Guide for Orthotropic

Steel Deck Level 1 Design

FHWA-HIF-22-056 | December 2022

Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE; Washington, DC 20590
Foreword NOTICE
This document is disseminated under
Over the course of many decades and across the globe, orthotropic the sponsorship of the U.S. Department
of Transportation (USDOT) in the
steel deck (OSD) bridges used around the world have proven to
interest of information exchange.
be safe, redundant, efficient, and durable. For this reason, efforts The U.S. Government assumes no
have increased in recent years to inform engineers in the United liability for the use of the information
States about successful OSD applications to encourage broader contained in this document.
implementation of them. However, OSD applications in the United The U.S. Government does not endorse
States have typically had higher relative costs associated with the products, manufacturers, or outside
entities. Trademarks, names, or logos
complex analytical procedures and labor intensive fabrication design
appear in this report only because
details usually employed. they are considered essential to the
In 2012, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published the objective of the document. They are
included for informational purposes
Manual for Design, Construction, and Maintenance of Orthotropic only and are not intended to reflect a
Steel Deck Bridges (Connor et al. 2012), which outlined three levels preference, approval, or endorsement
of design. In this Manual, each level is accompanied by a varying of any one product or entity.
level of complexity, with Level 3 being the most complex and Level
NON-BINDING CONTENTS
1 being the least complex. Level 1 design is “by little or no structural
Except for the statutes and
analysis, but by selection of details that are verified to have adequate regulations cited, the contents of
resistance by experimental testing (new or previous)” and is effectively this document do not have the force
proven through full-scale qualification testing or historical in-service and effect of law and are not meant
performance. This Design Guide simplifies the level of complexity to bind the public in any way. This
document is intended only to provide
suggested to design, fabricate, and construct OSD bridges through clarity to the public regarding existing
Level 1 design. requirements under the law or
agency policies. While this document
This Design Guide provides general information and details for
contains nonbinding technical
typical OSD bridges with either an open- or closed-rib system that information, you must comply with
satisfy American Association of State and Highway Transportation the applicable statutes or regulations.
Officials (AASHTO) Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Bridge Design Specifications (AASHTO 2017)1. Also included is
STATEMENT
information on the details of the deck plate, wearing surface, and
The Federal Highway Administration
floorbeam/diaphragm of an OSD. The details presented are the result (FHWA) provides high-quality
of an extensive review of in-service bridges that have a proven record information to serve Government,
of successful performance. Short summaries of the performance of industry, and the public in a manner
several in-service bridges are provided to further emphasize key that promotes public understanding.
Standards and policies are used to
points and to provide additional information to engineers, designers, ensure and maximize the quality,
owners, and fabricators. objectivity, utility, and integrity of its
information. The FHWA periodically
Joseph L. Hartmann, PhD, PE
reviews quality issues and adjusts its
Director, Office of Bridge and Structures programs and processes to ensure
Office of Infrastructure continuous quality improvement.
Federal Highway Administration

COVER IMAGE CREDIT

Cover image stylized from original taken
1. AASHTO. 2017. AASHTO LRFD-8. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge
Design Specifications. 8th Ed. (2017). American Association of State Highway and Transportation by Justin Dahlberg, Bridge Engineering
Officials, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(1)(v).) Center at Iowa State University
 Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

FHWA-HIF-22-056

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design December 2022

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Justin Dahlberg, Duncan Paterson, Thomas Murphy, Ronald Medlock,
Terry Logan, Roy Sougata, and Frank Artmont

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No.

Bridge Engineering Center
Iowa State University
2711 South Loop Drive, Suite 4700 11. Contract or Grant No.
Ames, IA 50010-8664 693JJ319D000020

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Office of Bridge Technology Guide
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
Washington, DC 20590

15. Supplementary Notes

The FHWA Task Order Contracting Officer’s Representative was Dayi Wang.

16. Abstract
This Guide provides bridge engineers and owners with general information and typical details to help standardize orthotropic steel
deck (OSD) bridge design/fabrication to make it more competitive. This document does not intend to set a national standard but
to help inform the effort through reduced parametric variations.
OSD bridges can be either closed- or open-rib systems, and this Guide begins with background information regarding OSD
bridge design.
General considerations with respect to OSD bridges are discussed, followed by specific instructions for closed- and open-rib
systems including rib geometry, size, and fabrication methods. Suggestions for deck plate selection are provided followed by a
discussion of wearing surface types and selection considerations. Lastly, suggestions for floorbeam/diaphragm design are provided.
Throughout the document, short summaries on the performance of several in-service OSD bridges are provided.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

bridge deck floorbeams—bridge deck plates—bridge wearing surfaces— No restrictions.
closed-rib bridge decks—open-rib bridge decks—orthotropic steel decks

19. Security Classification 20. Security Classification 21. No. of Pages 22. Price
(of this report) (of this page) 31 NA
Unclassified. Unclassified.

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Federal Highway Administration

Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck

Level 1 Design
December 2022
iv Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design
Contents

1. INTRODUCTION 1
Glossary of Terms 2
Illustrative Glossary 2

2. “BIG PICTURE” CONSIDERATIONS 4

Key Points 4

3. CLOSED-RIB SYSTEM 6
Key Points 6
Advantages 6
Challenges 6
Weld Considerations 6
Cut-Out at Floorbeam 7
Closed-Rib Geometry 7
Closed-Rib Details 8
Danziger Bridge – Louisiana 10

4. OPEN-RIB SYSTEM 11
Key Points 11
Advantages 11
Challenges 11
Open-Rib Geometry  11
Open-Rib Details 12
San Mateo-Hayward Bridge – California 14

5. DECK PLATE 15
Key Points 15
Deck Splice Details 17
Ben Franklin Bridge – New Jersey/Pennsylvania 19

6. WEARING SURFACE 20
Key Points 20
Poplar Street Bridge – Missouri 22

7. FLOORBEAM 23
Key Points 23
Floorbeam/Diaphragm Details 23

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 24

REFERENCES 25

Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design v

Figures Tables
Figure 1. OSD plan view 3 Table 1. Typical closed-rib
detail specifications 8
Figure 2. Detailed Section A-A view for Figure 1 OSD plan view with rib options 3
Table 2. Typical open-rib detail
Figure 3. Typical closed-rib detail 8
specifications 12
Figure 4. Closed rib to floorbeam detail 8
Figure 5. Closed rib to deck connection detail 9
Figure 6. Closed-rib field splice detail 9
Figure 7. Closed-rib field splice section view detail 9
Figure 8. Closed-rib field splice handhole detail 9
Figure 9. The Danziger Bridge in New Orleans 10
Figure 10. Danziger Bridge plan detail 10
Figure 11. Danziger Bridge typical trapezoidal rib detail 10
Figure 12. Typical open-rib detail 12
Figure 13. Open rib to floorbeam detail 12
Figure 14. Open rib to deck weld detail 13
Figure 15. Open-rib field splice detail 13
Figure 16. San Mateo-Hayward Bridge 14
Figure 17. Underside of San Mateo-Hayward Bridge deck 14
Figure 18. Detail of rib to diaphragm connection 14
Figure 19. Splice plates and bolts 14
Figure 20. Closed-rib bolted transverse deck field splice detail 17
Figure 21. Closed-rib bolted transverse deck field splice section view detail 17
Figure 22. Closed-rib deck welded transverse deck field splice detail 17
Figure 23. Closed-rib field-welded longitudinal deck splice section view detail 17
Figure 24. Open-rib bolted deck transverse field splice detail 18
Figure 25. Open-rib bolted deck transverse field splice section view detail 18
Figure 26. Open-rib welded deck transverse field splice detail 18
Figure 27. Open-rib welded deck longitudinal field splice section view detail 18
Figure 28. Ben Franklin Bridge over the Delaware River 19
Figure 29. Section 4 deck details 19
Figure 30. Section 5 deck details 19
Figure 31. Poplar Street Bridge over the Mississippi River 22
Figure 32. Floorbeam/diaphragm depth detail 23

