The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea

Techniques of Optimizing the Launching Nose in Incremental Launching Method

Hang-Yong Choi1, Suk-Koo Suh1, Myung-Seok Oh1, Sae-Hwan Oh1 and Keum-Bae Kong2
1

Structure Division, Seoyeong Engineering Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea

E-mail: chhy8524@hanmail.net, sksuh@seoyeong.co.kr, msoh@seoyeong.co.kr, shoh@seoyeong.co.kr
2
R&D Center, Seoyeong Engineering Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea
E-mail: kongja724@seoyeong.co.kr
Abstract
The behavior of nose-deck system during launch is examined by three dimensionless launching parameters, such as the
relative flexural stiffness, the relative nose weight, and the relative nose length. The techniques of optimizing the
launching nose are illustrated and equations of relationship between relative nose weight and relative nose length are
derived under minimum conditions of the launching negative and positive moment. Equations of maximum positive
and negative moment are suggested under the conditions. The optimum design method of the launching nose is
proposed in launched continuous girder bridges. The ideal launching nose is to design that with the relative nose weight
of 0.167 and the relative nose length of 0.836 to minimize absolute values of the positive and negative moment during
launch. The predicted results by the optimum design method are consistent with numerical analysis. The absolute
maximum moment can be easily evaluated by optimum design method during launch without complex construction
stage analysis.
Keywords: incremental launching method, launching nose, relative flexural stiffness, relative nose weight, relative
nose length
1. Introduction
Bridge types are determined by the structural characteristics, constructability, landscape, management and so on. The
structural characteristics and constructability are the most important factor of them. Erection method should be
determined by considering the location of erection, the compatibility with the design, stability and economy of erection.
Incremental launching is a construction technique for composite bridges widely used in Europe. About 80% of the plate
girder bridges in France have been constructed by the incremental launching method. In addition to the plate girder
bridges, it is used to construction of the box girder, arch, cable stayed bridges.
The role of the launching nose becomes more and more important as the self-weight of the superstructure increases.
Composite bridges are generally built by launching the steel girder and then casting the concrete slab. As the selfweight of the steel girder is only one-fifth of the final cross-sectional weight, the use of a launching nose may
sometimes be superfluous. When necessary, short, light trusses are used(Rosignoli, 2002). The behavior of the nosedeck elastic system is governed by three dimensionless parameters that describe its geometrical and mechanical
characteristics, such as the relative flexural stiffness, the relative nose weight, and the relative nose length(Rosignoli,
1998). But the launching nose has been designed according to customs and experience and the design method of
launching nose has not been established.
Rosignoli(1998) derived the theoretical equations of the bending moments which occurred in the nose-deck elastic
system, mainly considered the negative moment at the first support in the phase of launch, and derived the minimum
condition of the launching negative moment by using a trial-and-error method. But depending on the geometrical and
mechanical characteristics of the nose, it is likely to occur absolute maximum negative moment at the second support
of launch as well. During launching, it need to minimize the positive moment as well as the negative moment
depending on the type of the bridges(Choi et al., 2007).
Based on Rosignoli(1998) theory, the behavior of nose-deck system during the launch is examined by three
dimensionless launching parameters, such as the relative flexural stiffness, the relative nose weight, and the relative
nose length. The techniques of optimizing the launching nose are illustrated and equations of relationship between
relative nose weight and relative nose length are derived under minimum conditions of the launching negative and
positive moment. Equations of maximum positive and negative moment are suggested under the conditions. The
optimum design method of the launching nose is proposed in launched continuous girder bridges.
2. Nose-Deck Interaction System
2.1 Negative Moment at the Supports
The behavior of nose-deck system is governed by the relative nose length( Ln / L ), the relative nose weight( qn / q ), and

the relative flexural stiffness( En I n / EI ) that describe its geometrical and mechanical characteristics(Rosignoli, 1998).
Fig.1 shows the outline of the nose-deck elastic system in the first and second phase of launch.

