I

/ -

cbdg

Fast Construction Segmental and Launched Bridges

Prepared for the Concrete Bridge Development Group by Simon Bourne, BSc MSc DIC CEng FlCE FlStructE (Bena~m) and Colin McKenna (Technical Director, Scott W~lson)

Concrete Bridge Development Group Technical Paper 9

CONTENTS
Author Pages

Speed Innovations in Segmental and Launched Bridges

Simon Bourne Director, Benaim

Simon has worked almost exclusively in the Design and Construct market for over 25 years, designing awardwinning major infrastructure projects for contractors worldwide. He has designed and managed the design of major road and railway bridges, footbridges, tunnels and underground railway stations in the UK and overseas, advising contractors on construction methods and temporary works. He has particular experience of designing urban steel and concrete bridges in difficult locations and major crossings over rivers and estuaries, where value, speed, safety and buildability are the key elements.

Case Study Route 3, Hong Kong (Glued Segmental Bridges)

Colin McKenna Technical Director Scott Wilson

18-29

Colin McKenna is the Technical Director responsiblefor the bridges Resource Group in the Basingstoke Office with particular responsibilityfor overseas projects. He is Vice Chairman of the Concrete Bridge Development Group, a member of their Technical Committee and part of the Task Group on bridge strengthening. Current work includes the inspection, assessment and design of bridges both in the UK and overseas. His earlier experience was in the design and assessment of bridges of all types both in the UK and overseas including the 160m span Tsing Tsuen Bridge in Hong Kong.

The Concrete Bridge Development Group acknowledges the contribution of both authors to this Technical Paper.

Speed Innovations in Segmental and Launched Bridges Simon Bourne

BSc MSc DIC CEng FlCE FlStructE Director, Benaim Summary The methods of construction available to the designer depend on both his own ingenuity and lateral thinking, and the creative partnerships that exist with the contractors. Nothwithstanding the many options that may be considered, it is inevitably the programming of the works and the speed of construction that dictate the optimum solution. This is then the mechanismthat will be the key to generating best value and to reducing risks. Segmental and launched construction in its various forms has been used for many years and it might be thought of as a mature construction method, but this does not mean that there is no further room for innovation and development to suit particular contracts. This paper considers a number of developments in precast segmental and incrementally launched bridge construction methods and highlights particular developments in both methods, by looking at bridges recently constructed in the UK, Ireland, Malaysia, Singapore and Hong Kong.

Developments in Construction

Segmental and launched bridge designs have been developed over the years, by a large number of engineers, in response to the demands of construction sites. In this paper, I explore a number of changes in the design and construction of precast segmental bridges and launched bridges in recent years. It is important to remember that although Benaim were the final designer of the bridges shown, the developmentswere all achieved by collaborativeworking with the contractors who we worked alongside, as our client and fellow team member. Innovative design is much more likely to occur where designers and contractors work closely together, particularly for large bridges where the methods of construction dictate so much of the design. In many cases, there are also other engineers involved in the projects - as the original designer, where we have prepared an alternative design, or as the client's engineer in the Design & Construct sector - and the whole team has to work together to get the best for each project. Each project is different; it has its own demands related to its purpose, size, location, obstacles to be crossed, contractor's expertise, the political and contractual environment, and the like. Aesthetics, economy, buildability and safety are all crucial issues, but it is the programming, sequencing and planning issues that are always the most crucial It is the designer's duty to seek to optimise the design to suit these various demands, but because of the variety of these demands, it is rare that a designer can repeat a design. Indeed, depending on a database of previous designs when considering a new project can lead to lack of lateral thinking and innovation, conservatism and poor quality design. For both precast segmental and incrementally launched construction, I describe a number of recent developments on projects for which we have designed some new methods. These particularly relate to the integration of temporary works and permanent works, to the proper assessment of buildability and detailing, and to techniques that improve the speed of construction (please note that Acer Consultants were the designers of the permanent works on the Belfast Cross Harbour Links project).

Page 1 of 29

Precast Segmental Bridges

Match-cast precast segmental construction grew out of the desire to prefabricate off site as much of the bridge deck as possible, mainly in order to speed the construction process. The method has a number of advantages that include: lmproved quality control of casting in regular factory conditions lmproved control of casting programme by use of multiple moulds Reduction of disruption to the existing users of the site Ability to run the casting in parallel with the construction of the substructure Overall reduction in construction programme and hence cost savings
Classic Erection Methods

There have been a number of developments in the erection methods for precast segmental bridges. In the early days, it was common practice to erect the segments in balanced cantilever, with one segment either side of the pier stressed onto the previous segments using bars, followed by the permanent prestress. The segments were erected either using land or waterbased cranes, or shear legs. Segment delivery mechanisms are also important in achieving rapid construction methods. In balanced cantilever construction, it is necessary to ensure the stability of the balanced cantilevers during erection. Typically, this was done with a symmetric pair of falsework towers either side of the pier. However, on a number of recent projects, we have developed a combination of a prop and vertical prestress ties that has the advantage of reducing the amount of steelwork, and minimising the foundations and work at ground level required during construction (see Fig. 1).

Fig. I Belfast Cross Harbour Links Balanced cantilever - crane erection

Although these methods of erection are still appropriate for many bridges, gantry erection methods are often used for larger projects. Gantries usually allow more rapid construction and they can allow the segments to be delivered at deck level to minimise ground level working. There are a number of different types of gantry, overhead and underslung, which can erect segments either in balanced cantilever or in span by span formats (see Figs. 2-4).

