Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Advances in Engineering Software

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/advengsoft

A computer code for finite element analysis and design of post-tensioned

voided slab bridge decks with orthotropic behaviour
J. Díaz *, S. Hernández, A. Fontán, L. Romera
Structural Mechanics Group, School of Civil Engineering, University of La Coruña, Campus de Elviña, 15071 La Coruña, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents a computer software which allows the generation of a complete structural model of a
Received 22 December 2008 concrete bridge with a voided slab deck, a common design for medium span bridges. The code imple-
Received in revised form 15 October 2009 ments the orthotropic plate paradigm and provides a graphical user interface, which allows both prepro-
Accepted 30 April 2010
cessing and post-processing, linked to a commercial finite element package. A description of the code is
Available online 8 June 2010
presented, along with the formulation of the orthotropic plate. Verification and comparison examples
demonstrate the performance and features of the software and also the applicability of the formulation.
Keywords:
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Bridge design
Voided slab
Concrete deck
Finite element analysis
Orthotropic plate

1. Introduction
Concrete bridge decks with voided slabs are a very common
solution for urban bridges and motorway overpasses with small
and medium span length of 30–50 m. In general, these bridges
can have various spans and are usually simply supported by abut-
ments and piers. Fig. 1 shows an example of this structural type.
The main reason for introducing a longitudinal voided element
in the concrete slab is to reduce its weight without affecting its
stiffness significantly [1]. The voided slabs are used throughout
the bridge, except in the abutment and pier zones, where the
whole concrete section is required in order to transmit the vertical
deck reaction to the substructure.
To improve the structural response and to avoid undesired ten-
sile forces in the concrete, post-tensioned steel tendons are
embedded into the concrete at the final stages of construction.
The common layout of the tendons is parabolic, with negative
eccentricities in the mid-span and positive in the pier zones.
Although the advantages of this typology are obvious, the
voided slab design complicates the structural model. A solid slab
with constant thickness has the same bending stiffness in any
direction, while a voided slab has a different amount of material
depending on the direction. For this reason, a very common solu-
tion is to define grillages in the longitudinal and transversal deck
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jdiaz@udc.es (J. Díaz).
URL: http://gme.udc.es (J. Díaz).
directions [2], where the longitudinal beams of the grillage are lo-
cated in the zones between voids, as shown in Fig. 2. Since in this
discretization one-dimensional structural elements are employed
to represent the performance of a two-dimensional plate, some
adjustments are needed in the stiffness assigned to each of the ele-
ments in the grillage. Recommendations in that regard can be
found in the literature [3–6].
When cantilevers are present, the plane grillage analogy is re-
ported to be inaccurate [7], and a three-dimensional grillage is re-
quired [8], like the one shown in Fig. 3, where the set of beams
modelling the cantilevers are placed at their neutral axis and the
joint between this layer and the one discretizing the voided slab
is done with rigid elements.
However, the grillage model is only an approximation of the ac-
tual behaviour of the deck and does not model well the coupling of
slab in torsion neither the local effects. Therefore it is useful to de-
velop structural models that represent with more precision the
resistant scheme of the deck [9], like the orthotropic plate method.
In this approach, a comparison is established between the ac-
tual voided slab, made of concrete, which can be considered as
an isotropic material, and an equivalent solid slab with the same
height as the actual one, but made of an orthotropic material, with
its orthotropic directions going in the longitudinal and the trans-
versal deck directions, respectively. According to that, a finite ele-
ment model of shell elements under bending [10] can be created,
which better describes the deck behaviour. Also, with this analogy,
the post-tensioning layout can be defined with one-dimensional fi-
nite elements directly connected to the slab by rigid beams, as in
the grillage model, avoiding the difficulties which appear in models

0965-9978/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.advengsoft.2010.04.005
988 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999

Fig. 1. Voided slab bridge deck.

Fig. 4. Three-dimensional finite element model of a voided slab deck with shell and
Fig. 2. Grillage model of a voided slab deck.
beam elements.

a recreation of the model, with the undesired consequences of in-

creased cost in terms of time and money.
On the following sections, the development of the orthotropic
plate analogy implemented in the software and the description
of the code are presented.