954

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea

(a) the first launch stage

(b) the second launch stage

Figure 1. Nose-deck elastic system in the first and second phase of launch

Figure 2. Determination of the maximum positive moment in the first and second spans
The first launch stage is the cantilever configurations assumed before the nose reaches support A. At the start of launch,
for the dimensionless launching parameter = x / L = 0, the negative moment M B* in a dimensionless form
is(Rosignoli, 1998)
M B*
2 qn Ln
1 Ln
=

+
2
2
q L
2 L
qL

(0 < 1 Ln / L)

(1)

Once the nose tip has been reached at support A, the recovery of the elastic deflection creates a positive moment that
reduces the negative moment M B and the second launch stage starts, in which the nose slides on support A until the
deck arrives. The value of M B in the second launch stage is(Rosignoli, 1998)
M B M B* RA
=
+
qL2 qL2 qL

(1 Ln / L 1)

(2)

Where M B* is the cantilever moment in Eq.(1) and the reaction RA intervenes only for 1 Ln / L 1 .
2.2 Positive Moment in the Spans
During launch, the value of the negative moment is maximized at the support but the maximum point of the positive
moment changes. Fig.2 shows the nose-deck system for determination of the maximum positive moment in the first and
second spans during launch. Using the equilibrium conditions in the first span AB, the occurrence location and the
value of the maximum positive moment are
RA qn Ln
y
+
+
=
qL q L
L AB

(3)
2

max
q L 1 R 1 qn
M AB
R
= A 1 n n + A +
2
qL
q L 2 qL 2 q
qL

Ln qn
L q 1

(4)

Using the equilibrium conditions in the second span BC, the occurrence location and the value of the maximum
positive moment are
RB M C 1 M B
y
= 2 + 2
=
L BC qL qL 2 qL

(5)

max
M BC
M
1M
1 M
= C2 B2 + + B2
2 qL qL 2 qL
qL2

955

(6)

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea
3. Control the Launching Negative Moment in the Launching Girder

The minimum condition of the launching negative moment is to make the negative moment at the end of the first
launch stage( = 1 Ln / L ) same with the negative moment at the end of the launch( = 1.0) ensuring the relative
flexural stiffness En I n / EI 0.2.
The minimum condition of the launching negative moment is

(M

*
B

/ qL2 )

=1 Ln / L

= ( M B / qL2 )

(7)

=1

Substituting for Eq.(7) from Eq.(1) and Eq.(2), relationship between the relative nose length and the relative nose
weight under the minimum condition of the launching negative moment can be obtained as follows:
2

Ln
=
L

qn
q

q
1 n 1.576 0.5 0.366 n
q
q
q

q
2 0.5 0.366 n
q

qn
0.169)
q

(0 <

(8)

Fig.3 shows that the Relationship between the relative nose length and the relative nose weight under the minimum
condition of the launching negative moment of Eq.(8) compares with the result evaluated with trial-and-error method
by Rosignoli(1998). In order to satisfy the minimum condition of the launching negative moment, as the relative nose
length increases, the relative nose weight increases as well. It should be used longer launching nose than the result of
Rosignoli(1998).
Fig.4 shows evolution of the negative moment under the minimum condition of the launching negative moment at the
support B and C. As the relative nose length in Eq.(8) increases, the launching negative moment decreases to -1/12(= 0.083) which is the negative moment at the interior support of infinite continuous beam. In case of qn / q > 0.16, the
absolute maximum negative moment occurs at the support C. It should be limited the relative nose weight to less than
0.16( 0 < qn / q 0.16 ) in order to lead to occur the absolute maximum negative moment at the support B.
4. Control the Launching Positive Moment in the Launching Girder

Fig.5 shows evolution of the maximum positive moment under the minimum condition of the launching positive
moment in the span AB and BC. As the relative nose weight and length in Eq.(8) increases, the launching maximum
positive moment decreases. In case of qn / q > 0.16, the absolute maximum positive moment occurs in the span BC. In
order to minimize the absolute maximum positive moment under the minimum condition of the negative moment, the
value of the absolute maximum positive moment in the span AB should be same with the one in the span BC.
In order to minimize the absolute maximum positive moment, the value of the absolute maximum positive moment in
the span AB

(M )

max max
AB

/ qL2 should be same with the one in the span BC

(M )

max max
BC

/ qL2 .

