SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

Design Comparison of Steel Railway Bridge-

International Codes of Practice
Kalpashree S1, Dr D.L. Venkatesh Babu2
1
Post Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, ACS College of Engineering, Bangalore
2
HOD, Civil Department, ACS College of Engineering, Bangalore

Abstract Structural steel may be grouped into the following

Structures made from steel are emerging three categories:
worldwide nowadays due to its high strength, high (1) Carbon steels
weld-ability, high weight and high weight to strength (2) High-strength steels
ratio. That’s the reason its usage are stretching into (3) Heat-treated carbon steels
the bridges section. Constructors make use of several (4) Weathering steel
codes of practice to maintain economy, quality and
safety the best. Many countries of Asia use another Table I
country’s design codes along with their own design to Types of Structural Steel Along with their Properties
aim best quality, safety and economy. It is very Sl.no Structural steel Properties
essential to compare the codal provisions of Indian 1 Carbon steels Components-Mn, Si,
standards and European standards in the design of Cu
railway bridges made of steel. This will enable us to High welding ability
know that whether India or Europe standards are Yield stress-
economical, better quality and safer than compared to 270N/mm2
another. Construction procedures of both countries in 2 High-strength By adding Si, Cu it
design of web, moment check, shear capacity, end steels possess high strength
stiffener, intermediate stiffeners are shown. By Yield strength- 300-
varying the Steel grade, Aspect Ratio (A.R), d/tw (web 390N/mm2
slenderness ratio) total steel (in tonnes) used in girder
3 Heat-treated
is taken. Also the variation of steel grades, A.R, d/tw
carbon steels
along with steel weight and deflection are shown for
4 Weathering steel Possess corrosion
deriving better results
resistance and can be
left unpainted
Keywords- Steel railway bridge, design, comparison,
web slenderness ratio, deflection, aspect ratio, weight
of steel A. Actions and Nature of Rail Traffic Loads
Both Indian (IRS) and European codes (EN
I. INTRODUCTION 1991-2) consider following loads due to normal
railway operations for their designs
Steels possess high ductility, strength, weld
 Dynamic effects
ability and strength to weight ratio. Due to more
 Vertical loading for earthworks
efficient and economy it has become a necessary
 Vertical loading
choice for bridges having long spans such as truss
 Centrifugal forces
bridges, plate girder bridges and box type girder
 Nosing forces
bridges. Without affecting the strength of sections,
 Traction & braking forces
amount of steel has to be reduced as cost of steel is
 Combined response of a structure and track
rising in high rate. In order to achieve better economic
to variable actions
sections various optimization techniques are used.
 Aerodynamic effects from passing trains
Composition of Structural Steel
 Actions due to overhead line equipment &
(1) Iron
other railway infrastructure and equipment
(2) A very small amount of carbon and manganese
Few other loads or stresses by other sources are:
(3) Impurities like sulphur and phosphorous, that
 Centrifugal forces on a horizontally curved
cannot be fully removed from the ore
bridge
(4) Copper, silicon, nickel, chromium, molybdenum,
 Accidental load due to skidding or collision
vanadium, columbium and zirconium are few alloys
with parapet
added in very small quantities to improve the
 Creep and Shrinkage of concrete
properties of the finished product
 Snow load on bridge deck, cables, etc.
As carbon content in steel increases, strength also
 Friction at, or shearing resistance of, bearings
increases, but reduction in ductility and weld ability is
 Earth pressure on retaining structures
observed. Sulphur and phosphorus have undesirable
 Stream flow pressure, floating ice, buoyancy
effects and hence their maximum amount is controlled.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 59

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

 Earthquake or ground movement due to other 1) Minimizing Disruption to the operational

