Fatigue Provisions of IRS Bridge Code V/s International Practices

by
Shri Virendra Kumar, DyCE(Bridge)/WC Railway, Jabalpur and Shri P V Reddy, SrDEN(Co-ord)/Trichy Under the guidance of Shri V K Sood, Prof(Track-II)/IRICEN, Pune

1.0

Introduction 1.1 What is fatigue? Generally speaking, fatigue is a progressive failure of a part under repeated, cyclic, or fluctuating loads. Thus, fatigue may be defined as a phenomenon due to which a structure may fail (fracture) at a stress level less than that required to cause failure under static conditions. Fatigue phenomenon is primary source of failures of metals in service. Theoretically speaking, if we provide proper precautions against creep and corrosion, a structure subjected to steady, static load less than the limit strength of the metal should last forever. 1.2 The criterion for fatigue failure is the simultaneous action of cyclic stress, tensile stress, and plastic strain. If, any one of these can be eliminated, fatigue is also eliminated. Cyclic stress is readily visualized. The tensile stress is apparent to provide crack formation, but we should also bear in mind that though compressive stresses will not cause fatigue, compression loads will. However, in actual practice it is not possible to design railway steel bridges in such a way so as to eliminate all these factors altogether completely as railway bridges are subjected to impact loads suddenly and repeated loads recurring for large number of cycles. 1.3 Some typical factors affecting fatigue strength are the following:(i) Stress Raisers- These can be in the form of a notch or inclusion. The materials with high strength are much more notch sensitive than softer alloys. (ii) Corrosion- The corroded parts form pits and act like notches. Due to loss of section, there is increase in actual stresses. This type of failure is referred to as corrosion fatigue. (iii) Fretting corrosion - This occurs when two parts are press fitted or clamped together under vibratory loading. This is called fretting

corrosion which results in either stress concentration or change in material size. (iv) Decarburisation- This is loss of carbon from the surface producing a soft skin. Because of bending and torsion, stresses are highest at the surface. 1.4 Various terms used in regard to fatigue are briefly given as below. (i) Nominal stress- Obtained from the simple theory in tension, in bending and torsion neglecting geometric discontinuities. (ii) Maximum Stress- The largest or highest algebraic value of stress in a stress cycle. (iii) Minimum Stress- The smallest or lowest algebraic value of stress in a stress cycle. (iv) Mean Stress- The algebraic mean of maximum and minimum stress in one cycle. (v) Stress Range- The algebraic difference of maximum and minimum stress in one cycle. (vi) Stress amplitude- It is half the value of stress range. (vii) Stress Ratio- The ratio of minimum stress to maximum stress. (viii) Fatigue Life- The number of stress cycles, which can be sustained for a give test condition. (ix) Fatigue Strength- The highest or greatest stress that can be sustained by a member for a given number of stress cycles without fracture.

Various Types of Simplified Repeated loadings

1.5

S-N Curves- Fatigue life and fatigue strength are determined by SN curve. To draw S-N curve, a number of tests on material are performed. In the case of repeated loading, the material is tested at various stress levels and the number of cycles to failure is counted. Eventually enough data is accumulated to plot endurance curve or S-N diagram, in which failure stress (S) is plotted v/s the number (N) of cycles to failure. Vertical axis is usually a linear scale and the horizontal axis is usually a logarithmic scale.

The most important characteristic of fatigue failure is that it is a progressive failure and cumulative in nature i.e. damage done by repeated cyclic loading keep on accumulating until failure. 1.6 Fatigue failures in the form of cracking steel sections are a major cause of concern in railway track bridges on account of repeated stresses. Fatigue failures are often the result of geometrical or

strain

discontinuities,

poor

workmanship

or

improper

shop

techniques, material defects. Following are critical locations of cracking. (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) Ends of diagonal members near middle of span due to reversal of stresses. Sharp edges at cut notches in stringer flanges at connection with cross girders Top flange plates or flange angles of plate girders or rail bearers especially below sleepers. Roots of channels and angles on account of rolling defects Corrosion pits at various locations in tension members, joints at which heavy shear is transmitted. Hence, the bridges are to be designed with due regard to fatigue consideration.