Relative nose length, Ln/L

1.00
0.90

Eq.(8)
Rosignoli(1998)

0.80
0.70
0.60
EnIn/EI 0.20

0.50
0.00

0.04

0.08

0.12

0.16

0.20

Relative nose weight, qn/q

Figure 3. Relationship between the relative nose length and the relative nose weight under the minimum condition of
the launching negative moment

956

0.00
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

= (qn/q, Ln/L)

-0.15
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.0

0.2

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

-1/12 = -0.083

(0.12, 0.706)
(0.10, 0.667)
(0.08, 0.634)
(0.05, 0.594)

-0.05

Ln/L = varies
qn/q = varies
EnIn/EI = 0.20

-0.20

(0.16, 0.839)

-1/12 = -0.083

-0.25

(0.14, 0.758)

Ln/L = varies
qn/q = varies
EnIn/EI = 0.20

(0.169, 0.941)

Bending moment at support C, MC/qL2

-0.10

(0.16, 0.839)

-0.15

(0.14, 0.758)

-0.20

(0.12, 0.706)
(0.10, 0.667)
(0.08, 0.634)
(0.05, 0.594) = (qn/q, Ln/L)

-0.25

(0.169, 0.941)

Bending moment at support B, MB/qL2

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

(a) at the support B

(b) at the support C

1/24 = 0.042

0.02
0.00
-0.02
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Ln/L = varies
qn/q = varies
EnIn/EI = 0.20

0.06

1/24 = 0.042

0.04
0.02
0.00
-0.02
0.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

(0.16, 0.839)

0.04

0.08

(0.14, 0.758)
(0.12, 0.706)
(0.10, 0.667)
(0.08, 0.634)
(0.05, 0.594)

0.06

(qn/q, Ln/L) = (0.05, 0.594)

(0.08, 0.634)
(0.10, 0.667)
(0.12, 0.706)
(0.14, 0.758)
(0.16, 0.839)
(0.169, 0.941)

Ln/L = varies
qn/q = varies
EnIn/EI = 0.20

(qn/q, Ln/L) = (0.169, 0.941)

0.08

2
BC span bending moment, M max
BC /qL

2
AB span bending moment, M max
AB /qL

Figure 4. Evolution of the negative moment under the minimum condition of the launching negative moment

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

(a) in the span AB

(b) in the span BC

Figure 5. Evolution of the maximum positive moment under the minimum condition of the launching positive moment
The minimum condition of the launching negative moment is

(M

max
AB

/ qL2 )

=1 qn / q Ln / L

max
= ( M BC
/ qL2 )

(9)

=1 Ln / L

Substituting for Eq.(9) from Eq.(4) and Eq.(6), relationship between the relative nose length and the relative nose
weight under the minimum condition of the launching positive moment can be obtained as follows:
3

q
q
q
0.593 n + 0.452 n + 0.447 n
Ln
q
q
q
=
L
qn qn

+ 0.492
q q

+ 0.002

(0.032 <

q
q
q
q
q
q
= 29.2 n 112 n + 178 n 149 n + 70.6 n 18.5 n + 2.9
q
q
q
q
q
q

(0.353

qn
0.353)
q
qn
< 1.0)
q

(10)

Fig.6 shows the relationship between the relative nose length and the relative nose weight under the minimum
conditions of the launching negative and positive moment. In order to satisfy the minimum condition of the launching
negative moment, the relative nose length increases as the relative nose weight increases. But for the minimum
condition of the launching positive moment, the relative nose length decreases as the relative nose weight increases.
Fig.7 shows the absolute maximum positive moment with launch for different values of the relative nose weight and
the relative nose length. For Ln / L <0.6, as the relative nose weight increases, the absolute maximum positive moment

957

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea
always occurs in the span AB. But for Ln / L >0.65, the absolute maximum positive moment occurs in span BC as the
relative nose weight increases. The absolute maximum positive moments by Eq.(10) coincide with the minimum value
of the absolute maximum positive moment with launch. For qn / q >0.353, the minimum value of the absolute
maximum positive moment increases regardless the relative nose length.
5. Optimum Design Method of the Launching Nose