Page 2 of 29

Fig. 2 STAR LRTS Viaducts Balanced cantilever - gantry erection

Fig. 3 Stanstead Abbotts Viaducts Span by span - underslung gantry

Fig. 4 Route 3 Country Park Viaducts Span by span - overhead gantry

Whilst developing the design, it is necessary to consider in detail the interaction between the permanentworks, the construction method and the construction programme. For example, there is no point in detailing the design for rapid erection, if the supply of the segments is slow. Overseas, the prestressing can be selected as being either internal or external, with mixed systems often being used to suit the construction, i.e. smaller internal cables during construction in combination with larger external cables that are installed on completion. In the UK however, the requirements remain that all cables must be external -this suits span by span construction more readily than balanced cantilever construction.

Page 3 of 29

Temporary Prestressing Bars The relationship between the permanent prestress design and the temporary prestress bars, which are used to hold the segments together during construction, can be modified to suit different construction cycles. Whereas it used to be common to use bars to stress the segments onto the previous segment followed by immediate permanent prestressing, installing the permanent prestress is a relatively slow process and it is now more common to fix two or three segments on temporary bars before applying the permanent prestress. For shorter spans, it is even possible to erect all of the segments on bars and then to follow up with the permanent prestress. This technique was used on the design & construct project at the Belfast Cross Harbour Links (see Fig. 5) for spans up to 28m, using 4m segments. Here, the whole balanced cantilever was stressed with only temporary bars, leaving the installation of the permanent prestress entirely off the critical erection path (see Figs. 6-7). Usually though, we have limited the length carried on temporary bars to 9-10m.

Fig. 5 Belfast Cross Harbour Links Overview of the project

Fig. 6 Belfast Cross Harbour Links Entire balanced cantilever erected on temporary prestressing bars

Fig. 7 Belfast Cross Harbour Links Temporary prestressing bars anchored on top of the segment

The prestressing sequence for the balanced cantilevers of the STAR Light Rail Viaducts in Kuala Lumpur utilised three shorter (2.7m long) segments, all held on bars prior to installing the permanent prestress (see Figs. 8-9). This sequence was also tailored to suit the gantry erection method in the city centre, over live roads. Six segments could be erected at night over the

Page 4 of 29

closed roads, and then the permanent prestress installed and stressed during the day, when the roads were open to traffic again. This allowed up to three 35m spans to be erected each week.

Fig. 8 STAR LRTS Viaducts Temporary prestressing bar layout showing 3+3 segments erected on bars

Fig. 9 STAR LRTS Viaducts Segment details showing the banks of three permanent prestressing anchorages

Integration of Substructure

Whilst the majority of this paper is concerned with the design of the bridge superstructure, for an overall coherent and cost-effective design, one must also consider the co-ordination of the superstructure and substructures designs. There are three techniques that can be utilised single piles, portal span arrangements and built-in crossheads.
Single Piles

The design & construct STAR Light Rail Viaducts in Kuala Lumpur (see Fig. 10) are an example where we were able to use a single pile under each column for many of the piers, thus eliminating the pilecaps, which resulted in time and cost savings as well as reductions in the amount of disruption (see Fig. 11). Also, given that we were building the bridge in balanced cantilever, and that the gantry rested on the pier, the single pile was loaded almost up to its normal working load during construction. This, in effect, gave us a working load pile test on each of the large-diameterbored piles, at the same time as minimising the excavation for the pilecaps and reducing the disruption to the traffic and to the underground utilities (see Fig. 12). The piles need to be designed for substantial bending using soil-structure interaction techniques, but once this is achieved, the net result is an overall reduction in the required pile area.

Page 5 of 29

Fig. 10 STAR LRTS Viaducts Overview of the project

Fig. 11 STAR LRTS Viaducts Section at the piers showing the single piles

Fig. 12 STAR LRTS Viaducts Piers supported by single piles in the river

Some of the most successful projects are those where the two parts of the design are even more fully integrated, with the superstructure being built into the substructure.
Portal Spans

The West Rail Viaducts in Hong Kong (see Fig. 13) include 10km length of twin-track viaducts, which run through both rural and more well developed areas. In order to meet the stringent limits on noise levels created by trains running on the viaducts, the engineer made use of a number of mitigation measures. He chose to use an individual concrete box girder supporting each of the tracks instead of the more conventional solution of a single large box girder supporting both tracks. The box girders were generally simply supported, but continuous structures were used for the longer spans. In order to use continuously welded rail without rail expansion joints, the joints in the deck were at less than 80m centres.

Page 6 of 29

Fig. 13 West Rail Viaducts Overview of the typical portal spans

We prepared an alternative design, which was be cheaper and faster to build. From the noise mitigation studies, it became clear that by reducing the width of the box girder such that the webs were under the rails, the train-induced vibrations could be reduced and hence the concrete sections could be optimised whilst maintaining the same level of noise emission. Using this method, we were able to reduce the superstructure costs by 30% (see Fig. 14). However, the narrower box would not have been stable under typhoon wind loads and it was therefore decided to omit the bearings and build the box girder into the columns, forming portal spans. This had the distinct benefit, from the point of view of the client's maintenance costs, of removing all the bearings. In order to allow for deck movements, the piers were split into two separate leaves, each one built into the adjacent span (see Fig. 15).

