Bridge deck analysis of transversely post-tensioned concrete box girder bridges




bridge deck, grillage analysis, transversely post-tensioned concrete box girders


For rural bridges in Australia, a common design practice is pouring in-situ concrete on top of beams in order to tie all the beams together and distribute load. However, pouring concrete on-site creates more risk and contractors prefer to avoid it. Another method is using transverse post tensioning to tie beams. This article investigated the behaviour of transverse post-tensioning bars in providing load distribution between beams and ultimately comment on their effectiveness compared to in-situ poured decks. Currently, the industry has not completely investigated this matter in order to design post-tensioning accurately. Conservative estimates are currently used in industry today. Current practice is 50% of the design load on the beam where the load is applied in their design assumptions which is quite high. The team modelled concrete box girder bridges with transverse post-tensioning using grillage method. Several factors were investigated including bridge length and width, bridge skew and beam type. From the models, the team concluded that increasing the bridge span increases the load distribution, the load distribution difference is negligible for skew between 0 and 20 degrees and larger shear actions are observed with increased skew and width. It was determined that the worst-case total load on the beam where the load as applied was found to be 40.5%, 9.5% less than current practice. It is recommended that a similar investigation is conducted using a finite element method to gain a deeper understanding.


Download data is not yet available.


AASHTO 2017. ASH 7TO LRFD bridge design specifications. Washington, DC: AASHTO.

ANNAMALAI, G. & BROWN, R. C. 1990. Shear-transfer behavior of post-tensioned grouted shear-key connections in precast concrete-framed structures. Structural Journal, 87, 53-59. DOI:

AS5100 2017. Bridge Deisgn. Standards Australia.

BADWAN, I. Z. & LIANG, R. Y. 2007. Performance evaluation of precast posttensioned concrete multibeam deck. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 21, 368-374. DOI:

BAKHT, B., JAEGER, L. G. & CHEUNG, M. S. 1983. Transverse shear in multibeam bridges. Journal of Structural Engineering, 109, 936-949. DOI:

EL-REMAILY, A., TADROS, M. K., YAMANE, T. & KRAUSE, G. 1996. Transverse design of adjacent precast prestressed concrete box girder bridges. PCI journal, 41. DOI:

FU, C. C., PAN, Z. & AHMED, M. S. 2011. Transverse posttensioning design of adjacent precast solid multibeam bridges. Journal of performance of constructed facilities, 25, 223-230. DOI:

GRACE, N. F., JENSEN, E. A. & BEBAWY, M. R. 2012. Transverse post-tensioning arrangement for side-by-side box-beam bridges. PCI journal, 57. DOI:

HAMBLY, E. C. 1991. Bridge deck behaviour, CRC Press. DOI:

HANNA, K. E., MORCOUS, G. & TADROS, M. K. 2009. Transverse post-tensioning design and detailing of precast, prestressed concrete adjacentbox-girder bridges. PCI journal, 54, 160-174. DOI:

LABIB, S. N., EL-GENDY, M. G. & EL-SALAKAWY, E. F. 2021. Adjacent concrete box girders transversely post-tensioned at top flanges only: Experimental investigation. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 26, 04021017. DOI:

LI, J., WU, Z., SHI, C., YUAN, Q. & ZHANG, Z. 2020. Durability of ultra-high performance concrete–A review. Construction and Building Materials, 255, 119296. DOI:

NGO, N., PAPE, T., KOTZE, R. & PRITCHARD, R. 2015. Load testing and in-service monitoring of transversely stressed deck unit bridges. Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, 14, 85-96. DOI:

PCI 2014. PCI bridge design man-ual. Chicago, IL: PCI.

TMR 2021. Design Criteria for Bridges and Other Structures. Department of Transport and Main Roads, QLD.




How to Cite

J. Edmunds, L. Franco, Jayasinghe, T., Ginigaddara, T., Vaz-Serra, P. and Mendis, P. (2023) “Bridge deck analysis of transversely post-tensioned concrete box girder bridges”, Electronic Journal of Structural Engineering, 23(1), pp. 46–63. doi: 10.56748/ejse.234101.