2.0

IRS Steel Bridge Code:Railway bridges are subjected to dynamic loads causing fluctuating loads (cyclic stresses) in members leading to fatigue phenomenon. Para 3.6 of this code deals with fatigue design and fabrication of steel bridges. The para 3.6 of IRS Steel Bridge Code is reproduced below:-

2.1

IRS Provisions of Fatigue Clause 3.6- Fluctuations of Stress (fatigue) Clause 3.6.1- Fluctuations of stresses may cause fatigue failure of members or connections at lower stresses than those at which they would fail under static load. Such failures would be primarily due to stress concentrations introduced by the constructional details. Clause 3.6.2- All details shall be designed to avoid as far as possible stress concentrations likely to result in excessive reductions of the fatigue strength of members or connections. Care shall be taken to avoid a sudden reduction of the section of a member or a part of a member, especially where bending occurs. Clause 3.6.3- Stresses due to dead load, live load and impact, stresses resulting from curvature and eccentricity of track and secondary stresses as defined in clause 3.3.2 (a) only shall be considered for effects due to fatigue. All other items mentioned in clause 3.1 and secondary stresses as defined in clause 3.3.2(b) shall be ignored when considering fatigue. Clause 3.6.4- To allow for the effect of fatigue the allowable working stresses shall be determined from Appendix G. In no case the permissible stresses given in clause 3.7 (Table II) 3.8, 3.9 and 3.18 relating to tensions, compression and bending shall be exceeded. This Appendix covers mild and high tensile steel fabricated or connected by welding, riveting or bolting. The allowable stresses given in the Appendix are the principal stresses at the point under consideration. Thus, in the

design of girder web the combined effect of both bending and co-existent shear stresses shall be considered. The allowable stress P will depend on the ratio of minimum stress fmin to maximum stress fmax, number of repetitions of stress cycles N, the method of fabrication and the type of connection. In determining the ratio fmin/ fmax gross area shall be used. Clause 3.6.5- All members of standard bridge girders should be designed for 10 million cycles of stresses produced under minimum and maximum of the design load. Note:-No allowance for fatigue need be made in the design of foot over bridges. Clause 3.6.6- Connection riveted or bolted- The number of rivets and bolts shall be calculated without any allowance for fatigue but rivets or bolts subjected to reversal of stress during passage of live load shall be designed for the arithmetical sum of the maximum load plus 50% of the reversed load. In the case of wind bracings, the connection shall be designed to resist the greater load only. Clause 3.6.7- The welds shall be designed according to the

permissible stresses given in IRS Welded Bridge Code. 2.2 SHORT COMINGS OF IRS APPROACH (1) There is no rational basis for adopting counts of 10 million number of cycle to determine the allowable stress levels. (2) Stress-ratio procedure does not take into account the effect of all stress ranges experienced by a member. (3) Material S-N curve forms the basis of all fatigue analysis and design which is not the case with the present procedure. (4) The fatigue is cumulative phenomena which is not reflected in above procedure.

2.3.1

IRS code is silent about what type of load (train/vehicles

load(s)) constitute a cycle for the purpose of the clause. Further, the code also does not take into account the fact that different members of a truss undergo different number of stress cycles when a train passes over a bridge. For example, a stringer beam is subjected to alternative loading and offloading with passage of each bogie but bottom, top and diagonals will not. Thus a stringer beam is subjected to much more fatigue stresses than main truss members. Similarly, a cross-girder is also subjected to more fatigue stresses than main truss members. In a nutshell loading on a bridge is quite complex depending on truss configuration, vehicle/train axle configuration and axle configuration in vehicle. This will be clear from the Influence Lines diagrams for an open web girder members, which are given below.

From the above it is seen that when the distance between two-bogie centers is equal or more than the Influence Line length, there will be one significant stress cycle with successive loading and offloading of the member with passage of each bogey. For members with longer Influence Line lengths, number of significant stress cycles will be one only for one train as ones a train is entered the bridge there will always be some axles till complete train is passed. This has also been verified by instrumentation of bridge undertaken by different railways. Load spectrum obtained for different members during instrumentation of a bridge clearly demonstrates this. Consider the example of a through truss bridge with span = 38.1 m No of Panels =6 Panel length= 6.35 m The stress response in a stringer girder, a cross girder and a lower chord member under passage a heavy axle load train is shown below. It can be seen that though the maximum stresses for all the three members is in the same range, number of stress cycles experienced are vastly different.

2.2

Fatigue is a cumulative phenomenon; this is not reflected in

the above procedure. This is important in assessing the residual life of bridges/bridge members also specially with increasing axle loads (CC+6/CC+8/25 T loads).