Fig. 14 West Rail Viaducts Comparison of the original and alternative sections

Fig. 15 West Rail Viaducts Typical portal span layout showing single piles and twin-leaf piers

This arrangement respected the engineer's layout of typical 35m span lengths and movement joint locations, and also used single piles (i.e. no pilecaps) under each pier. It was necessary to

Page 7 of 29

develop a new type of reinforced concrete detail for the monolithic connection betweenthe deck and the leaf piers -this used shell segments that were subsequently infilled after erection (see Figs. 16-17). For longer spans, the deck was made continuous and varied in depth. Similar principles were adopted though to those for the simply supported spans - namely precast segmental deck monolithic with the piers, internal prestress and pairs of flexible leaf piers (see Fig. 18).

Fig. 16 West Rail Viaducts 3-D image of the monolithic pierlsegment connection

Fig. 17 West Rail Viaducts Detail at the pier segment showing the anchorages and the in-situ infill zone

Fig. 18 West Rail Viaducts Overview of the continuous spans showing the twin-leaf piers

Built-in Crossheads

Page 8 of 29

The upgrading of Pasir Panjang Road required a new dual three-lane road, with associated slip roads and ramps, to be constructed above the existing live road. The site is located in a busy urban area in Singapore and the existing roads carry a high volume of traffic, especially during peak hours. One of the main constraints was that the existing carriageway had to be kept fully operational at all times, expect during a short 6-hour period at night. We were appointed by the contractor to prepare an alternative design that could be almost entirely precast off site. The two elevated carriageways were separated by an air gap and we proposed to construct the balanced cantilever viaduct using separate precast boxes for each carriageway. The columns had to be in the central reservation of the road below and this required a large concrete crosshead to support the deck. The deck was monolithicallyconnected to the columns in order to improve the appearance of the bridge and to reduce the number of bearings, thus reducing maintenance costs. The monolithic connection of the deck with the columns also eliminated the need for temporary props during construction. On this project, we developed a new technique that allowed the contractor to cast the piers in-situ but to construct the deck and the crosshead using match-cast, precast segments. The crosshead segments weighing up to 100t were erected using a mobile crane whilst the standard deck segments of up to 50t were erected using an overhead launching gantry. The crosshead segments were cast as shell units, and were subsequently infilledto stitch them to the pier tops. During the 6-hour night shift, the traffic was diverted away from one carriageway to allow erection of segments on one end of the crosshead, and then the traffic was diverted to the other carriageway to allow segments to be erected on the other end of the crosshead (see Fig. 19).

Page 9 of 29

Fig. 19 Pasir Panjang Road Viaducts Six-stage construction sequence showing the built-in crosshead details

This method of construction requires particular care in alignment control; the shape of the crosshead and all four cantilevers which are attached to it are predetermined in the casting yard, as errors are very difficult to put right on site. The crossheads were cast using a long-line mould system and were match-cast against the first box girder segments. The box girder segments were cast in short-line, match-cast segmental moulds. The precast solutions were also extended to the slip road ramps.
Precast Shells

The Taney Road Bridge (see Fig. 20) carries a new light railway (LUAS Line) over a busy road intersection in Dublin.

Fig. 20 Taney Road Bridge Overview of the project

The alternative design prepared by Benaim respected the aesthetic qualities of the conforming design but utilised a constant depth precast segmental shell infilled with concrete throughout the whole length of the structure (see Fig. 21). The tower, piers, foundations and anchorage abutment were unchanged from the conforming design. The precast shell and in-situ infill construction has advantages over more conventional forms of construction; it avoids the extensive shuttering needed for in-situ construction, it reduces the weight of the lifted segments (with smaller cranes needed for less time) and allows the use of continuous prestress ducts that are normally very difficult to achieve with fully precast segmental construction. The purpose of the alternative was to develop a design that would simplify and speed up the construction process (see Fig. 22).

Page 10 of 29

Fig. 21 Taney Road Bridge Four-stage construction sequence showing the precast shells

The use of this form of construction for a major bridge was not documented and so the development of the details required careful consideration, and, in particular, the detailing for the longitudinal shear at the interface between the precast concrete and the infill. The prestress for the bridge took three forms: Temporary prestress bars placed on temporary blocks Permanent prestress bars, anchored between segment diaphragms Permanent strand prestress in ducts cast into the in-situ infill concrete In the original design, there were up to 106 No. 40mm prestressing bars in the cross-section, whilst in the alternative, this was reduced to 10 No. 40mm bars plus up to 17 No. 19l15mm tendons.

Fig. 22 Taney Road Bridge Two-stage construction sequence showing the precast shell details

Page 11 of 29

Taney Road Bridge is understood to be the first use of precast segmental shells in the construction of a cable-stayed bridge, and indeed on this scale and in this manner, at any bridge. We have subsequently extended this precast shell and infill method to the alternative design of a bridge over the River Shannon (see Fig. 23), in Ireland, using very similar techniques with the exception that temporary piers were used during construction rather than cable stays - erecting the bridge in span by span style as opposed to by balanced cantilever (see Figs. 24-25).