5.1 Optimum Design formula of the Launching Nose

Fig.8 and Fig.9 show the absolute maximum positive and negative moment with launch under the minimum conditions
of the launching negative and positive moment, respectively. Under the minimum condition of the negative moment,
the absolute maximum positive and negative moment decrease for qn / q 0.16 and increase for qn / q >0.16. The
occurrence locations of the absolute maximum positive and negative moment change from the span AB to the span BC.
Under the minimum condition of the positive moment, the absolute maximum positive moment decreases until
qn / q <0.353 and the absolute maximum negative moment decreases until qn / q <0.167. Therefore, the relationship
between the relative nose weight and length under the minimum condition of the negative moment is as follows:
2

Ln
L =
N

qn
q

q
1 n 1.576 0.5 0.366 n
q
q
q

q
2 0.5 0.366 n
q

(0 <

qn
0.16)
q

(11)

The relationship between the relative nose weight and length under the minimum condition of the positive moment is as
follows:
3

q
q
q
0.593 n + 0.452 n + 0.447 n + 0.002
Ln
q
q
q
L =
qn qn

P
+ 0.492
q q

(0.032 <

qn
0.353)
q

(12)

Using Eq.(11) and Eq.(12), it can be calculated the optimum length of the launching nose to minimize the launching
negative and positive moment.
The equations of the absolute maximum positive moment and negative moment can be obtained by the regression
analysis for the absolute maximum positive moment and negative moment calculated using Eq.(11) and Eq.(12). Using
Eq.(11) for the minimum condition of the negative moment, the absolute maximum positive moment and negative
moment are obtained as follows:
2

M NPOS / qL2 = 0.1 0.604 n + 0.358 + 0.17 + 0.0473

q

(13)

q
q
q
q
M NNEG / qL2 = 55.7 n 14.1 n + 1.15 n + 0.0154 n
q
q
q



q

0.1056

(14)

Using Eq.(12) for the minimum condition of the positive moment, the absolute maximum positive moment and
negative moment are obtained as follows:
3

q
q
q
M PPOS / qL2 = 0.361 n + 0.355 n 0.166 n
q
q


q

+ 0.075

NEG
P

q
q
/ qL = 0.35 n + 0.119 n 0.105
q

q
2

(0.032 <

q
q
= 0.16 n 0.584 n 0.0017
q
q

958

(0.167

(15)
qn
0.167)
q
qn
0.353)
q

(16)

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea

0.8
0.7

0.353

0.16

0.5
0.0

EnIn/EI 0.20

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Ln/L = 1.00
0.95

0.07

0.90
0.50

0.85

0.55

0.06

0.80

0.60

0.75
0.70

0.05

0.65
0)
.(1

0.6

EnIn/EI 0.20

max
(M max
/qL2
AB )
max
(M max
/qL2
BC )

0.353

0.9

0.08

Eq

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

Eq.(8) : Min. condition of negative M

Eq.(10): Min. condition of positive M

By

Relative nose length, Ln/L

1.0

0.04
0.0

0.2

Relative nose weight, qn/q

1/24 = 0.042

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Relative nose weight, qn/q

Figure 6. Relationship between the relative nose length Figure 7. Absolute maximum positive moment with launch
and weight under the minimum conditions of the
for different values of the relative nose weight and
launching negative and positive moment
the relative nose length
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(8)
AB )
max
(M max
)
/qL2 by Eq.(8)
BC
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(10)
AB )
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(10)
BC )

0.09
0.08
0.07

0.353

0.06

0.16

0.05
1/24 = 0.042

0.04
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.10
max max
(M AB
) /qL2 by Eq.(8)
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(8)
BC )
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(10)
AB )
max
(M max
/qL2 by Eq.(10)
BC )

EnIn/EI 0.20

0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05

0.839

2
EnIn/EI 0.20

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

0.10

1/24 = 0.042

0.04
0.5

Relative nose weight, qn/q

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Relative nose length, Ln/L

(a) for different values of the relative nose weight

(b) for different values of the relative nose length

EnIn/EI 0.20

-0.12
-0.11

-0.09
-1/12 = -0.083

-0.08
0.0

0.1

0.353

-0.10

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Relative nose weight, qn/q

-0.15
-0.14
-0.13

(M B )max/qL2 by Eq.(8)
(M C )max/qL2 by Eq.(8)
(M B )max/qL2 by Eq.(10)
(M C )max/qL2 by Eq.(10)