causes Railway:
 Settlement of supports Minimizing disruption to the railway is one
 Impact from shipping. of the key criteria to be understood by the designer in
The three basic parameters which determines the developing a successful solution. Due to the nature of
form of construction of a railway bridge: railway, access on or near the railway is restricted and
 Available construction depth generally personnel or operations that can lead to
 Span and geometric configuration objects coming within a horizontal distance of 3m of
 Limitation imposed by substructure the nearest operational rail can only be undertaken
during closures of the railway, called possessions.
B. Functional Requirements Even work outside the 3m limit (such as preparatory
There are two key functional requirements for works) may be subject to speed restrictions being
a bridge carrying railway: placed on the line and this clearly is another disruption
 Provision of satisfactory support to the to railway operations.
railway traffic and infrastructure throughout The level of disruption that would be acceptable on
the life of a bridge. the railway line(s) that would be affected by the works
 Provision of adequate clearances between has to be done prior to the commencing the design of a
the structure and the traffic on and beneath new project.
the bridge Two main categories of disruption-
First requirement can be expressed in terms  Restrictions to speed
of requirements for-  Possessions
 Strength & Fatigue endurance
 Limiting the bridge deformation Speed Restriction
 Robustness A temporary speed restriction (TSR) has to
 Durability imposed if any works affect the increase risk of
The second requirement is expressed in terms of derailment and affecting the stability of the track.
various “clearance gauges”, defined by railway & Imposition of a TSR is required for the installation of
highway authorities track and ballast on to a newly bridge constructed.
To verify that the requirements continue to be Amount of time available for the track-work
met throughout the life of the structure (i.e., to ensure contractor to lay and bed down the track affects the
on-going serviceability), there is also a need to make duration and severity of the TSR. At a given particular
provision for access to inspect and maintain the time, only a certain level of disruption is permitted on
elements of the structure in a safe and convenient way, railway track.
as in [9].
Possessions
C. Construction Requirements Closure of a section of the railway to normal
The design of railway bridges has always rail traffic is defined as a possession. The availability
required the design engineer to give detailed of possessions is classified as either „Rules of Route‟,
consideration to the possible methods of construction which are those available for the day to day
that might be available at a particular site. This is maintenance of the railway or „Outside Rules of the
considered a fundamental requirement in order to Route‟ (also known as „abnormal‟), which are special
produce a design solution that can be translated into possessions usually of longer duration and booked for
reality within the very short periods usually available specific activities.
for such activities. This is particularly so in case of Rules of Route Possessions, available for
underline bridges because they are required to be regular maintenance of the railway, usually vary
capable of supporting the imposed railway loads by between 4 and 29 hours depending on the lines
the time the structure is ready for reinstatement of the affected. These are generally booked three months in
track. advance. Sometimes it is possible to reduce this
With the introduction of the Construction, booking period by undertaking works on the back of a
Design and Management Regulations in 1995, the possession provided for other work, as long as it does
need for the designer to consider carefully the effect of not adversely affect the works the possession was
his proposals, from a safety point of view, was originally booked for.
formalised. Outside Rules of the Route (abnormal)
When the requirements of the CDM possessions are the ones most commonly used for
regulations are considered together with the client‟s bridgeworks because they generally offer a longer
operational requirements, it becomes obvious that duration for construction activity. These possessions
knowledge of methods of construction, and the are usually booked up to two years in advance and are
stability of each, play an important part in selecting commonly up to two days duration or, in exceptional
the appropriate design solution for particular site. circumstances (such as over periods with public
holidays), longer. Occasionally the abnormal

