Failure mechanism in steel truss bridge

Bridge Trusses are used in bridges to transfer the gravity load

of moving vehicles to supporting piers. Depending upon the site
conditions and the span length of the bridge, the truss may be
either through type or deck type. In the through type, the carriage
way is supported at the bottom chord of trusses. In the deck type
bridge, the carriage way is supported at the top chord of trusses.
Usually, the structural framing supporting the carriage way is
designed such that the loads from the carriage way are transferred
to the nodal points of the vertical bridge trusses.
Manda And Nakamura (2010) described case of progressive
collapse analysis for executed to clarify the three continuous steel
truss bridges. It is intended to clarify how the live load intensity and
distribution affect structural safety and ductility for these two truss
bridges. Therefore, structural models are simplified as two
dimensional and gusset plates are not considered. The progressive
collapse analysis is conducted for the four load cases and for the
two bridge models with different span ratios by large deformation
elastic-plastic analysis. Then the collapse process, the collapse load
and the final deformation are obtained. Furthermore, it is studied
how the span ratio and the live load distribution affect the truss
bridge ductility. Fig.1 and Fig.2 show the bridge model, a Warren
truss bridge with three continuous spans with a total length of
230m. Model Bridge-A has a span ratio of 1:2:1 with a main-span of
115m, a side span of 57.5m and a height of 10m. Although Model
Bridge-A is nearly the same as the I-35W, the objective of this study
is not to investigate the collapse causes of the I-35W but to conduct
the progressive collapse analysis for different live load distribution
and span ratio.

Model Bridge-B has a span ratio of 1:1.3:1 with a main-span of 92m,

a side of 69m and a height of 10m. The length of each upper chord
and lower chord is 11.5m.

For Model Bridge-A the span ratio of 1:2:1, the bridge collapse due
to the compressive elastic or plastic buckling in all four load cases.
Maximum strain of tensile member was less than 5% in the four
cases. It clarify that the bridge didn't collapse due to the tensile
failure. Model Bridge-B with the span ratio of 1:1.3:1 collapses due
to the compressive plastic buckling in the four load cases. Maximum
strain of tensile member was less than 5% in the four cases. The
bridge didn't collapse due to the tensile failure. Displacement
increased more gradually in Model Bridge-B. Also redistribution of
load is larger in Model Bridge-B. On the other hand, when the live
load distributed only near the intermediate support, less members
yield and redistribution of load is small. It is found that common
span ratio of Model Bridge-B is more ductile than Model Bridge-A.
And has higher redistribution of loads.
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl (2008) presented the progressive
collapse of steel truss bridges, the case of i-35w collapse. If a single
primary member or gusset plate connection of the main trusses

fails then the steel deck truss bridges being determinate systems
and not having redundancy and can progressively collapse over the
entire span. On 2007 the 40 years old I-35W steel deck truss bridge
over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, suddenly and without
almost any noticeable warning collapsed entirely into the river,
causing the deaths of 13 people and injury to more than 100 others
who were crossing the bridge in their vehicles at the time of the
collapse.

Fig. 1: A view of the I-35W bridge looking northeast

three analytical models are planned for this case; 3D elastic model
by using SAP2000 software and 3D inelastic model using Perform
software. This analysis aimed to establish the initiating cause of this
progressive collapse and to establish the progression of failure after
the first critical element fractured and started the progressive
collapse. The figure shows the 3D elastic model of the bridge which
predicts the initiation of progressive collapse after fracture of gusset
plate U10. At this time, we are in the process of building Perform
and Nastran models.

The I-35W bridge collapse initiation predicted by SAP2000

In the opinion of the author, and based on the results of the analysis
discussed in the above section briefly, the stresses created in the
bridge, due to addition of very heavy weight of construction
equipment and material placed on the bridge itself combined with
the already high stresses due to under-designed thicknesses of the
gusset plates U10 and addition of 5 cm of wearing surface concrete,
resulted in tragic and brittle progressive collapse of I-35w. In the
collapsed I-35W deck truss bridge, gusset plates U10 at four
locations on the main trusses were under-designed originally and
had already developed edge buckling during or prior to 2003 due to
addition of dead load of 5 cm wearing surface and curbs. The
addition of considerably heavy load due to construction material
and equipment , in the opinion of the author, have caused the
already over-stressed gusset plates U10 reach the limit of their net
section capacity and fracture through the net section. After fracture
of the net section of gusset plate U10, the progressive collapse of
main trusses occurred quite rapidly and in a brittle manner due to

lack of redundancy in the trusses and presence of net sections in the

perforated members and riveted/bolted gusset plates.

