ECONOMICS OF STEEL BRIDGES V/S CONCRETE BRIDGES:

R.K. Gupta R.K. Gupta, born in 1958, Graduated

Executive Director, in Civil Engg. with Hons in 1980 and
Bridge & Structures then after, obtained M.Tech. (Structures)
RDSO, Manak Nagar degree in 1982 from IIT Delhi
Lucnow-226011 Presently, he is Head of the Department
India dealing with Bridge & Structures at
[email protected] Research, Designs & Standard
Organization (RDSO) of Indian Railways.

In the good olden days, for higher spans, steel girders whether plate girders or
triangulated girders were pre-dominantly used. After the advent of pre-stressed concrete,
its use in higher span bridges increased tremendously. Main reason behind use of PSC
girders is due to its initial economical cost. No doubt, PSC girders are economical in the
initial stage of construction, but the same may not be true if we consider the life cycle
cost including other factors. In this paper, author is trying to explain the various factors,
which are mainly ignored while favouring PSC girders over steel girders.
1. Introduction:
In any infrastructural development of a country, Bridge construction is one of the most
important constructions. It is very costly structure as compared to others. Lot of
considerations are required in doing the investigation, deciding its configuration, type
span and final construction of the bridge. A Bridge properly constructed will serve the
cause successfully without any hindrance for a longer period and at the economical cost.
Changes in shape, material, configuration and practice have been a continuous process
for safe, expeditious, economical and elegant construction of a bridge. For higher spans,
in the olden days, steel girders were predominantly used, whether that was for Railway
Bridge or Road Bridge or Rail cum Road Bridge. Technology of pre stressed concrete
was developed around 1935. First bridge of pre-stressed concrete was constructed
simultaneously in many countries of Europe around 1940. India was not lagging behind
in adaptation of this technology. In India, first time, Indian Railways used PSC Girder
Bridge in 1949 on Assam Rail Link Project followed by another PSC girder bridge by
PWD/ Tamil Nadu. After that, a new era of bridge construction had started. Now, most
of the bridges particularly of higher spans are made of pre-stressed concrete.
Adaptation of new technology is always a good thing. In similar fashion, prestressed
concrete technology for bridges was not only welcomed but was also adapted in such a
way, which seems to be somewhat erroneous. Result is that, everywhere, PSC girder
bridges are being adopted without giving consideration to many factors.
Main reasons for not preferring steel girder bridges are:
v Its initial cost is more.
v It requires recurring expenditure in painting.
In contrary to that, about PSC girders, it is believed that:
v PSC girders are cheaper.
v It does not require any type of maintenance.

1
 No doubt, PSC girder bridges are economical in initial cost, but the same may not be true
considering life cycle cost of a PSC girder bridge as compared to that of steel girder
bridge. To illustrate the matter, let us examine some of the aspects to visualise about the
factual position.
2. Availability of configuration and its repercussion on fixing the rail level:
Leaving about plate girders, which are adapted in Railway bridges upto 30.5m (100 ft)
spans, for 30.5 m span and above (it is worth while to point out that for 30.5 m span,
standard drawing for plate girder and triangulated girder, both are available), 3 types of
shapes are available in steel bridge i.e.
Ø Deck type of triangulated girder.
Ø Semi through type of triangulated girder
Ø Through type of triangulated girder

Adaptation of any of the above mentioned type depends upon the situation. Deck type
shape is adopted where HFL is much below the formation level of the approach
embankment of a bridge. Semi through and through type of triangulated girders are
adapted where HFL is high and as such, deck type of triangulated girder is not possible to
provide.

Let us look about the prestressed concrete girder bridge side. Most of the PSC girders are
of deck type. Hence, alternative to deck type of triangulated girder bridge is available in
PSC Girder Bridge also. Now think about alternative to semi through and through type of
steel girder bridges. In case of PSC girders, two alternatives are available, ie either to
adapt deck type of PSC girder or to go for special type PSC girders of bow- string
configuration. Due to special configuration, bow- string type may not have the same cost
advantage as in case of normal shape of PSC -I girders and box girders.

For a time being, overruling the possibility of bow- string girders, now again come to the
deck type of alternative. With the standard PSC girders and steel girders, a comparison
has been done among the two as per standard plan of RDSO and the same is shown in
table No.-1

From table No.-1, it is clear that total height from bed block to rail level in case of the
PSC girder bridges (particularly for PSC box girders), are almost matching with that of
steel girders for smaller spans i.e. for 12.2m and 18.3m spans. In case, I type of PSC
girders are selected, although total height from bed block to rail level will be more as
compared to that parameter of the corresponding spans of steel girders. Here, we see that
the rail level difference being of 740 mm and 846 mm for 12.2 m and 18.3 m spans
respectively. Since the differences are not of appreciable value, hence, the same can be
ignored.

As and when the spans are increasing, rail level difference between the PSC girders and
the steel girders are increasing tremendously for the same span. Due to increase in rail
level, particularly in case of adaptation of PSC girders, height of embankment will have
to be raised. Raising of embankment height will cause many complicacies. Let us come
to those complicacies and evaluate its repercussion.

