by
8m T. Yen
FHWA/PA 82-012
4. Titl. ond Subtitle s. Repo,t Date
Recommendations for Design of Composite Box Girders July 1982
6. Performin; Oq~onit.ction Code
1 s. Suppf~men'ory Notes
Prepared in cooperation with the Unit~d States Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, from the study "Strength of Rectantular Composite
Box Girders
\6. Abstract
."
,''''~'
,
..,.-
19. Security Clo"if. (of thi. report) 20. Security C105Sif. (of this poge) 21. No. of Poges 22. Price
Unclassified. Unclassified 50
by
B. T. Yen
LEHIGH UNIVERSITY
Office of Research
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
July 1982
Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1
3. RECOMMENDATIONS 8
3.2.2 Commentary 26
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 27
TABLE 28
FIGURES 29
REFERENCES 45
1. INTRODUCTION
sizes of the composite box girders are such that the" deck width usually
-1-
not represent the load carrying capacity (or ultimate strength) of
composite box girders are also expected to be higher than the web
buc~ing strength or the load at· first yielding of a point in the box
(6)
girder. Current design provisions recognize this fact and permits
the use, of rules for plate girders for the design of webs of composite
composite box girders within the elastic range of behavior, and the
-2-
2. REVIEW OF BEHAVIOR OF COMPOSITE BOX GIRDERS
plate to form a steel box girder. (5) By the thin-walled elastic beam
theory,(14) the applied load on the equivalent steel box girder can be
ponents. (see Fig. 1). The box girder bends, twists and·changes its
of these load components gives the total normal and shearing stresses
are below yield stresses and buckling stresses, the analysis is valid
define the geometry of the steel flange plates of composite box girders
so that the resulting stresses in these plates are below the buckling
stresses.
-3-
The results of analysis from this study confirmed the validity
Figure 2 shows the comparison of torsion and shearing stresses from two
deflections with computed values along the span of two composite box
on-set of the tension field action. (8) One web panel of a co~osite
box girder section "buckles" under shear or combination of shear and
· d ers (16,17)
g1r . and·1n t h e test1ng
· 0f ·
compos~te b ox glr
· d ers 0 f th·18
-4-
inclined tensile stress field. This limit does not have any significant
results have been incorporated into design provisions for plate and
box girder webs. (4,6,31,32)
inclined tension field are anchored'by the composite top flange, the
steel bottom flange, the web plates in adjacent panels, and the
transverse stif'feners which form the boundary of the web panel. When
6 show two composite box· girder web panels after testing to failure.
The failure of the flanges accompany the failure of the webs. The
shown as Figs. 7 and 8. Failure of the webs and the composite box
-"':"+-..... .,.
recognize this post web-buckling tension field action ~nd permits its
-5-
utilization through the rules for plate girder webs. (6) The per-
evident· that the tension field action of composite box girder web
the webs and the flanges-. The development of tension field and
the load carrying capacity of the box girder segment. Analysis and
-6-
(a) Under negative bending moment, the buckling of the
box girder.
by flange failure.
-7-
3• RECOMMENDATIONS
girders.
A. AASHTO Specifications(6)
Factor Design
Factor Design
Bridges (32)
Factor Design
-8-
The AASHTO Specifications for plate girders, as implied in the
relevant commentary of Ref. 32, are also recommended for composite box
same design provisions for web plates of plate girders, composite box
girders, and steel box girders. Two sets of provisions are needed for
box girders~
provisions of Task (b) are adopted directly from those of Ref e 32, and
-9~
3.2 Proposed Design Specifications, Allowable Stress Design
F
vcr -
< 0.58 IF y
2 ~ (~f
3 av
)2
where F
vcr is the critical shear buckling stress, as defined
in Art. 1.7;4X (B)(2), and f is the average numerical
av
value of the flexural axial stresses at the opposite
where V
v is vertical shear force and 9 is the angle of
inclination of the web to the vertical.