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 60

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

possession duration for the main bridge works will superstructure, erection of a new steel railway bridge
have been agreed in advance of the design involves following activities
commencing, thus representing a constraint on the  Crane lifting
solution to be designed.  Rolling / Sliding
Because of the importance of handing back  Transporting
the possessions on time for train operations to
recommence, designer needs to produce a viable 1) Crane Lifting:
scheme that can be constructed within the available By use of one or more cranes it is the most
possession period, during any reasonably foreseeable commonly used method, either piecemeal or in a
inclement weather and with consideration given to the single lift. Actual amount of time for erection depends
robustness of every detail. Specifying that all on overall size & type of structure, particularly on
components are trial erected, and ensuring there are type of connections to be made & on type of crane to
adequate tolerances in the design for fit up, will be used.
significantly help to achieve it. The cranes are usually road-mobile but can
also be either rail-mounted or on a floating vessel.
D. General Site Constraints Developments in both road mobile and rail-mounted
For most structures, it is necessary to cranes have significantly increased the size of
understand the impact of site constraints before elements that can be installed.
developing the design solution, as these factors can Before the final selection of carnage as the
dictate the method of erection and the form of erection method, consideration should also be given to
structure. the following:
 Access to site for crane and bridge elements
1) Site Access  Overhead power lines
This is the single most important  Overhead electrification equipment
consideration because access by road to the bridge site  Underground services
is not always available, particularly if bridge spans  Exposure to wind or flooding
over an obstruction other than a road (e.g. a canal,  Available possession time
river, or flood plain). In such cases careful thought  Availability and locality of back up plant,
needs to be given to researching the types and quality spares and fitters
of access that might be arranged to enable the
particular design solution being considered. 2) Sliding/ Rolling:
The quality of site access will determine the Sliding and Rolling are 2 different processes.
type and size of bridge elements (and the type and size Sliding a structure on low friction surfaces.
of plant) that can be brought to site. Particular care Phosphor/bronze or PTFE sledge on stainless steel
needs to be taken to make sure that the load carrying used in combinations making large number of systems
capacity of any bridges supporting the access road are together. From minimum 5% to a maximum of 12%
adequate for the weight of plant and bridge elements co-efficient at breakout is likely to vary. But this
being considered. reduces to 2% and 8% during sliding.
Rolling is made on ball bearings or on
2) Available Working Place proprietary rollers. The co-efficient of friction for a
Many rail sites are in heavily built up areas 75mm diameter steel balls for ball bearings has 10% at
and often buildings have been erected adjacent to the breakout and 2.5% at once rolling .Whereas in case of
railway after the line was constructed. These may proprietary rollers, 2.5% at both cases
preclude various methods of erection and significantly Possible to use sliding/rolling to remove existing
constrain others. bridge so that it can be safely demolished without
affecting critical items of work.
3) Services
Services include all statutory undertakers 3) Transporting:
plant, from sewers and fibre optic telecommunications This is a relatively recent technique for
cables buried in the road through to overload power moving railway bridges. It uses Self Propelled Lifting
lines. As part of initial option development, the Vehicles (SPLVs), to lift heavy assembled bridge
location of utilities services need to be confirmed and from temporary works at near-by sites & transport it to
their impact on the proposed scheme identified. This its final position. This method is more expensive than
will need to cover the viability of any diversionary other methods. This is particularly suited to bridges
works together with an order of costs. over highways or presence of OHE (Over Head
Electrification).
E. Bridge Erection Methods
Depending on whether it is a completely new F. Recent Developments
structure or the reconstruction of an existing There has been a higher requirements of steel
in off-shore structures because of low temperature,

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 61

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

high tides and greater water depths. By adding alloys • Accidental loading
such as Va, Ni, Cu, Mu to high strength Ca-Mn steel, • Loads due to wind effects
strength up to 500N/mm2 are reached. To attain high • Loads due to temperature effects
ductility, high weld ability and good notch toughness
properties quenching-tempering to be done having 1) Dead Load:
strength of 700N/mm2 Structural elements load are considered as
dead weight. It is the product of material densities and
G. Objectives size of material selected.
Following are the objectives kept in mind
while designing the bridge - 2) Superimposed Dead Load:
 To determine remaining fatigue life of the Parapet wall, walkways, balconies, water
existing bridge proofing layer, ballast, etc., are superimposed dead
 Total deflection bridge undergoes by varying load. Even the superimposed dead loads are calculated
the web slenderness ratio, steel grades and in same way as that of dead load. Usually partial
aspect ratio factors applied to SDL are larger than those applied to
 Total weight of steel the DL since there may be less control over extent of
 To determine ultimate strength items making up the SDL
Allowance should be made for increased
ballast depth where the deck is sloped for drainage and
II. DESIGN PROCEDURES so the depth is usually taken to the top of sleepers.