2
 Table No.1
Rail level difference in PSC girder and steel girder for different spans.

PSC girder Steel girder

Total
Total Level
height
height difference
Type of from
S. from in PSC
Span girder & bed Type of girder &
N bed girder &
drawing block drawing number
block to steel
number. to rail
rail level girder
level in
in mm
mm
1. 12.2m Box Girder 1780 Welded plate girder 1730 50mm
(40 ft) B-1533 B-1528
2. 12.2m I -Girder 2470 Welded plate girder 1730 740mm
(40 ft) B-1565 B-1528
3. 18.3m Box Girder 2370 Welded plate girder 2329 41mm
(60 ft) B-1519 B-1529
4. 18.3m I - Girder 3175 Welded plate girder 2329 846mm
(60 ft) BA-10227 B-1529
5. 30.5m Box Girder 3050 Riveted triangulated 1583 1467 mm
(100 ft) BA-10222 girder
BA-11341 Welded
triangulated girder 1583
BA-11461
6. 45.1m Box Girder 4250 Riveted triangulated 1625 2620 mm
(150 ft) B-1750 girder (Average)
BA-11361
Welded triangulated 1637
girder
BA-11481
7. 61.0 m Box Girder 5700 Riveted through 2176 3500 mm
(200 ft) Not (approx) type of triangulated (approx)
standardised girder
BA-11321
7. 76.2m Box Girder 7100 Riveted 2176 4900 mm
(250 ft) Not (approx) BA-11151 (approx)
standardised
8. 92.0m Box Girder 9500 Not standardised 2500 7000 mm
Not (Refere (Approx) (Approx)
standardised nce
taken
from
JURL
project)

3
3. Repercussion of higher rail level in case of PSC girders:
From Table No.1, we have seen that in case of adaptation of PSC girders, rail level will
be more than that of steel girders of the same span. For this, we have to raise the
embankment height so as to provide the required vertical clearance with reference
particular HFL by certain amount as shown in the last column of table No.-1. Raising of
embankment by this additional height is with reference to the through type of triangulated
steel girder bridges of the same span. Additional raising of embankment will require
extra land width, extra earthwork and finally extra energy consumption in climbing of the
trains by that much extra height. It is worthwhile to point out that extra energy
consumption will be of recurring nature.

For comparison sake, calculation has been done regarding the extra energy consumption
in case of PSC girder bridges with reference to steel girder bridges for 4500 tonnes goods
train (a standard load configuration of a goods train) and 15 coaches of passenger train.
The same is reflected in table No.-2.
Table No.2

Details of extra energy consumption, extra land area required and extra
earthwork in case of PSC girder bridges for different spans.

Theoretical
Rail Extra
Extra energy consumption extra land
level earthwork in
and cost area in
differ cubic meter
square meter
ence
For 4500 For 15 coach
Span in
S tonnes goods passenger
in PSC
N train train For 1 For 1 For 1 For 1
meter and
Steel Ene Ene Appro in 100 in 150 in 100 in 150
Approx
gird -rgy -rgy ximate gradi gradi gradi- gradi
imate
-er in in in cost in -ent -ent ent -ent
cost in
meter Joule Joule Rup
6 Rupees
x10 x10 6 -ees
1 30.5 1.47 71.3 79.2 14.3 15.9 6406 9609 19985 29978

2 45.1 2.62 127.1 141.2 25.4 28.2 12624 18936 45571 68357

3 61.0 3.50 169.8 188.7 34.0 37.8 19485 29227 72301 108452

4 76.2 4.90 237.7 264.1 47.5 52.8 28077 42116 129794 194691

5 92.0 7.00 339.6 377.3 67.9 75.4 45990 68985 256435 384653

While calculating the extra energy consumption, theoretical value has been enhanced by
10.0% to accommodate the efficiency factor and additional resistance on account of
gradient due to climbing. Further more, cost of electricity has been taken as Rs. 4.0 per
unit (the cost taken from the Electrical department, which on an average basis, Railways
is paying to the Electricity Boards).

4
Due to fixing of higher embankment height, land requirement and earthwork in the
embankment will also be more. Hence, these two parameters have also been worked out
and shown in table No.2. Requirement of land width and earthwork is a function of bank
height. Hence, for calculation purpose, bank height of 3.0 m, just at the approach of the
river bridge has been taken, which can be considered as a representative height in most of
the bridges. With this reference, for single line having bank width of 6.85m for PSC
sleeper at the top and embankment slope of 2 H to 1 V, extra land requirement and
earthwork has been worked out.

3.1 Consequence of extra consumption of energy

Consumption of extra energy in climbing the additional height in case of PSC girder
bridges as compared to steel bridges should not only be compared with its cost
component. It should be clearly taken in mind that the energy is mostly derived from the
fossil fuel, a non-renewable source of energy. Furthermore, extra consumption of energy
produces extra pollution in the environment, which is an irreparable damage to the
environment.

4.Cost comparison of the steel and PSC girder bridges:

To have a fair comparison among the two, field data has been collected, particularly
regarding cost of PSC girders, steel girders, earthwork etc. The same is reproduced as
below:

4.1 Cost of PSC girders:

Construction organisation of the Northern Railway has recently accepted the rate of PSC
girder bridges of various spans. The same is given in table No.-3:

Table No. 3
Cost of PSC girders:

S Span in Per span cost of the PSC box Remarks

N meter girder including launching
1 22.8 Rs. 13.0 lacs Simply supported span

2 34.0 Rs. 29.0 lacs Simply supported span

3 45.72 Rs. 50.0 lacs Simply supported span

4 92.0 Rs. 2.03 lacs per Rate is on an average basis for

meter run continuous PSC box girder having
span of 64 m+92 m+64 m.