2. Orthotropic plate formulation

2.1. Kinematics relations in a flat slab

According to the Reissner–Mindlin shell theory [13], the consti-

tutive equation of the three-dimensional elasticity applied to the
Fig. 3. Three-dimensional grillage model of a voided slab deck with two layers bending of flat slabs can be expressed as
joined by rigid beams.
rb ¼ Db eb ð1Þ

using three-dimensional solid elements [8]. The deck discretization where rb and eb are the stress and strain vectors in bending,
is done with the following elements (Fig. 4): respectively

rTb ¼ ð rx ry sxy Þ
 A layer of orthotropic shell elements, which is located in the  2 
2
  ð2Þ
@2 w
centre of gravity of the voided slab. In the abutments and the eTb ¼ ex ey cxy ¼ z @@xw2 z @@yw2 2z @x@y
intermediate piers, as the section of the deck is solid, the ele-
ments are defined as isotropic. and Db is the constitutive matrix of the material, which for an iso-
 A layer of isotropic shell elements, modelling the lateral cantile- tropic material results in
0 E mE
1
vers and placed in their neutral axis [11]. 1m2 1m2
0
 Rigid elements connecting the previous layers and also ensuring B C
Db;i ¼ @ 1mEm2 E
1m2
0A ð3Þ
the transmission of forces between elements [12].
0 0 G
 Bar elements modelling the post-tensioning layout, connected
to the orthotropic elements of the slab with rigid bar elements and in the case of an orthotropic material
of variable length. 0 Ex myx Ey 1
1mxy myx 1mxy myx
0
B C
This approach to the finite element model construction, Db;o ¼ B mxy Ey
@ 1mxy myx
Ey
0 C
A ð4Þ
1mxy myx
although precise and effective, requires an overwhelming prepro-
0 0 Gxy
cessing effort by engineers and so, a software has been developed,
which can make all the transformations required by the orthotro-
pic material formulation and create a mesh with the deck and 2.2. Moment–curvature relation in a flat slab
post-tensioning layout. This code can also perform the usual tasks
involved in the analysis and design of this class of bridges, where The integration of the stress vector to obtain the force vector is
subtle modifications in the structural properties imply very often done in the following manner
 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 989

Z Z
h=2 h=2
b b ^eb the equivalent slab are obtained. Thus, considering 1  m2 ’ 1
r^ b ¼ zrb dz ¼ zDb eb dz ¼ D ð5Þ and 1  mxymyx ’ 1, it can be concluded that
h=2 h=2

^ b and ^eb are the general- Iy

where h is the thickness of the slab and r Ex ¼ E ð12Þ
ized force and strain vectors in bending, respectively I
Ix
Ey ¼ E ð13Þ
r^ Tb ¼ ð Mx My Mxy Þ ð6Þ I
 2 2 2
 Ix
^eTb ¼  @@xw2  @@yw2 2 @x@y
@ w
ð7Þ Exy ¼ G ð14Þ
I
b b is the generalized constitutive matrix of the material in
and D While Ex, Ey and Exy are determined uniquely, there are two
bending different expressions for mxy, so the average value is chosen as
common practice
Z h=2
bb ¼
D z2 Db dz ð8Þ Ix þ I y
h=2 mxy ¼ m ð15Þ
2Iy
which for a voided flat slab of an isotropic material, corresponding Since the height of the equivalent orthotropic slab is the same
with the actual voided deck, is as the voided slab, a fictitious orthotropic material density must
0 EIy mEIy 1 be defined to ensure that the weight of both slabs is the same. If
1m2 1m2
0
b b;i ¼ B mEIx C qr is defined as the actual concrete density and qf as the fictitious
D @ 1m2 EIx
0 A ð9Þ orthotropic material density, the relation of weight equality in the
1m2
0 0 GIx cross section leads to