A. General 3) Track Weights (TW):

Entire bridge and its components designing- To avoid „double-counting‟, track weight
basic form of bridge selection, aligning its are often coated as „extra over‟ values (i.e. the weight
components, elements sizing,etc.,the three basic of the sleepers, rails, etc.) minus (the weight of the
endurances required for the adequacy of structural displaced ballast).
performance are- deformation, strength and fatigue.
All these factors have high effect on railway bridges. 4) Railway Live Loading (RL):
Hence, prior to the beginning of the bridge design all Primary live load and secondary live load
three has to be taken into the account. are two types of railway live loading. Weights of
Primarily, the site details, topography details, vertical loads are primary live loads. Horizontal loads
geographical details, soil profile, relevant codes, and are considered as the secondary loads. Type RL
much more are to be collected. Only after having all loading deals with passenger rapid transit railway
these details principal elements sizes, construction system, SW/0 deals with alternative loading, and type
form can then be selected. RU Loading deals with nominal loading in bridges
Load effects such as forces, moments and carrying mainline traffic.
displacements are determined after checking of initial
selection and global analysis. 5) RU and SW/O Load Models:
When applied to a simple supported beam
B. Basis for Design would produce load effects approximately equal to or
Design loads are products of load factors and slightly in excess of those that would be derived if the
nominal loads, as per BS 5400 static weight of trains are applied, simplified model
i.e., D.L = γFl . N.L Type SW/0 loading is a special loading that only
where, DL= Design loads needs to be applied to continuous bridges, where the
γfl=load factors RU model does not give the worst loading effects at
NL= Nominal loads the intermediate supports. The load model should be
The obtained DL are used to calculate curtailed if it produces a more onerous effect.
displacements, BM, SF and these inturn used to
determine resultant design load effects. 6) Secondary Live Loads (SLL):
Expression for structural adequacy is, Change in direction, speed of train that
Rd ≥ Ld causes primary loading causes secondary live loads.
Rd = design resistance Three categories- longitudinal, centrifugal and nosing
Ld= design load effects effects

C. Types of Loads 7) Centrifugal Loading:

Following are the loads to be taken in to The centrifugal load due to a mass travelling
account- around a curve at speed is easily calculated.
• Dead Load Fc = [P (vt + 10)2 x f] / 127r
• Superimposed dead loads Where, P = static load
• Railway Live Loading Vt = train speed (kmph)

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 62

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

r= radius of curvature in m moment df= depth of flange

f= reduction factor that recognizes that train travelling For semi plastic
in excess of 120kmph will be lighter (lower mass) and section
thus the centrifugal force is less. Flange breadth ,bf ≤
13.6 df
8) Nosing:
Lateral oscillation of the train on the track 3. Moment Moment capacity
also gives rise to lateral forces. the dynamic wheel / capacity Mc =fy*Af*hs
rail interaction force from measurements of forces on M-maximum moment fy=Yield strength
rails should be applied on both straight and curved Mdesign =Ze*fy/ɣmo Af=Area of flange
track. Ze= Section modulus hf=Centre to centre
ɣmo- Material factor distance between flanges
9) Longitudinal Loads:
Forces due to traction and breaking both acts 4. Shear Check for serviceability d/t
along the rails. With continuous welded tracks, some buckling <t
of the force is transmitted beyond the bridge. Traction Stiffener Check for flange buckling
and braking differ in that there are usually only a spacing/depth ≥1 in to the web
small number of driving axles, but wheels are braked Ks Thickness, t ≥ (d/294)*√
all along the train. For long loaded lengths, the =5.15+4/(stiffener/de (Pyf/250)
braking loads are therefore significantly higher than pth)² qe(a/d >1) -
the traction loads. Shear stress for [1.0=0.75/(a/d)²][1000/(d/t
Elastically critical, )]²
10) Wheel Loads and Axle Loads Distribution: τcr = KΠ²E/(12*(1- λw -√[0.6*(fyw/ɣm)/qe] >
The railway loading may be applied along μ²)*(d/tw)²) (a/d)
the lines of the rails which are usually at 1.5m centres, Non dimensionless qcr =qe fv =FVA/d*t
for determining bending moments in transversely slenderness, λ
spanning elements. RL loading should be shared w=√(fyw/√3*τcr) λw >
56%:44% and RU loading has to be shared equally 1.2
between two rails. shear stress τb
=fyw/(√3*1.83²)
11) Loads Due to Accidents: Shear force
Impact of a vehicle collision or from Vn=Vcr=Av*τb > V
derailment of train causes Accidental loading.
5. Web local υt=1.5qcr/√(1+(a/d)²,yb=√
III.INDIAN AND EUROPEAN STANDARDS capacity (Pyw²-3qcr²+υ²)–υt
DESIGN PROCEDURES COMPARISON Clause8.7.4 Local qb=qcr+(yb/2[a/d +
capacity, √(1+(a/d)²)]
fw end panel is safe if qb >fv
Following table gives a comparison made =(b1+n2)*tw*fyw/ɣ Resisting shear force,
between the design procedures using Indian standards mo Vres=H/2 Av=t*a
and European standards for calculating dimensions, If fw<Fv end Pv=0.6*Pyw*Av
design checks, design of end stiffeners, and design of stiffeners should be End panel is safe if Rtf<Pv
intermediate stiffeners, as in [8]. provided ,
Mres= H*d/10
Table II I=(1/12)*t*a³ M= I*Py/y
Dimensions Comparison of International standards If Mres > M end panel is
Indian Standard (IS European Standard (BS safe
800:2007) EN 1993)
1. Web depth Web depth 6. End Fm=Mres/a,
D/L (depth/span)= Depth / span =0.0667 stiffener Compression in total, Fc=
0.10 to 0.0667 Minimum thickness= 10 to Effective length on Fb+Fm
D=(Mk/fy)1/3 20 one side – 14tf Area of stiffener –
K= d/tw , Area of buckling (0.8*Fc/Pys)
tw=web thickness resistance A Pc=(σc*Ae/ λ m) >Fc
Moment of Pcrip =(b1+n2)*t *pyw ,
2. Design of Flange design resistance Ix r FA=Fc- Pcrip
Flange Af =Mmax/d*fy =√(I/A) , PA=Pys*A PA> FA
Flange area, Af ≥ fy=Yield strength of slenderness ratio λ
M*1.1/(fy*d) material =KL/r
M=maximum bf=0.3*df fcd – from IS 800