2.3.2

Factors affecting the number and magnitude of stress cycles

1. Length of Influence line 2. Train composition & Traffic over the bridge 3. Type of bridge construction 4. Section properties of the member 5. Fatigue properties 6. Impact factors a. Stringers and hangers see one stress cycle for every car b. But lower chords see only one cycle for the entire train because it is not off-loaded while train is passing. c. Long span members such as plate girders and deck girders experience only one major stress cycle for each train

More no. of stress cycles in short members, leads to rapid consumption of their fatigue lives. 2.3.3 Due to above reasons for railways it has become critical now

because of 1. Axle loads of engines & wagons are increasing 2. Bridges are ageing 3. One cycle per train to many cycles per train as discussed in foregoing paras

3.0

AREMA Guidelines to evaluate stresses, fatigue damage and

remaining life of Steel Bridges The number of cycles to failure (N) of a bridge member is generally given by: N= A x SR-3.0 where, N = Estimated minimum number of cycles to failure SR = allowable stress range, ksi ( in Kips per sq inch) A = constant, whose value is dependent on the susceptibility of the member to fatigue. Effect of Fatigue Properties AREMA classifies the fatigue resistance of a member into eight categories based on the susceptibility of the member to fatigue The eight categories are: A, B, B` C, D, E, E`& F. , Out of these, A is the least fatigue prone & E Category F is only used for the design of welds A values for AREMA Fatigue Categories is the most fatigue prone.

values

for

AREMA

Fatigue A

Categories Fatigue Category A B B C D E E 2.5X1010 1.2X1010 6.1X109 4.4X109 2.2X109 1.1X109 3.8X108

AREMA Fatigue Categories, A B B` C D E E` Plain material High strength bolted joints or fully inspected butt welds Welded stiffeners New rivets Cover-plated beams < 0.8 thick Cover-plated beams > 0.8 thick

Each category is associated with an S-N curve. An S-N curve describes the fatigue performance of member by relating stress range to the minimum number of cycles to failure. The constant A relating to stress range to the number of cycles is determined based on the fatigue category of the member and the corresponding S-N curve.

4.0

Fatigue provisions of BS-5400 Fatigue provisions of BS-5400 are based on the concept of cumulative

fatigue damage. The code concerns with the fatigue design methodology for highway and railway bridges and takes into consideration the various drawbacks of IRS approach. The methods of fatigue assessment provided in the code are based on Palmgren-Miners damage summation model. Fatigue life assessment is based on the S-N curve approach wherein the number of cycles to failure is dependent only on stress range and not on maximum stress values. For fatigue assessment of Railway bridges the provisions and design methodology have been described in a systematic manner. The important provisions concerned with design of railway bridges are discussed below. 4.1 STRESS RANGE CALCULATION, Rmax

(a) Cl. 6.1.1 For Welded Details Rmax is taken as the greatest algebraic difference between principal stresses not more than 45 degree apart in any one stress cycle. i.e. if max is 9.4 kg/mm & min is (-) 2.0 kg/mm , then Rmax would be 11. 4 kg/mm . (b) Cl. 6.1.3 For Non-Welded Details In case, stress range is entirely on compression side i.e. when there is no stress reversal taking place, the effect of fatigue loading may be ignored. (c) In case of stress reversal the effective stress range to be used in the fatigue assessment Rmax is = 60% of range from zero stress to maximum compressive stress +
2 2 2 2

100 % of range from zero stress to maximum tensile stress i.e. when max (+) 9.4 kg/mm & min is (-) 2 kg/mm then
2

Rmax would be equal to 7.64 kg/mm (=0.6 x 9.4 + 2). It is evident that for the same values of maximum and minimum principal stresses, the stress range taken for fatigue analysis in welded details is much higher as compared to corresponding values for non-welded details. more susceptible to fatigue failure then the non-welded members. 4.2 Standard Live Loads Considered It therefore, implies that under the same loading conditions the welded details are

