ac

z da

Ac max

Shear connection stiffness

Beff /B does NOT DEPEND on

Reinforcing ratio
Beam flexural stiffness
Creep

Parametrical analysis
Main results
Beff

Beff

Beff
2B1
2B

Ac

z da

Ac max

B/L slab width to span length ratio

B1/B beam spacing to slab width ratio

Beff /B DEPENDS on
Deck geometry
Actions

Thermal action and concrete shrinkage

Forces (vertical, longitudinal, udl and concentrated, )
Slab prestressing (internal cables, external tendons,
support settlement)

Parametrical analysis

Effective width formulas

Validation of the method

Effective width formulas

Definition of new effective widths
The formulas are obtained by linear and second
order polynomial regressions by performing the
least squares fit of data obtained from the
parametrical analysis.

Beff

Beff

2B1
2B

at lateral supports
Beff,0

Beff ,0

Beff ,0

Beff ,1

Beff ,1

B
B
B
C1
C 2 C3 1 C 4 1 C 5
B

L0
B

at spans
Beff,1

B
B
B
D1 D2 D3 1 D4 1 D5
B
B

L1
B

at internal supports
Beff,2

Beff ,2

B 2
B 2

B
L
B
E2
E1
E3 E4 1 E5 1 E6 E7 2 E8

B
L2tot
B
L
L2tot
B

2
tot

Beff ,2

Effective width formulas

Definition of new effective widths

Vertical loads
L0

L1

L2L

L2R

L2 minL2 L , L2 R

L2R

L2 minL2 L , L2 R

L2tot

Envelope of vertical loads

L0

L1

L2L
L2tot

Support settlements

L2tot

Effective width formulas

Definition of new effective widths
External supports
UDL
TLE
SS
SH

C1
-0.75
-0.75
0
0

C2
0.97
0.87
1
1

C3
-1.45
-1.45
0
-2.5

C4
1.20
1.20
0
1.4

C5
0.76
0.76
1
0.425

Span sections
UDL
TLE
SS
SH

D1
-0.67
-0.67
0
0

D2
1.05
0.95
1
1

D3
-0.66
-0.66
0
0

D4
0.72
0.72
0
0

D5
0.81
0.81
1
1

Internal supports
UDL
TLE
SS
SH

E1
6
6
0
0

E2
-3.75
-3.75
-0.83
0

E3
0.95
0.95
0.97
1

E4
-2.81
-2.81
-1.24
0

E5
2.07
2.07
1
0

UDL
TLE

Uniformly distributed load

Traffic Load Envelope

SS
SH

E6
0.67
0.67
0.81
1

E7
-0.35
-0.35
0
0

E8
1.17
1.17
1
1

Support Settlement
concrete SHrinkage

Effective width formulas

Variation along the deck axis
Beff,0

Beff,1

6/5 B

Beff,2

6/5 B

6/5 B

Sagging regions constant values equal to Beff ,1

Hogging regions linear variation between Beff ,2 and B
in a deck section of length 3/5 B

Deck ends

linear variation between Beff ,0 and Beff ,1

in a deck section of length B

Effective width formulas

Method of analysis

1. Calculation of the stress resultants for each load case

by considering the real geometry of the deck
2. Definition of the effective widths for each load case
3. Calculation of the stress state for each load case
(cross sectional analysis)
4. Superposition of the results

Parametrical analysis
Effective width formulas

Validation of the method

Validation of the method

Cross section
2800

1000

2B21000
220

120
15
120
1300

6000

Actions

9000

6000

Uniformly distributed loads (udl)

Traffic loads envelope

Italian Code of Practice

200 kN
200 kN
200 kN

Support settlement

q1a
30 kN/m

Thermal action on the slab

Comparisons

q1b

30 kN/m
6.0

1.5 1.5

6.0

15.0

proposed method
analytical model
EC4

Validation of the method

Uniformly distributed load
40 m

Beff /B

80 m

100 m

80 m

proposed method
analytical model
EC4 envelope
EC4 zero bending moment method

The proposed method gives a good

approximation of Beff at span and at
support sections
EC4 overestimates Beff at span section
and especially at internal supports

0.5

c [MPa]

The proposed method gives a very

good approximation of the slab
stresses all along the deck axis
EC4 underestimates the slab stresses
especially at internal supports

Validation of the method

Traffic load
40 m

80 m

100 m

80 m

proposed method
analytical model
EC4

The discrepancies between Beff of the

proposed method and the EC4 method
are larger

Beff /B

EC4 overestimates Beff at span sections

and especially at internal supports

0.5

Proposed method gives a very good

approximation of the slab stresses all
along the deck axis

c [MPa]

EC4 underestimates the slab stresses

by about 10% at spans 25% at internal
supports

Validation of the method

Support settlement
40 m

Beff /B

80 m

100 m

80 m

proposed method
analytical model
EC4 zero bending moment method

The proposed method gives a good

approximation of Beff all along the
deck
EC4 overestimates Beff at internal
supports

0.5

c [MPa]

The proposed method gives a very

good approximation of the slab
stresses all along the deck axis
EC4 applied by considering the
effective length calculated as the
distance between points of zero
bending moment gives good results

Validation of the method

Uniform thermal action
T = -10C
60 m

40 m

60 m

60 m

proposed method
analytical model

40 m

Beff /B

The proposed method gives a good

approximation of Beff and of the slab
maximum stresses all along the slab

0.5

c [MPa]

Application to a real case

Pont sur la Nive - France
269,38
0,50

49,14

C1

68,04

P2

94,50

56,70

P3
47,25

47,25

0,50

C5

P4
47,25

Four span continuous deck

47,25

1000
var.

steel girders with variable depth

2B21000
220

Twin girder composite deck

var.
var.
var.

Slab width = 21 m

1300
6000

2,40

3,50

2,40

3,50

2,40

2,40

Max span length = 94.50 m

9000

6000

Refined analysis performed

by using shell finite elements

Application to a real case

UDL self weight
250 kN/m
49.14

68.04

94.50

56.70

proposed method
FEM shell eleme
EC4

Beff /B

The proposed method gives Beff

smaller than those given by EC4
method

0.5

c [MPa]

The proposed method furnishes better

estimation of the stresses at hogging
regions than EC4

Application to a real case

Traffic loads
Traffic load - NTI
49.14

68.04

94.50

56.70

proposed method
FEM shell eleme
EC4

Beff /B

The proposed method gives Beff

considerably smaller than those given
by EC4 method

0.5

c [MPa]

1.5

1.5

The proposed method furnishes better

estimation of the stresses both at
sagging and hogging regions than EC4

Conclusions

A method for the evaluation of the stress state in

slabs of steel-concrete composite decks at SLS and
Elastic ULS has been proposed.
The method is based on new effective widths
depending on the loading conditions.
The method, tested with refined shell finite element
models, gives a good approximation for various
loading conditions, i.e. uniformly distributed load,
traffic load, support settlement, concrete shrinkage
and uniform thermal action.

Load-Consistent Effective Width for the Analysis of

Composite Steel-Concrete Bridge Decks

S.Carbonari(1), L.Dezi(1), F.Gara(1), G.Leoni(2)

(1) D.A.C.S.,

(2) Dip.

Universit Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy

ProCAm, Universit di Camerino, Ascoli Piceno, Italy