There are so many factors affecting the cost. On an average, upto 30 m span, cost of PSC
girders are coming as 1.2 lacs /running meter including cost of sub structure and super
structure. Average cost of 92 m span is coming to Rs.3.86 lacs/m including cost of sub-
structure and super structure. Out of Rs. 3.86 lacs/m run, Rs. 1.83 lacs/m run is the cost of
substructure and Rs. 2.23 lacs/m run is the cost of super structure

5
4.2. Cost of steel girders:
Recently, Construction Organisation of the Northern Railway has called for tender for
steel girder bridges of various spans. Tender is under finalisation. Rate of the lowest
tenderer i.e. of M/s Triveni Structural, Allahabad is given in table No.-4
Table No.4
Cost of steel girders:
S Span Weight per Base price Quoted rate Total rate per tonne
N span tonnes per tonne above base price including launching
1 80.0m 350 Rs.61000/- 6.5% Rs.64,965/-

2 102.0m 550 Rs.61000/- 6.5% Rs.64,965/-

3 154.0m 950 to 1000 Rs.63000/- 6.5% Rs.67,095/-

The above rate of steel girder bridges are likely to be accepted soon and hence can be
taken as a current base price for comparison. Rate of the lowest tenderer is nearer to the
base price calculated before calling of tender and hence, seems to be justified.
4.3. Cost comparison:
Based on the data given above, a comparison has been made in-between the cost of steel
girder and PSC girder to have a fair idea about its cost. For this comparison, standard
Railway span of 45.72m (150 ft) has been selected. This span has been selected
purposely since exact rate of PSC girder as well as steel girder both are available for this
span. Furthermore, this span is more frequently used as compared to other spans, in case
of Railway Bridges, particularly for triangulated girders. Various parameters for these
two types of bridges has been worked out and clubbed together for easy comparison as
shown in table No.-5
Table No. 5
Traffic requirement to offset the extra cost of steel bridges:
S Item One span Two spans Three spans Four spans Five spans
N
1. Cost of steel bridge in Rupees 7925900 15851800 23777700 31703600 39629500
including channel sleepers with
fittings.
2 Cost of concrete bridge in 8740400 13873500 19006600 24139700 29272800
Rupees including ballast, PSC
sleepers and fittings, extra
cost of land and earth work.
3 Difference in cost in Rupees. -814500 1978300 4771100 7563900 10356700
4 10% of difference in cost as - 197830 477110 756390 1035670
interest rate per year in
Rupees.
5 Pair of trains (one goods + - 3.2 7.7 12.2 16.8
one passenger) required to
offset the amount of interest.
6 Annual Gross Million Tonnes 5.26 12.65 20.04 27.59
of traffic corresponding to
row No.-5

6
In the above table, in case of PSC girder bridge, extra cost of land at the rate of Rs. 10 per
sq.m. and extra cost of earthwork at the rate of Rs.50 per cubic meter has been taken.

4.4 Comment about initial high cost of steel bridges based on table No. 5:

We have discussed in the introduction part that first and foremost reason behind
discarding steel girder bridges are due to its initial high cost. Hence, it is necessary to
examine this aspect first

From table No.5, it is clear that for single span, even steel girder is cheaper as compared
to PSC Girder Bridge. For two spans and above, position reverses and PSC Girder
Bridge becomes cheaper than the steel girder bridge. This is so, since quantity of
earthwork and land width will remain the same for multi span bridge or single span
bridge. Hence, position reverses for multi span bridge in case of PSC girder and it seems
to be cheaper than the steel girder bridge. This aspect is clear from row no.1 & 2 of table
No.5.

Vide table No.2; we have already seen that in case of PSC girders one time extra
expenditure is there in extra land requirement and extra earthwork. This aspect has
already been accounted for in row No.2 of table No.-5.

To work out further, cost difference between steel girder and PSC girder has been worked
out in row No.3. This amount can be considered as an extra amount blocked in steel
girder bridges at the time of initial construction. Taking 10% as interest rate, in row
No.4, interest amount accrued on annual basis for different span has been worked out. In
table No. 2, it has already been worked out that for 45.72 m of span, extra cost incurred in
counteracting the extra height in case of PSC Girder Bridge for one goods train of 4500
tonnes (standard load configuration of goods train) is Rs.141.2 and for passenger train of
15 coach is Rs. 28.2. Combined extra operational cost of one goods train and one
passenger train is coming to Rs. 169.4. For comparison sake, combination of one goods
train and one passenger train has been taken as one pair of train.

In row No.5, it has been shown that the per year interest amount on the cost difference is
compensated if 3.2 pair of trains on an average basis is operating on daily basis in case of
two span bridge. In case of three, four and five spans bridge, numbers of pairs of trains
are coming to 7.7, 12.2 and 16.8 respectively. It mean to say that when calculated
numbers of pairs trains are in operation on steel girder bridge, then the interest amount of
the initial extra expenditure over the PSC girder bridge of the same span will be
neutralised. If the pairs of trains are more than the calculated one, then the steel girder
bridge will prove cheaper than the same span of PSC Girder Bridge

To have further better idea about the two types of bridges, in row No.-6,corresponding
annual Gross Million Tonnes of traffic requirement equivalent to the numbers of goods
train shown in row No.-5 has been worked out. Here, passenger trains figure has not been
taken into account, since passenger trains are not being counted while calculating the
gross million tonnes (GMT) of traffic in railway parlance.

