7612 Analysis of orthotropic steel

bridge decks by a stiffness method

M. S. TROlTSKY, DSc, MASCE,MEIC,MIABSE*
A. K. AZAD, MEng,AMASCEt

A stiffnessmethod of analysis of orthotropic steel bridge decks having open type ribs
(torsionally soft)is developed incorporating thebasic theory of eccentrically stiffened
plates. The method is readily programmed to obtain the desired solution from the
computer. The proposed analysis and the approximate design method of Pelikan-
Esslinger are compared by applying themto several bridge decksof different propor-
tions. It is found that the design method, in general, indicates higher stresses and
becomes increasingly conservative with longer rib spans.

Introduction
Orthotropic steel plate deck bridges, developed first in Europe after the Second
World War as an answer to the shortage of materials, are becoming increas-
ingly popular in medium and long span bridges due to the economic advantages
andstructuralperformance.The widespreadresearch and interestinthis
type of construction have produced numerous analytical methods to analyse
thesedecks,which are based on variousstructuralidealizations.l-14For
design purposes, however, the method of Pelikan and Esslinger7 has so far been
used mostly because of its relative simplicity and accuracy.15*16 Design cri-
teria based on this method anda review of the state of knowledge in this area
are given in references 17 and 18.
2. In order to accept a design method which can be used satisfactorily in
a wide range of deck proportioning with a variety of variable parameters, the
accuracy and the reliability of such a method needs to be carefully evaluated
and compared with a more exact theory. With this objective, a method of
analysis of conventional orthotropic steel bridge decks having open ribs is
proposed. Force-displacement equations of an orthotropic plate with stiffen-
ers disposed eccentrically1- 3 * 8 - 1 2 are applied and the problemis solved using
the stiffness method.
3. In this approach, the deck is idealized as a plate stiffened only by the
closely spaced longitudinal open ribs andbeing continuous over flexible trans-
verse stiffeners or floor beams. In actual construction of these conventional
decks, the floor beams are spaced at a larger interval, which arrangement does
not allow them to assume their rigidities correctly as they are distributed over
the entire width of the floor beam spacing. It is more appropriate to consider
them as elastic supports to the rib-deck platesystem. Furthermore, the main
carrying members are also assumed to provide simple supports to thedeck.
Written discussion closes 15 August, 1973, for publication in Proceedings, Part 2.
* Professor of Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Sir George Williams Univer-
sity, Montreal.
t Research Fellow, Department of CivilEngineering,SirGeorgeWilliamsUniversity,
Montreal.
447

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY A N D AZAD

column matrix containing the fixed end action

effective web area of the floor beams
cross-sectional area of ribs in the y direction per unit Iength alongthe
X axis
width of the deck in the X direction between supports
column matrix containing the displacements corresponding to degrees
of freedom
modulus of elasticity
modulus of rigidity
moment of inertia of the deck plate per unit width
moment of inertia of the floor beams
moment of inertia of the area A , with respect to the middle surface of
the plate
torsional constant of the floor beam for pure torsion
torsional constant of the rib per unit length in the X direction
length of the deck between floor beams
bending moments in the X and y directions with respect to the middle
surface of the deck plate per unit length in the y and X directions
respectively
torsional moments about the X and y axes per unit length in the y and
X directions respectively
resultant normal forces in the X and y directions per unit length in the
y and X directions
horizontal shear forces in the y and X directions per unit length in the
X and y directions respectively
arbitrary loading
shear forces in the X and y directions per unit length in the y and X
directions respeclively
support reactions per unit length along the supports parallel to the y
and X axes respectively
structure stiffness matrix
panel stiffness matrix
thickness of the deck plate
displacements of a point on the middle surface of the deck plate in the
X , y and z directions respectively
co-ordinates of a point on the middle surface of the deck plate
Poisson's ratio

