INTEGRATED

INTEGRATED
chairman, hssi
This book is specially dedicated to our late chairman Dato Ir. Haji Abu Bakar
Bin Haji Mohd Amin and late Dato Ir C. Sivasubramaniam in Grateful
Appreciation for their years of outstanding service and devotion.
Theyset thefoundationfor what wehavebecometoday
Theyfortifiedthepillarstohelpusweather thestorm
Theytaught ustobridgeover insurmountableodds
Theyshowedusthehighwaytoabetter tomorrow.
Though sorely missed, be assured that their legacy lives on through all of us
at the HSS Group.
Dato Ir. Haji Abu Bakar Bin Haji Mohd Amin
1941 - 2009
Dato Ir. C. Sivasubramaniam
1925 - 2009
contents
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
introduction
design concept and key considerations
design development
award of contract
scope of widening works
construction challenges and innovations
conclusion
references
appendices
key milestone
dates
15 10 2006
Completion of
toll plaza
03 02 2006
Starting of first
soil investigation
boreholes
18 08 2006
Driving of first
bore piles
06 11 2007
First beam
launched
27 05 2009
Completion of
stitching Prai side
26 04 2009
Completion of
stitching Penang
side
1
introduction 1.0
2
The Penang Bridge is a 13.5 km crossing that
connects Gelugor on the Penang Island to Seberang
Perai on the mainland of Peninsular Malaysia. It
comprises a 2.2 km length of cable-stayed bridge and
high level approach viaducts (dual 3 lane) and 5.76
km of low level approach viaducts (dual two-lane).
Construction of this bridge started in 1982 and was
officially opened to traffic in 1985. By 2002, the traffic
demand on the bridge had increased to 98,000
vehicles, reaching capacity during peak hours.
Under the terms of the Concession Agreement, PBSB
as the Concession Company was required to widen
the existing dual two-lane low-level approach viaducts
at an appropriate time in the Concession Period to
enable traffic capacity and toll revenue to be
maximized.
The Penang Bridge 1.1
3
The Consultants
Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd engaged Consultants HSSI
to provide the following professional engineering
services for the Project, as the lead consultant:
Preliminary engineering study
Traffic studies
Preliminary environmental impact screening
study
Detailed engineering design
Tender documentation
Pre-qualification of tenderers
Construction and supervision works
In engaging HSSI, Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd sought
the following standards of services:
Formulation and implementation of a cost-
effective method of widening the bridge
Minimization of construction impacts on traffic
flows
Project delivery on-time and to budget
Rigorous application of QA standards
Regular reporting to Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd
HSSI was engaged in September 2003 and provided
services through to August 2009. At the peak, HSSI
had 70 professional staffs working on the project.
This booklet records the design and construction
work and, in the process, summarizes the main
challenges faced by the consultant and contractor
involved in widening the Penang Bridge.
This Booklet 1.2 1.3
4
design concept
2.0
Design Concept And Key Considerations
5
Layout
The location of the low-level approach viaducts in
relation to the overall crossing, including the
main cable-stayed bridge and the high-level
approach spans, is shown in Fig 2.1.1.
The eastern low-level viaduct, with a total length of
3.96 km and referred to as the Prai Shore Approach,
extends from the east abutment to pier 24E. It
comprises nineteen five-span units, each 40 m in
length. At the eastern end, there is one three-span
unit, each 40 m in length, and one 38 m long single-
span. The western low-level viaduct, with a total
length of 1.8 km and referred to as the Middle Bank
Bridge, extends from pier 24W to pier 69W. It
comprises nine five-span units, each 40 m in length.
Penang bridge general layout
Fig 2.1.1
2.1
6
7
2.2
The Penang Bridge carries a significant volume of
motorcycles and scooters. At the feasibility study
stage, Consultants HSSI examined options for adding
a dedicated motorcycle lane to each side of the
existing dual two-lane low level approach viaducts, on
the basis that this could significantly improve traffic
capacity and in turn avoid widening works involving
new foundations. However, it was concluded that a
lower cost option of this form would only provide an
interim solution and would not maximize the traffic
capacity provided by the existing dual three-lane
cable stayed bridge and high-level approach spans.
It was therefore recommended that the low-level
approach viaducts and Penang Island Interchange
ramp bridges should be widened to dual three-lane
standard in order to provide the same capacity as that
available on the existing dual three-lane sections of
the Penang Bridge.
This recommendation was approved by LLM
(Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia) on 11 November
2003. Fig 2.2.1 shows the carriageway layout on the
existing low-level viaducts and the final layout
required with the widening.
