DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE RION

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE RION

ANTIRION BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS
ANTIRION BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS
Alain PECKER
Technische Technische Universit Universit t t Hamburg Hamburg- -Harburg Harburg, , January 29, 2008 January 29, 2008
Finance
Design
Build
Own
Operate
Transfer
Continental Greece
Peloponese
KEY DATES
KEY DATES

Launch
Launch
of tender :
of tender :
1992
1992

Contract
Contract
award
award
:
:
December
December
1997
1997

Start
Start
of construction :
of construction :
1999
1999

Opening to traffic
Opening to traffic
:
:
August
August
2004
2004

Total
Total
cost
cost
:
:
770 Mi Euros (630 construction)
770 Mi Euros (630 construction)
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION

Overview of project
Overview of project

Geotechnical and environmental conditions

Geotechnical and environmental conditions

Description of
Description of
foundation
foundation
system
system

Design strategy
Design strategy

Construction methods
Construction methods
Gulf of Corinth
RION
RION
ANTIRION
ANTIRION
RION ANTIRION
286 560
2252
560 560 286
65 m
9
0

m
230 m
GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS
GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS
65 m.
RION ANTIRION
SAND AND GRAVEL
CLAY
SILT
WEAK ALLUVIUMS :
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 100 200 300 400 500
Undrained shear strength (kN/m
2
)
D
e
p
t
h

b
e
l
o
w

g
r
o
u
n
d

s
u
r
f
a
c
e
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Shear wave velocity (m/s)
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
Unacceptable
Unacceptable
performance
performance
B
a
s
i
c

o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
E
s
s
e
n
t
i
a
l
/
H
a
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
S
a
f
e
t
y
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
o
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
Frequent
Frequent
Occasional
Occasional
Rare
Rare
Very
Very
Rare
Rare
E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e

d
e
s
i
g
n

E
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e

d
e
s
i
g
n

l
e
v
e
l
l
e
v
e
l
Earthquake performance
Earthquake performance
level
level
Fully
Fully
operational
operational
Operational
Operational
Life
Life
safe
safe
Near
Near
collapse
collapse
DESIGN SPECTRUM
DESIGN SPECTRUM
Sea
Sea
bed
bed
level
level
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Period (s)
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l

a
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n


(
g
)
Damping 5 %
M = 7.0
Return period2000 y
TECTONIC MOVEMENTS
PLAN :
HORIZONTAL OPENING : 2 m
ELEVATION :
VERTICAL SLIP : 2 m
PIER BASE
180 000 t
RION ANTIRION
SHIP IMPACT :
16 knots
CONTROL
CONTROL
L
L
ING FACTORS
ING FACTORS

No rock formation at less than 500 m

No rock formation at less than 500 m

Large water depth : 65 m

Large water depth : 65 m

Performance
Performance
objectives (2000
objectives (2000
year
year
return
return
period
period
)
)
:
:

Damages acceptable but bridge
Damages acceptable but bridge
repairable
repairable
,
,
and
and
re
re
-
-
usable
usable

horizontal sliding acceptable ; tilt prohibited (<0.1 %)

horizontal sliding acceptable ; tilt prohibited (<0.1 %)

Significant duration for design

Significant duration for design

Possibility for development of innovative concepts
Possibility for development of innovative concepts
FO
FO
UN
UN
DATIONS ?
DATIONS ?
PILES
PILES
EMBEDDED CAISSONS
EMBEDDED CAISSONS
SOIL SUBSTITUTION
SOIL SUBSTITUTION
SHALLOW FOUNDATION
SHALLOW FOUNDATION
Soil reinforcement with stiff inclusions
Soil reinforcement with stiff inclusions
SOIL REINFORCEMENT
SOIL REINFORCEMENT

Driven steel pipes

Driven steel pipes

Diameter 2 m, Thickness 20 mm
Diameter 2 m, Thickness 20 mm

Length 25 m to 30 m
Length 25 m to 30 m

Spacing 7 m x 7 m
Spacing 7 m x 7 m

Gravel layer : 3m thick

Gravel layer : 3m thick
20
20
0
0 INCLUSIONS
UNDER EACH FOUNDATION
UNDER EACH FOUNDATION
FOUNDATION LAYOUT
ROLE OF
ROLE OF
INCLUSIONS
INCLUSIONS
+ GRAVEL LAYER
+ GRAVEL LAYER

1

1
n
1
+
1
1 n
n
+
+
=

N Brittle links
+ + Ductile link
= = Ductile chain
P P P P

1
CAPACITY DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
CAPACITY DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
Plastic hinge = Gravel bed
Plastic hinge = Gravel bed

Fuse
Fuse
Overstrength
Overstrength
= Reinforced soil
= Reinforced soil
COMBINED EFFECT PROVIDES
COMBINED EFFECT PROVIDES

Bounds for forces in the superstructure

Bounds for forces in the superstructure

Control of failure mode

Control of failure mode
(horizontal sliding)
(horizontal sliding)

Facing a new design situation

Facing a new design situation

Keep things as simple as possible
Keep things as simple as possible

Three
Three
steps
steps
process
process

C
C
onceptual
onceptual
design
design
: New
: New
tools
tools
(
(
Yield
Yield
Design
Design
Theory
Theory
)
)

Am
Am
enable to parametric studies
enable to parametric studies

Validation :
Validation :
Physical
Physical
modeling
modeling
(centrifuge)
(centrifuge)