vi Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

1. Introduction
Orthotropic steel deck (OSD) Level 2 design, which makes use of bridge deck types. The designer is
bridges have been used successfully simplified one-dimensional (1D) given typical open-rib and closed-
around the world since the 1940s or two-dimensional (2D) analysis rib options based on experiences
(Connor et al. 2012). An OSD methods calibrated to experimental in real bridge applications.
bridge deck system is a durable results, and Level 3 design, Through the development of Level
and redundant system that is which makes use of refined three- 1 design with typical details, the
lightweight compared to other deck dimensional (3D) analysis. use of OSDs may become more
systems. The system has been used common and fabrication costs
The 2012 FHWA OSD Manual
in new design and rehabilitation may decrease as fabricators work
provides resources to researchers
scenarios alike. However, the with a small number of designs
and engineers. The intention of
wider application of OSDs for to establish economically viable
this new Design Guide is to further
commonplace bridges was affected fabrication processes.
develop details of Level 1 design
by the complexity of design,
and encourage the implementation Each chapter in this guide aims
sophisticated analysis needs, high
of OSD systems. to provide information for a
fabrication costs, and owner-
complete OSD system, whether it
mandated experimental fatigue Over the past decade, the FHWA
be open- or closed-rib. Key points
testing (Connor et al. 2012). recognized the need for a more
are provided to highlight some
accessible process for designing
The Federal Highway of the benefits and drawbacks of
and analyzing OSDs. As a result,
Administration (FHWA) one system over the other. Several
the FHWA sponsored a research
published the Manual for Design, short summaries are included to
study on successful OSDs from
Construction, and Maintenance draw attention to the performance
which proven designs could be
of Orthotropic Steel Deck Bridges of in-service OSD bridges.
adopted and adapted for use on
(OSD Manual for short) in 2012
commonplace bridges, which aligns Options for typical closed- and
(Connor et al. 2012). Three levels
with the Level 1 design specified in open-rib OSD systems, including
of design were introduced in both
the LRFD Specifications (AASHTO the deck plate, are provided for rib
the OSD Manual and the American
2017)1. At the same time, the span length (i.e., the floorbeam
Association of State Highway and
AASHTO and National Steel Bridge or diaphragm spacing) and rib
Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
Alliance (NSBA) have engaged in spacing. This guide’s purpose is
Load and Resistance Factor Design
ongoing efforts to collaborate on not to set a binding requirement
(LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications
addressing the manufacturability of or standard, but to encourage the
(LRFD Specifications) (AASHTO
OSDs, the complexity of design, and efforts by designers and fabricators
2012) in 2012.
the evolution of complex detailing. toward simpler modular design.
These include Level 1 design, which This Design Guide provides typical
makes use of proven OSD solutions details similar to those for other
without the need for analysis,

1. AASHTO. 2017. AASHTO LRFD-8. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 8th Ed. (2017). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(1)(v).)

1. Introduction 1
Glossary of Terms Girder: A main load-carrying Rib: Longitudinal members that
Blow-through: Excessive, member that runs longitudinally can be open (e.g., angle or plate
undesirable penetration of the weld with the orthotropic deck ribs and rib) or closed (e.g., U-shaped or
application leading to holes in the the bridge. In orthotropic decks, trapezoidal) and used to stiffen the
weld root and welded surfaces. girders are integrated with the deck steel deck plate.
plate and other components of the
Crossbeam: Alternative name for Rib span: The span length of a
orthotropic system.
floorbeam (see Floorbeam). longitudinal rib member between
Melt-through: In orthotropic supporting floorbeams (or
Deck plate: The top plate of an
deck welding, an unintended diaphragms).
orthotropic deck that supports
but harmless condition where
the wearing surface and directly Wearing surface: A top layer
additional weld material penetrates,
supports the wheel loads. placed on the deck plate to
especially at the back side of the rib-
provide a skid resistant surface
Diaphragm: A diaphragm is a to-deck weld, and forms additional
with good ride quality to provide
transverse component that is reinforcing on the opposite side of
corrosion protection to the deck
similar to a floorbeam but is the weld application.
plate, accommodate deck plate
typically characterized by not
Orthotropic: A word derived from irregularities, and potentially offer
having a bottom flange or being
two terms. The system of ribs and additional stiffness to the deck plate
seated atop a sub-floorbeam in
floorbeams are orthogonal and resulting in reduced stress levels.
the primary bridge framing (see
their elastic properties are different
Floorbeam). A diaphragm is Illustrative Glossary
or anisotropic with respect to the
generally smaller and does not Figure 1 and Figure 2 are a generic
deck: thus, orthogonal-anisotropic
necessarily connect to a main plan view and cross-sectional view
becomes orthotropic.
structural member. of an OSD, respectively. Each figure
Orthotropic steel deck: A system is provided to give additional clarity
Extended cut-out: The cut-out is
where a steel deck plate is stiffened to certain terms used throughout
a stress-relieving cut made in the
by longitudinal ribs and transverse this guide. Note that all of the
floorbeam (diaphragm) web to
floorbeams (or diaphragms) in plan views and detail drawings in
alleviate the out-of-plane stresses
which the ribs and floorbeams this guide were developed by the
induced by in-plane end rotations
are orthogonal and their elastic researchers for this project unless
of the rib due to applied loads on
properties are anisotropic with otherwise credited under the
the deck and/or to avoid welding
respect to the deck directly individual figures.
to the bottom of the rib where
supporting live loads.
longitudinal stresses are highly
concentrated. Redeck (Redecking): The
rehabilitation of an existing bridge
Floorbeam: A floorbeam is a
by removal and replacement of the
transverse component that provides
existing deck with a new deck or
support to the ribs and transfers
deck system.
loads to the primary girders.