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 63

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

Table 9c  Standard of loading considered for the design

Bearing resistance – of proposed structure is 25Tons-2008
fcd * A > Fv  Steel ladders have been provided on the
Bearing strength of abutment and piers to get down to the top of
stiffener fpsd – the bed block
Aq*fy*q/0.8 λ mo  Foundation pressure developed for the
should be greater abutment max, 36.70 T/Sq.m
than shear load  Minimum grade of concrete M25
 The load testing of the open web girder has
7. Intermediat Intermediate stiffener been carried out and the deflection found
e stiffener If a≥d√2Is≥0.75dt³ within permissible limits.
Is =(1.5 d³t³/c²) If a<d√2Is≥0.75dt³/a³  Fabrications are done at Jaibalpur
Vbuckling=V-Vcr/ϒm0 Fq=V-Vs  Camber has been provided in order to avoid
Resistance for Rres=σc*A/1.15 negative deflection
buckling =fcd * A Rres≤ 13.7tsɛ
B. Specifications
 S.W.R railway standard specifications for all
materials and works of 2008
IV. OPEN WEB GIRDER BRIDGE  I.R.S concrete bridge code 1997(REVD)
including latest correction
Ministry of state for railways K.H.  I.R.S bridge substructure and foundation
Muniyappa who laid the foundation stone for the two code 2004 (REVD)
bridges on May 28, 2008 had given his assurance that
work could be complete by March 2011. It‟s part of Table III : Grades of Concrete and Aggregate sizes
the on-going track building work between the two Used for Different Components
cities, executed to a cost of Rs.497crores. The project NO Description of Grade Aggregate*
has been undertaken on a cost – sharing basis with the component
state government agreeing to contribute 2/3rd 1 RCC bed block , M35 20
Rs.231crore and the railways chipping in with the Pedestals, Dirt wall
balance amount of Rs.166crore. 2 RCC Abutments and M30 20
New bridge will be 13m wide Foundation
Cauvery North Bridge will be 325m long whereas 3 Coping M30 20
Cauvery south bridge 275m long *mm maximum size graded hard stone aggregate
Cost of both bridges – around 60crores of approved quality

1) Grade for Reinforcement Steel:

HYSD /TMT/ BARS, Fe 500 to IS:1786

2) Bearings:
 Rocker Roller Bearings for open web girder
 Elastomeric Bearings for plate girder

3) Weep holes:
Weep holes and back filling are provided as per
addendum and correction slip no. 3 dated 30-5-1989
of substructure code

4) Bed Block:
 Reinforced cement concrete M30 grade using
20mm max size
 Graded hard stone aggregate of approved
quality

Figure 1: Both Old Bridge and the Proposed New 5) Coping:

Bridge in Sri Rangapatna  Cement concrete M30 grade using 20mm max
size
A. General  Graded hard stone aggregate of approved
 Safe bearing Capacity of soil is 180T/m² at quality
the depth of average 3m from EGL