7
After having a glance from beginning to the end of table No.-5, we come to the
conclusion that it is rightly said that:
“ ALL THAT GLITTERS IS NOT GOLD ”.
It means to say that even for multi span PSC Girder Bridge and even initial cost being
favorable to PSC girder bridge, in overall scenario, steel girder bridges may be cheaper if
we account for the other expenditure like additional operational cost.
In the above calculation, principal amount of cost difference has been kept reserved
purposely. We will consider it subsequently.
4.5 Review of recurring painting cost of steel girder bridges:
The second most important disadvantage of the steel girder bridges is said to be about its
recurring painting cost. This aspect has also been examined and the details worked out is
shown in table No.-6: Table No. 6
Examination of recurring painting cost
S Three
Item One span Two spans Four spans Five spans
N spans
1 Difference in cost of - 814500/-
steel girder and PSC (by this
girder as per table No.5. amount
steel bridge 1978300/- 4771100/- 7563900/- 10356700/-
is cheaper
at initial
stage itself)
2 Present cost of painting
(including labour and 66000/- 132000/- 198000/- 264000/- 330000/-
material.)
3 Cumulative capitalised
cost for 11 numbers of
13561680/- 27123360/- 40685040/- 54246720/- 67808400/-
paintings in the life of
bridge with 5% interest.
4 Sum of row 1 and 3. - 29101660/- 45456140/- 61810620/- 78165100/-
5 Scrap steel* after useful
115 tonnes 230 tonnes 345 tonnes 460 tonnes 575 tonnes
life
6 Present cost of scrap*
920000/- 1840000/- 2760000/- 3680000/- 4600000/-
@ Rs.8000 per MT.
7 Scrap value after 60
years life of the bridge
17185600/- 34371200/- 51556800/- 68742400/- 85928000/-
assuming the same
escalation i.e. @ 5%.
8 Percentage gain in steel Already
bridge over PSC girder cheaper in
(with reference to row the initial
18.1% 13.42% 11.21% 9.93%
no. 4 & 7 ) stage of
construct-
ion itself.
* Here, scrap value of channel sleepers has not been taken. However, for working
out of the initial cost of steel girder bridges, cost of steel channel sleepers has already
been taken.

8
In this table, row No.1 is the same as row No.3 of table No.5 and hence needs no
illustration. Row No.2 is the present painting cost including labour and material. For
working out row No.3, assuming life of steel bridge as 60 years (as specified in Financial
code of the Indian Railways), total 11 number of times paintings will be required.
Cumulative cost of all the paintings at the end of 60 years have been worked out
assuming escalation @ 5% per annum.

Since annual interest amount of the cost difference of steel girder and PSC girder bridge
has already been consumed in compensating extra fuel consumption, so after life of the
bridge, only principal amount of the cost difference will be available. Hence, in row
No.4, summation of row No.1 and 3 has been done. Row No.5 is the quantity of scrap
steel. Its present value is given in row No.6. Assuming escalation @ 5%, scrap value at
the end of life of the bridge has been worked out and shown in row No.7. In row No.8, it
has been tried to show that steel bridges are cheaper by different percentages varying
from 18.1% to 9.93% for 2 span bridges to 5 span bridges.

This table shows that steel bridges are still cheaper. Or, we can here safely conclude that:

“OLD IS STILL GOLD”.

4.6 Effect of interest rate:

On the initial extra expenditure in case of steel bridges, interest rate of 10% has been
taken, treating the initial extra expenditure as blocked amount. In near future, rate of
interest is likely to decrease. Decrease in interest rate will make the steel bridges more
favourable since in that case, even in lesser volume of traffic, steel and concrete bridge
will become at par. On painting cost, inflation rate of 5% has been taken on the following
consideration:

v Composite labour and material cost is increasing almost by this rate.

v Chances are there regarding development of new paints of cheaper variety or of

longer life.

Ø On steel scrap value also, inflation rate of 5% has been taken which is based on
past experience and rough estimation.

4.7 Other parameters affecting cost of steel and PSC girders, whose exact amount
has not been worked out.
There are so many other items whose cost calculation is difficult but play an important
role in selection of a type of bridge. Some of those items are given in table No.-7

9
 Table No.-7
Other factors governing cost of the bridge

S
Items Steel Girder PSC Girder Remarks
N
1 Change Normally not Elastomeric bearings Data is based on the idea taken
of required require replacement in from manufacturer of the
bearings during the 15-20 years and bearings. Here, exact cost of
. lifetime of the PTFE/POT bearings replacement of bearings of PSC
bridge. require replacement in girders is difficult to work out
about 20-25 years. due to vague idea of traffic loss,
resulting revenue loss
2 Life of Comparatively Comparatively less. More life of the steel bridge will
the more. make it more cost competitive
bridge. than the PSC girder bridge
3 Inspecti Easy, reliable Difficult, not so Even field maintenance staffs
. on and worth reliable and difficult can easily visualise the health of
understanding to understand for steel bridge, It is difficult for
even to skilled skilled artisans them to visualise the same for
artisans. PSC girder bridge
4 Repair Easy to repair Difficult to repair and Departmental field maintenance
. and and maintain. maintain. staffs are competent to do the
mainten maintenance of the steel
ance bridges, while the same may be
difficult for them to maintain
PSC girder bridges with the
same confidence

All the above factors show positive and favourable indication towards steel girder
bridges.

4.8 Cost difference in other spans higher than standard span of 45.72m:
Due to non-availability of exact cost of PSC Girder Bridge in case of higher spans i.e. of
61.0 m and 76.2m of standard Railway spans, precise comparison is not possible.
However, a rough estimate has been done for next higher standard span of 61.0m for a
two span bridge. Two span bridges has been taken purposely since in the above example,
we have seen that even initial cost wise, single span bridge of 45.72m of steel girder is
cheaper than that of PSC girder bridge. (After taking extra land and earthwork cost in
case of PSC Girder Bridge).