2 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

 Floorbeam centerline

Girder
Splice
distance
Deck

Panel
width
splices

Bridge
Rib span length

Girder

Figure 1. OSD plan view

Deck plate
Wearing surface

Deck plate joint Rib depth

Open rib
Closed rib
Girder Floorbeam/diaphragm

Figure 2. Detailed Section A-A view for Figure 1 OSD plan view with rib options

1. Introduction 3
2. “Big Picture” Considerations
KEY POINTS The typical rib designs and • Maintain uniform cross slope or
• Optimization of material use for details provided in this guide are place the crown at a longitudinal
OSDs in short- and medium- based on historically successful weld location
span bridges is a secondary in-service performance of real
matter in comparison to retrofit • Set the ribs and floorbeams
bridges and balanced input from
or long-span projects where (diaphragms) normal to the cross
weight minimization may be designers and manufacturers, slope and profile grade line
more critical in accordance with LRFD
Specifications (AASHTO 2017)1. OSDs are highly redundant with
• OSDs are highly redundant,
which alleviates safety concerns respect to connections and load
due to potential fatigue cracking
OSDs have been used in new carrying members. Although it
or corrosion loss construction, retrofit, and is expected that an OSD would
• Maintenance of OSDs is similar rehabilitation of bridges around the deteriorate at the same rate as
to that for other steel bridges world—primarily for signature and other steel bridge components,
• Automation is not a requirement long-span bridges. Those designs the inherent redundancies help
for quality fabrication of OSDs were often refined to minimize alleviate potential concerns
overall weight and depth to that fatigue cracking or section
conform to geometrical restrictions. corrosion loss will become an
For OSDs of typical shorter span issue. This is especially true when
bridges, reducing weight and depth adopting design details of proven
are only two of the considerations in-service bridges where the long-
toward the goal of life-cycle cost term performance is well known.
optimization. The details suggested
Maintenance of OSDs is the same as
in this guide reflect an effort to
other routine maintenance. The OSD
design the panels for broader
is inspected for fatigue and section
application, which may result in a
loss due to corrosion. Maintenance
lesser optimized design. However,
of paint or other protective coatings
the initial cost of additional material
is expected to be completed over
is nominal in comparison to the cost
the lifetime of the deck at intervals
incurred by potential unexpected
consistent with maintenance plans
and/or ongoing serviceability and
for a typical steel superstructure.
maintenance issues.
New technologies and methods are
Some additional suggestions are
emerging to expedite rib fabrication,
offered with respect to the bridge
particularly for closed ribs. These
geometry to further simplify the
technologies should be able to roll
use of OSDs. Effort should be made
ribs of various shapes and sizes
to simplify deck plate geometry
and help in the standardization
with the highway design. These
of these shapes. The closed-rib
are not requirements, but ways to
shapes described in this guide are
remove unnecessary complexity:
anticipated to be formed using a
• Maintain tangent geometry and brake, although the guide is equally
ensure piers and abutments are valid for ribs formed using the
orthogonal newer technologies.

1. AASHTO. 2017. AASHTO LRFD-8. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge
Design Specifications. 8th Ed. (2017). American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(1)(v).)

4 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

For those unfamiliar with them, alone. The designers should avoid end, fabricators should produce
OSDs might appear to require over-prescribing the fabrication panels such that they suitably fit-up
complex fabrication methods means and methods, leaving room in the field, and the check of this
and even automated (robotic) for the fabricators to select viable condition is the suitability fit of the
fabrication, but high-quality cost-effective solutions. deck joints.
fabrication can be readily achieved
To ensure field construction of While no special tolerance is
in OSD fabrication using traditional
OSD bridges does not encounter suggested for panel length,
methods. With advancements in
unnecessary difficulties, the width, and squareness, the fit of
fabrication and investments in
fabricator should pay special the panel joints controls these
equipment and skills by fabricators,
attention to the alignment and geometries. That is, for proper
the costs of OSDs are continually
geometry during shop trial panel dimensions, the geometry
being reduced.
assembly. The suggestion for panel and welding preparation of field-
Connection complexity has also flatness tolerance is 1/8 in. over 10 assembled deck joints should meet
been a deterrent for designers and ft, consistent with normal shop groove weld alignment tolerance
a challenge for fabricators. For this tolerance for flatness of other steel per the AASHTO/American
reason, efforts have been made to bridge members. This tolerance Welding Society (AWS) D1.5
adopt simple connection details should also result in a suitable Bridge Welding Code (AASHTO/
in lieu of minimizing material use driving surface. However, in the AWS 2016)1.

1. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR
625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

2. “Big Picture” Considerations 5

3. Closed-Rib System
KEY POINTS Advantages Field splices between deck
• Closed-rib configurations have Closed-rib OSDs have proven to segments are not as easily
been shown to be an effective be an effective system in many completed when compared to an
OSD solution open-rib system. Tighter tolerances
in-service bridges (Connor et al.
• Trapezoidal ribs are simpler to 2012). The inherent flexural and during fabrication and erection are
fabricate than U-shaped ribs needed to ensure proper fit. Rib
torsional rigidity of the closed-rib
• A relaxation from some past system provides some benefits splices are often completed using
practices in the minimum weld bolts that are accessed through
penetration for rib-to-deck over the open-rib system. Loads
plate partial joint penetration are more efficiently distributed handholes in the bottom of the
(PJP) welds has been transversely across the deck and, rib, which adds to the overall
established by AASHTO of the closed-rib shapes that are in fabrication challenges.
• Fabricators should be given existence, the trapezoidal-shaped The connection of the rib to the
the flexibility to prepare the ribs are simpler to fabricate and
ribs as necessary to facilitate
floorbeam is also more complex
perform equally to other closed when compared to an open-rib
welding goals
shapes. For this reason, the shape system. Larger cut-outs need to
provided in the following sections be accounted for in the floorbeam
is trapezoidal. design, often resulting in greater
The connection between the structural web depth.
rib and deck plate is completed Weld Considerations
using PJP groove welds. Past weld Given a minimum penetration
specifications have made this for rib-to-deck welds, fabricators
connection difficult to complete. target a penetration such that, given
Research has shown that the the variation in penetration they
minimum weld penetration can expect, penetration is always above
be reduced and the allowance for the minimum. Penetration can be as
melt-through can be accepted great as 100 percent provided there
(Sim and Uang 2008) which can are not soundness concerns with
improve the constructability and the weld. Some mild melt-through
cost of the connection. is usual for welds that reach 100
Challenges percent, and melt-through is not
The connection between the rib deleterious. It is very unusual for
and deck plate is only observable blow-through to occur for properly
from outside the rib, which limits designed welding procedures.
the ability to ensure penetration Ribs are tightly fit to deck plates
during fabrication and, later, if to minimize melt-through and
deemed necessary, during in- facilitate a sound weld. There is
service inspections. It is important not a prescribed maximum fit-up
for fabricators to develop an gap as long as sound welds are
effective procedure to ensure achieved, but typically, rib-to-deck
a sound weld with the correct fit-up gap is no more than 0.020 in.
minimum penetration.