Basic equations of eccentrically stiffened plates

4. A typicalplateelement, stiffenedeccentrically by open ribs in the y
direction only, under influence of forces actingon the positive faces, is shown
in Fig. 1 . D u e to asymmetry of ribs, the middle surfaceof the plate does not
coincidewith the centroidalaxisinthe y direction.Therefore, the forces
N,, Nu, N,, and N y , exist and increase the complexity of the problem.
5. The refined analysis of such a stiffened plate involves the solution of
three simultaneous differential equations expressed in the terms of the dis-
placements U, U and W of the middle surface of the plate in the directions X, y
and z respectively. From Fig. 1, basic equations are written.
448

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 A N A L Y S I S O F O R T H O T R O P I C S T E E L B R I D G ED E C K S

Fig. 1. Typical element of stiffened plate with open ribs

Stress-displacement relations for the plate

Stress-displacement relations for the rib

U, = (e-+) . . . . . . (Id)

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD

a2W
M,, = - E [ Z ( l - p ) + J * ] - axay . . . * (54

I n these equations

1
t* = t/(l - p )
t2 = t / 2 ( 1 + p )
A; = A,+t* . . . . . . . (6)
1; = z y + z
J* = Jp/2(1+ p )
6. Satisfying theequilibriumconditions of a plateelementwhenacted
upon by any loading P = p ( x , y), three differential equations are obtained

a%
Ay -ay2
a2u
-+t1axay+t
a%
--S
a3w
-= 0 .
a axa ay3

where tl = t/2( 1 -p).

7. Transforming equations (7)-(9), an eighth order differential equation in
terms of W can be obtained in the form

where Q depends upon the fourth order derivativeof loading P and

a1 = tzt*Z
~2 = t l 2 ~ -ta2Z- 2t,*Z- t*AgZ- t*tJD
+
= 2 2 ' 1 - 2tlaZ+ 2t*AvZ+t2AyZ+ t2t*IY t*AyJ*- 2tI2ZJ* +
2ta2ZJ*
a4 = t*Sy2+ t12iy- tz21u- 2tzAyZ- t*AyIv- AytzJ*

= tZAyIy- taSy2

8. In thecase of a rectangular platewith two oppositeedges, X = 0 and X = a,

being simply supported, single series solution of the Levy type can be forrnu-
450
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 A N A L Y S I S O F O R T H O T R O P I CS T E E LB R I D G ED E C K S
lated for the displacementsU , v and W representing the homogeneous solution
of the differential equations (7)-(9) which are expressed as
W
wh = 2 W, sin f i x
m=l
m
uh 2 U, cos f i x
m= 1
. . . . . (12)
W
Vh = 2 V,,,sin f i x
m=l
where f i = m?r/a and W,, U, and V, are the functions of y only.
9. Using equations (7)-(9) and (12), the functions W,,,, U,,,and V, may be
represented as
4 -
W,,,= 2
j= 1
. .
[Cjmes~my+C~,+p),e-S~my] . (13a)
4 - -
U,,, =
j= 1
. . .
2 [Kj,C,mes~my+C~j+4~me-s~my] ( 1 3 ~
4 -
V, =
j= 1
. . .
2 [R,mCfmes~my+C~,+4~me-s~my] (13c)
where Cl,. . . C,,,, are the arbitrary constants to be determined from the
boundary conditions at y = k 112 and ? sj are theeight roots of the polynomial
a5se+a4ss+a3s4+a2sa+al= 0 . . . . (14)
Also

10. For an actual bridge deck out of four pairs of roots from equation
(14), two pairsare always realand the other two pairs are complex ~0njugate.l~
Coefficients C,,, K,, and R,,,,associated with complex conjugate roots must
also be complex conjugate.
11. For the particular solutionof equation (g), the loadingP on the deckis
expressed into a Fourier sine series covering the entire width a of the plate.
With the aid of equations (7)-(9) it can be shown that the only displacement
that exists is W,, which may be given as
W, = n2 i s- -=- Qm
m4EI
tiix . . .
where Qm is the amplitude of the sinusoidal loading for the mth component.
The final displacements are then
m
W =
m= 1
2 (W,+a,,,) sin tiix . . . . . (17a)
00
U = 2
m=l
Urncosf i x . . . . . . (17b)
m
v = 2
m=l
V,,,sin f i x . . . . . . (17c)

