-

Fast Construction Segmental and Launched Bridges

Technical Paper No 9

First published 2005

0 Concrete Bridge Development Group 2001

Published by the Concrete Bridge Development Group

Riverside House 0 4 Meadows Business Park 0 Station Approach
Blackwater 0 Camberley Surrey CUI7 9AB 0 UK
Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 0 F a : +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.

CONTENTS
Author
Speed Innovations in Segmental
and Launched Bridges

Simon Bourne
Director, Benaim

Pages

1-17

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 W ikon

18-29

Colin McKenna is the Technical Director responsible for

the bridges Resource Group in the Basingstoke Office
with particular responsibility for 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.

C O N C R f T E BRIDGE D L V f L O P M f N T G R O U P

ADDENDUM TO TP9 PAGE 1

Please note that Acer Consultants were the
designers of the permanent works on the Belfast
Cross Harbour Links project

Speed Innovations in Segmental and Launched Bridges

Simon Bourne
BSc MSc DIC CEng FlCE FIStructE
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 mechanism that 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.
1

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 developments were all achieved by collaborative working 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 clients 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, contractors 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 designers 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.

Page 1 of 30

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:
e
e
e
e
e

2.1

Improved quality control of casting in regular factory conditions

Improved 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 prestressties 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. 1 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 30

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
permanent works, 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 30

2.2

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 30

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.

I
I

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

2.3

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.
2.3.1

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-diameter bored 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 30

Fig. 10 STAR LRTS Viaducts

Overview of the project

Fig. 11 STAR LRTS Viaducts

Section at the piers showing
the single piles

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.

2.3.2

Portal Spans

The West Rail Viaducts in Hong Kong (see Fig. 13) include 1Okm 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 30

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 clients 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

YJj
i--f
L-J

rlBuuwm

Yj
+--e
L-J

Fig. 15 West Rail Viaducts

Typical portal span layout showing single
piles and twin-leaf piers

This arrangement respected the engineers 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 30

develop a new type of reinforced concrete detail for the monolithic connection between the 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. 18 West Rail Viaducts

Overview of the continuous spans showing the
twin-leaf piers

2.3.3

Built-in Crossheads

Page 8 of 30

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 monolithically connected
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 infilled to 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 30

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.
2.4

Precast Shells

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

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 30

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:
0
0
0

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. 19115mm
tendons.

Fig. 22 Taney Road Bridge

Two-stage construction sequence showing the precast shell details

Page 11 of 30

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 temDoraw DroDs

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 30

e
e
e
e

3.1

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 incrementally launched construction the 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.
3.2

Partial Prestressing

Broadmeadow Estuary Bridge (see Fig. 28) carries the M1 Motorway over the estuary north of
Dublin and it was constructed to a value-engineered design prepared by Benaim. The sensitive

Page 13 of 30

I
I

nature of the site demanded careful consideration of both the appearance of the bridge and its
construction methods. The value-engineered design maintained the 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 30

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
installed from 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 understood that this is the first bridge with a curved sofit
to be constructed by launching anywhere and it is the first substantial launched bridge in Ireland.

Page 15 of 30

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 Droiect

Fig. 34 Blackwater Viaduct

Proposed partial prestressing system
with low-friction, banded cables

Fig. 35 Blackwc--r Viaduct

Showing the nose and the temporary
props over the river

Page 16 of 30

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:
0

0
0
0
0

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, clients engineer, contractor, contractors 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 30

Glued Segmental Bridges - Route 3, Hong Kong

Colin.McKenna
Technical Director, Scott Wilson
1

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 approaches to 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

Figure 1 - Route 3 Country Park Section

DESCRIPTION OF STRUCTURES

Page 19 of 30

Previous page
is blank

The precast segmental bridges all form part of the Au Tau Interchange with Bridge l 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.

DESIGN

3.1

Substructures

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
(la). 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 20 of 30

Typical cross sections are shown in Figure 2.