6 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Gaps that are too large result in a rib end rotation would result. To tested (Saunders et al. 2019). Early
concave profile and possible blow- better understand this connection forms of the detail needed intensive
through. The fabricator should and investigate ways to reduce the fabrication and subsequent forms
be allowed to match the need by stresses, extensive research has been were developed to facilitate
their own determination for weld completed over the past decades. fabrication. These connections were
joint design (e.g., angle of bevel, primarily directed at redecking
Most recently, it was observed in
size of landing). The fabricator applications where the structure
laboratory fatigue tests (Saunders
should be allowed to determine depth was limited and the benefit
et al. 2019) that, when the fitted
the number of tacks, tack size, tack of a deeper floorbeam/diaphragm
connection was subjected to very
frequency, and spacing needed to could not be realized, therefore
high loads (25 percent greater than
achieve the fit-up of the rib to deck, limiting the use of the fitted
the AASHTO Fatigue I combination
although an excessive amount of connection detail for redecking.
total factored tandem axle load
tack welding may undermine the
for OSDs) and a large number of Closed-Rib Geometry
quality of final welds. Typically, the
cycles (approximately 2 million), Typical rib dimensions for a closed-
approval of tack weld details comes
unexpected root cracks occurred. rib system are presented in Figure
from the Engineer of Record.
The same test completed under 3 and Table 1. Two rib size options
All other welds in this OSD design typical stresses under factored are shown with maximum span
are fillet welds, subject to fillet AASHTO fatigue loads would not lengths (and floorbeam spacing,
weld non-destructive examination result in the same weld cracks. as detailed in Figure 4) indicated
(NDE) requirements. The fatigue Furthermore, lower stress levels for each option and a typical rib
performance of these welds is not are expected with deeper floor spacing of 2 ft 2 in. maintained.
a major concern if preparation and beams as are used in new and Level
The performance of in-service
welding are executed per AASHTO/ 1 typical detail OSDs. To date,
OSDs with closed ribs of this size
AWS D1.5 (AASHTO/AWS 2016)1. no cases of similar root cracking
extending beyond this length
Cut-Out at Floorbeam occurring in an in-service fitted
have not been investigated and are
connection are known.
Fully fitted connections between therefore not presented here. The
the closed rib and floorbeam To reduce the potential for high rib geometry is held constant to
are appealing for simplicity of stresses and weld fatigue cracks, promote OSD fabrication of Level 1
fabrication. Even so, engineers have several versions of details employing design. Figure 5 through Figure 8
been hesitant to use a fully fitted a cutout in the floorbeam/ show additional details.
connection, believing it would be diaphragm near the bottom of the
too stiff and high stresses under closed rib were developed and

1. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR
625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

3. Closed-Rib System 7
Closed-Rib Details

See Figure 5 Figure 3 Commentary

Wearing surface
The typical closed rib maintains
a consistent bend angle and
width at the bottom of the rib for
72˚
standardization. The rib depth (A)
is provided in Table 1. The width
at the top of the rib is a function of
Rib depth (A) the rib depth.
Deck plate
108˚

R = 1½ in. 6½ in.
⅜ in. bent plate

Figure 3. Typical closed-rib detail

Table 1. Typical closed-rib detail specifications

Option Rib Depth (A) Max Span Length* Deck Plate Thickness

#1 10½ in. 15 ft ⅝ in.

#2 14 in. 18 ft ¾ in.
* See previous Figure 1

Wearing surface Figure 4 Commentary

Rib spacing (S)
The floorbeam is cut to match
the rib contour and is welded
as shown. The depth of the
floorbeam (or diaphragm) below
the ribs should be equal to or
greater than the depth of the rib
Rib depth (A)
(A) to maintain proper flexibility.
Deck plate
The spacing of the rib (S) is
Typ. 2 ft 2 in. but can be nominally
reduced to accommodate
overall bridge geometry.
Min. depth (A) Cutout
Closed rib (typ)

Figure 4. Closed rib to floorbeam detail

8 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Closed-Rib Details (continued)

Figure 5 Commentary
The closed-rib weld to the deck is a PJP
Wearing surface
Deck plate
weld as shown. Both laboratory and
full fabrication panels have shown that
the weld indicated produces consistent
results eliminating weld blow-through
and provides reasonable penetration
tolerance. Joint preparation should be
left to the fabricator.
60% min penetration
Closed rib Use the current AASHTO LRFD
design, which specifies a minimum
weld penetration of 60 percent
Figure 5. Closed rib to deck connection detail (AASHTO 2020)1.

Deck plate Deck splice Figure 6 Commentary

Splice plate Bolt (typ) The bolted splice represented
each face should be designed to transfer
the rib forces through the splice
location. Typically, the splices are
located at the inflection points
Spa. of moment diagrams under dead
and uniform live loads so that the
design moments are very small.
Eq. spa. Eq. spa. A maximum number of rows of
bolts that can fit in the rib walls
Closed rib
Closure plate (typ)
is typically used to minimize the
Figure 6. Closed-rib field splice detail offsets of the two bolt groups.

Deck plate Figure 7 Commentary

The rib splice section view
shows splice plates on each side
of the trapezoidal rib plate and
the bolt locations.
Splice plates
Figure 7. Closed-rib field
splice section view detail 4 in. × 2 ft-0 in. handhole

Wire screen Figure 8 Commentary

4 in. × 2 ft-0 in. handhole
The handhole provides access
R = 2 in. to the inside of the rib plate
where the bolted connection is
completed. The removable wire
screen prevents bird access and
the potential for nesting.

Figure 8. Closed-rib field splice

Closure plate (typ.)
handhole detail

1. AASHTO. 2020. AASHTO LRFD-9. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 9th Ed. (2020). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. (Approved for use under the authority of 23 CFR 625.3(f)(2); see FHWA
memorandum, Approval of the use of structural design standards (Apr. 11, 2022).)

3. Closed-Rib System 9
Danziger Bridge – Louisiana

is commonly observed among

many closed-rib OSD projects. No
indications were provided in the
inspection report suggesting this
connection was not performing well.
The rib splice locations
incorporated a handhole cut-out at
the bottom of the rib. This handhole
is used to access the bolts to fasten
the splice plates to the rib. Once
cmh2315fl, license at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ the connection is completed, the
Figure 9. The Danziger Bridge in New Orleans handhole is covered with a screen to
deter birds, primarily, from nesting
The Danziger Bridge (Figure 9) the 5/8 in. thick plate observed with in the ribs. The inspection report
spans the Industrial Canal in New other OSD bridges. noted some screens were missing
Orleans, Louisiana. It is a vertical and, birds, in fact, have used the
The wearing surface cracking was
lift bridge on US 90, constructed in handholes as a nesting area.
likely caused by lower overall
the mid-1980s using OSD panels rigidity and might be partially related Although the rib-to-web extended
(Figure 10). Upon completion, the to the wearing surface material and cut-out detail is different from the
bridge became the widest lift bridge application. The inspection record closed-rib design in this guide, past
in the world. does not show that this is a symptom performance makes the Danziger
of possible rib-to-deck joint Bridge an example for trapezoidal-
The Danziger Bridge OSD was
cracking. Any of the following may shaped closed-rib design with its rib
functioning well according to the
help in solving the wearing surface geometry and splice details.
report resulting from the 2018
cracking problems: thicker deck
inspection, which was contracted
plate, deeper ribs, or stiffer overlay.
by the Louisiana Department of
Transportation and Development The ribs are closed and folded
(DOTD), although notes included trapezoidal in shape (Figure 11)
wearing surface cracking and rather than U-shaped, which
patching, which may be indicative simplifies the fabrication between
of an overly flexible rib/deck/overlay the two types.
combined system. It should also be The rib-to-deck connection was
noted that the deck plate is 1/2 in. completed using a partial penetration Louisiana DOTD
thick, which can reduce the overall weld with 80 percent minimum Figure 11. Danziger Bridge
rigidity of the bridge and is less than penetration. This connection typical trapezoidal rib detail