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 64

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

C. Track details 5 Cross girder depth 900 mm

Depth of construction 2500 mm
Table IV Track Details Used in Project
Description
Loading 25T
Alignment Straight
Grade Level
Pro. Rail level 682.521
Pro. Formation level 681.783
Span 37.7m

D. Hydraulic Particulars

Table V : Required and Provided Dimensions for

Hydraulic Particulars
Description Required Provided
Catchment area - - Figure 2: Two Lane Steel Railway Bridge
Waterway 1020 Sq.m 1967.746 Sq.m
Vertical 1500 mm 3434 mm
clearance
Free board 1000 mm 3846 mm
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Scour depth
A. Steel grade effects on weight and deflection

Table VI :Safe Bearing Capacity and Foundation 1) Design results for Indian Standards:
Pressures Developed for Abutments and Piers
Foundation Pressure Developed Safe Bearing Table IX : Effect of Grade of Steel as per Indian
For abutments For piers Capacity Standards
36.70 T/sq.m 57.706 T/Sq.m 130 T/Sq.m Steel Spa Web Permissi Deflecti Weight
n depth( ble on (δ), (tons)
(L), D), m Limit m
Table VII : Depth of Construction Chosen for North m L/600, m
Cauvery Project
E450 60 2.5 0.1 0.09931 78.18
Sl.no Description Depth E410 60 2.5 0.1 0.09494 81.25
1 Rail 52kg 172 mm E250 60 2.5 0.1 0.08865 86.24
2 Thickness of GRP 10 mm E450 50 2.5 0.08333 0.07659 40.01
E410 50 2.5 0.08333 0.07141 42.17
3 Thickness of canted 18 mm
E250 50 2.5 0.08333 0.06719 44.21
bearing plate
E450 40 2.5 0.06666 0.05312 19.93
4 Height of steel channel 150 mm E410 40 2.5 0.06666 0.04952 20.77
sleeper E250 40 2.5 0.06666 0.03322 26.87
5 Thickness of rubber pad 25 mm
6 Thickness of stringer 720 mm
7 Bottom of stringer to 85 mm
bottom of cross girder
Depth of construction 2500 mm

Table VIII : Depth of Construction Chosen for South

Cauvery Project
Sl.no Description Depth
1 Rail 52kg 172 mm
2 Thickness of GRP 10 mm
3 Thickness of canted bearing 18 mm
plate
4 Depth from steel channel 80 mm
sleeper top to top of cross
girder

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 65

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

250
300

200
250

150 200
500Mpa S460
100 150
450Mpa S420

50 S235
100

0 50
40 50 60
0
Figure 3: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Span
Length Along X-Axis for Different Steel Grades
40 50 60
Figure 5: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Span
180 Length Along X-Axis for Different Steel Grades
160
140
120
100 450Mpa
80 500Mpa
60
40
20
0
40 50 60
Figure 4: Plot Of Weight Along Y-Axis Against Span
Length Along X-Axis for Different Steel Grades

2) Design results for European Standards: Figure 6: Plot of Weight Along Y-Axis Against Span
Length Along X-Axis for Different Steel Grades
Table X : Effect of Grade of Steel as per Euro Standards
Gra Bridg Dep L/600 Δ W B. Panel Aspect Ratio v/s Weight and Deflection
de e th (Permis (deflect (Wei By varying the aspect ratio (c/d) of web panel
of Span of sible ion), m ght) from 0.8 to 1.6, the railway bridge plate girders were
Stee (L), m web limit), ,Tons modelled. By keeping the depth of web as constant,
l (D), m the aspect ratio was determined by varying the
m width(c) of the web panel. Also the effect of aspect
460 60 2.5 0.1 0.0979 54.53 ratio on deflection and weight of the panel was
compared by varying the grade of steel. The
420 60 2.5 0.1 0.0918 55.35 comparison of the effect of aspect ratio on deflection
235 60 2.5 0.1 0.0772 59.44 and weight for various grades of steel is shown in
460 50 2.5 0.0833 0.0797 38.84 table below.
420 50 2.5 0.0833 0.0749 40.62
235 50 2.5 0.0833 0.0664 42.73 1) Design Results for Indian Standards:
460 40 2.5 0.0666 0.0489 17.21 Table XI : Effect of Variation of Aspect Ratio on Total
420 40 2.5 0.0666 0.0459 17.81 Deflection and Weight
235 40 2.5 0.0666 0.0322 19.33 Grade Bridge Depth Panel L/600 Δ W
of Span(L of aspect (Permi (Deflection (weig
Steel ), m web(D) ratio ssible ), m ht),ton
.m limit), s
m