-10-
(2) Calculation df:C~iti~al Shear Buckling Stress,
F
vcr
web:
O
F , the critical web buckling stress under shear
vcr
stress acting alone, shall be calculated' as a
A
v
= 0 30
•
!?-
t
w
~E
t ~ web thickness
w
O
The values of F are found from equations in
vcr
Table 1.7.YY(B)(2), or from Fig. 1.7.XX.
-11-
(c) At distance D/2 from location of change of
(10 mm).
D
c < .:,' 3.4
< D/2:
Dc -
tw - -IFIE
y
6.8
D
<
D > D/2:
c t
w I Fy IE
where D
c
= distance between neutral axis and compression
flange.
(A) Scope
-12-
shall not exceed the allowable shearing stress,
Fv (in psi).
F
v
0.55 (F +F )
vcr VT
where F
vcr
= critical buckling shear stress, see
F
F T
= -----=-----
VT
2(/1 + a,2'+ a,)'
a, = d /D
0
d
0
= distance- between· transverse stiffeners
F = tension field stress, see Art. 1.7.YY(B)(5)
T
F
vy
< 0.58 I F2 -
y
(!
3
f
av
)2
-13-
as defined in Article 1.7.YY (B)(4)
~ /10.92 F
A = ....:L
v E
tw \ 7T Z /-; k
.v
1<:
v
= 5 +2-2
ct
-14-
TABLE 1.7.YY(B) (2)
0.58 -< Av -
< 1.41 FO = [0.58 0.357 (A - O.S8)1.18]F
vcr v y
O
The critical stresses F for Case (1), compression
ccr
acting alone, and F~cr for Case (2), bending acting alone,
A >1.5: FO IF = 1/A 2
cr y
where
-~
D/t
A - 0.95
r:t-
--L
E k
-15-
The value of k shall be taken as
F 2 F 2 F
vcr ber ccr
+ + = 1
FO ]"0 FO
vcr ~·bcr ccr
FO,
ccr
= critical compressive buckling stress in
the case of pure axial compression acting
Curve (1)
-16-
Fvcr ' Fbcr ' and Fccr are individual (shear, pure
F = 1 - R llF
ber 2 vcr
F
ccr = l+R
2
llF
vcr
where
f
1w
11=-£-
v
f
2w
= axial stress at opposite edge of panel coin-
-17-
:The value of R may be positive or negative, depending
where Fb cr = ~F
vcr ·
2
0.25 £22
w
+ 3Fvcr
-18-
(C) Design Stresses in Web Panel
(10 mm).
D < D/2:
c-
D > D/2:
c
D
c
/tw -< 3w4/~
y
where D
c
= distance between neutral axis and compression
flange.
-19-
under the assumption of linear stress distribution must be
box girder cross section used for design of the flange panel
Compression flange:
l:F 1 Dtw 9
vcr
/j.f
bl
= (1 - f )[(f
1R
- 'f ) +
I 2A f VM cot (...E-)
2
]
VM fc
Tension flange:
l:F 1 Dtw 9
ilf = (1 - vcr) [(f - f ) ---f cot (~)]
b2 f 2R 2 2 Aft VI1 2
VM
Notation is as follows:
divided by Dt
w
= sum of buckling (beam action) shear stress of
L:f
vcr
all webs at box girder cross section under con-
-20-
f and M in accordance with Art. 1.7.YY(B)(4)
VM
£1'£2 = stress in compression or in tension flange,
f
lR
,f
2R
= stress in compression or tension flange
axis.
Afc,A
ft = compression or tension flange area,
re~pectively or equivalent steel area of a
composite flange.
Q
d
= cot -1 (a) = angle of inclination of web panel
diagonal to the horizontal
(A) Scope
-,"_.'"