Fabrication, erection including provision of channel sleeper cost of two span of 61.0m
steel girder bridge is coming to Rs. 26740200/- (excluding cost of foundation common
land and common earthwork cost) Let us assume that the total cost of the bridge of two
spans of 61.0 m each of PSC girder and steel girder will be the same. After adjusting the
extra cost of land and earthwork, cost of each PSC girder is coming to Rs.10336000/-
Without having exact idea of cost of PSC girder of 61.0m span, it is difficult to comment
whether per girder cost of PSC girder of Rs.10336000/- is appropriate or not? With this
cost, its per meter cost is coming to Rs. 1.69 lacs/ m run.

10
 However, one more exercise has been done for 61.0 m of PSC girder span assuming its
cost as Rs.7500000/-(i.e. Rs. 1.23 lacs/ m run). At this cost, cost difference between the
steel girder and PSC girder is coming to Rs.5672100/-. In the similar fashion, to offset
the interest amount of the cost difference with the extra haulage cost due to additional rise
in case of PSC girder, 6.9 pairs of train per day on an average basis will be sufficient.

5. Experience gained from the Konkan Railway:

In India particularly for Railway Bridges, there may not be any other example available
regarding most favourably adaptation of PSC girder bridges than that of Konkan
Railway.Moto of this Railway was to provide only PSC girder bridges. The author is not
commenting about the decision of the Konkan Railway. But one example of that railway
is worth quoting, which certainly proves the superiority of steel girder bridges for higher
spans and in locations where embankment height is more.
While working out the details on the Zuari Bridge and the Mandovi Bridge, engineers of
the Konkan Railway found themselves in a very difficult situation in favouring PSC
girders on those two bridges. Main problem was that, from navigational point of view,
horizontal clearance of 96 m between the two piers and vertical clearance of 10m from
high tide level to bottom of the girder was required to be provided. Nearby road bridge
was having span of 124.2 m. Accordingly, it was decided to provide the same waterway
in the central portion of the above-mentioned two bridges for navigational purposes.
In the approach of both of the bridges, being coastal area, soil was not having good
bearing capacity. As such, height of approach embankment was not possible to raise
above 10 m. In case of adaptation of deck type of PSC box girder of 124.2m span to
match with the adjacent road bridge, cantilever construction method was requiring a
depth of about 12 m of the PSC box girder itself. To accommodate this much depth of
PSC box girder and simultaneously to ensure that the height of embankment should not
be more than 10m, approach viaducts was required to be extended to the tune of 1500 m.
This proposition was not viable at all. In such situation, steel girder bridge came, as
savior of the problem where depth from rail level to soffit of the girder was only 1.5m.
Accordingly, through girder steel spans were provided on those two bridges in the central
portion. On either sides of the central spans, PSC girders were provided of lesser spans,
which were of smaller depths and not posing any constraint to the available conditions.

6. Comments on merits and demerits of PSC girder bridges.

6.1 Merits
As we have already mentioned in the introduction part that PSC girder bridges are having
so called following two merits:
v Initial construction cost is less.
v PSC girders are maintenance free.

Based on the discussion till now, we have seen that initial construction cost of PSC girder
bridges is less. But after including operational and life cycle cost, steel girder bridges
becomes cheaper than that of PSC girder bridges. Hence, first merit about less initial
construction cost has no relevance.
As far as so-called maintenance free aspects of PSC girders are concerned, that does not
seems to be justified. Further more, it is too early to say that PSC girder bridges will not
require any maintenance. Example of some of the PSC girder bridges reveals that
11
maintenance is also required for PSC girder bridges. Keeping in view these aspects only,
corrosion protection, durability criteria etc came up and now are being followed.

Further more, steel girder bridges are criticized for its regular maintenance, particularly
regarding painting aspects. But, normally we forget about the replacement of bearing
aspect part in case of PSC girder bridges. In the life of a PSC girder bridge, at least two
times bridge bearings will need replacement. Replacement of bearings will not only incur
extra expenditure but will also dislocate the traffic. This will further result inconvenience
to the public and also cause revenue loss.

One more merit of PSC Girder Bridge is about its facility of providing the same track
structure like in approaches. No doubt, this merit is excellent one. But in steel girder
bridge, no such disadvantages are there either in shape of speed restriction or any, which
may discourage the existing track structure on bridges. In addition, RDSO has
standardised and issued many steel girder drawings having ballasted deck. On
problematic locations, if any, one can adapt ballasted deck type of steel girders.

6.2 Demerits:
As far as demerits of the PSC girders are concerned, these are-

v Brittle failure nature.

v Less life.
v Very difficult strengthening/repair/ restoration
v Possibility of tempering of emergency cables by the miscreant in case the same
has been provided as a strengthening measure.
v Changing of bearings problem

6.2.1 Brittle failure nature:

Concrete is brittle in failure. It fails all of a sudden without giving any warning. Failure
of Mondovi Bridge at Goa is a burning example. Although, failure of any bridge is not
desirable at all but its possibility can only be reduced and cannot be completely
eliminated. Where elimination of possibility of failure is not 100%, concept is for
ensuring fail-safe mode. In this regard, fail-safe mode of PSC girder cannot be at par
with that of steel girder bridges, which is a ductile material and gives lot of warning
before failure.