4.2.1 Type RU Loading : This loading allows for all combination of vehicles currently running or projected to run on railways in Europe including United Kingdom and is to be adopted for the design of bridges carrying main line railways of 1.4m gauge and above. RU loading consists of four 250 kN concentrated loads preceded and followed by a uniformly distributed load of 80 kN/m. 4.2.2 Type RL Loading: Nominal type RL loading consists of a single 200kN concentrated load coupled with a uniformly distributed load of 50 kN/m for loaded length up to 100m. For loaded lengths in excess of 100m the distributed a nominal load shall be 50 kN/m for the first 100m and shall be reduced to 25 kN/m for lengths in excess of 100m. Alternatively two concentrated nominal loads, one of 300 kN and the other of 150 kN, spaced at 2.4m intervals along the track, shall be used on deck elements where this gives a more severe condition. These two concentrated loads shall be deemed to include dynamic effects. RL loading is a reduced loading for use only on passenger rapid transit for use only on passenger rapid transit railway systems on lines where main line locomotives and rolling stock do not operate. 4.3 VARIOUS FACTORS (a) Design Life factor k1- It is assumed 1 for standard design life of 120 years for standard load spectra given by table 2 for RU loading and table 3 for RL loading of the BS-5400. (b) Multiple Cycle factor k2- This is applied when there are more than one

cycle of stress induced by the loading event. (c) RU Loading factor k3-Depends upon detailed class of connection and base length of point load influence line. (d) GMT factor k4- k4 is equal to 1 for GMT of 18 to 27, which is GMT assumed in standard RU/RL load spectra. Factor reduces with increase in GMT. (e) Lane Factor k5- Takes into consideration the stress induced at detail due to two tracks. (f) RL loading factor k6- IT is just as RU loading factor k3. But relevant value is to be taken from table 7 of the BS-5400. 4.4 DESIGN
r-

N RELATIONSHIP

Clause 11.2Computation of no. of cycles to failures The values given in Table-8 are based on two standard deviations below the mean line with a probability of failure of 2.3%. The probabilities of failure associated with various numbers of standard deviations below the mean line are given in Clause A.1 of Appendix-A of BS-5400 part-10. The number of repetitions to failure N of any one stress range from the equation N=K/
2

is obtained

m
rr
r

or

Log10N = Log10k2 mlog10

Values of k2 & m are as given in Table 8. Clause 11.3 Treatment of low stress cycles Number of repetitions of each stress range r less than 0 should be reduced in the proportion ( r/ 0)2. Where
0

= Stress range given by equation in Clause 11.2 N = 107 i.e. 10 million cycles

4.5 CALCULATION OF LIMITING STRESS RANGE, T First find 0 constant amplitude non-propagating stress range for the constructional detail, as chosen appropriately on the basis of Table 17,

this value is to be taken from Table -8. e.g. for Detail Class D for riveted type of connections, m = 3.0 k2 = 1.52 x 1012 = 53 N/mm2 The limiting stress range can now be calculated in accordance with Clause 9.2.2.1 (d)
0
T

= k1, k2, k3, k4, k5, = k1 , k2 , k4 , k5 , k6 ,

for RU loading for RL loading

4.6

CHECK FOR DESIGN ADEQUACY: per

The design adequacy of the given detail may now be checked as Clause 9.2.2.2 and Clause 9.2.2.3 Where
Rmax

(Maximum Stress Range) does not exceed

, i.e

Rmax

T,

the

detail may be considered to have a fatigue life in excess of the specified design life. Where (i)
Rmax

is more than

, we have following two options:

The detail may be assessed by more precise procedure given in Clause 9.3. The detail may be strengthened so as to reduce should be designed to a higher class. Rmax or it

(ii)

4.7 4.7.1

MORE PRECISE PROCEDURE OF DAMAGE CALCULATION General

This method involves a calculation of Miners summation and may be used for any details for which the -N relationship is known and for any known load for stress spectra.
r

4.7.2

Design Spectrum for Standard Loading The design spectrum can be determined by the use of either table 2 for RU loading or table 3 of RL loading (amended where appropriate in accordance with 7.3.3). These tables indicate, for simply supported members, the equivalent frequency of occurrence of stress ranges of varying magnitudes resulting from the passage of the individual trains forming various standard traffic types, where the stress ranges are expressed as proportions of the maximum stress range and the load proportion, kw is the ratio of actual to standard gross weights of vehicles, bogies or axles in a load spectrum. Now in order to draw the standard load spectra for a particular type of loading one has to determine the maximum stress range due to that loading and then the histogram of number of cycles verses stress ranges of varying magnitudes can be plotted with the help of Table 2 or Table 3 of the code for the appropriate base length(L). This method of drawing standard load spectra is based on the understanding of the provision given in Clause 7.3. and Appendix-E of the code. The annual traffic tonnage for standard traffic types and the composition of standard traffic mix are given in Table 15 and Table 16 of the code.