Fig. 23 River Shannon Bridge Overview of the project

Fig. 24 River Shannon Bridge Segments in the storage yard showing the precast shell details

Fig. 25 River Shannon Bridge Precast shells erected on temporaw Drops

Incrementally Launched Bridges Incremental launched construction also grew out of the desire to prefabricate off site as much of the bridge deck as possible, mainly in order to speed the construction process. The method has a number of advantages that include:

Page 12 of 29

Improved quality control of casting in regular, quasi-factory conditions Reduction of disruption to the existing users of the site Ability to run the casting in parallel with the construction of the substructure Overall reduction in construction programme and hence cost savings
Classic Erection Methods

In its traditional form, the incrementally launched method of construction is based on casting segments in a mould placed behind the bridge abutment. Segments are cast on a weekly cycle and each week the deck is jacked forward out of the mould to make space for the next segment to be cast. Whereas in precast segmental construction the segments are match cast but not continuously reinforced, in incrementallylaunched constructionthe segments are cast up against each other with reinforcement passing through the construction joint. It would be common for the casting length to be one third or one half of the span length and normally the deck is internally prestressed. The prestress during launching must be centroidal and is supplemented, after launching, with additional draped tendons. Because the centroidal prestress is less efficient, the prestress is typically 25% greater than a similar bridge built by other methods. Spans are typically 45m and steel launching noses, around 30m long, are used to control the effects at the construction head during the launch (see Figs. 26-27).

Fig. 26 Sungai Sitiawan Bridge Classic launch and nose techniques

Fig. 27 Sungai Sitiawan Bridge Classic section details and internal prestressing

There have, of course, been a large number of derivatives of this basic method. In the next section, I show details of a recent, innovative development that has proved cost-effective on two bridges in Ireland.
Partial Prestressing

Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge (see Fig. 28) carries the M I Motorway over the estuary north of Dublin and it was constructed to a value-engineered design prepared by Benaim. The sensitive

Page 13 of 29

nature of the site demanded careful consideration of both the appearance of the bridge and its construction methods. The value-engineered design maintainedthe overall appearance of the bridge with its 69m spans, but was based on the incrementally launched method of construction (see Fig. 29).

Fig. 28 Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge Overview of the project

In the revised design, the deck concrete was cast in sections behind the abutment and incrementally launched across the estuary (see Fig. 30). The deck post-tensioning was not applied until after the deck was fully launched; prior to this stage the deck was purely reinforced concrete and was supported on temporary piers in the middle of the spans as well as at the permanent piers. This is an innovative form of construction, which was developed out of the research that was the basis for the HA documents BD and BA 58/94. In particular, these documents recognise that for externally prestressed structures the corrosion protection to the tendon is primarily provided by the grouted or wax-filled duct and that normal cracking of the box girder can be allowed. This leads to a fully prestressed design under dead loads and a partially prestressed design under live loads. This novel combination of post-tensioning and untensioned reinforcement led to a 35% saving in the weight of the prestressing steel set against a small increase in the un-tensioned reinforcement.

Fig. 29 Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge Showing the nose and the temporary midspan props

Page 14 of 29

Fig. 30 Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge Layout of the casting area

The internal prestress for the original design is shown at the top of Fig. 31, following the normal layout of a balanced cantilever bridge. The prestress layout for the revised design is shown at the bottom of the same Fig. 31 for comparison. All of the prestress was external and was installedfrom one end of the bridge to the other, anchored on the abutment diaphragms. The redesign led to a reduction in the number of prestressing tendons from 660 No. 12 strand tendons to 24 No. 27 strand tendons running the full length of the bridge (see Fig. 32).

Fig. 31 Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge Comparison of the original and alternative prestressing layouts

Fig. 32 Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge Details inside the box showing the simple, external prestressing layout

It is believed that this is the first time that a bridge has been launched on reinforcement only and subsequently post-tensioned. It is also understoodthat this is the first bridge with a curved soffit to be constructed by launching anywhere and it is the first substantial launched bridge in Ireland.

Page 15 of 29

The success of this project has led on to the construction of another bridge in Ireland - the Blackwater Viaduct (see Fig. 33) on the Fermoy Bypass. This uses similar principles, but this time the bridge is 450m long with 58m spans, and a special low-friction prefabricated prestressing tendon is being used to enable the cables to be stressed from end to end (see Figs. 34-35).

Fig. 33 Blackwater Viaduct Overview of the ~roiect

Fig. 34 Blackwater Viaduct Proposed partial prestressing system with low-friction, banded cables

Fig. 35 Blackwater Viaduct Showing the nose and the temporary props over the river

Page 16 of 29

Conclusions

Segmental and launched construction in its various forms has been used for many years and it might be thought of as a mature construction method, but this does not mean that there is no further room for innovation and development to suit particular projects. A number of examples of precast segmental and incrementally launched bridge construction methods have been considered, which highlight particular developments in the last few years, each of which was chosen to improve the speed of construction. These include the use of: Temporary prestressing bars - with fewer prestressing operations Integration of substructure -with no pilecaps and greater use of precasting Precast shells -with lighter lifts and fewer critical operations Temporary midspan props - with fewer prestressing operations Partial prestressing - fewer prestressing anchorages

The key rules to achieve speed are to either remove work stages, to remove work stages away from the critical path, or to make the stages quicker and easier. These effects can only be achieved by the detailed and thorough analysis of methodologies, sequences and programmes, with the essential need being that the design is carried out in full recognition of the construction process. Engineers, working in teams - client, client's engineer, contractor, contractor's designer - must strive for creative thinking and develop new and improved methods of construction to suit the challenges of each and every project.