where Ix and Iy are the moments of inertia per unit length in the cor- Ar;x
qf ¼ qr ð16Þ
responding axes x and y. In the case of a solid flat slab made of an Af ;x
orthotropic material, the Eq. (8) turns out to be
where Ar,x is the actual area of the voided slab cross section and Af,x
0 myx Ey I 1
Ex I
0 is the area of the equivalent fictitious solid slab.
1mxy myx 1mxy myx
B C
b b;o ¼ B mxy Ey I
0 C
D Ey I ð10Þ
@ 1mxy myx 1mxy myx A 2.4. Postprocessing of force and stress results
0 0 Gxy I
Once the finite element model with the mechanical properties
where I is the moment of inertia per unit length of the orthotropic solid slab is created, the expressions that relate
3 the stress and force values of the orthotropic solid model with the
h
I¼ ð11Þ ones of the actual voided slab must be developed. This is done by
12
taking into account that the forces in the actual isotropic model
(Fig. 5) are the same as in the orthotropic slab (Fig. 6). Thus, estab-
2.3. Identification of the mechanical parameters of the orthotropic slab lishing the equality of the membrane forces in x direction
Nx ¼ rr;x;m Ar;x ¼ rf ;x;m Af ;x ð17Þ
From the developments of the previous sections and establish-
ing the equality between the elements of the generalized constitu- where rr,x,m and rf,x,m are the membrane stresses in x direction for
tive matrices of the orthotropic material (10) and the isotropic the actual and fictitious material, respectively. From here, the mem-
ones (9), the expressions of orthotropic mechanical parameters of brane longitudinal stress in the real voided slab can be expressed as

Fig. 5. Membrane stress in x direction in the real model.

Fig. 6. Membrane stress in x direction in the fictitious orthotropic model.

990 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999

Fig. 7. Membrane stress in y direction in the real model.

Fig. 8. Membrane stress in y direction in the fictitious orthotropic model.

Fig. 9. Bending stress in x direction in the real model.

Fig. 10. Bending stress in x direction in the fictitious orthotropic model.

Af ;x q section is considered. Establishing again the equality of forces in

rr;x;m ¼ rf ;x;m ¼ r rf ;x;m ð18Þ
Ar;x qf the actual and fictitious section, the membrane transversal stress
in the real voided slab is
The same can be concluded for the transversal direction and so,
the membrane stress in y direction is Af ;y h
rr;y;m ¼ rf ;y;m ¼ rf ;y;m ð20Þ
Ny ¼ rr;y;m Ar;y ¼ rf ;y;m Af ;y ð19Þ Ar;y e1 þ e2
Now the bending stresses in x direction for the actual material
where rr,y,m and rf,y,m are the membrane stresses in y direction for
are obtained by the same reasoning of force equality (Figs. 9
the actual (Fig. 7) and fictitious material (Fig. 8), respectively. Ar,y
and 10)
and Af,y are the actual area of the voided slab cross section and
the area of the equivalent fictitious solid slab in y direction, My ¼ rr;x;b;i W r;y ¼ rf ;x;b;i W f ;y ð21Þ
respectively.
In this case, the cross section in y direction is not constant due where i represents the top fibre for i = 1 and the bottom fibre for
to the walls between voids. Therefore, the worst case of the voided i = 2 and rr,x,b,i and rf,x,b,i are the bending stresses in x direction
 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 991

Fig. 11. Bending stress in y direction in the real model.

Fig. 12. Bending stress in y direction in the fictitious orthotropic model.