Louisiana DOTD
Figure 10. Danziger Bridge plan detail

10 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

4. Open-Rib System
KEY POINTS Advantages Challenges
• There are inherent simplicities Open-rib deck systems are Compared to closed-rib systems,
to the fabrication of open-rib primarily fabricated using flat open-rib systems have less
systems
plates, although other shapes such torsional rigidity, which results
• Fillet welds between the rib as bulb-T and angles have been in less efficient transverse load
and the deck plate simplify
fabrication compared to PJP
used in the past. For the purpose distribution. To overcome this
groove welds of simplifying fabrication, only disadvantage, a closer rib spacing
• Open-rib connections at flat plate shapes are shown in this is needed, which can double the
the floorbeam are easier guide. In comparison to closed- number of welds. The depth of the
to accomplish than closed shaped ribs, several advantages ribs is typically greater than that for
connections exist with respect to fabrication. closed ribs of equal spans. Overall,
• Field splicing between deck the amount of steel required for
segments is performed with Welds between the deck plate
typical open-rib deck systems in
relative ease and the ribs are fillet welds,
this guide is greater than that for
which reduce the need for weld
an equivalent closed-rib system,
preparation and simplify fabrication
although this loses significance
overall. In addition, access to these
when considering the overall cost
weld areas is not limited.
of each system.
At the floorbeam/diaphragm, the
connection of the continuous ribs
Open-Rib Geometry
is also performed with relative Figure 12 through Figure 15 and
ease. This type of connection Table 2 show the rib dimensions
is straightforward given the and details for an open-rib system.
fabricator can accurately cut Two rib size options are shown
floorbeam/diaphragm webs using with maximum span lengths
computer numerical control (floorbeam spacing) indicated
(CNC), which can be used later as for each option and a typical
a template to help position the ribs rib spacing of 1 ft 3 in. The rib
and achieve fit. geometry is held constant.

Bolted rib splices are The performance of in-service

straightforward connections given OSDs with open ribs of this size
each of the assembled parts is extending beyond this length
easily accessible. have not been investigated and are
therefore not presented here.
Generally, the cost when
considering fabrication, labor,
and quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) is less for open-
rib systems than for an equivalent
closed-rib system.

4. Open-Rib System 11
Open-Rib Details

Wearing surface Figure 12 Commentary

Deck plate The open rib uses a flat plate. The
rib depth (A) and rib thickness (B)
are provided in Table 2.
A ⅝ in. minimum rib thickness
90˚
for any open rib is suggested
Rib depth (A) by AASHTO (2020)1 and in this
guide. In unique situations where
a thinner rib is used, a minimum
Open rib thickness of ½ in. should be used
to avoid bridging between the fillet
Rib thickness (B)
welds on either side of the rib.

Figure 12. Typical open-rib detail

Table 2. Typical open-rib detail specifications

Max Span Deck Plate

Option Rib Depth (A) Rib Thickness (B)
Length Thickness

#1 10 in. ⅝ in. 10 ft ⅝ in.

#2 12 in. ¾ in. 15 ft ¾ in.

Figure 13 Commentary
Rib spacing (S) Rib spacing (S) Wearing surface
The floorbeam is cut to match
the rib and is welded as shown.
The depth of the floorbeam (or
diaphragm) below the ribs needs
Cope R = 1 in. to be equal to or greater than the
Rib depth (A)
Deck plate depth of the rib (A) to maintain
proper flexibility.
½ in. The spacing of the rib (S) is 1 ft 3
Typ.
in. but can be nominally reduced
to accommodate overall bridge
Open rib geometry. Ribs spaced too closely
may cause weld access problems.
2 in. dia.
Min. depth (A) Normal AASHTO/AWS (2016)2
D1.5 tolerances should be used
for fit-up of the rib to the floor
beam and to the deck plate.
The designer should specify the
fillet weld termination detail at
the keyhole, either wrapping
around or stopping short, with
Figure 13. Open rib to floorbeam detail balanced consideration of fatigue
resistance and fabrication access.

1. AASHTO. 2020. AASHTO LRFD-9. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 9th Ed. (2020). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. (Approved for use under the authority of 23 CFR 625.3(f)(2); see FHWA
memorandum, Approval of the use of structural design standards (Apr. 11, 2022).)
2. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

12 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Open-Rib Details (continued)

Figure 14 Commentary
Normal AASHTO/AWS (2016)1 D1.5
Wearing surface tolerances should be used for
Deck plate
fit-up of the rib to the deck plate.
As with other bridge fillet welds, if
fit-up gaps are larger than 1⁄16 in.,
fillet weld sizes can be increased
Typ. to make up for this gap as allowed
by AASHTO/AWS D1.5.
Fillet welds are common
on bridges and shops are
Open rib accustomed to the practices
needed to satisfy AASHTO/
AWS D1.5 tolerances for fit-up to
Figure 14. Open rib to deck weld detail achieve suitable welds.

Splice plate ea. side Deck splice Figure 15 Commentary

The bolted splice shown is
Bolt (typ.) Deck plate designed to transfer the rib
forces through the splice
location. Typically, the splices are
located at the inflection points
of moment diagrams under dead
¼ in.
and uniform live loads so that the
Eq. spa. design moments are very small.
A maximum number of rows of
¼ in. max. bolts that can fit in the rib walls
is typically used to minimize the
offsets of the two bolt groups.
Eq. spa. Eq. spa.

3¼ in.

Figure 15. Open-rib field splice detail

1. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

4. Open-Rib System 13
San Mateo-Hayward Bridge – California

Craig Howell, license at https://creativecommons.

org/licenses/by/2.0/
Figure 16. San Mateo-
Hayward Bridge

The San Mateo-Hayward Bridge The floorbeams, which work

(Figure 16) is a seven-mile-long with the OSD system to provide
bridge that carries California State the structure of the floor system,
Route (SR) 92 across the San are about 2 ft deep. The ribs
Francisco Bay between Forster City continuously pass through the
and Hayward, California. floorbeams/diaphragms. For
modern-day fabrication, this type
The bridge was built in the 1960s of connection is straightforward
and was an early large-scale use given the fabricator can accurately
Ric Maggenti, Caltrans, used with permission
of an OSD system. The western cut diaphragm webs using CNC, Figure 17. Underside of San
portion of the bridge includes including the rounded part of the Mateo-Hayward Bridge deck
17 high-rise spans of all-steel cut-out (Figure 18).
construction, and the bridge
The diaphragms, then, coupled
consists of an OSD supported on
with a realistic tolerance to
two parallel box girders.
account for variation and impart
The OSD system on the bridge straightness and flatness, can be
consists of 8 to 12 in. deep by 5/8 to used as a template to help position
3/4 in. thick open ribs welded to a the ribs and achieve fit.
Caltrans, used with permission
5/8 in. or 3/4 in. thick deck plate. The The connection of ribs to the deck Figure 18. Detail of rib to
deck plate and ribs are supported plate can be achieved using a fillet diaphragm connection
on I-shaped floorbeams, which weld, which is advantageous from
are suspended between the box a fabrication standpoint. The rib
girders (or cantilevered from the splices are simply constructed
box girders for the outer lanes) at using splice plates and bolts
approximately 10 ft-5 in. spacing (Figure 19) with the connection
(Figure 17). completed in the field.