Member failure causes dynamic behavior of a truss bridge,

and displacement in the dynamic behavior can exceed that in the
static behavior. Therefore, dynamic analysis would be relevant for
evaluating the behavior of a truss bridge after member failure. in
this paper the post-member failure analysis method of a steel truss
bridge is studied by Yamaguchi et al in (2011). The truss bridge
model to be analyzed herein is constructed by referring to an
existing steel truss bridge whose diagonal members were all
corroded. The schematic of the bridge model is given in Figure 1.
The node numbers are assigned, as indicated in Figure 2. The
analysis of the bridge model is carried out by the finite element
method using Y-FIBER3D (2000). 2-node beam elements of fiber
type are employed, and 8 elements are used in modeling each truss
member except a lateral member that is modeled by 4 elements.
1364 beam elements are used in total.

The post-member-failure behavior of a truss bridge was investigated

by the static analysis and the dynamic analysis. Large discrepancy
between the results due to the two analyses was observed, which
was found attributable to the fact that the two analyses resulted in
different deformed configurations. Then an analysis method of the
post-member-failure behavior was proposed in an effort to include
the dynamic effect in the static analysis. The effectiveness of the
proposed method has been verified by comparing the result with
that due to the dynamic analysis. Since the computational time of
the proposed method is not much different from that of the static
analysis and much less than that of the dynamic analysis, it is
believed that the proposed method is promising for the postmember-failure analysis.
Yield condition steel truss elements
Yamaguchi and Yamada (2009) studied about the local
buckling analysis of steel truss bridge under seismic loading. the
local buckling in the lower chord member of a truss bridge is to be
looked into. local buckling can be simulated in the finite element
analysis (FEA) with shell elements. even though it is not impossible
to model the whole bridge by shell elements and conduct nonlinear
dynamic FEA, beam elements are employed exclusively for the
analysis of seismic design. however, since the cross section of a
beam element does not deform, the direct simulation of the local
buckling by beam elements is not possible. To that end, the existing
criterion for local buckling in terms of average strain is tested for
the case when tensile yielding precedes compression, failing to
confirm its applicability. Then the criterion is modified by
introducing the updated average strain. The seismic response
analysis is then conducted to show the significance of the proposed

criterion. When beam elements are employed for the seismic

response analysis of a bridge, the criterion for local buckling is
necessary. However, it has been concluded in the present study that
when tensile yielding preceded, the existing criterion could not give
the correct judgment. The modification of the criterion in which the
average strain was replaced by the updated average strain has
been proposed. The seismic response analysis of a steel truss
bridge then demonstrated the significance of the proposed criterion.
Wang et al (2009) studied on the mechanical behaviors of a
special joint between a rigid suspension cable and a truss girder in a
rigid suspension stiffened steel truss bridge. Both a model test and
a numerical finite element analysis (FEA) have been conducted, and
relevant information about the models used, loading procedure and
test scheme is presented. The study was on Dongjiang Bridge in
Dongguan City is the first rigid suspension stiffened steel truss
bridge in China. The 432 m long bridge, with a centre span of 208 m
and side spans of 112 m, is also the first double-deck highway
bridge in China, and it has six lanes on the upper deck and eight
lanes on the lower deck (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Structural dimensions of the Dongjiang Bridge (m).

The joint was analyzed using a finite element (FE) model, and the
results are compared with those from the model test. The threedimensional FE model consists of shell elements, In this section, the
experimental and finite element analysis (FEA) results are
summarized. Some of the results obtained by the two methods are
compared and a good agreement is observed. The two sets of
results have similar distribution patterns, and ratios between the
experimental results to numerical analysis results are mostly within
the range from 0.8 to 1.2. At the gusset, where the stiffness is
bigger and the plate is thicker, the stresses are relatively small and
will not be considered in the following discussion. On the other
hand, the stresses on Sections I and J are much larger than those on

the other sections, and will be investigated in more detail in this

section.
A comprehensive study on the special joint in Dongjiang Bridge has
been conducted and the following conclusions can be made based
on the model test and finite element analysis. Good agreement is
achieved between model test results and the FEA results, and the
relative errors for most of the results are no more than 10%. The
results from this study would be useful as references for design of
joints in steel structures, especially special joints in rigid suspension
stiffened steel truss bridges.
Reference
Astaneh-Asl, A., (2008). Progressive Collapse of Steel Truss
Bridges, the Case of I- 5W Collapse Invited Keynote paper,
Proceedings, 7th International Conference on Steel Bridges,
Guimaraes, Portugal, 4-6 June,
Manda. A, Nakamura. S, (2010) Progressive Collapse Analysis
of Steel Truss Bridges proceedings. Of the School. Engineering.
Tokai University, Series E vol. 35 pp 27-34
Yamaguchi. E, Yamada. K, (2009) Local Buckling Analysis Of
Steel Truss Bridge Under Seismic Loading International Journal of
Advanced Steel Construction Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 224-236
Yamaguchi. E, Okamoto. R, and Yamada. K, (2011) PostMember-Failure Analysis Method of Steel Truss Bridge Procedia
Engineering vol. 14, pp 656661
Wang. R, Huang. Y, Li. Q, Zhen. X, (2009) Model test and
numerical analysis of a special joint for a truss bridge Journal of
Constructional Steel Research 65, pp 1261-1268