451
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD
,Simple support Elratic supports

Fig. 2. Idealized structure

k - 2 4 \ Simplesupport
I:
12. In order to complete the general solution of the plate subjected to an
arbitrary loading, the constants C,, are to be determined from the conditions
at y = k 112 and the conditionsof continuity at eitheredge of the loaded strip.

Method of analysis
13. Arbitrary loading on the deck of the idealized structure (Fig. 2) will
causethedeckplate to undergo a verticaldeflexion and rotation at each
support of the floor beam. The slopedeflexion equations at a support line
relating the end displacementsto the end actionsof panels can be setup if the
panel stiffness corresponding to the degrees of freedom, namely the rotation
and deflexion, are known a priori. The stiffness method can then be used to
analyse the structure.
14. This objective is achieved by observing that a sinusoidal loading cover-
ing the entire widthof the panel, having simple edgesX = 0 and X = a and arbi-
trary support conditions at theedges y = k 112, will produce sinusoidal deflex-
ion, rotation, moments and shears in the y direction at any location y. This
results from theexpressions for moments, shearand rotation in they direction
and the deflexion which contains the term sinf i x .

Panel.stiffness matrix
15. The stiffness matrix for a typical panel can be determined by solving
the individual plate problems, as shown in Fig. 3. From the nature of the
displacement functions U, v and W, and equations (3)-(9, it is evident that for
a given sinusoidal rotation at one edge (Fig. 3(b)) the moments and reactions
at theedge rotated and at thefixed edge are also sinusoidal. Similarly, if one
fixed edge is subjected to a sine wave type deflexion (Fig. 3(c)) the induced
moments and reactions at bothfixed edges are also distributed as sinecurves.

Unit sinusoidal rotation at one end

16. The eightboundaryconditionstodeterminetheeightunknown
constantsinequation (13), foranunloadedplatesubjectedtoarotation
O = 1 sin f i x (Fig. 3(b)), are w=O, u=O (supported along the X direction),
D = B sin f i x (assumed) and awlay = 1 sin f i x at the edge y = 112 and W = U = v =
&/ay = 0 at y = 112.
17. The displacement amplitude fi at the rotated edge can be determined
from the condition that at the neutral line parallel to the X axis, located at

452
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 A N A L Y S I S O F O R T H O T R O P I CS T E E LB R I D G ED E C K S

Fig. 3. End momentsandreactionsofatypicaldeckpanel due to unit sinusoidal

displacements; (a) typicaldeckpanel, (b) induced moments and reactions due to
unit sinusoidal rotation at edge A, (c) induced moments and reactions due to unit
sinusoidal deflexion at edge A

distance Z. from the middle surface of the plate, the strain is zero. For the
rotated edge then

18. Simultaneous linear equations involving the boundary conditions can

be written in the matrix form as
[A]{C}= { F } . . . . . . . (19)
in which [ A ] is an 8 X 8 matrix containing coefficients associated with {C}and
{ P } is a column vector in the form
{ F ) = {O, 0, g, 1, 0, 0, 0, o y . . . . (20)
19. If the elementsin [ A]-l are denoted by aij (i,j = 1 .. . S ) then from equa-
tion (19)
C,, = aj38+aj4 . . . . . . (21)
20. The values of derivatives aaw/aya and avlay at y = -112 can be desig-
nated as
aya = blCl,+ ...... +beCB, = bjCj,
a2w
. . . (22a)
aV
-
ay
= dlCl,+ ...... +decem = djCj, . . . (22b)
in which b, and dj are known coefficients.
453
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD

Fig. 4. Numbering system for deck

21.. With values of C,, from equation (21) and using the relationship of
equation (l%), fi can be expressed as

22. Havingdetermined 6, theunknownconstants C,, canbeevaluated

fromequation (21). Therequiredamplitude Omn, ern,,e
, and Or, ofthe
3(b), which form a part of the panel stiffness
end moments and reactions in Fig.
matrix, can then be determined.