HARD
SHOULDER

3300

I, STRIP
HARD
VARIES

CARRIAGEWAY
7300

'

r 3 0 0 0

1600 WlOE I
ACCESS HOlt
DIAPHRAGM
-POST
KNSIONEO
SEGMENTAL CONCRETE
BOX GIRDER

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 1860 N/mm2 which results in an
ultimate force in each tendon of 10323kN.
3.3

Superstructure Design

The structures are all designed to the requirements of 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 21 of 30

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 0.1mm 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.
I

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.
4

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 recommendation of 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
O.ld 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 61 MNm 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 isoparametric three 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 22 of 30

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 anchorages was 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 7.5Owhich 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 integrityof
the structure is dependent on this element a conservative approach was considered appropriate

Page 23 of 30

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 4.75N/mm2
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.
5

ERECTION

5.1

General

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 Carnage, (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 launchingcylinders.
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 24 of 30

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 PGs 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 PGs 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 25 of 30

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 spans 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
121/2% of the load was taken. The jacks were locked off using a safety ring nut and the other
end extended until they took 12/2% of the load between them. (121/2% + 121/2% = 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 26 of 30

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 maintain temporary
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

2.

Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways - Highways Department, Hong
Kong Government

3.

British Standard BS5400 Parts 1 to 10 - Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges.

4.

Department of Transport Design Standard BD 58/94 -The Design of Concrete Highway

Bridges and Structures with External and Unbonded Prestressing

5.

ClRlA Guide No 2 - The Design of Deep Beams in Reinforced Concrete

Page 27 of 30

jTArii 9
LAUNCU GANTRY

ARl RL

Figure 3 - Gantry Movement Sequence

Page 28 of 30

-+
7

1.

2.

TECHNICAL GUIDES
TGl

INTEGRAL BRIDGES
A 72-page Report of a Study Visit by CBDG delegation to USA in August 1997, sponsored by DTI

TG2

GUIDE TO TESTING AND MONITORING THE DURABILITY OF CONCRETE STRUCTURES

An easy-to-use practical guide for bridge owners and designers produced by the CBDG Task Group

TG3

THE USE OF FIBRE COMPOSITES IN CONCRETE BRIDGES

A 36-page state-of-the-art review of the use of advanced composites authored by Dr J L Clarke
(Concrete Society)

TG4

THE AESTHETICS OF CONCRETE BRIDGES

A Guide produced by a CBDG Task Group led by John Bergg with 60 colour photographs

TG5

FAST CONSTRUCTION OF CONCRETE BRIDGES

A Guide prepared by a CBDG Task Group

TG6

THE USE OF HIGH STRENGTH CONCRETE IN CONCRETE BRIDGES

A state-of-the-art report authored by BRE on behalf of CBDG

TG7

SELF COMPACTING CONCRETE IN BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION

A state-of-the-art report authored by Professor Peter Bartos on behalf of CBDG

TECHNICAL PAPERS
TPl AN OVERVIEW OF THE THAUMASITE FORM OF ATTACH
TP2 TOWARDS THE DESIGN OF SOIL LOADING FOR INTEGRAL BRIDGES
TP3 GUIDE TO COMPRESSIVE MEMBRANE ACTION
TP4 FLUSH BOND TESTS
TP5 THE EFFECT OF SHEAR ENHANCEMENT ON THE RESISTANCE OF AN INFILL DECK
TP6 JOINING CONCRETE BRIDGES
TP7

TESTING OF HIGH STRENGTH CONCRETE BEAMS WlTH LIMESTONE AGGREGATE

TP8

IMPLEMENTATION OF EUROPEAN CONCRETE AND AGGREGATE STANDARDS AND THEIR

INFLUENCE ON THE USE OF RECYCLED AGGREGATES IN CONCRETE FOR BRIDGES

TP9

FAST CONSTRUCTION - SEGMENTAL AND LAUNCHED BRIDGES

3.