Page 17 of 29

Glued Segmental Bridges - Route 3, Hong Kong

Colin.McKenna Technical Director, Scott Wilson
INTRODUCTION

Route 3 is a new expressway connecting Guangdong Province with Kowloon and Hong Kong Island. It was constructed in a number of contracts of which this is one The Country Park Section lies between Ting Kau on the coast and Yuen Long near the provincial border. The contract commences at the approachesto the Ting Kau Bridge and terminates near Yuen Long where it connects with the existing New Territories Circular Road which leads to the border and the Guangzhou-Shenzen Superhighway. A 30 year franchise for this 12km long section was let to a consortium led by Sun Hung Kai Properties. Scott Wilson was appointed in joint venture with Maunsell Consultants Asia Ltd to act as lead consultants for the construction consortium which included several of Hong Kong's leading contractors, namely Nishimatsu, Dragages et Travaux Publics (HK) Ltd and Gammon Construction Ltd. The structures that are the subject of this paper were designed by Scott Wilson and all lie to the north of Tai Lam tunnel which serves to divide the section into two. The general layout of the contract is shown in Figure 1
GUANGDONG PROVINCE
.>

I .

..
"'

I
1
' I
,

'

, .
,,
<

>,'
\

Figure 1 - Route 3 Country Park Section

DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES

Page 18 of 29

The precast segmental bridges all form part of the Au Tau Interchange with Bridge I a carrying the main carriageway and Bridges E, G and H carrying slip roads. These all consist of simply supported spans, longitudinally linked with a continuous top slab and curved in plan. Span lengths of up to 37m are used with a maximum of 16 spans per bridge. Segment joints are glued. Bridges E, G and H are all single cell boxes in which the main box dimensions are constant and the cantilever lengths vary to accommodate the road widening for visibility requirements. Bridge l a carries dual carriageways of up to 17.4m width and it consists of two separate decks each made up from two single cell boxes connected by a short insitu deck slab. The complex highway alignment is dictated by major existing roads which are joined by the slip roads and other constraints below. Radii as low as 200 metres are required. Simply supported structures were chosen for the segmental structures since at the time of carrying out the design there was insufficient geotechnical information for the relatively poor ground conditions to be able to assess differential settlements. It was considered that the cost of additional piling to minimise these settlements would outweigh the savings to be made if continuous superstructures were employed. Ready access was available to a suitable location for a precasting facility which made the use of match cast segments even more beneficial.
3

DESIGN Substructures

3.1

The piers all consist of a standard tapered upper section sitting on a circular stem. The upper section for the wide box structures tapers from the 2.5 metre diameter stem to a pier top 6 metres by 3.5 metres over a height of 7.5 metres. The piers of Bridge l a also have 2.5 metre diameter stems but support the deck on a cantilevered crosshead. In general each free pier is supported on a pair of 2 metre diameter bored piles up to 40 metres long and the restrained piers on 3 similar piles. The ground offered low lateral restraint to the piles and a buckling analysis modelling the full length of the pier and pile system was required to determine effective lengths for design. The majority of the piers were designed to allow unrestrained longitudinal movement of the superstructure, however the critical design condition was during the erection of the superstructure. The weight of the gantry plus the completed span in combination with the high wind loadings of the area meant that in general all piers had similar reinforcement. 3.2 Superstructure

Short-line match casting techniques were used for the construction of the precast segments with two lines available for the wide box bridges (E, G and H) and two lines for the narrow box bridge ( I a). Production of over 1000 segments was required. Up to six spans are linked together with continuous top slabs to reduce the number of movement joints. The longitudinal forces due to braking and traction or seismic effects are restrained at two piers in each of these lengths. The continuity slabs between spans at unrestrained piers are designed to transfer all the longitudinal forces back to the points of fixity and also to resist the load effects due to wheel loads and the relative rotations of the adjacent spans. The decks are supported on metal pot bearings.

Page 19 of 29

Typical cross sections are shown in Figure 2

1600 WIDE x #I ACCESS HOLE THROUGH DIAPHRAGH

TYPE P I CONCRETE BARRIER PUS T TENSIONED SEGMENTAL CONCRE T

Figure 2 -Twin and single box superstructures

The tendons used are some of the largest ever installed in bridges. The 37/16 system uses strand to draft Euronorm 10138 (1) , with a tensile strength of I860 ~ / m m which ~ results in an ultimate force in each tendon of 10323kN.
3.3 Superstructure - Design

The structures are all designed to the requirementsof the Hong Kong Structures Design Manual (2) (which makes reference to British Standard BS5400 (3)), supplemented where necessary by UK Department of Transport Design Standards. The main additional standard is BD 58/94 -The Design of Concrete Highway Bridges and Structures with External and Unbonded Prestressing (4). Highway loading on the structures is 45 units of HB and associated HA loading. The segmental structures are required to satisfy Class 1 (no tension) stress limits in all load combinations. The insitu bridges satisfy Class 1 only for Combination 1 (Permanent Loading only) and Class 2 (limited tensile stresses) in all other load combinations. The total prestress required in the longer segmental spans could not all be introduced with only the self weight of the deck acting without inducing higher than permissible compressive stresses in the bottom slab. A maximum of six tendons were initially stressed (Stage 1). After the construction of the edge parapets and a specified time delay calculated to account for the development of the time dependent losses due to creep and shrinkage any further required tendons were stressed (Stage 2) and the continuity slabs cast.

Page 20 of 29

A key feature of external prestressing is the potential for replacement of the tendons. It is a requirement that this should be possible without restricting traffic on the bridge. In most cases this is the governing criterion in determining the prestress requirements.