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 66

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

E250 60 2.5 1.6 0.1 0.1151 64.89 m limit), m

E250 60 2.5 1.4 0.1 0.1075 65.12 S235 60 2.5 1.6 0.1 0.1071 57.8
E250 60 2.5 1.2 0.1 0.09931 65.48 9
E250 60 2.5 1.0 0.1 0.09494 65.82 S235 60 2.5 1.4 0.1 0.0994 58.1
E250 60 2.5 0.8 0.1 0.08865 66.24 5 2
E250 50 2.5 1.6 0.0833 0.08958 41.98 S235 60 2.5 1.2 0.1 0.0913 58.4
E250 50 2.5 1.4 0.0833 0.08443 42.32 1 8
E250 50 2.5 1.2 0.0833 0.07859 42.81 S235 60 2.5 1.0 0.1 0.0839 58.8
E250 50 2.5 1.0 0.0833 0.07221 43.67 4 2
E250 50 2.5 0.8 0.0833 0.06719 44.21 S235 60 2.5 0.8 0.1 0.0.07 59.2
E250 40 2.5 1.6 0.0666 0.05568 25.07 72 4
E250 40 2.5 1.4 0.0666 0.04893 25.35 S235 50 2.5 1.6 0.0833 0.0885 39.9
E250 40 2.5 1.2 0.0666 0.04267 25.96 8 8
E250 40 2.5 1.0 0.0666 0.03793 26.49 S235 50 2.5 1.4 0.0833 0.0835 40.3
E250 40 2.5 0.8 0.0666 0.03321 26.87 9 2
S235 50 2.5 1.2 0.0833 0.0778 40.8
3 1
S235 50 2.5 1.0 0.0833 0.0715 41.6
300 1 7
S235 50 2.5 0.8 0.0833 0.0669 42.7
1 3
250 S235 40 2.5 1.6 0.0666 0.0543 18.0
9 7
200 S235 40 2.5 1.4 0.0666 0.0475 18.3
8 5
60m span S235 40 2.5 1.2 0.0666 0.0414 18.9
150
50m span 3 6
S235 40 2.5 1.0 0.0666 0.0368 19.4
100 40m span 7 9
S235 40 2.5 0.8 0.0666 0.0322 19.3
50 7 3

0 300
0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 250

Figure 7: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Panel 200

Aspect Ratio Along X-Axis for 250Mpa
60m span
150
50m span
100 40m span

50

0
0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

Figure 9: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Panel

Aspect Ratio Along X-Axis for S235

Figure 8: Plot of Weight Along Y-Axis Against Panel

Aspect Ratio Along X-Axis for 250Mpa

2) Design results for European standards:

Table XII : Effect of Variation of Aspect Ratio on Total
Deflection and Weight
Grade Bridge Depth Panel L/600 Δ W
of Span(L) of aspect (Permiss (deflecti (weigh
Steel , m web(D), ratio ible on), m t),tons

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 67

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

140
70
120 250Mpa
60
100
50
80 60m span 410Mpa
40
60 50m span
30 450Mpa
40 40m span
20
20 10 Deflection
limit
0 0
0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 120 140 160 180

Figure 10: Plot of Weight Along Y-Axis Against Panel Figure 11: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Web
Aspect Ratio Along X-Axis for S235 Slenderness Ratio Along X-Axis