Ric Maggenti, Caltrans, used with permission

Figure 19. Splice plates and bolts

14 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

5. Deck Plate
KEY POINTS Varying deck plate thicknesses have have used both thin and thick
• A minimum thickness of ⅝ in. has been used for bridges in service. overlays, and cases of successful
been effectively demonstrated The in-service performance of performance were found for
with in-service bridges deck plates and their associated both options. In preparing this
• Bolted splices are more easily wearing surfaces have proven to be document, the research team
erected in the field than problematic at times when the deck learned that some owners having
welded splices
plate thickness is less than 5/8 in. experience with both types tend
• Bolted splices need a thicker Deck plates less than this thickness to favor the thick type for its
wearing surface
do not provide the rigidity needed to longevity, while others like the
• Welded splices are a suitable limit the deformation and stresses in thinner types for their light weight
option and have been used
more often the wearing surface, which can lead and considerable advancement in
to cracking and further degradation. recent years.
• Wearing surface suitability
should be discussed with Accordingly, the minimum thickness
The engineer should be mindful
product manufacturers of the Level 1 typical OSD plate
that the wearing surface selection
detail is 5/8 in. (AASHTO 2020)1.
contributes to the overall deck self-
Thicker deck plates (3/4 in.) have weight. Furthermore, the climate
been used, which can help improve conditions vary from location
the fatigue performance of the OSD to location and should also be a
and also enhance the performance consideration. A thicker wearing
of the wearing surface. The design surface can contribute to the overall
options provided in this guide use stiffness of the deck and reduce live-
a minimum 5/8 in. thick deck plate load induced stresses, although this
and a typical rib spacing for shorter is rarely considered during design.
span ribs and a 3/4 in. thick deck
Historically, welded deck splices
plate and a typical rib spacing for
have been used more commonly
longer span ribs.
than bolted splices, and they have
The type of wearing surface performed well. However, several
selected may also contribute to the advantages to using bolted deck
decision for a deck plate thicker splices, including field erection
than the minimum prescribed. and fit-up, can lead to cost savings.
A discussion with the wearing Bolt heads at bolted splice locations
surface manufacturer should help need to be accommodated in the
identify the sensitivity to increased design by using countersunk bolts
or decreased OSD flexibility. or by choosing a thicker wearing
Furthermore, owners of bridges surface. Waterproofing of bolted
where a particular wearing surface deck splices can also be a key
has been used can be a valuable consideration. Typical bolted deck
resource and could be consulted in splice details are provided in Figure
the wearing surface decision. 20 and Figure 21 for closed-rib
The projects reviewed during the systems and Figure 24 and Figure
course of this guide development 25 for open-rib systems.

1. AASHTO. 2020. AASHTO LRFD-9. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge
Design Specifications. 9th Ed. (2020). American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, Washington, DC. (Approved for use under the authority of 23 CFR 625.3(f)(2); see
FHWA memorandum, Approval of the use of structural design standards (Apr. 11, 2022).)

5. Deck Plate 15
Welded deck splices can be chosen • Non-steel backing should be Another option that avoids backing
with no inherent disadvantage to allowed entirely is to put an initial weld
structural performance. The option pass on the underside of the joint
• Mixed welding processes, such as
to use either connection method in the overhead welding position,
flux cored arc welding (FCAW)
(longitudinal bolted splices or and then, on the top side of the
in the root and submerged-arc
transverse welded splices) or a joint, back gouge to the root, and,
welding (SAW) for fill passes,
combination of both is available to then, complete the weld from
should be allowed
the engineer. Erection procedures the top side. This option may be
and desired wearing surface should Deck joints need to be complete suitable for longitudinal deck
be considered when making the joint penetration (CJP) groove joints but may not be suitable for
selection. Typical welded deck welds, and a common way to transverse joints if the presence of
splice details are provided in Figure complete these welds is to use ribs limits access to the underside
22 and Figure 23 for closed-rib backing and complete the weld of the joint.
systems and Figure 26 and Figure entirely from the top side. Steel
It is not unusual to mix welding
27 for open-rib systems. backing is common because
processes in a welded joint. This is
it facilitates clamping and is
A suggested tolerance for deck joint allowed by the AASHTO/AWS D1.5
relatively easy to weld compared
alignment is 1/4 in. in an unclamped Bridge Welding Code (AASHTO/
to other backing. Ceramic backing
condition, so that, when clamps are AWS 2016)1. Given the relatively
and copper backing for bridge
used, the AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge tight confines of the groove weld
structures are currently uncommon
Welding Code alignment tolerance root and the overall large size of
in the United States due to lack of
of 1/8 in. is satisfied (AASHTO/ the groove weld, some contractors
successful application experiences.
AWS 2016)1. In the field, clamps prefer to make the root passes with
can be used on either side of the Removing steel backing improves FCAW or gas metal arc welding
joint to bring the plates together. fatigue resistance. However, (GMAW) and use SAW for the fill
Despite this suggestion, the greater transverse backing can remain in passes and cap passes. Although
goal should not be disregarded for place due to access limitations and AASHTO/AWS D1.5 allows the
fabricators to produce panels such the fact that transverse deck joint mixed welding process, a few
that they suitably fit-up in the field, locations are typically chosen to be states/owners limit the use of
whether that is less than or greater away from zones subjected to high GMAW by specification.
than 1/4 in. tensile stress.

With respect to field joint backing Removal of backing is a challenging

of welded joints, the following operation and needs remedial work
suggestions are offered: to provide the proper surface profile.
To facilitate backing removal, copper
• Longitudinal backing should be
backing or ceramic backing may be
removed
used. However, some remedial work
• Transverse backing can be left to the joint is likely still needed.
in place

1. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR 625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

16 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Deck Splice Details

Deck plate Splice plate Figure 20 Commentary

Bolted deck splices need a thicker
wearing surface to protect splice
plates and bolt heads above the
deck plate surface.
Bolt (typ.) Web splice not shown (see Figure
Splice plates 6 and Figure 7 for details).

Figure 20. Closed-rib bolted transverse deck field splice detail

Deck plate Splice plate Figure 21 Commentary

Bolted deck splices need a thicker
wearing surface to protect splice
plates and bolt heads above the
deck plate surface.

Bolt (typ.) Splice plates

Figure 21. Closed-rib bolted transverse deck field splice section view detail

Deck splice Figure 22 Commentary

Rib splice
CJP weld Deck plate The deck splice consists of a CJP
Backing bar weld using a backing bar.
The transverse backing bar can
Closed rib
be left in place.
Cope rib plate
each side Rib splice not shown (see previous
Figure 6 and Figure 7 for details).

Figure 22. Closed-rib deck welded transverse deck field splice detail

Deck splice Figure 23 Commentary

Deck plate
CJP weld The longitudinal backing bar
Backing bar should be removed for good
fatigue performance and the splice
positioned away from the primary
wheel paths when possible.

Closed ribs

Figure 23. Closed-rib field-welded longitudinal deck splice section

view detail

5. Deck Plate 17
Deck Splice Details (continued)

Splice plate Deck splice Figure 24 Commentary

Bolt (typ.) Deck plate Bolted deck splices need a thicker
wearing surface to protect splice
plates and bolt heads above the
deck plate surface.
Splice
plate Rib plate Rib plate splice not shown (see
previous Figure 15 for details).

Figure 24. Open-rib bolted deck transverse field splice detail

Splice plate Figure 25 Commentary

Deck plate Bolted deck splices need a thicker
wearing surface to protect splice
plates and bolt heads above the
deck plate surface.
Rib plate splice not shown (see
Splice plates previous Figure 15 for details).
Open rib

Figure 25. Open-rib bolted deck transverse field splice section view detail

Deck splice Figure 26 Commentary

Deck plate
CJP weld The deck splice consists of a CJP
Backing bar weld using a backing bar.
The transverse backing bar can
be left in place.
Cope rib plates
Rib plate field splice is not shown
(see previous Figure 15 for details).