EnIn/EI 0.20

-0.12
-0.11
-0.10
-0.09

0.836

-0.13

(M B)max/qL2 by Eq.(8)
(M C)max/qL2 by Eq.(8)
(M B)max/qL2 by Eq.(10)
(M C)max/qL2 by Eq.(10)

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

-0.14

-0.15

0.167

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

Figure 8. Absolute maximum positive moment with launch under the minimum conditions of the launching negative
and positive moment

-1/12 = -0.083

-0.08
0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Relative nose length, Ln/L

(a) for different values of the relative nose weight

(b) for different values of the relative nose length

Figure 9. Absolute maximum negative moment with launch under the minimum conditions of the launching negative
and positive moment
Fig.10 shows the optimum design curves for the relative nose length and absolute maximum bending moment with
launch for different values of the relative nose weight. Depending on the section of a launching girder, the relative nose
weight can be determined. Appling the determined relative nose weight to Eq.(11) and (12), it can be obtained the
optimum length of the launching nose. Also, applying the determined relative nose weight to Eq.(13) and Eq.(14) or

959

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea

( )
Ln
L

M NPOS/qL2

( )
Ln
L

0.07

0.9
P

0.8

2
M POS
P /qL

0.06

0.7

0.05

0.6

Relative nose length, Ln/L

0.08

1/24 = 0.042

0.04
0.0

0.1

0.2

0.5
0.4

0.3

-0.18

1.0
EnIn/EI 0.20

-0.16

( )
Ln
L

( )
Ln
L

-0.14
-0.12

0.9
P

0.8

0.7

2
M NEG
N /qL

2
M NEG
P /qL

-0.10

0.6

Relative nose length, Ln/L

1.0
EnIn/EI 0.20

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

Absolute maximum moment, M/qL

0.09

-1/12 = -0.083

-0.08
0.0

0.1

Relative nose weight, qn/q

0.2

0.5
0.4

0.3

Relative nose weight, qn/q

(a) for the absolute maximum positive moment

(b) for the absolute maximum negative moment

0.056

0.8

0.553

0.6

1/24 = 0.042

0.04
0.459
(y/L)AB

0.02

0.4

0.257

0.2

0.4

0.860

-0.02
0.0

0.2
0.459

0.00

0.6

0.8

0.0
1.0

0.06

1.0
max

0.056

M BC /qL

Ln/L = 0.836
qn/q = 0.167
EnIn/EI = 0.20

0.8

1/24 = 0.042

0.04

0.6
0.514

0.02

0.455

0.4

(y/L)BC

0.00
-0.02
0.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

0.0
1.0

2
Location occurred M max
BC /qL , (y/L)BC

0.08

0.164

max

M AB /qL

2
BC span bending moment, M max
BC /qL

0.06

1.0
Ln/L = 0.836
qn/q = 0.167
EnIn/EI = 0.20

2
Location occurred M max
AB /qL , (y/L)AB

0.08

0.164

2
AB span bending moment, M max
AB /qL

Figure 10. Optimum design curves for the relative nose length and absolute maximum bending moment with launch for
different values of the relative nose weight

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

(a) in the span AB

(b) in the span BC

Ln/L = 0.836
qn/q = 0.167
EnIn/EI = 0.20

-0.20
-0.15
-0.10

M B/qL

-0.095

-1/12 = -0.083

-0.05
0.00
0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

-0.25
Ln/L = 0.836
qn/q = 0.167
EnIn/EI = 0.20

-0.20
-0.15
-0.093

-0.10

-1/12 = -0.083
M C/qL

-0.05
0.00
0.0

0.164

Bending moment at support C, MC/qL2

-0.25

0.164

Bending moment at support B, MB/qL

Figure 11. Evolution of the occurrence and the value the maximum positive moment under the minimum condition of
the absolute maximum negative moment

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Dimensionless launching parameter, a