3.4

Segment Geometry

The individual segment geometry in any span was calculated to give units that are of equal length along their centre line except for the penultimate unit and the diaphragm units which were of necessity shorter than the box sections so as to be of similar weights. The maximum variation in length of segments for all the span arrangements was 200mm. Allowance was made in the geometry for the predicted deflections due to elastic and time dependent effects. A precision of 0.1 mm was specified for dimensions. The basic box section was constant throughout; carriageway widening was provided for by increasing the length of the cantilevers on each side of the box. The segments that included beams to restrain the tendons at deviators were designed so that the length of segment between the bulkhead of the casting mould and the deviator was constant in order to maximise the repetition of formwork and reinforcement. This does however complicate the overall geometry by making the plan arrangement non symmetrical.

DESIGN ASPECTS PARTICULAR TO EXTERNAL PRESTRESSING

A number of areas were noted as being peculiar to external prestressing and warranting special mention.

4.1

Ultimate Bending Strength

The recommendationof reference (4) is that the ultimate bending capacity should be calculated using the calculated tendon force after all losses have occurred unless the tendons are within 0.1d of the soffit, in which case an addition to this force can be made, or a non-linear analysis is carried out.

4.1 .I

Precast Segmental Bridges

The potential enhancement of the tendon force based on the geometric criterion was not applicable since the centroid of the tendons lies 285mm above the soffit of a section 2100mm deep and so a non-linear analysis was performed. For one particular span it is worth noting that bonded tendons in the same section would have provided a capacity moment of 118MNm compared with a value of 61MNm for the unbonded tendons using the unenhanced stress after losses. A capacity of 76MNm was required. The non-linear analysis was carried out using LUSAS to confirm acceptable capacity at ULS. Thin shell three dimensional semiloof elements with elasto-plastic material properties for those elements likely to go into tension or beyond their elastic limit in compression were used to represent the concrete elements and isoparametricthree dimensional bar elements, again with elasto-plastic properties, to represent the tendons. The tendons were modelled as fixed to the concrete at the anchorages, but free to slip at deviator locations. The connections between

Page 21 of 29

adjacent concrete elements were modelled by non-linear joint elements to simulate the joints between units in practice. An initial stress was introduced into the bar elements to represent the tendon force in the standing state condition. A further loading was then incrementally applied to represent a parabolic moment distribution of imposed loading. This analysis also provided results for deflections at failure which were required for design of some of the deviators. 4.2 Tendon Geometry

The ducts form straight line connections between the various "fixed points" (anchorages and deviators). Unlike internal prestressing where the tendons are specified relative to the local concrete faces it is important to take account of the global geometry of the structure and also any local changes of cross section that may occur in order to give free passage to a tendon. It was considered undesirable for a tendon to touch a web due to plan curvature and so considerable effort was expended in designing a standard layout compatible with all the geometric constraints. This also had to take account of the minimum allowable radii in reference (4) at deviators and the required spacing between deviators to account for lateral forces due to plan curvature. A consistent layout of tendons at deviators and anchorageswas required on the precast bridges to simplify casting arrangements for the units. This required fine tuning of the tendon forces to satisfy both short and long term stress requirements. 4.3 Deviators

Not only must the intermediate deviator units provide for the geometric requirements of the tendon but also they must accommodate the considerable forces imposed by that change of direction. In general all tendons were inclined between the diaphragms and the first (nominally "quarter span" deviator) and then ran nominally straight through "midspan" deviators. The maximum vertical angular change at the first deviator was approximately 7.50 which resulted in local concentrated vertical forces of 1350kN per tendon being applied to the deviator. The deviator beams were also subject to horizontal forces due to deviation of the tendons in plan. In the segmental structures the weight of each unit was at a premium and so a "minimum concrete" solution was adopted for the deviator design. The forces were distributed around the box by bending of the deviator beam, requiring a considerable amount of reinforcement to be provided. The deviators through which the tendons pass nominally straight are required to maintain the eccentricity of the tendon under ultimate bending conditions. The design forces on them were calculated by consideration of the angular change that would occur at failure of the beam as a whole, as calculated by the non-linear analysis. 4.4 Anchorages and Diaphragms

With internal prestress a diaphragm is generally provided for transfer of imposed loadings onto the bearings. With external prestress it also serves the primary function of transferring the tendon forces to the structure. The forces in each anchorage are large and since the integrity of the structure is dependent on this element a conservative approach was considered appropriate

Page 22 of 29

to the design of these elements. Deep beam design in the UK is outside the scope of reference (3) and reference is generally made to ClRlA Guide No 2 (5). A finite element analysis of a loaded diaphragm was carried out which gave results suggesting that little transverse distribution of load occurred for those anchorages located away from the webs and that it could be considered as spanning vertically between the top and bottom slabs. The anchorages are positioned close to the support points of the diaphragm (the top and bottom slabs) and the bending design of the section as described in Reference 5 was readily satisfied. The guide however was written for elements likely to be supporting reasonably uniform loading and the shear design limits were not considered totally appropriate to the particular situation. It was considered that the introduction of vertical prestress near the tensile face would restrict the development of any cracking, which though it might not be structurally significant might cause concern and serviceability problems. This vertical prestress was designed by calculating the prestress required to reduce the Principal Tensile Stress (PTS) induced by the maximum calculated shear stress to that which would exist with the allowable shear stress of 4.75~/mm* given in reference 3 Part 4.