for the actual and fictitious material, respectively. Wr,y and Wf,y are paradigm and without requiring excessive modelling work from
the strength modulus in y direction for the actual and orthotropic the user. At the same time, the engineer’s background should be ta-
material. From here, the longitudinal bending stress in the real ken into account. Therefore, the programme has the following
voided slab can be expressed as characteristics:
2
My hi My hi h  A graphical user interface (GUI) that allows the designer to
rr;x;b;i ¼ ¼ ¼ rf ;x;b;i ð22Þ
W r;y Ir;y 6Ir;y define the geometrical and mechanical properties of the struc-
where Ir,y is the moment of inertia per unit length about y axis for tural model quickly and without errors. In the Fig. 14 can be
the actual material. Using the same reasoning, the bending stress seen the main interface of the software developed, where all
about y axis is obtained for the actual material (Figs. 11 and 12) the workflow is controlled and the graphical user interface of
the preprocessor GeoStar, included in the finite element pack-
Mx hi Mx age COSMOS/M [16], used to run the analysis.
rr;y;b;i ¼ ¼
W r;x Ir;x  Predefined load generation, in compliance with the current
2hi h
2 structural codes.
¼ h  2  2 i rf ;y;b;i ð23Þ  Automatic calculation of the mechanical parameters of the
e31 þ e32 þ 12 e1 h1  e21 þ e2 h2  e22 orthotropic material.
 Definition of the post-tensioning layout and tendon characteris-
where Ir,x is the moment of inertia per unit length about the x axis
tics with very few parameters. Also, fine adjustment of the path
for the actual material. Once membrane and bending stresses are
is allowed.
calculated, they must be combined to obtain the total stresses rr,x,t,i
 Generation of a finite element model compatible with commer-
and rr,y,t,i
cial packages. At the moment, the plug-in is available for COS-
rr;x;t;i ¼ rr;x;m;i þ rr;x;b;i ð24Þ MOS/M [16], but others are in progress.
rr;y;t;i ¼ rr;y;m;i þ rr;y;b;i ð25Þ  Provides graphical and numerical results of structural
responses: displacements, stresses, internal forces and
Those results allow the global design and definition of the reactions.
bridge. For the precise definition of details, such as web thickness,
number of voids, top and bottom flange dimensions, some refer- The code can be organized conceptually into the blocks shown
ences can be consulted [1,4,14,15]. in the flowchart of Fig. 13. Each of the blocks involves a number
of modules in which the tasks related with them are specified.
3. Description of the code The first block, dealing with preprocessing, comprises the
modules of model definition and load specification. This block
3.1. Concept and characteristics is in charge of all the data definition and so, a graphical user
interface has been created using the Visual Basic language. In
The structural model shown in Fig. 4 can be generated using any the processing block, which is designed specifically for the exter-
commercial finite element package. However, this is a complex and nal finite element package in which the analysis will be carried
time consuming task, since these programmes have been devel- out, the model is generated in the corresponding module. After
oped for general purpose, but not for such specific situations. Con- this step, the programme control is transferred to the external
sidering this fact, the main goal in the development of the software package until the analysis of the structure is finished. All the
was the creation of a tool with the capability of producing a struc- modules in the processing block are implemented with the
tural model, like the one in Fig. 4, using the orthotropic slab Fortran language.
992 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999
Post-
Geometry Material
tensioning
Model definition
Loads
Preprocessing
Fig. 13. Flowchart of the code.
Fig. 14. Main graphical user interface of the software.
The last block, related with the post-processing, is loaded when
the control is recovered by the main programme after the process-
ing block has finished its tasks. Here, the transformation of the
analysis data and also the generation and display of the results is
accomplished. Again, as the duties involved with this block require
user interaction, a GUI is implemented with Visual Basic language.
A brief description of the aforementioned blocks is indicated next.
3.2. Model definition
This module requires from the user the input of all the geomet-
rical and mechanical data, through a graphical interface, to proceed
with the necessary calculations to create the finite element model.
In the geometry window (Fig. 15), all the dimensions of the model
are defined. It is organized in three panels. In the first one, located
in the lower part, the cross-sectional characteristics are entered:
the number of spans, the height and width of the slab, the shape
of the cross section, the number and the radius of the voids, the
top and bottom flange dimensions and the definition of the canti-
levers, if any. In the second panel, in the upper right corner, the
longitudinal dimensions are defined. Those values are the length
of each span and the thickness of the diaphragms. In the third pa-
nel, the transversal and longitudinal sections are plotted along
with the input data.
Model Generation
Generation of Results
Structural Display
Analysis of Results
Processing Postprocessing
In the material window (Fig. 16), the concrete and steel proper-
ties are introduced. The programme stores the material data of the
Spanish standard codes [17,18], so the user only needs to indicate
the type in each case, although non-standardised materials can
also be used, if its mechanical parameters are known.
In the post-tensioning data form (Fig. 17), the tendon layout
data and its force are defined. The user can restrict the null eccen-
tricity points, as well as the maximum and minimum eccentrici-
ties, while the programme plots the layout with the changes in
real time. The jack force is introduced in the left lower panel,
where the steel stress, the cross section required and the number
of cords needed in each tendon are specified. It is possible to limit
the post-tensioning force to a certain percentage of the elastic limit
or the critical load and then the code calculates the worst case and
selects the right tendon for that value.
After all the structural variables and parameters related to the
model have been entered, the load interface is activated, to select
the desired values and their combination coefficients [19]. The
dead loads of the structure can be defined here and also the pat-
terns of live loads acting over the deck and the cantilevers. Combi-
nations of different patterns are possible, either over the whole
deck or in alternate spans and lanes. It is also possible to introduce
additional loads directly in the analysis code, including point loads,
imposed displacements or thermal loads.
 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 993

Fig. 15. Geometry data interface.