4.7.3 In the case of loading from more than one track, account should be taken of the possibility of stress fluctuations arising from the passage of trains on not more than two track, both separately and in combination. As an approximation, the effects of two track loading may be obtained by dividing R max (see 9.3.2.1) by the coefficient k5 which can be obtained from table 6. 4.7.4 Where the approach, passage and departure of a unit uniformly distributed load procedures more than one cycle of stress, as for instance in multi-span longitudinal or cross members or in continuous deck slabs, al the cycles should be taken into account. The appropriate standard trains composing the load spectra should be

traversed across the relevant point load influence lines and the resulting stress histories should be analyzed by the reservoir method, given in appendix B, to derive the respective stress spectra. These should then be combined with the appropriate annual occurrences obtained from table 15 to 16, proportioned for the required traffic volume and multiplied by the specified design life to produce the overall design spectrum. As an approximation, the effect of the additional cycles may be obtained by dividing either
R max

(see 9.3.2.1) or

/k R max 5

(see

9.3.2.2) by the coefficient k2 which should be obtained from 9.2.4. 4.8 Design Spectrum for Non-Standard Loading 4.8.1 Where the loading does not comply with 7.3.1 the appropriate train should be traversed across the relevant point load influence lines and the resulting stress histories should be analyzed by the rainflow method to derive the respective stress spectra. These should then be combined with the appropriate total occurrences in the design life of the bridge to compile the overall design spectrum. For nonwelded details the stress range should be modified as given in clause 6.1.3. 4.8.2 In assessing an existing structure, a design spectrum may be compiled from strain readings or traffic records obtained from continuous monitoring. 4.8.3 Simplification of Spectrum Where a non-standard loading is used in accordance with 7.1 or the stress ranges are obtained from strain gauge readings, the design spectrum should be divided into at least 10 equal intervals of stress. All the stress ranges in any one interval should be treated as the mean range in that interval and low tress ranges should be treated in accordance with clause 11.3. 4.9 Calculation of Damage Using the design spectrum the value of Miners summation n/N should be calculated in accordance with clause 11 and it should not exceed 1.0 for the fatigue life of the detail to be acceptable.

5.0 CONCLUSION: The British Code (BS-5400, Part 10) addresses the problem of fatigue design exhaustively and if provisions are based on rational. It takes into consideration the design parameters such as traffic density, number of lanes, loading type, design life, multiple cycles of stress produced by loading event and suggest a simplified approach for assessing the fatigue life of the component being designed. Fatigue life of the component depends on the type of connection adopted which is also taken into consideration by choosing different values of parameters describing the shape of the characteristic S-N curve of the fabrication material. 6.0 6.1 LIMITATIONS AND AREA OF FURTHER RESEARCH The simplified procedure given in the code is applicable for standard type of loadings applicable to European conditions. For IRS type of loading the values of loading parameters and various coefficients needs to be developed for which further study and research is required. For using detailed assessment procedure a standard load spectra applicable to types of trains and traffic density found on Indian Railways needs to be developed. 6.3 The characteristic to be developed S-N curves for the steel and the types of connections adopted for design of bridges in Indian Railways needs for proper assessment of the fatigue strength of bridge members.

6.2

REFERENCES 1. British Standards BS 5400: Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges, Part 10. Code of Practice for Fatigue, British Standards Institution, 1980. 2. British Standards BS 5400: Steel, Concrete and Composition Bridges, Part 2. Specification for Loads, British Standards Institution, 1978. 3. IRS Code of Practice for the Design of Steel/Wrought Iron Bridges (Steel Bridge code) Revised 1962, (with all the amendments). 4. Metal Fatigue: Theory and Design, by A. F. Madayag

AcknowledgementsAuthors acknowledge with deep sense of gratitude for keenness and enthusiasm shown by Shri V. K. Sood, Prof (Track-II) for undertaking the above project. Authors also express their gratitude to Shri Ajay Goyal, Sr Prof (Bridge) for extending valuable guidance. Authors are also thankful to Shri Ganesh Kumar, DyCE(Br-II)/CR, Mumbai for timely assistance and expertise provided in preparing the above report.