This article applies to box girder web panels with
-21-
(B) Allowable Shearing Stress
apply:
,
~ = d
0
In
, ,
R = fZw!f 1w
,
~ = f
1w
If v
-22-
where D' = depth 'of subpanel
,
f
1w
= governing axial compressive stress at
panel
, ,
f
Zw
= axial stress coincident with f lw at opposite
edge of subpanel. Compression is designated
equations:
A = 0 8 IL
v • t
t[!f
w'
y
E k
v
*
With K
v
* ,the plate buckling coefficient for combined
-23-
for > 1: ··v
k
* = 5 + 5/a
,2 . ,2)[ f
+ (1.5 + 5.5/a - t
If v + (f /f )2]
v
Ci, t
disregarded.
(C) ·Slenderness,Limitations
requirements:
,
D <
t
< 13.6
_ _ an d tD
~
w I Fy/E W
flange> 2D /5
- c
where Dc = clear distance between neutral axis and
compression flange.
-24-
The horizontal stiffener shall not be placed
Stiffeners
n'n 8.1
nn D
<
t D
w IF7E
y
c
-25
Art. 1.7.YY(E), except that if longitudinal stiffeners
3.2.2 Commentary
not repeated. Articles 1.7.213 (of Ref. 32) for the design of
Ref. 32.
-26-
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
-27-
TABLE 1 SEQUENCE OF STRENGTH DEVELOPMENT
Negative Bending
Positive Bending and Torsion IL and Tors'ion
Failure of Failure of
Concrete Deck Concrete Deck
-28-
. Pb
....
-.Pb
4h
-
--IliIJIItm- 4 h
(T=~ tP~+P~t
"-----.-....
tP/4
.... Pb · ~ Pb
4h
-4h
Torsion Pure Torsion Distortion
-29-
A B
9589mm(377.5") Ll
c z =
9970mm C392.5")L2
ABC
LI 0 t::,. 1:1
(4000) L2 • A •
400
T
KN-m
200 (2000)
(3) (4)
o 10 20 30
TMN/m ~,ksi
(4000) L2 LI
400 a ~
T
KN-m'
200 (2000)
•
(kip - in.)
(~) . (~)
o 10 20 30
T MN/m2 , ksi
-30-
P=80.lkN (IB',k)
I~ ----- Theory
• Test
ct
I . ,P
1191mm
I(7.5")t 3.45MN/m 2
. [_._-----(-~)---- I~o.5kSj)
I I
o 34.5MN/m 2
(+ ) (5 ksi)
Steel
-31-
p
(60") Cf..
o~-~----------------
Partial
Deck
.~
--... ..,
.:.
-32-
Fig. 5 Tension Field in North Web of End Panel L2-CD
Fig. 6 Failed North Web and Flanges of West End Panel L2-CB
-33-
p
(kips)
,600
500
400
L2-CB
300
p
200
~B
~ TI
S N
100
o 0 1 2 3 4 5
Deflection ("in.)
Fig. 7 Load-Deflection Curves) Composite Box Girder Test L2-CB
-34-
P
(kips)
300
250
200
v
..-
_.-.~
V
.
~
/ / -·S • N
• •
/ •/
•
150
./• •/
./ •I
100
II
• • p p
II
••
+n . ~,
50
••
J: J:l s N
f
o 0 1 2 3 4 5
Deflection (in. )
-35-
p p
p
(kips)
JB !
IT
700
Ji I 7*:
j
S N
Ll-CB
600
------.
500
~~.
~~r' .
//.
.
s II
/e •
/'
N
S
•
N
•
I/
••
400 1/
••
/1
if
••
II
••
.. -
300
II
j.ii
200
ff·
••
100
#
1 2 3 4 5
Deflection (in.)
-36-:-"
Fig. 10 Failure of Composite Box Girder LI-CB
-37-
Fig. 11 Deflected Bottom Flange and South
Web of Panel 11 LI-CD
-38-
Fig. 12 Failure at Bottom Flange and South Web,
L2-CD
-39-
0.6
o
Fvcr
---. - ~ WEB THICKNESS tw
O.5~ Fy
o
0.4
0.3
NOTE: THIS SHEAR STREN(iTH CURVE FOR
UNSTIFFENED WEBS ONLY IS BASED
I
.p.-
o
ON SHEAR BUCKLING COEFFICIENT k v =7
I 0.2
0.1
~t w Jf
r.