Fig. 16. Material data entry window.

3.3. Model generation and structural analysis
This part of the software links with the selected finite element
package, creates the geometry and meshes the model. The user
can control the maximum element size, as well as the solver con-
figuration. Once all the data has been entered and checked, the
code transfers the execution control to the external package, wait-
ing for the completion of the analysis. In that moment, the control
is recovered and if no errors have been detected, the post-process-
ing block is activated.
994 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999
Fig. 17. Post-tension definition interface.
Fig. 18. Dimensions of the verification example.
Fig. 19. Finite element model of the verification example.
3.4. Generation and presentation of results
In this part of the software, the analysis data is transformed
according to the previous formulation to generate the stress and
internal force results in the voided slab, without user intervention.
The graphical postprocessor of the finite element package is used
to display the structural responses, such as displacements, mem-
brane and bending stresses and internal forces at the user’s re-
quest. Also, a complete list of all the input and output data is
provided.
4. Examples
4.1. Verification example
In order to check the accuracy of the orthotropic slab analogy
and to verify its implementation in the code, a model is created
to reproduce the results obtained by O’Brien and Keogh [8].
Fig. 18 shows the longitudinal elevation and the cross section of
the two span bridge, where all the dimensions are in metres, and
in Fig. 19 the finite element model generated by the code is dis-
played, where the maximum element size is 0.8 m, resulting in
2663 elements and 2174 nodes. The only load considered in this
model is the self weight and there are no post-tensioning tendons.
Fig. 20 shows the comparison of top stress results in longitudi-
nal direction, for the first span, between the orthotropic slab model
produced by the code and the one by O’Brien and Keogh. As ex-
pected, the maximum compressive stress is located at x = 9 m,
which is 38 of the span, and the maximum tensile stress is at the
central support.
As can be seen, the results are in accordance with each other
along all the span, without significant differences, being the rela-
tive error below 5%. The main downside is at x = 21 m, where the
difference is 4.9% greater in the orthotropic model, so the verifica-
tion can be judged as positive. Besides this verification, extensive
 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 995

8 tests with numerous examples have been passed to the software

O’Brien and Keogh during all the development process.
Díaz et al.
6
Longitudinalstress σ x (MPa)

4.2. Comparison example

4
This example is proposed to study the differences between the
grillage model and the orthotropic slab implementation suggested
2
here. According to that, two models of the two span bridge of
Fig. 21 are generated.
0 The properties of the grillage model in Fig. 22 are calculated fol-
lowing the recommendations in [1,2] and the orthotropic slab mod-
-2 el in Fig. 23 is created with the new code. Material properties are
shown in Table 1 and a 18 cable post-tensioning layout is defined,
-4 with 2500 kN jack force in each of the cables. Two load cases are
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 introduced, following the first one -named LC1- a totally symmetri-
Longitudinalposition x (m) cal pattern, with the self weight plus the service load of 4 kN/m2
equally distributed along all the top surface of the deck. The second
Fig. 20. Comparison of total stress in longitudinal direction at top fibre in the first
span of the verification example.
load case, named LC2, is defined to study the torsional behaviour of
the bridge and the transverse response and so, the service load is
distributed in alternate lanes along the deck in each span. The self
weight is also considered and an isolated load of 600 kN at the outer
lane of the first mid-span is applied, which is part of the live load,
along with the service load.
It can be noticed (Fig. 24) that the orthotropic model delivers a
more precise and detailed information of the structural response,
where the distorting effect of the 600 kN live load can be appreci-
ated without employing a local model. On the other hand, using
the results for the subsequent dimensioning is easier in this case
and no additional treatment or interpolation between values is
needed.
In Fig. 25 the deformed shape of the whole bridge with a scale
factor of 1000 is shown, along with the plot of vertical displace-
ments. In order to make a comparison of the responses of both
modelizations, the graphs of vertical displacements at the deck
are displayed in Figs. 26–29.
The movements uz at the longitudinal axis of the first span in
load cases 1 and 2 are shown in Figs. 26 and 27 respectively and,
Fig. 21. Dimensions of the comparison example. as can be seen, results do not differ significantly and so it can be

Fig. 22. Grillage model of the comparison example.

996 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999

Fig. 23. Finite element model of the comparison example.