C. Web Slenderness Ratio v/s Deflection and Weight 2) Design results of European standards:
3)
Variation of thickness of web from 14mm to Table XIV : Effect of Slenderness Ratio on Total
20mm is achieved by varying the web slenderness Deflection and Weight
ratio (d/tw), by keeping depth as constant. The varying Grade Bridg Depth Slend L/600 Deflect Weight
slenderness ratio is monitored to get variation in total of e of erness (Permissi ion(δ), (tons)
deflection and total weight. Also for different grades Steel Span( web( ratio, ble mm
of steel of web, calculations are done. Results L),m D),m (d/tw) limit),m
tabulated below 460 50 2.5 178 0.0833 99.74 47.14
460 50 2.5 156 0.0833 98.62 49.68
1) Design Results of Indian Standards: 460 50 2.5 138 0.0833 97.2 51.99
Table XIII : Effect of Slenderness Ratio on Total 460 50 2.5 125 0.0833 94.28 56.89
Deflection and Weight 420 50 2.5 178 0.0833 94.06 49.84
Grade Bridg Depth Slen L/600 Deflecti Weigh 420 50 2.5 156 0.0833 93.15 51.38
of e of dern (Permiss on(δ), t 420 50 2.5 138 0.0833 91.63 56.24
Steel Span( web(D ess ible mm (tons) 420 50 2.5 125 0.0833 87.86 58.06
L),m ),m ratio limit),m
, 235 50 2.5 178 0.0833 90.67 50.01
(d/tw 235 50 2.5 156 0.0833 85.45 53.18
) 235 50 2.5 138 0.0833 87.00 58.45
450 50 2.5 178 0.0833 50.78 18.07 235 50 2.5 125 0.0833 83.10 61.2
450 50 2.5 156 0.0833 48.64 18.07
450 50 2.5 138 0.0833 47.32 18.07
450 50 2.5 125 0.0833 45.18 18.07 Figure 12: Plot of Deflection Along Y-Axis Against Web
Slenderness Ratio Along X-Axis
410 50 2.5 178 0.0833 47.16 20.74
410 50 2.5 156 0.0833 45.23 20.74
410 50 2.5 138 0.0833 44.2 20.74 100
410 50 2.5 125 0.0833 42.54 20.74
250 50 2.5 178 0.0833 33.33 25.88
90
250 50 2.5 256 0.0833 31.63 25.88 80 S235
250 50 2.5 138 0.0833 30.85 25.88 70
250 50 2.5 125 0.0833 29.87 25.88
60 S420
50
40 S460
30
20
Deflection
10 limit
0
120 140 160 180

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 68

 SSRG International Journal of Civil Engineering ( SSRG – IJCE ) – Volume 4 Issue 6 – June 2017

VI. CONCLUSIONS 6. As per Indian and European design standard

By comparing the code provisions as per results, stiffener spacing have much impact on
Indian and European standards in the design of steel the deflection of a plate girder bridge
railway bridge, following conclusions were derived REFERENCES
from design results:
[1] British Standard BS 5400: Part 3: 2000: Code of Practice for
Design of Steel Bridges. British Standards Institution, London.
1. According to the Indian standards design, the [2] BS EN 1991-2:2003 Eurocode 1 – Actions on structures.
railway bridge of constant span and depth Traffic loads on bridges BSI, 2003
shows that as the grade of steel increases the [3] ENV-1993-1-5, (1992), Eurocode 3:Design of Steel
Structures, Part 5
total deflection of the girder increases but the [4] ENV-1993-1-1, (1992), Eurocode 3:Design of Steel
total weight decreases. Structures, Part 1.1, General Rules and rules for Buildings,
2. European standard design depicted that, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels
deflection increases and weight decreases as [5] F. Faluyi , and C. Arum, (2012). “Design Optimization of
Plate Girder Using Generalized Reduced Gradient and
grade of steel increases. Constrained Artificial Bee Colony Algorithms”, International
3. The maximum deflections obtained for a 60m Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering.
span bridge with varying aspect ratio from 0.8 [6] IS 800:1984 (1984). “Indian standard code of practice for
to 1.6 as per Indian standards is more while General Construction in Steel”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi
compared to the European standards. Similar [7] IS 800:2007 (2007). “Indian standard code of practice for
behaviour is observed for 40m and 50m span General Construction in Steel”, Bureau of Indian Standards,
bridge. New Delhi
Increasing the web slenderness ratio from 120- [8] M. Krishnamoorthy, D.Tensing , (2008). “Design of
Compression members based on IS 800-2007 and IS 800-
180, the deflection also increases. 1984- Comparison”, Journal of Information Knowledge and
4. From the results it is clear that the deflection is Research in civil engineering.
inversely proportional to the thickness of the [9] Steel Construction Institute, SCI Publication P318,(2004),
web “Design Guide for Steel Railway Bridges”, Ascot
5. By observing the design results of Indian and
European standards, it is evident that as web
thickness increases deflection reduces.

ISSN: 2348 – 8352 www.internationaljournalssrg.org Page 69