Bulb versus Trough

TL;DR: The use of bulb profiles as longitudinal stiffeners instead of troughs could offer a more favorable solution for traffic-intensive bridges due to their lower cost, weight, and production time.

Abstract: With the increasing traffic intensity and traffic loads, it can be questioned whether the application of orthotropic steel decks with troughs as longitudinal stiffeners is still the best solution. Possibly, the use of bulb profiles as longitudinal stiffeners could offer a better solution. Bulb profiles were commonly used till the late sixties but are no longer applied due to high manufacturing costs. However, new welding techniques have become available nowadays, which could possibly eliminate this disadvantage. In this study, a comparison is made between an orthotropic deck with troughs and with bulb profiles. For both deck types, an optimized design is made with respect to fatigue, after which both designs are compared with respect to weight, costs, production, maintenance, and inspection. Surprising outcome is that the bulb deck can be more favorable on certain aspects compared to the more recent trough deck.