4.5

Shear

The design of the boxes for shear was found to be simplified when compared with internal prestressing. Reference 4 requires that the design be carried out assuming a reinforced concrete section with the prestressing forces, both axial and any vertical component, being treated as external loads. Further benefit is gained from being able to utilise the full section of the webs because of the absence of any ducts.

ERECTION General

5. I

The segmental bridges were all constructed span by span. A specially designed overhead segmental launching gantry was employed to temporarily support the precast units prior to the permanent external prestress being applied and the completed deck being transferred to its support bearings. The gantry was designed to position and support all the segments of the span until completion of the first stage prestress. It then moved itself onto the next span in order to repeat the operation. The sequence of operations for movement of the gantry is shown on Figure 3. 5.2
Gantry Description

The gantry consisted of seven main sections; the Additional Rear Leg, (ARL); the Rear Leg, (RL); the Front Leg, (FL); the Nose Strut, (NS); the Plate Girders, (PG); the Hoist Carriage, (HC); and the Segment Hanger System, (SHS). All launching was carried out from the ARL using hydraulically operated sprag trolley devices. Due to the length of gantry at the rear the maximum launch possible was approximately 12 metres, in increments of 1.2 metres, this being governed by the stroke of the launching cylinders. A system located below the launching equipment allowed the gantry to be slewed from side to side so that it could follow the curvature of the bridge structure. The ARL was removed once the process had been completed in order to allow installation of the segments at the rear of the gantry.

Page 23 of 29

The RL was designed as a fixed leg at the top and a pin joint at the base. A lower frame sat on the pier head during segment erection. However during launching this lower frame was detached. The weight of the gantry was transferred to the bridge deck webs using a transverse beam. To give the gantry longitudinal stability during launching it was necessary to use restraining props attached to the head frame of the FL. This beam was stressed down to the bridge deck. The FL was designed as a pin joint, achieved by placing Hillman Rollers between the head frame and the PGs. The FL was pushed out to the next pier using the HC. A fixed leg at the front of the gantry, the NS, allowed the load to be taken while the FL was pushed to the forward pier. The twin PGs were approximately 2.4 metres deep and 77 metres long at 3 metres centres and were stiffened using transverse bracing. The weight of the PG was reduced by cutting out the web towards the NS and welding diagonals for strength. Below the lower flange of the PG's ran the HC. Its main function was to remove the segments from the transporter and transfer them to the required position. By using a stiffened connection the HC could be attached to the FL or the ARL in order to transit to the following pier or to the back of the RL respectively. Once a segment had been taken to its correct location it was attached to the SHS. This consisted of a transverse beam supported over both PG's with two high tensile steel bars, one each side, a high strength wire sling and a lifting beam. The lifting beam was attached to the segment prior to delivery to the gantry and was also used to attach segment and HC.
5.3

The Launching Process

The ARL was positioned just behind the RL and the load carried by the RL then transferred to the ARL. The ARL sprag trolley with the launching cylinder was engaged and the cylinder extended, thus launching the gantry towards the next pier. Once the maximum length was achieved the RL would again take the load. This process of moving the ARL, transferring load from RL to ARL, and ARL to RL was repeated until the NS landed on the next pier. The load at the front of the gantry was then taken on the NS, allowing the HC to push the FL forward. The FL, once plumbed and levelled, would then take the load once more so launching could proceed. The launching process continued until the RL reached its final position.
5.4

Segment Erection

As mentioned earlier, the ARL needed to be removed to allow segment installation. The segments were introduced in the following order, as shown in Figure 4. Segment 1, the diaphragm segment, was brought in and adjusted for level and alignment. Segments 2 to 11 where then stacked as shown. This allowed segment 12 to be passed through the RL and be rotated 900. The segments were then rearranged, leaving a slight clearance for cleaning and applying glue. Starting at the rear, the penultimate segment was glued to the diaphragm segment, and these were temporarily stressed together using Macalloy bars. The two segments were then checked for level and alignment, with any necessary adjustment made. This checking and adjustment was critical as once these segments were glued together it became too complicated for any adjusting.

Page 24 of 29

The segments were then glued and temporarily stressed together, one by one, until the span was complete.
5.5

Permanent Prestressing

After the segments were installed, several lengths of HDPE pipe were joined together to form the required tendon length. Several holes were then drilled, at the required locations, in the HDPE duct and grout vents fixed. The strands were then fed into the HDPE pipe, using a strand pusher, one by one until the required number of strands were threaded. 5.6 Load Transfer

Temporary support jacks, two each end, were then checked to ensure they sat in the correct position. They were extended to ensure the swivel head was in close contact with the underside of the diaphragm segments either end of the span, taking an initial load of 10kN each. The spans could support their self weight after 3 or 4 tendons had been stressed 100%. The design required stressing to be carried out in pairs, meaning that 4 tendons needed to be stressed prior to the span being released from the gantry. In order to stress the tendons, and transfer the load gradually, the following procedure was adopted. The first pair of tendons was stressed to 50% of their design capacity. This gave capacity for 25% of the span's total weight. By hydraulically linking the temporary support jacks, and operating one set at a time, the temporary jacks acted as a three point support. Thus the first set of temporary jacks would be extended, linked hydraulically and the other end locked off, until 12l12% of the load was taken. The jacks were locked off using a safety ring nut and the other end extended until they took 12Il2% of the load between them. (12Il2% + 12Il2% = 25% of the total deck load) Once this operation was complete the first pair of tendons was stressed to their design capacity with the temporary support jacks being extended to take 50% of the total deck load. The process was then repeated for the second pair of tendons with the temporary support jacks extended in order to take 75% and then 100% of the deck weight. When the temporary support jacks were carrying all of the deck load the segment hanger system was detached.