(a) at the support B

(b) at the support C
Figure 12. Evolution of the negative moment under the minimum condition of the absolute maximum negative moment
Eq.(15) and Eq.(16), it can be calculated the absolute maximum positive and negative moment without complex
construction stage analysis.
In other words, depending on the length of launching nose, the optimum launching nose can be designed by using the
minimum conditions of the positive moment or the negative moment for qn / q <0.16. The optimum launching nose can
be designed by using the minimum condition of the positive moment for qn / q >0.16. Because the absolute maximum

960

The 5th International Symposium on Steel Structures

March 12-14, 2009, Seoul, Korea
positive and negative moment are occurred in the first span AB and at the first support B respectively, the design of the
launching nose under the minimum conditions is more effective to control the stress resultants.
5.2 Ideal Optimum Launching Nose
Table 1 compares the absolute maximum positive and negative moment calculated by the optimum design curves.
Using qn / q =0.167 and Ln / L =0.836, a launching girder can be designed by the absolute maximum negative moment
with 114% of the absolute maximum negative moment at the interior support of infinite continuous beam. Using
qn / q =0.353 and Ln / L =0.812, a launching girder can be designed by the absolute maximum positive moment with
107% of the absolute maximum positive moment in the interior span of infinite continuous beam. Therefore, the ideal
design of the launching nose is to apply the relative nose weight of qn / q =0.167 and length of Ln / L =0.836 that
minimize the absolute maximum negative moment and control the absolute maximum positive moment.
Table 1. Absolute maximum positive and negative moment calculated by the optimum design curves
M PPOS / qL2

M PNEG / qL2

qn / q

Ln / L

0.167

0.836

0.0555

133%

-0.0949

114%

Minimum of M NEG

0.191

0.828

0.0537

129%

-0.1074

129%

Rate of M POS equal to that of M NEG

0.353

0.812

0.0448

107%

-0.1879

225%

Minimum of M POS

Remark

The rates are the absolute maximum moments compared with 1/24(= 0.042) and -1/12(= -0.083).

Fig.11 and Fig.12 show the evolution of the occurrence location and the value of the maximum positive and negative
moment using qn / q =0.167 and Ln / L =0.836. The absolute maximum positive and negative moment value during
launch is consistent with the proposed method and the occurrence location is

and

( y / L ) AB =0.459~0.553 in the span AB

( y / L ) BC =0.455~ 0.514 in the span BC.

7. Conclusions

The behavior of nose-deck system during launch is examined by three dimensionless launching parameters, such as the
relative flexural stiffness, the relative nose weight, and the relative nose length. The techniques of optimizing the
launching nose are illustrated and equations of relationship between relative nose weight and relative nose length are
derived under minimum conditions of the launching negative and positive moment. Equations of maximum positive
and negative moment are suggested under the conditions. The optimum design method of the launching nose is
proposed in launched continuous girder bridges. The conclusions are as follows:
(1) For qn / q <0.16, the minimum conditions of positive and negative moment can be chosen depending on the length
of launching nose and it can be designed by using the minimum condition of positive moment for qn / q >0.16.
(2) The ideal launching nose is to design that with the relative nose weight of 0.167 and the relative nose length of
0.836 to minimize absolute values of the positive and negative moment during launch.
(3) Because the absolute maximum moment are occurred in the first span AB and at the first support B respectively, the
design of the launching nose under the minimum conditions is more effective to control the stress resultants.
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by a grant(06 Construction Consequence C11) from the Construction Technology
Innovation Program of the R&D project funded by Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of Korean
government. The authors wish to thank the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs of Korean government.
References
Choi H.Y., Suh S.K., Oh M.S., Oh S.H., and Kim H.S. (2007) Temporary Stresses by Applying Construction Methods
for Continuous Steel-Concrete Double Composite Box Girder Bridges, Journal of Korean Society of Steel
Construction, Vol. 19, No. 6, pp. 681-693 (in Korean).
Choi H.Y., Suh S.K., Oh M.S., and Oh S.H. (2008) Techniques of Optimizing the Launching Nose under Conditions of
Minimizing the Launching Bending Moment, Journal of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 28, No. 4A, pp.
487-495 (in Korean).
Rosignoli M. (1998) Nose-Deck Interaction in Launched Prestressed Concrete Bridges, Journal of Bridge Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 21-27.
Rosignoli M. (2002) Bridge launching, Thomas Telford Ltd., London.

961