F
F
inal
inal
design
design
: non
: non
linear
linear
finite element models
finite element models
dynamic
dynamic
macro
macro
element
element

Structural analyses
Structural analyses
DESIGN STRATEGY
DESIGN STRATEGY
SEISMIC CAPACITY
SEISMIC CAPACITY
BEARING CAPACITY
under
COMBINED LOADS
x
F
Q
M
N
T
B
O
M
N
T
CB N N
CB T T
CB M M
/
/
/
2
=
=
=
Yield design theory
200 400 600 800 1000
Horizontal shear force at foundation level (MN)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
0
O
v
e
r
t
u
r
n
i
n
g

m
o
m
e
n
t


(
M
N

m
)
BOUNDING
BOUNDING
SURFACE
SURFACE
WITHOUT
inclusions
WITH
inclusions
WITH
Gravel layer
WITHOUT
Gravel
layer
N
N
= 8
= 8
6
6
0 MN
0 MN
-
-
L
L
= 25 m
= 25 m
-
-
S
S
= 7 m
= 7 m
0
10000
20000
30000
0 200 400 600 800
Hori zontal shear force (MN)
O
v
e
r
t
u
r
n
i
n
g

m
o
m
e
n
t


(
M
N
-
m
)
9m x 9m
7m x 7m
INCLUSIONS
INCLUSIONS
SPACING
SPACING
M=V.h
M=V.h
EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION
EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION

Centrifuge tests
Centrifuge tests

Ultimate failure loads
Ultimate failure loads

Monotonic tests
Monotonic tests

Push over test

Push over test

Cyclic behavior
Cyclic behavior

Cyclic tests
Cyclic tests
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Horizontal shear force at foundation level (MN)
O
v
e
r
t
u
r
n
i
n
g

m
o
m
e
n
t


(
M
N
-
m
)
CYCLIC TEST #2
CYCLIC TEST #2
MONOTONIC FAILURE LOAD
MONOTONIC FAILURE LOAD
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 50 100
Measured failure load (MN)
C
o
m
p
u
t
e
d

f
a
i
l
u
r
e

l
o
a
d

(
M
N
)
CYCLIC LOAD
CYCLIC LOAD
75% Failure load
75% Failure load
-50
-30
-10
10
30
50
-0.50 -0.30 -0.10 0.10 0.30 0.50
Hori zontal di spl acement (m)
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

f
o
r
c
e

(
M
N
)
1
10 10
1
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Horizontal shear force (MN)
O
v
e
r
t
u
r
n
i
n
g

m
o
m
e
n
t

(
M
N
-
m
)
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
GRAVEL BED DESIGN
GRAVEL BED DESIGN
SEISMIC DEMAND
SEISMIC DEMAND
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION
V
M
H
NEAR FIELD
FAR FIELD

K C
M
Nonlinearities :
geometrical (interface behaviour) :
Uplift model
material (elasto-plastic soil behaviour) :
Plasticity model
Wave propagation :
dissipation of radiation energy
Dynamic elastic impedances
DYNAMIC MACRO ELEMENT

RHEOLOGICAL MODEL
RHEOLOGICAL MODEL

0
C
0

NEAR FIELD
FAR FIELD
F
O
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION
SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION
-500
-250
0
250
500
0 10 20 30 40 50
Simplified model
Finite element model
Time (s)
Time (s)
H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

H
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l

s
h
e
a
r
s
h
e
a
r
f
o
r
c
e

(
M
N
)
f
o
r
c
e

(
M
N
)
PIER OFFSET DURING EARTHQUAKE
PIER OFFSET DURING EARTHQUAKE
U
-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
-0.40 -0.35 -0.30 -0.25 -0.20 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.05 0.10
U
x
[m]
y
[
m
]
TECTONIC MOVEMENTS
TECTONIC MOVEMENTS
CONSTRUCTION METHODS
CONSTRUCTION METHODS
Off-Shore Foundations
Cable stayed
bridge
Inclusions
Steel Pipe Driving & Gravel Bed Installation
END OF AN EXCEPTIONAL
END OF AN EXCEPTIONAL
TECHNICAL CHALLENGE
TECHNICAL CHALLENGE
AND HUMAN ADVENTURE
AND HUMAN ADVENTURE
AUGUST 8
AUGUST 8
th th
, 2004
, 2004
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Key factors to the success
Key factors to the success

Correct assessment of foundation performance
Correct assessment of foundation performance
criterion
criterion

Time allowed for design
Time allowed for design

Close collaboration and
Close collaboration and
confidence
confidence
between all
between all
parties:
parties:

Owner, Contractor, Design team, Checker

Owner, Contractor, Design team, Checker
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

GEFYRA SA (Concessionaire)
GEFYRA SA (Concessionaire)

J ean Paul
J ean Paul
Teyssandier
Teyssandier

GEFYRA KINOPRAXIA (Contractor)

GEFYRA KINOPRAXIA (Contractor)

Gilles de
Gilles de
Maublanc
Maublanc
, Pierre
, Pierre
Morand
Morand

DESIGN J V
DESIGN J V

J ean Marc Tourtois
J ean Marc Tourtois

DESIGN CHECKER
DESIGN CHECKER

Peter Taylor
Peter Taylor

Ralph Peck, Ricardo Dobry
Ralph Peck, Ricardo Dobry