6.2.2 Less life:

Life of PSC Girder Bridge is less as compared to Steel Girder Bridge. Due to less life, its
early replacement will be required than that of steel girder bridge. This will require extra
expenditure of revenue. Further, it will also cause public inconvenience and revenue loss
due to dislocation of traffic at closer intervals.

6.2.3 Very difficult restoration /strengthening/repair process:

In case any repair/maintenance/strengthening of the PSC girder bridge is required due to
any reason like deterioration or damage on account of weathering, accident or explosion,
the same will not be an easy job at all. Further more, it will be a costly affair also. Even
after repair/maintenance/strengthening, field engineer cannot be 100% sure about its
complete restoration of the strength.

12
 While in case of steel girder bridges, not only repair and maintenance is easy but also
after repair/maintenance/strengthening, field engineer will be 100% sure about restoration
of its potential. In case of steel girder bridges, even strength can be increased than the
existing strength.

6.2.4 Possibility of tampering of emergency cables:

In case strengthening of PSC girder is required, emergency cables are provided and
girders are strengthened. Full possibility is there regarding tampering with the
emergency cables in case of PSC girders by the miscreants. This is so since these cables
are outside. No such problem is there in case of steel girder bridges.

6.2.5 Changing of bearing problems:

In case of PSC girder bridges, either elastomeric bearings or PTFE/POT bearings are
provided. Life of these bearings is much less than the life of PSC Girder Bridge. It
means, many times bearings are likely to be replaced in the useful life of PSC Girder
Bridge. Changing of bearings is not an easy job. It is not only time consuming and
incurring expenditure but also cause dislocation to the traffic.

In contrary to that, in case of steel girder bridges mostly roller-rocker type of bearings is
provided. These bearings normally serve upto the useful life of steel girder bridge. This
is also an added advantage in case of steel girder bridges.

7. Merits and demerits of steel girder bridges:

7.1 Merits
There are many advantages of steel girder bridges, which is not available in PSC girder
bridges. Some of them are listed as below:

7.1.1 Flexibility in strengthening of girders in case of need:

Steel girders provides full flexibility in case its strengthening is required. In this regard,
railway bridges of steel girders have proved its ability of flexible nature to get
strengthened in case the same is required. Examples of strengthening of steel girder
bridges while gauge conversion can be taken. Many of the steel girder bridges, which
were found in sound condition except weak in strength for higher standard of loading,
were successfully strengthened. Matter has become so popular that on the demand of the
zonal railways, RDSO has developed and standardised drawings for such purpose. Details
of such drawings are given in table No.-8:
Table No.-8
R.D.S.O Drawings for MG-BG conversion of plate girder bridges

S.N. Span Loading Date of Riveted Drawing Remarks

Standard issue /Welded Number
1 9.2 m Gauge-conversion 18.5.1992 Riveted B-1639
2 12.2 m Gauge-conversion 18.5.1992 Riveted B-1640
3 18.3 m Gauge-conversion 19.5.1992 Riveted B-1641
4 24.4 m Gauge-conversion 18.5.1992 Riveted B-1642
With the help of above-mentioned plans, so many meter gauge plate girder bridges had
been converted into broad gauge bridges. Thus, Indian Railways has saved huge amount

13
of money, otherwise new plate girder bridges had been fabricated spending not only
money but consuming appreciable time also. This time saving also ensure timely
completion of the gauge conversion projects.

7.1.2 About strengthening of triangulated girder steel bridges:

Not only plate girder bridges had been strengthened for gauge conversion projects but
even triangulated girder bridges had also been strengthened to make them fit from meter
gauge standard to broad gauge standard. Regarding this, example of Izat Bridge over
river Ganga, near Allahabad on Allahabad-Varanasi section of North Eastern Railway is
worth quoting. Initially, that section of NER was of meter gauge. Under gauge
conversion plan, section was required to be converted into broad gauge. Izat bridge was
the major constraint. Analysis of the said bridge was done and the design engineers came
to conclusion that strengthening of some of the members including widening of the left
and right girder will make the bridge fit for broad gauge standard. Accordingly, bridge
was modified which saved crores of Rupees, precious time and also helped in completion
of the gauge conversion project in time.

Bridge No. 111 of NE Rly. over river Ganga, near Allahabad

This meter gauge bridge was modified into broad gauge bridge while gauge
conversion

There might be so many similar other examples also whose details are not readily
available to the author.

7.1.3 About re-use of the plate girders and triangulated girders for smaller spans:
Time to time, loading standard on railway was revised as per requirement. Due to
revision in loading standard, old bridge had become weak for the same span, even though
its condition was good. Instances are there, when such old bridges were removed from
the track, new bridges were provided on those locations and the released one were
modified to suit for smaller spans and accordingly used.

14
Such type of flexibility is only available in steel girder bridges. In PSC girder bridges,
thinking of such type of possibility is like a dream.