Table 1
However, both of these idealizations have their own limitations
Material properties of the comparison example. and are not capable to deal with some of the non-linear phenom-
ena occurring in post-tensioned concrete structures, like for in-
Concrete Steel
stance creeping, shrinkage or cracking. These limitations can be
Type HP-35 Y1860 S7 15.2 addressed using more sophisticated analyses, considering both
E (GPa) 29.8 190
m 0.2 0.3
geometrical and material non-linearities with suitable constitutive
Density (kN/m3) 25 78.5 equations, including elastoplastic and damage models. These capa-
bilities are not included in the software at the present moment and
are planned as a future improvement.
concluded that no model stands out over the other in this aspect. In
the same manner, in the transverse distribution of vertical dis-
placements in the cross section of the first mid-span (Fig. 28), a dis- 4.3. Application example
crepancy can be noticed between both models, although the
variation is below 5%, which is not significant. The reason for the The last example is presented with the aim of checking the ef-
small <difference is that this is the first load case, which is sym- fect of the finite element mesh size in the generation and analysis
metrical. On the other hand, in the second load case (Fig. 29), the time of the model, which directly affects the project cost. With this
relative error in the grillage model increases up to 74% in the worst purpose, eight models of the three span bridge of Fig. 30 have been
scenario, at the edges of the deck, because of the poor performance generated and analyzed. Fig. 31 shows the dimensions of the
of the grillage model with unsymmetrical loads. bridge and Table 2 lists the material properties. The post-tension-
It can be concluded from the previous results that the perfor- ing layout has 14 cables with 3700 kN jack force applied in each
mance of the orthotropic model is better than the grillage analogy. one of them from both ends. The applied loads are the self weight

Fig. 24. Total stress rx in longitudinal direction at top fibre in the voided slab of the comparison example. Load case 2.
 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 997

Fig. 25. Vertical displacement of the deck in the comparison example. Load case 2. Scale factor of 1000.

3.00 3.00
Grillage model Grillage model
Orthotropic deck model Orthotropic deck model
2.00 2.00
Vertical displacement uz (mm)
Vertical displacement uz (mm)

1.00 1.00

0.00 0.00

-1.00 -1.00

-2.00 -2.00

-3.00 -3.00
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24
Longitudinal position x (m) Longitudinal position x (m)
Fig. 26. Comparison of vertical displacements at the longitudinal axis of the first Fig. 27. Comparison of vertical displacements at the longitudinal axis of the first
span. Load case 1. span. Load case 2.

and a live load of 4 kN/m2, evenly distributed along all the top sur-
face of the deck, except in the cantilevers, where there is no load.
The maximum element size ranges from 0.6 to 2.0 m, with a
20 cm step, resulting in eight different meshes. All of them have
been preprocessed and analyzed in a single processor and single
core Pentium IV computer with a CPU frequency of 3.2 GHz and
2 GB of physical memory. Several measures of the generation and
analysis times have been taken for each mesh and the averaged re-
sults are shown in Fig. 32. As expected, the computational cost of
both the generation and the analysis of the models is related to
the element size, and it is also significant that in all cases the gen-
eration time is higher than the analysis time. In any case, and being
the example presented here of sufficient complexity, the computa-
tional costs obtained are not disproportionate and all of them are
in the order of minutes, which is a great advantage over manual
generation of the model, where operator times of hours have been
measured during the development of the software.
Besides this, and taking into account that during the usual de-
sign cycle an iterative sequence is followed until the final product
is defined, and that in each of the steps a new generation of the
mesh with minor modifications of the previous design is per-
formed, time savings are of even greater importance, allowing
engineers to focus on the fundamental facts of the design, resulting
in a lower total cost of development.
5. Conclusions
In this work, the orthotropic model of a voided slab bridge deck
has been developed and implemented in a computer code. The fol-
lowing conclusions can be deduced from the investigation:
 Post-tensioned concrete bridges with voided slab decks can be
modelled in a more precise way using three-dimensional finite
element meshes with orthotropic material. This approach is
more precise than the well known grillage model and it does
not complicate the construction of the mesh excessively, as
other models do. This also affects the computational cost, which
is maintained at a reasonable level.
998 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999

1.50
Vertical displacement uz (mm)

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25 Grillage model

Orthotropic deck model
0.00
-5 -3.75 -2.5 -1.25 0 1.25 2.5 3.75 5
Transverse position y (m)
Fig. 31. Dimensions of the application example.
Fig. 28. Comparison of vertical displacements at the transverse section of the first
mid-span. Load case 1.