Figure 26. Open-rib welded deck transverse field splice detail

Deck splice Figure 27 Commentary

Deck plate
CJP weld The longitudinal backing bar
Backing bar should be removed for good
fatigue performance and the splice
positioned away from the primary
wheel paths when possible.

Open rib

Figure 27. Open-rib welded deck longitudinal field splice section

view detail

18 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Ben Franklin Bridge – New Jersey/Pennsylvania

and minor to moderate surface

corrosion was observed.
The bituminous concrete wearing
surface on the bridge was replaced
in 2004 and remained in good
condition with some isolated
areas in fair condition. Most
recently (in 2018), portions of the
bridge wearing surface were fully
resurfaced. Other portions were
planned for resurfacing in the future.
The wearing surface typically
Beyond My Ken, license at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2012_Ben_Franklin_Bridge_and_Race_Street_Pier.jpg exhibited random fine to medium
Figure 28. Ben Franklin Bridge over the Delaware River cracks, small spalls, and asphalt
patches at scattered locations. Some
The Ben Franklin Bridge (Figure The 2020 inspection report
rutting was observed in the wheel
28) is a suspension bridge carrying completed for the DRPA by a
lines of heavily traveled lanes. A
I-676 over the Delaware River private consulting firm and its
combination of grade, alignment,
between Camden, New Jersey and subcontractors indicated the OSD
and heavy traffic braking had
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. is in overall good condition. The
resulted in slippage cracks at
The bridge consists of a 1,750 ft deck plate was spliced using bolted
isolated locations. Overall, the deck
main span, two 716 ft side spans, and welded connections and was
and wearing surface condition had
and multiple truss and girder considered to be in generally good
not indicated undesirable flexibility
approach spans. The bridge was condition. In some isolated areas,
in the deck plate, and the system
completed and opened to traffic in deteriorated/peeling paint, loose or
was performing satisfactorily.
1926 and is owned, operated, and missing nuts, missing/broken bolts,
maintained by the Delaware River
Port Authority (DRPA). In the
mid-1980s, the suspended, truss,
and girder spans of the bridge
were re-decked with an open-rib
OSD system.
The OSD system on the suspension
spans of the bridge consists of open Delaware River Port Authority
bulb-shaped ribs with a maximum Figure 29. Section 4 deck details
spacing of 1 ft. 31/2 in. welded to a
5/8 in. thick deck plate (Figure 29
and Figure 30).
The ribs are approximately 13 in.
deep and 1/2 in. thick and include a
11/2 in. thick by 31/2 in. deep bulb at
the bottom. The rib-to-deck plate
connection was completed using a Delaware River Port Authority
double-sided 1/4 in. fillet weld. Figure 30. Section 5 deck details

5. Deck Plate 19
6. Wearing Surface
KEY POINTS Wearing surfaces on OSD bridges Similar to bituminous systems,
• Wearing surface options are serve multiple functions including concrete surfacing systems are
most typically bituminous corrosion protection of the steel considered thick (2 to 3 in.). In its
surfacing systems, polymer deck, improved ride quality, basic form, concrete is placed with
surfacing systems, or concrete
and increased rigidity and load added reinforcement and topped
surfacing systems
distribution characteristics in some with an epoxy/aggregate system.
• Thick wearing surface options
cases. Historical selection and The concrete used can be of a
contribute to the overall deck
stiffness and can reduce live- performance of wearing surfaces specific mix design (e.g., high-
load induced stresses has varied widely. The steel deck performance concrete) and the
• Each type of wearing surface plate thickness, traffic volume, reinforcement can take on several
option has its own prescribed truck traffic, and climate, among forms (welded wire reinforcement,
installation procedure other variables, are all contributors steel fiber, carbon fiber, etc.).
to the effectiveness of the wearing Furthermore, welded shear studs
surface. The three most common may be added to positively connect
surfacing systems used include the wearing surface to the steel
bituminous, concrete, and polymer. deck. An advantage of the concrete
system is the ability to add deck
Bituminous surfacing systems are
stiffness, which can contribute to
considered a thick wearing surface
the reduction of live-load stresses
(2 in. or greater). Bituminous
in the deck plate.
surfacing thickness can contribute
to the reduction in live-load Polymer surfacing systems are
induced stresses in the deck plate, considered thin wearing surfaces
although its contribution is not (1/2 in.) and contribute minimally
considered in design. The wearing to the overall dead load, unlike
surface has been found to perform bituminous and concrete systems.
relatively well, especially on OSD The final thickness of the system
systems with greater rigidity. Due does not lend to additional deck
to the nature of the materials used, stiffness. The most common
the system can be sensitive to problems observed include
temperature effects, softening in delamination from the steel deck
high temperatures and hardening and loss of surface aggregates,
in low temperatures. The most although recent advancements
common problems observed in polymer systems have helped
include rutting, shoving, and reduce these occurrences.
tensile cracking.

20 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

Prior to placing any of the surfacing two construction methods: multi- Concrete surface systems are placed
systems, the OSD is cleaned and coat overlay or slurry. with slipform pavers following
shot blasted to eliminate oil, grease, the placement of reinforcement.
The multi-coat method involves
dirt, dust, mill scale, rust, paint, Shear transfer and bonding of the
spreading a thin layer of polymer
oxides, corrosion products, and concrete wearing surface to the
resin with rollers/squeegees
other foreign matter. Once this steel deck surface is done in a
followed by broadcasting coarse
process is completed, a zinc-based couple of different ways. The first
aggregate into the resin. Once
primer is often used to protect the way is using an epoxy embedded
dried, loose aggregate is removed,
steel deck from corrosion. with granular aggregate on the steel
and the process is repeated until
deck, which is then overlaid by
Bituminous wearing surfaces are the desired thickness is achieved.
the concrete. The second way is to
placed in multiple built-up layers
The slurry method consists of first use shear studs welded to the steel
of bond coats and epoxy asphalt
placing a layer of polymer resin deck and cast into the concrete.
concrete. Pneumatic tire and heavy
followed by a 3/8 in. thick polymer
steel rollers are used to achieve
concrete slurry. Coarse aggregate
compaction. Polymer surface
is broadcast onto the slurry
systems are often proprietary
layer. Once cured, the process is
and have specific installation
completed by sealing the surface
instructions. In a general sense,
with a polymeric resin.
however, they tend to follow one of