7.1.4 Other modification in the steel girder bridges:

Recent experience of the Northern Railway regarding some other type of modification in
steel bridges are very encouraging and worth sharing. For railway electrification work on
Saharanpur-Ambala-Ludhiana-Amritsar section of the Northern Railway, CORE (Central
Organisation for Railway Electrification) got sanctioned the work without surveying the
through girder bridges, whether the required clearances are available in those bridges or
not. When officers of the CORE were finalising the detailed drawings, section to section,
to their surprise, they found that in most of the important bridges like those on rivers
theYamuna, the Sutlej, the Beas etc, adequate vertical clearances are not available. In
such a situation, they approached bridge department. Adequate time for regirdering was
not available which otherwise had taken at least five years time even in very tight
schedule.
Situation was very difficult for bridge engineers. Even completion plan of some of the
bridges were not available, since headquarter of some of the region of the above
mentioned section was Lahore, which is now in Pakistan. In such situation, bridge
engineers of the Northern Railway accepted the challenge, prepared the drawing as per
field data, analysed the bridges for modification work and finalised the drawings. Details
of such bridges along with existing vertical clearance and the clearance provided after
modification is given in table No.-9:
Table No. –9
Details of modifications of triangulated steel girder bridges
Existing Vertical
S Span in Vertical Clearance
Bridge no. River Section Remarks
N meter Clearance provided in
in mm mm
245 Triangulated girder bridge
combined The Ambala- wide enough to
1 7x61.0 5110 5880
bridge for Yamuna Saharan pur accommodate UP & DN
UP and DN line both
Western
2 Ambala- Only UP line required
251 UP Yamuna 1x61.0 5004 5893
. Saharan pur modification
Canal
UP & DN line both bridge
283 UP & The Ambala-
3 6x45.72 5020 5520 required modification
DN Markanda Saharan pur
involving 12 spans
Ambala- Only UP line required
4 294 UP TheTangri 3x45.72 5020 5520
Saharan pur modification
UP & DN line both bridge
5A UP & Ludhiana - 11 x
5 The Satluj 5030 6125 required modification
DN Amritsar 61.0
involving 22 spans
4x32.0
Semi- Only through spans of UP
20 UP & The East Ludhiana –
6 through 4900 5820 & DN line (Four spans)
DN Byne Amritsar
+2x42.0 required modification
Through
UP & DN line both bridge
63 UP & Ludhiana -
7 The Beas 9 x 61.0 5030 6125 required modification
DN Amritsar
involving 18 spans

15
It is worthwhile to point out that modification works on most of the bridges have already
been completed except two, which will be taken in hand after completion of the works
already in progress.

7.1.5 Easy restoration of traffic after terrorist activities/bomb explosion

There are many examples of the steel girder bridges where after terrorist activities/bomb
explosion, bridge was used after strengthening and repair at the earliest possible time.
Some examples are given as below:

7.1.5.1 Bridge no.225 over river Markanda on Delhi-Ambala section:

Some terrorists’ activity took place about three years back by explosion of some
explosive in the bearing area zone of the said bridge. Bridge was having 11 spans of 100
ft. each. Incidence took place on the down line abutment at Ambala end. Bridge girders
were under-slung type of duplicate girders. After the explosion, bottom saddle plate
cracked, roller of the bearing came out and top saddle plate was hanging. Repair team
reached to the site in half an hour. Hard wood packing was provided in the bearing area
to support the girder and train service was normalised within two hours time of the
explosion. Then after, one released bearing of the old girder bridge was reclaimed and
provided in place of the damaged bearing. Some bridge members were also strengthened
near the bearing zone by welding MS plates as a mark of Strengthening. As such bridge
was restored to the normal strength.

7.1.5.2 Restoration of Hardinge Bridge:

This bridge is over river Ganga in Bangla-Desh.During Indo-Pak war of 1971, Pakistan
army exploded the bridge so that Indian army could not proceed further. Due to
explosion, one girder fell down in the river. Others were severely damaged. The
triangulated girder, which fell down in the riverbed could not be restored. But the bridge
engineers of the Indian Railways successfully strengthened other damaged girders. It is
worthwhile to point out that after end of the war, Bangla-Desh government took
assistance of bridge engineers of the Indian Railways in restoration of that bridge.

Such type of repair and strengthening is only possible with steel bridges.

7.1.6 Easy solution in case of accident/derailment and in keeping reserve stock:

Although, accident/derailment on the bridge portion is having remote possibility, yet the
same cannot be ignored. Furthermore, in case of accident/derailment on the bridge
portion, due to heavy trainload, chances of damage to the bridge are bound to be there.
Again, in such situation, repair/rehabilitation to PSC girder is very difficult and
effectiveness of repair is again doubtful. Again, in case of steel bridges
repair/rehabilitation is easy as well as of good quality.

In case damage is very severe, and span needs to be replaced, then in case of PSC girder,
replacement of the span is very much cumbersome job and likely to take a longer time.
In present day situation, closure of bridge for longer time cannot be allowed. It may
result huge loss to the national economy.

Reserve stock for steel girder bridge can be maintained and its transportation is also
easier. Reserve stock of PSC girder is neither feasible nor easy since the transportation is
very difficult.
16
One burning example of Central Railway is worth mentioning. One of the bridge which
was having 14 nos. of spans of 24.4m (80 ft.) each and having pier height of about 18m,
met with an accident due to derailment of some of the goods train in 1994. All the 28
girders (up and down line both) of the bridge were affected due to derailment. Keeping
in view the quantum of work, Northern Railway bridge staffs were also deputed. It is
worthwhile to mention that all the girders were reused after some
rectification/strengthening.
If similar incidence has been taken place in case of PSC Girder Bridge, same type of
recovery is almost unthinkable.

7.1.7 Restoration of the bridge in case of washing away due to flood and breaches:
Indian Railway is having so many experiences wherein due to flash but welding piers had
been washed away resulting this location of the girder. In case of plate girder bridges,
girders have been recovered and after construction of a new pier the same has been again
put in position.