EDUCATIONAL BROCHURES
a)
Concrete Bridges
b)
Concrete Substructuresfor Bridges
c)
Concrete Bridge Decks
Ready Mixed Concrete in Bridge Construction
d)
Precast Concrete in Bridge Construction
e)

4.

A CENTURY OF CONCRETE BRIDGES

A 6-page brochure showing the best examples of concrete bridges in the 201he century

5.

CONCRETE BRIDGES WALLCHART

A comprehensive introduction to concrete bridges for students

6.

WHOLE LIFE COSTING

Collection of papers reproduced from 1994 seminar

7.

ASSESSMENT OF CONCRETE BRIDGES (1)

A report by CBDG Task Group

8.

UPDATING HIGHWAYS AGENCY CODES, ADVICE AND STANDARDS RELATING TO BRIDGE TESTING
A report by a CBDG Task Group

9.

LONG TERM MONITORING OF MOISTURE IN CONCRETE STRUCTURES

A 25-page report produced by a CBDG Task Group (University of Luton)

10.

BRIDGE DETAILING GUIDE

The original CBDG Detailing Guide is now being incorporated into this major ClRlA publication sponsored by
the HighwaysAgency (now available from CIRIA)

11.

MEMBERS PUBLICATIONS
The Strategy Document, Members Handbook, Newsletters (1992-2001), Technical Intelligence Directory 2001,
Seminar Papers (1992-2001) are all available FOC to members on application to the Secretary.

12.

BRIDGE JOINT ASSOCIATION

STANDARD FOR ASPHALTIC PLUG JOINTS
STANDARD FOR MECHANICAL BRIDGE JOINTS

To order or to receive a quotation, please use our website www.cbda.ora.uk

or contact ihe Secretary on 01276 33777.
Additional charges will be made for postage and packing for UK addresses.
Overseas charges by negotiation.

The

Concrete Bridge Development Group aims to promote excellence in the design, construction and
management of concrete bridges.

With a membership that indudes all sectors involved in the concrete bridge industry - bridge owners and managers,
contractors, designers and suppliers - the Group acts as a forum for debate and the exchange of new ideas. A
major programme of bridge assessment, strengthening and widening is underway to accommodate European
standards and the increasing pressure on the UK road network, The Group provides an excellent vehicle for the
industry to coordinate an effective approach and to enhance the use of concrete.
Through an active programme of events and seminars, task groups, newsletters, study visits and publications, the
Concrete Bridge Development Group aims to:
0
0

0
0

0
0

Address the challenge of the national bridge programme

Provide a focus for all those involved in concrete bridge design, construction and management
Promote an integrated approach and encourage development of innovative ideas and concepts
Promote best practice in design and construction through education, training and information dissemination
Make representations on national and international codes and standards
ldentrfy future research and development needs
Maximise opportunities to develop the wider and better use of concrete.

Membership of the Concrete Bridge Development Group is open to those who have an interest in promoting and
enhancing the concrete bridge industry. Five main types of membership are available:
0
0
0

0
0

Group membership for industry organisations and associations

Corporate membership for contractors, consultants, suppliers and specialist service companies
Associate membership for academic organisations
Bridge Owners for all organisations which commission, own, maintain and manage concrete bridges
Individual consultants.

By being representative of the whole industry, the Concrete Bridge Development Group acts as a focus for the best
in concrete bridge design, construction, maintenance and management.

Concrete Bridge Development Group

Riverside House 0 4 Meadows Business Park 0 Station Approach
Blackwater Q Camberley 0 Surrey GU17 9AB 0 UK
Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 0 Fax:+44 (0)1276 38899
w.cbdg.0rg.uk

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
Boume (Director, Benaim) and Colin McKenna (Technical Director, Scott Wilson)
for CBDG

Concrete Bridge Development Group

Riverside House 4 Meadows Business Park Station Approach
Blackwater Camberley Surrey GU17 9AB UK
Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 F a : +44 (0)1276 38899