6. Wearing Surface 21
Poplar Street Bridge – Missouri

The bridge has three separate

deck thicknesses of 9/16 in., 5/8 in.,
and 3/4 in. Rib-to-deck plate weld
cracking was the clear majority
of all fatigue cracks with their
concentration in areas with
thinner deck plates and near the
very stiff main girder webs. Cracks
forming at the 9/16 in. rib-to-deck
plate weld grew through the weld
throat, turned into the rib, or grew
into the deck plate. Where cracks
formed within the 5/8 in. and 3/4 in.
deck plates, the cracks initiated
Justin Dahlberg, Bridge Engineering Center at Iowa State University
in the rib-to-deck plate weld and
Figure 31. Poplar Street Bridge over the Mississippi River either grew in the weld or turned
into the rib; they did not grow into
One of the primary aspects of Until 2006, a 3 in. thick asphaltic- the deck plate as was observed in
OSD design in the past has been based overlay provided general the 9/16 in. plate deck.
to optimize performance while protection and added stiffness
Additional cracking was discovered
minimizing weight. Accordingly, the to the OSD. In 2006, a 1/2 in.
at other locations, albeit in limited
deck plate thickness has often been thick epoxy concrete overlay was
locations. Ultimately, to fix the
minimized while still meeting the installed, which quickly de-bonded
deck plate flexibility issue, the
strength criteria. One downfall of a and led to failure of the overlay and
deck plate was studded, and a 4 in.
minimized thickness is the loss in eventual exposure of the steel deck
thick fiber-reinforced lightweight
stiffness. Over time, the flexibility to direct traffic. Analysis suggested
concrete wearing surface was
becomes apparent in wearing surface this was directly related to both
placed. The serviceability of the
degradation and/or fatigue cracking. the thickness and the elasticity of
OSD itself has not been in question
the epoxy, lending to flexibility,
Review of numerous OSD bridges since, and particularly where the
particularly during the summer
indicated that the well-performing thicker deck plates exist. Based
months when wearing surface
decks have a minimum deck plate on the inspection reports, the thin
temperatures could exceed 120
thickness of 5/8 in. overlay and a thin deck plate were
degrees Fahrenheit.
likely responsible for the Poplar
A good example of the drawbacks
Overall, this reduction of wearing Street Bridge fatigue cracking.
of reduced deck plate stiffness is
surface stiffness increased local
the Poplar Street Bridge (Figure
flexibility and therefore stresses at
31), which spans the Mississippi
the OSD weld details. Thus, the
River between St. Louis, Missouri
deck plate was more susceptible to
and East St. Louis, Illinois.
cracking. Although deck cracking
The bridge was constructed in was discovered during inspections
the mid-1960s and was the first at several locations, this condition
long-span orthotropic bridge to be was not a safety concern and the
constructed in the United States. resulting wearing surface cracking
The bridge has known serviceability was largely only an inconvenience to
and deck performance issues tied to the traveling public as a rough ride.
the wearing surface.

22 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

7. Floorbeam
KEY POINTS In the United States, OSDs floorbeam/diaphragm can be
• For new construction, floorbeam have often been used in retrofit maintained. Where the depth of
depth is not restricted as with applications. In these applications, the floorbeam/diaphragm is less
retrofit scenarios the structural depth restrictions have than the depth indicated in Table
• It is beneficial to use a deeper regularly limited the depth of the 1 and Table 2, the designer should
floorbeam/diaphragm for added floorbeam/diaphragm. Accordingly, pay additional attention to the
system stiffness and improved
the floorbeam/diaphragm analysis possible need for cut-outs at the
fatigue performance at rib-to-
floorbeam connections and design have been more rib-to-floorbeam connection.
• Fit-up of ribs is readily achieved extensive, and the connection
Normal shop tolerances are
with appropriate tolerances detailing has been more complex.
commonly used for rib to floorbeam/
With new structures, the typical diaphragm fit-up and are readily
depth is not restricted in the achieved, especially for smaller
same way. A deeper floorbeam/ bridges. A tighter tolerance is
diaphragm can be used, which unnecessary and tighter tolerances
lends to added system stiffness and have posed challenges that can be
simplified connection to the ribs. avoided. Fillet welds, which avoid
The floorbeam/diaphragm depth the necessary effort for complete or
below the ribs can be optimized for partial penetration groove welds,
maximum structural performance may be used between the rib and
rather than ensuring the total floorbeam/diaphragm. As the
system depth remains within the Bridge Welding Code (AASHTO/
bounds that an existing structure AWS 2016)1 allows, in places where
may impose. a fit-up gap greater than 1/16 in.
occurs, this can be addressed by
It should be noted that this guide
correspondingly increasing the size
is intended for OSD systems
of the fillet weld (Figure 32).
where a minimum depth of the

Floorbeam/Diaphragm Details
Figure 32 Commentary
As presented for
both open and closed
Depth (A) Depth (A) ribs, the depth of the
floorbeam/diaphragm
below the ribs needs to
be equal to or greater
than the rib depth (A)
Min. depth (A) Min. depth (A) to reduce potential for
increased stress levels
at the rib-to-floorbeam
welds. Engineers still
need to check the
floorbeam for shear and
Figure 32. Floorbeam/diaphragm depth detail
bending moment forces.

1. AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015_AMD1. Bridge Welding Code (BWC),

7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials and American Welding Society, Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference at 23 CFR
625.4(d)(2)(iii).)

7. Floorbeam 23
Acknowledgments
The research team thanks those who provided information and expertise to this project.
Ewa Bauer-Furbush, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Mark Bucci, Louisiana DOTD
Xiaohua (Hannah) Cheng, NJDOT
Nina Choy, Caltrans
Lian Duan, Caltrans
John Eberle, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Karl Frank, Professor Emeritus from The University of Texas at Austin
Brian Gill, NYC DOT
Dennis Heckman, MoDOT
Ian Hodgson, Lehigh University
Joe Keane, NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority Bridges and Tunnels
Brian Kozy, Michael Baker International
Wilson Lau, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Kevin McAnulty, NYC DOT
William Neubauer, NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority Bridges and Tunnels
Michael Rakowski, Delaware River Port Authority
Carl Redmond, NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority Bridges and Tunnels
Maria Rohner, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Steve Song, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Aris Stathopoulos, NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority Bridges and Tunnels
Michael Venuto, Delaware River Port Authority
Chuck Voong, Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District
Vikas Wagh, NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority Headquarters
Qi Ye, CHI Consulting Engineers, LLC

24 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design

References
AASHTO. 2012. AASHTO LRFD-6. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 6th Ed. (2012). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.
———. 2017. AASHTO LRFD-8. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 8th Ed. (2017). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.
(Incorporated by Reference in 23 CFR 625.4(d)(1)(v).)
———. 2020. AASHTO LRFD-9. AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications. 9th Ed. (2020). American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington,
DC. (Approved for use under the authority of 23 CFR 625.3(f)(2); see
FHWA memorandum, Approval of the use of structural design standards
(Apr. 11, 2022).)
AASHTO/AWS. 2016. AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/D1.5:2015 Bridge Welding
Code (BWC), 7th Ed., Amendment (Dec. 12, 2016). American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials and American Welding Society,
Washington, DC. (Incorporated by Reference in 23 CFR 625.4(d)(2)(iii).)
Connor, R., J. Fisher, W. Gatti, V. Gopalaratnam, B. Kozy, B. Leshko, D.
L. McQuaid, R. Medlock, D. Mertz, T. Murphy, D. Paterson, O. Sorensen,
and J. Yadlosky. 2012. Manual for Design, Construction, and Maintenance
of Orthotropic Steel Deck Bridges. FHWA-IF-12-027. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC.
Saunders, J., Y. Chen, J. Marks, I. Hodgson, and R. Sause. 2019. Fatigue
Resistant Rib-to-Floor Beam Connections for Orthotropic Steel Decks.
Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems (ATLSS) Engineering
Research Center, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.
Sim, H.-B. and C.-M. Uang. 2008. Effects of Fabrication Procedures and
Weld Melt-Through on Fatigue Resistance of Orthotropic Steel Deck Welds.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Sacramento, CA.

Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design 25

 Guide for Orthotropic Steel Deck Level 1 Design
FHWA-HIF-22-056 | December 2022
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE; Washington, DC 20590

Background image stylized from original taken by Craig Howell, license at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/