Details of some of the girder bridges recovered after washing away is given as below.
List might be very lengthy. But particulars of those bridges are not known to the author at
present.
Table No.-10
Details of steel girder bridges re-used after washing away
S Bridge
River Section Span Remarks
N No.
105x12.2
m (steel)
Mana Out of 105 no of spans of plate
+40x12.
Pamban Madurai- girder, 104 nos. washed away
1 2m
Viaduct Rameshwa out of 40 nos. of PSC girders, 19
(PSC)
ram nos. washed away
+1x61.0
m (steel)
196,
Local Pathankot- near Pier was washed away. Same
2 3x40 ft.
nala Jammu Vijay girders were reused.
Pur
216,
Local Pathankot- Pier was washed away. Same
3 near Bari 3x40 ft.
nala Jammu girders were reused.
Brahman
Under slung girder fell down
Local Allahabad- due to washing away of
4 -- 1x150 ft.
nala Mughal Sarai foundation. The same was
reused on new foundation.
Due washing away of the
foundation, girders fell down
Patiala- Rajpura- 35, near
5 5 x 40 ft. and were found about a 200 m.
ki-nadi Dhuri Patiala
on down stream side. Same
girders were reused.

17
Regarding this experience of Pamban viaduct of the Southern Railway is worth quoting.
Pamban viaduct is the bridge connecting Rameswaram with the mainland of the country.

In the night of 22nd/23rd December 1964, one cyclone unprecedented to the history of
region came. That cyclone washed away 104 nos. of steel girders of 12.2 m spans (out of
total 105 nos.) and 19 nos. of PSC girders out of total 40 nos. The only steel girder,
which remained intact, was the Sherzer span, which is a lift span. Probably that a span
could not be dislocated due to its heavy weight as well as due to its comparatively
stronger fixing arrangement. For restoration of Pamban viaduct, search of girders from
South (Kanyakumari) to North (Jalandhar) and from East (Guwahati) to West (Sabarmati)
were on. Meanwhile it was tried to recover the dislodged girders from the sea. To the
much strange, all the washed away plate girders were successfully recovered, given
proper treatment and again placed in the position. Such a massic damage required only
42 days of closure of traffic. Such a glorious achievement was only possible due to steel
girder bridge. It is worthwhile to point out that even washed away PSC girders were
recouped by new steel girders.

In case of PSC Girder Bridges reuse of the same is not possible at all due to most
probably damaging of the same beyond repair and due to further its relaunching problem.
In case of steel girder bridge particularly of smaller spans of plate girders, maximum
chances are there regarding reuse of the same.

7.1.8 Disposal of the bridge:

After useful life, disposal of PSC girder is very difficult as compared to steel girder.
Furthermore steel girder give good return by the way of scrap steel while in case of PSC
girder, useful scrap generation is not there.

7.2 Demerits of steel girder bridges:

Steel girder bridges are known for its more initial cost. Mainly this disadvantage covers
up its all other advantages. Matter has already been discussed logically how the extra
initial cost is being compensated by its so many other associated advantages. It is time to
realise the other associated advantages of steel girder bridges which not only nullify the
initial extra cost but is also somewhat environment friendly due to spending less
consumption of non renewable type of fossil fuels and also its advantages of recycling of
the steel itself.
Another disadvantage of the steel girder bridge is about its timely maintenance
particularly painting of the same. Painting is not very costly. Furthermore painting also
permit cleaning as well as inspection of even difficult part of the bridge location which
otherwise is difficult to approach and inspect. There are so many instances when during
painting, some of the serious problem in the steel bridge were noticed and then after the
problem was rectified.

8. Reuse of steel Railway bridges:

There are so many cases wherein after useful life of the steel bridge in Railway traffic,
the same had been handed over to the State Government for using of the same as Road
Bridge. Some examples are given as in table No.-11

18
 Table No.-11
Details of Railway bridges now being used as road bridges

S.No. Section River & Year of handing over Remarks

Bridge for using as a road
No. bridge.
1 Kanpur- Ganga 110 1910 Bridge is still in use for
Lucknow road vehicles.
2 Near Yamuna Bridge is still in use for
Kalpi road vehicles.
3 Near Narmada Bridge is still in use for
Bhuj road vehicles.

9. International opinion about the steel bridges:

Trend about adaptation of PSC girder bridges is now changing. Present international
scenario is about adaptation of the steel girder bridges. Change in the trend might be due
to most of the facts mentioned in this paper regarding superiority of the steel girder
bridges. Unfortunately, in our country, most of the bridges are still being constructed as a
PSC girder bridge, without giving in depth consideration to the various factors, some of
which has already been mentioned in this paper.

10. Recommendations:

Ø A thorough study is required before deciding the type of bridge i.e.

whether it should be a steel bridge or concrete bridge, to achieve at the
appropriate alternative, considering life cycle and operational cost also.

Ø In case, where bank is high, steel bridge is more preferable.

Ø In the zone of high traffic, steel bridges should invariably be provided,

which will be cheaper than the PSC girder bridge, after considering
operational cost.

Ø In vulnerable location where chances of terrorist activities or washing

away of the bridge is expected, steel bridges are more preferable.

11.Conclusion:
PSC girder bridges, which seem to be cheaper than the steel girder bridges on the initial
cost of construction basis, may prove even costlier after considering its life cycle cost.
Hence, consideration of life cycle cost is more realistic to arrive at the appropriate
alternative.

Note:
i) This paper was published in the Indian Institute of Bridge Engineers Seminar paper
held at Mumbai in April, 2002. Although, data about rates are about 3 years old, yet
conclusions and other facts derived in the paper still hold good.
ii) This paper presents views of the author and not views of Ministry of Railways.

19