Unit sinusoidai deflexion at one end

23. With the edgey = 112 subjected to a deflexion W = 1 sin riix as shown in
Fig. 3(c), the plate problem can besolved using the boundary conditions W =
1 sin f i x at y = -112 and U = v = i3wIay = 0 at both edges y = f 112.
24. The unknown constants C,, in this case can be determined from equa-
tion (1 9) with a new column vector { F } whose elements are all zero except the
first one, which has a value of 1.
25. Therefore
C,, = U ~ (I j = 1. . .8) . . . . . (24)
26. With these values of C,, the amplitudes S,,, Srn, S,, and S,, in Fig. 3(c)
can be determined, which will provide the remaining part of the panel stiffness
matrix. The panel stiffness matrix SRis then given in terms of amplitudes of
forces, using the new sign convention and indexing as depicted in Fig.4, as

Floor beam stiffness

27. In the previous development of panel stiffness matrix, only the stiff-
ened plate action was considered. However, the interaction of flexible floor
beams has to be taken into account in order to generate the overall structure
stiffness matrix.
454
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 A N A L Y S I S O F O R T H O T R O P I CS T E E LB R I D G ED E C K S
28. The flexibility effect of beamscanbecomputed,assumingthatit
possesses both the flexural and torsional stiffness. It can be shownthat if
a simply supported beam is subjected to a sinusoidally varying deflexion and
rotation of amplitudes 6 and 4 respectively, the sinusoidal vertical load and
torsional moment of amplitudes F,, and Mt are given as

where G A , is the effective shear rigidity, EIb is the flexural rigidity and GJb is
the torsional rigidity for pure torsionof the beam.

Fixed end actions due to load

29. Expressingtheappliedload ontheparticularpanelintoaFourier
sine series, the plate problem, with the edges y = k 112 as fixed, can be solved
using boundary conditions W = U = v = awlay = 0 at each edge.

Fig. 5. Breakdown of loading into a pair of symmetric and antisymmetric loading

455

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD
30. Forhighwaybridges,theapplied wheel loadscan beconsideredas
loadsdistributedonrelativelysmallareas. If theloadingwidth in the y
direction, 2b, is not symmetrical about theX axis of the panel, the solution for
each component of loading requires 24 simultaneous linear equationsto solve
24 unknown constants for the displacement functions. Thus, the size of the
matrix becomes 24 X 24 which, however, can be reduced to the size of 12 X 12
by replacing the actual loadingby a pair of symmetrical and anti-symmetrical
loadings with respect to the X axis, as shown in Fig. 5.

Solution by the stiffness method

31. The overall stiffness matrix S for a bridge deck with n floor beams will
be the order of 2n X 2n and can be assembled following the numbering se-
quence of Fig. 4. The terms in the leading diagonal will contain the values
representing the stiffness of the floor beam in the proper order. If the fixed
endactions,because of theappliedloading,aredesignated by thematrix

20 Lips

' 1 l

Type I Rib, in. I c. in.

8 X t

Fig. 6 . Example bridge decks

456

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 ANALYSIS OF O R T H O T R O P I CS T E E L B R I D G E D E C K S
{Am},assembled properly, the matrix {D,}containing the unknown displace-
ments at floor beam supports is given by
(D,} = [S]-l{Am> . . . . . * (27)
32. With the values of displacements being determined, the desired stresses
and deflexions can be obtained subsequently.

Application and comparisonwith thePelikan-Esslinger method

33. The proposed method is applied to analyse several hypothetical decks
shown in Fig.6 and the results are then compared with those obtained from the
approximate design method of Pelikan-Esslinger.