0.75

300 6000
Vertical displacement uz (mm)

0.00 Generation time

Analysis time
250 5000
Number of nodes
-0.75

Number of nodes
200 4000
Time (s)

-1.50
150 3000
-2.25
100 2000

-3.00
Grillage model 50 1000
Orthotropic deck model
-3.75 0 0
-5 -3.75 -2.5 -1.25 0 1.25 2.5 3.75 5
2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6
Transverseposition y (m)
Maximum size of finite elements (m)
Fig. 29. Comparison of vertical displacements at the transverse section of the first
mid-span. Load case 2. Fig. 32. Computational cost of the application example.

Fig. 30. Finite element model of the application example.

 J. Díaz et al. / Advances in Engineering Software 41 (2010) 987–999 999

Table 2 [2] O’Brien EJ, Keogh DL. Bridge deck analysis. London: E & FN Spon; 1999.
Material properties of the application example. [3] Hambly EC. Bridge deck behaviour. 2nd ed. London: E & FN Spon; 1991
[previous ed: 1976].
Concrete Steel [4] Elliott G, Clark LA. Circular voided concrete slab stiffnesses. Proc Am Soc Civil
Eng, ASCE 1982;108(11):2379–93.
Type HP-40 Y1860 S7 16
[5] West R. Use of a grillage analogy for the analysis of slab and pseudo-slab bridge
E (GPa) 30.9 190
decks. Technical report 21, Cement and Concrete Association; 1973.
m 0.2 0.3 [6] Bakht B, Jaeger LG, Cheung MS, Mufti A. State of the art in analysis of cellular
Density (kN/m3) 25 78.5 and voided slab bridges. Can J Civil Eng 1981;8(3):376–91.
[7] Keogh DL, O’Brien EJ. Recommendations on the use of a 3-d grillage model for
bridge deck analysis. Struct Eng Rev 1996;8(4):357–66.
[8] O’Brien EJ, Keogh DL. Upstand finite element analysis of slab bridges. Comput
 Asymmetrical loads perform better with the orthotropic model Struct 1998;69(6):671–83.
than in the grillage, and also the local effects of the loads and [9] Bakht B, Jaeger LG. Bridge analysis simplified, McGraw-Hill infrastructure
series. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1985.
their distribution can be measured with more precision. [10] Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL. The finite element method. 5th
 Programmes focused on specific tasks of the design cycle can be ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000.
an effective tool for engineers, helping them to generate struc- [11] Chapelle D, Bathe K-J. Finite element analysis of shells: funda-
mentals. Berlin: Springer; 2003.
tural models in a very short period of time and with a low rate [12] Cook RD, Malkus DS, Plesha ME, Witt RJ. Concepts and applications of finite
of modelling errors. Links with in-house codes or with other element analysis. 4th ed. New York, NY: Wiley; 2001.
software can be used for the structural analyses. [13] Timoshenko S, Woinowsky-Kreiger S. Theory of plates and shells. Engineering
societies monographs. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1959.
 Graphical user interfaces are an advantage in this kind of engi-
[14] Elliott G, Clark LA, Symmons RM. Test of a quarter-scale reinforced concrete
neering software, since they offer an easy working environment voided slab bridge. Technical report 527, Cement and Concrete Association;
and error correction. 1979.
[15] Clark L, Thorogood P. Transverse shear in rc circular voided slabs. J Inst Struct
 The code presented in this paper satisfies the previous condi-
Eng 1994;72(12):192–5.
tions as a time and cost saver on the development of these mod- [16] COSMOS/M Finite Element Analysis System. User guide, basic FEA system,
els, so it is very suitable for the analysis and design of this advanced modules and command reference, Los Angeles, California; 2005.
structural type. [17] EHE. Spanish structural concrete code (in Spanish). Madrid: Ministry of Public
Works and Transport; 1998.
[18] UNE 36094. Steel wires for post-tensioned tendons in concrete (in
Spanish). Madrid: AENOR; 1997.
References [19] IAP. Loads values for the project of road bridges (in Spanish). Madrid: Ministry
of Public Works and Transport; 1998.
[1] Rajagopalan N. Bridge superstructure. Oxford: Alpha Science International;
2006.