E
o J 234 5 678 9
F =!SO ksl
F:~3:~~~O) .f:;~~n
(2~O MPo)
/00 220·//3W 200: ~
FIG. 1.7. xx CRITICAL BUCKLING STRESS OF UNSTIFFENED WEB DUE TO SHEAR
ACTING ALONE'
0.6
o
FYer
FLANGE OR LONGIT.
STIFfENER' :1-. t·- t.TRANSvERSE STlff[N£R
F.,
0.5
f: 1
o or 0' I I cr If:Cr 0< .~
o
o<.&~
o'
0.4
0.3
I
~
J--I 0.2
I
0.'
~fF;
Lw JE
o 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 .2 13 .4
'0
"
F't • 50 kSI
(350 MPo)
Ft· 36 ksi
(250 MPa)
50/ ·- I~- ,z:- ~- 2?: - tw
~
t.,
FIG.1..7.y Y (A) CRIT'CAL Bt.)CKLING STRESS DUE TO SHEAR ACTING ALONE
1·°1 fO o
0.9·1 -F-
0
Fer
~: do
~ ~ #V ·
y o ,
0.9
I 0(': do I I ~I I I C
/ /1'--uSE
01
!LJ CURVE@
0.7 I. ·~RFbOCr
(R <"I)
0.6 WEB - PANEL ELEVATION
STRESS DISTRIBUTION
0.3
1
0.2
0.1'
.
If A
(§EE 1.7.xx(C) OR 1.7.yy(CU
J= :~w
f
R =--!!.
f ,w
w
I
~=Rf,w .
~
(",)
I
~
SHEAR STRESS PANEL ELEVATION AXIAL· STRESS
AT A-A AT A-A
)
SUBPA
J
SUBPANEL 2
14 f~wj
~
• Dc
o - LONGIY. STIFfENERS
SUBPANEL 2
SUBPANEL n o~ N.A. SUBPANEL n
I
.~
..r:::--
I
~ TRANSV. STIFFENERS -.5' TENS.
~ ~
FLEXURAL SHEAR
PAN£L ELEVATION STRESSES AT A- A
I
0< :: do , do t lW R:: f~w
o . eX
n
=--=--.
On r::y;- f',w
6. AASHTO
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY BRIDGES, The American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials,
12th Edition, Washington, D. C., 1977.
8. Basler, K.
STRENGTH OF PLATE GIRDERS IN SHEAR, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 87,
ST7, 1961, p. 151.
-45-
REFERENCES (continued)
9. Basler, K.
PLATE GIRDERS UNDER COMBINED BENDING AND SHEAR, Proc.
ASeE, Vol. 87, ST7) 1961, p. 181.
13. Scordelis~ A. C.
ANALYSIS OF SIMPLY ~UPPORTED BOX GIRDER BRIDGES, Report No.
SESM-66-l7, Department of Civil Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley~ CA.-, October 1966.
14. Vlasov, J. Z.
THIN-WALLED ELASTIC BEAMS, The Israel Program for Scientific
Translation, Jerusalem, 1961; Available from the Office of
Technical Service, U. S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
D.C.
-46-
REFERENCES (continued)
2~. Rockey, K. C.
FACTORS INFLUENCING ULTIMATE BEHAVIOR OF PLATE GIRDERS,
Conference on Steel Bridges, June 24-30, 1968. British
Constructional Steelwork Association, Institute' of Civil
Engineers~ London.
24. Fujii, T.
ON AN IMPROVED THEORY FOR DR .. BASLER'S THEORY, Final Report
IABSE 8th Congress, New York, New York, 1968. ~
27. Komatsu, S.
ULTIMATE STRENGT H OF STIFFENED PLATE GIRDERS SUBJECTED TO
SHEAR, IABSE Colloquium on Design of Plate and Box Girders
for Ultimate Strength, London, 1971.
-47-
REFERENCES (continued)
-48-