457
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD

4 6 8 10 6 8 10 12
I
Rib span: fc

- Proposed (4 --.- Pellkm-Essllnger

4 6 8 10 6 8 I0 I2
Rlb spini R
'(W
Fig. 8. Variation of deck plate stress uy ; (a) at location B, (b) at location A

34. The width of the deck is taken arbitrarily as10 ft and the ribs are spaced
at 12 in. centres for all cases. A single load of 20 kips distributed on an area
of 24 in. X 16 in. is placed symmetrically at the centre panel of the seven span
continuous deck structure. The maximum values of the stresses are of con-
cern to the designers, and so those at locations A and B on the loaded rib
(Fig. 6 ) are computed and compared.
35. The analytical results obtained from the refined analysis and Pelikan-
Esslinger's method presented in Figs7 and 8 are based on thevalues ofmoment
of inertia of floor beams, 200.0 in4. Torsional stiffness and shear deflexion
of floor beams are not considered in the present analysis togive a favourable
comparison. Figs 7 and 8 show that there is in general a goodagreement
between the maximumstresses at the bottomof the rib for both sections A and
B. The design method indicates stresses usually higher and, although it gives
a satisfactory estimate of maximum rib stress for shorter rib spans, it becomes
increasinglyconservativewithlongerribspans. For the range considered,
the stressesobtainedfromthe design methodaregenerallyabout 6-25%
higher depending on the deck proportions.
36. Regarding the stress ug at the top of the deck plate (Fig. S), it should
be noted that, although the two sets of resultsare in close agreementat location
B, those at A show differences. Depending on thethickness of the deck plate,
stresses at B are either slightly higher or lower than those from the proposed
458
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 A N A L Y S I S O F O R T H O T R O P I C S T E E LB R I D G ED E C K S

0 0.25 . 0.50 0.75 I -00

0 0.750.25 0.20 1.00

Relativerlgidltyratto 7
(b)
Fig. 9. Stress at bottom of rib plotted against relative rigidity ratio; (a) a t location B,
(b) at location A

refined analysis. To find the effect of floor beam flexibility on the stresses.
Figs 9 and i0 are plotted using different values of the relatiie rigidity ratio
as defined in references 17 and 18. It is seen that although the two sets of
curves for stress uy at the top of the deck plate at B are in good agreement,
those at A show closer agreement only with stiffer floor beams (smaller r)
and show larger differences with increasing y. Observing more or less a con-
stant difference between the stresses at the bottom of the rib for all values of
y, it may be concluded that the procedure outlined in references17 and 18 for
computation of floor beam flexibility is satisfactory concerning the rib stress
and deck plate stress at midspan of the rib.

Conclusions
37. A method of analysis of the conventional orthotropicsteel bridge decks
with open ribs is presented with the object of obtaining a closer estimate of
the actual stress set-up in the deck. The method is readily programmed to
459
Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 TROITSKY AND AZAD

-6

.
c

a.

..
2
Y
-4

-21 I I I I
0 0.25 0.50 0 -75 1.00

Rclatlve rlgldlty ratlo 7

(4
-propared --- - Pcllkan-Brllngcr

-2 I I I I I
0 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00

Relative rlgldity ratlo 7

(V
Fig. 10. Deck plate stress ug plotted against relative rigidity ratio ; (a) at location B,
(b) at location A

obtain the desired solution conveniently from a computer which requires a

small input data.
38. The simplifieddesign method ofPelikan-Esslinger,when compared
with the proposed analysis, shows that it provides a satisfactory estimateon the
safer side of the maximum stresses in the deck plate and rib. The difference
between the magnitudes of maximum rib stress is small with shorter rib span,
but increases with longer spans thus making the design method increasingly
conservative.