Page 25 of 29

5.7

Launching Preparations

Using the temporary support jacks, the bridge deck was adjusted for level. Once adjusted the gap between the bearing plinth and the diaphragm segment was then grouted. When sufficient strength had been gained the temporary support jacks were removed. However since not every span contained a fixed bearing it was necessary to maintaintemporary longitudinal and transverse restraint until the continuity slabs could be cast. The temporary longitudinal restraint consisted of two high tensile Macalloy bars which acted as tension ties between one span and another. Universal channels were fitted and wedged between diaphragm segments to act as struts. The transverse restraint consisted of two turnbuckles, crossed, and secured to the pier segment and the pier head. The ARL was reconnected at the rear of the gantry and positioned just behind the RL. The FL restraint props were also fixed. It was also necessary to raise the SHS above the FL head frame to prevent damage from collision. The gantry was now ready for launching to the next span.

CONCLUSIONS
The paper has described the successful design and construction of externally post-tensioned concrete box structures. The importance of taking into account temporary loading conditions in both the construction stage and the service life has been highlighted.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Sun Hung Kai Properties and Highways Department for their permission to publish this paper, and also the design and construction teams without whose efforts they would not have succeeded.

REFERENCES
1. Euronorm 10138 (Draft) - Prestressing Steels Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways - Highways Department, Hong Kong Government British Standard BS5400 Parts 1 to 10 - Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges. Department of Transport Design Standard BD 58/94 - The Design of Concrete Highway Bridges and Structures with External and Unbonded Prestressing ClRlA Guide No 2 - The Design of Deep Beams in Reinforced Concrete

2.

3.
4.

5.

Page 26 of 29

o(:.j. . . ..~
NOVE FRONT LSG 7 0

sm

I EAOING P E R

FTAGE 2 I AUNCtI GANTRY

--

CTA (i6 7 LAIINLH GANTRY

STAGE . -

2
LEG

HOVE AOOITIOYAL RE*

STAGf 8 N O V r AODIflONAL RFAR 1 CCi

STAGE 4 lAUNCH GANTRY

STAGE2 LAUNCH GANTRY

A I L RL

F1

7
Figure 3 - Gantry Movement Sequence

NS

STdGf 5
NOVE AOOlT/ONAl REAR LEG

Page 27 of 29

5.7

Launching Preparations

Using the temporary support jacks, the bridge deck was adjusted for level. Once adjusted the gap between the bearing plinth and the diaphragm segment was then grouted. When sufficient strength had been gained the temporary support jacks were removed. However since not every span contained a fixed bearing it was necessary to maintaintemporary longitudinal and transverse restraint until the continuity slabs could be cast. The temporary longitudinal restraint consisted of two high tensile Macalloy bars which acted as tension ties between one span and another. Universal channels were fitted and wedged between diaphragm segments to act as struts. The transverse restraint consisted of two turnbuckles, crossed, and secured to the pier segment and the pier head. The ARL was reconnected at the rear of the gantry and positioned just behind the RL. The FL restraint props were also fixed. It was also necessary to raise the SHS above the FL head frame to prevent damage from collision. The gantry was now ready for launching to the next span.

CONCLUSIONS
The paper has described the successful design and construction of externally post-tensioned concrete box structures. The importance of taking into account temporary loading conditions in both the construction stage and the service life has been highlighted.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Sun Hung Kai Properties and Highways Department for their permission to publish this paper, and also the design and construction teams without whose efforts they would not have succeeded.

REFERENCES
1.
2.

Euronorm 10138 (Draft) - Prestressing Steels Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways - Highways Department, Hong Kong Government British Standard BS5400 Parts 1 to 10 - Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges. Department of Transport Design Standard BD 58/94 - The Design of Concrete Highway Bridges and Structures with External and Unbonded Prestressing ClRlA Guide No 2 - The Design of Deep Beams in Reinforced Concrete

3.
4. 5.

Page 26 of 29

jlAGE 3 HOVE ADDlTiONAL RL*

LEG

STAGE . -

4 --

lAUN[H GANTRY

Figure 3 - Gantry Movement Sequence

Page 27 of 29

Fast Construction Segmental and Launched Bridges

The contents of this paper are based on presentations made at the 2005 Annual Conference of the Concrete Bridge Development Group, prepared by Simon Bourne (Director, Benaim) and Colin McKenna (Technical Director, Scott Wilson) for CBDG.

Fast Construction - Segmental and Launched Bridges Technical Paper No 9

First published 2005

O Concrete Bridge Development Group 2001

Published by the Concrete Bridge Development Group Riverside House 4 Meadows Business Park Station Approach Blackwater Camberley Surrey GU17 9AB UK Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 Fax: +44 (0)1276 38899 All rights reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be addressed to the Concrete Bridge Development Group. Although the Concrete Bridge Development Group (limited by guarantee) does its best to ensure that any advice, recommendations or information it may give either in this publication or elsewhere is accurate, no liability or responsibility of any kind (including liability for negligence) howsoever and from whatsoever cause arising it, is accepted in this respect by the Group, its servants or agents.