Acknowledgement
39. This Paper is part of theresearchstudies on orthotropic steel deck
bridges undertaken at Sir George Williams University. The financial assist-
ance of the National Research Councilof Canada is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. PFLUGER A. ZumBeulproblem der AnisotropenRechteckplatte. Zng.-Arch.,
1947, 16, 111-120.
2. PFLUGERA. Die Orthotrope Platte mitHohlsteifen. Oslerreichisches Zng.-
Arch., 1955, 9, 199-207.
460

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 ANALYSIS OF O R T H O T R O P I CS T E E LB R I D G ED E C K S
3. TRENKS K. Beitrag zur BerechnungOrthogonalAnisotroperRechteckplatten
Bauingenieur, 1954, 29, 10, 372-377.
4. CORNELIUS W. DieBerechnungderEbenerFlachen-TragwerkemitHilfeder
TheorieOrthogonal-AnisotropenPlatte. Stahlbau, 1952, 21, Feb., 21-24;
April, 60-64.
5. MADERF. W.Berechnung Orthotroper Platten Unter Flachenlasten, Rando-
momentenundRanddurchbiegungen. Stahlbau, 1957,26, May, 131-135.
6. GIENCKE E. Die BerechnungvonDurchlaufenden Fahrbahnplatten. Stahl-
bau, 1958, 12, Sept., 229-237; Nov., 291-298.
7. PELIKAN W. and ESSLINGER M.Die Stahlfahrbahn, Berechnung und Konstruk-
tion. M.A.N. ForschHeft, 1957, 7.
8. GIENCKE E. DieBerechnungvonHohllrippenplatten. Stahlbau, 1960, 29,
Jan., 1-11 ; Feb., 47-59.
9. GIENCKE E. Einfluss der Steifen-Exzentrizitat auf Bieaunaund Stabilitat Ortho-
troper Platten.. Beitrage A& Statikund Stahlbai,ferlags-GMBH, Koln,
1961. 35-61.
10. MASSONNETCh.Plaques et coquescylindriquesorthotropies A nervuresdissy-
metriques. Publs Inr. Ass. Bridge Srruct. Engng, 1957, 17,201-230.
1 1 . CHU K. H. and KRISNAMOORTHY G. Use of orthotropic plaie theory in bridge
design. J . Strucr. Diu. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs, 1962, 88, June, 35-77.
12. CLIFTON R. J. et al. Analysis of orthotropic plate bridges. J . Strucr. Diu. Am.
Soc. Ciu. Engrs, 1963, 89, Oct., 133-171.
13. HEINS C. P.and LOONEY C. G. T. Bridge analysis usingorthotropic plate theory.
J. Struct. Diu. A m . Soc. Ciu. Engrs, 1968, 94, Feb., 565-592.
14. POWELL G. H. and OGDEND. W. Analysisof orthotropic steelplatebridge
decks. J . Struct. Diu. Am. Soc. Ciu. Engrs, 1969, 95, May, 909-922.
15. TROITSKY M. S. and AZADA. K. Bending and torsion in orthotropic deck box
girder. J. Struct. Diu. Am. Soc. Ciu. Engrs, 1972, 98, Sept., 1987-2003.
16. GLOCKNER G. P. et al. Study of the behaviour of a three-panel orthotropic steel
platedeck. Trans. Engng Inst. Can., 1971, 14, Mar., 1-7.
17. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEELCONSTRUCTION. Design manual for orthotropic
steelplate deck bridges. AISC,NewYork, 1963.
18. TROITSKY M. S . Urthotropic bridge theory and design, 2nd edn. James F. Lincoln
Arc Welding Foundation, Ohio, 1968.
19. TROITSKYM.S . and AZADA.K. Refined analysis of orthotropic steel bridge
decks. Sir George WilliarnsUniv.,Montreal, Canada, 1972, 2.

Conversion factors
Imperial SI
1 in. 25.40 mm
1 ft 0.305 m
1 kip 4.448 kN
1 kip/sq.in. 6.895 kN/m2

461

Downloaded by [ University of Sussex] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.