3750 3750 3750 3750
3500 3500 3500 2000 3500 3500 3500 2000
Existing cross-section
New cross-section
4800 Widening
4800 Widening
9125 9125
13925 13925
Bridge Cross-section
Fig 2.2.1
Cross-Section of widened carriageway
8
2.3
The present dual two lane arrangement of the low-level approach is to be widened to dual three lane. This will
form the major component of the construction works.
Several widening options were considered including symmetric widening, asymmetric widening and a new
parallel, separate structure. Both asymmetric and parallel widening posed the problem of having to overcome
more difficult transition zones and for this reason they were not adopted. Symmetric widening was recommended
on the basis that it would facilitate easier integration with the cable-stayed bridge, the high level approach spans
and the existing interchanges, as well as minimizing the impacts on users during construction.
Widening Options
9
2.4
The design concept for the low-level viaduct widening
works envisaged that the widening would be achieved
as follows:
Extending the sub-structure on either side at
each pier location and providing two additional
longitudinal beams with a composite deck slab
on each side of the deck
Adding two reinforced concrete bored piles, an
extension to the pile cap, a new column and an
extension of the crosshead on each side at each
pier location, designed to support the extended
deck
Providing structural connections between the
existing and new works at pile cap and deck
level
The basic design concept for widening of the low-
level viaducts is shown in Fig 2.4.1
The typical cross-section of the widened viaducts that
was finally adopted is shown in Fig 2.4.2. In order to
provide a harmonious solution for the widening, the
new works incorporate structural elements of similar
size and form to those of the existing structure
Fig 2.4.2 Typical Cross-Section of Completed
Viaduct Widening (symmetrical about existing viaduct
centerline)
Fig 2.4.1
Design Concept for the Widening
10
At layby locations, the design of the widening works
follow a similar approach with two additional precast
beams are placed to the outside of the existing layby
in order to form a new layby at the same location. The
design also provides for the controlled breaking-out of
the existing deck in the vicinity of the existing
longitudinal joints and the casting of concrete stitching
in order to ensure that the deck is fully integral.
So as to avoid any disruption to traffic, the design
approach established by Consultants HSSI allowed
all of the construction works related to widening of the
bridge to be completed independently to the existing
structure and outside of the existing parapets.
Controlled traffic management was only required for
the demolition of the existing parapets and the
stitching of the new deck slab to the existing deck
slab.
By using precast concrete pile cap shells as
permanent formwork to the in-situ structural concrete
pile cap, a dry working environment was provided for
the in-situ works once the shell was placed and
positively located against the existing pile cap face.
Fig 2.4.2
11
The following options were considered for the
additional beams required:
Prestressed concrete I-beams (ie similar to the
existing beams): Not recommended because it
would detract from the visual appearance of the
deck edge (refer Section 2.5)
Prestressed concrete U-beams (the
recommended arrangement refer Section 2.5):
Results in a shorter edge overhang and also
provides more elegant appearance to the edge
of the superstructure (note that the addition of
two precast U-beams on each was not adopted
because it could not provide a standardized
solution for all spans)
Steel box girders: Offers the same advantages
as the prestressed U-beam and is significantly
lighter, thus reducing the magnitude of the
additional load transferred to the existing
foundations
Steel I -beams: Offers the advantage of being
light, but requires a long deck cantilever and
would be more flexible than the existing precast
concrete beams - in order to limit differential
deflection effects between the new steel and
existing concrete beams, it would be necessary
to use a comparatively uneconomic section,
working at low stresses, so as to provide
adequate stiffness.
Various options were considered for the new pile
foundations, including:
Driven precast concrete spun piles: Not
recommended due to the risk of damage and/or
differential settlement occurring to the existing
spun pile foundations and viaduct structures
during driving of such high-displacement piles.
Driven open-ended tubular steel piles: Whilst
this option provided a lower-displacement pile
solution compared to drive spun piles, it was
also not recommended on the grounds of risk of
damage / differential settlement risk resulting
either from vibration effects or from the
densification of the soil during pile driving
Bored / cast-in-situ reinforced concrete piles
with permanent casings (recommended)
12
2.5
Aesthetics was given due importance in selecting the
beam type. The Consultant recommended that post -
tensioned precast U-beams should be used for the
edge girders on the widening, rather than the
standard precast I-beams used in the original
structure.
This offered the following advantages:
Improved visual appearance to the deck edge in
elevation
Higher flexural stiffness, which eliminated the
need to provide intermediate in-span
diaphragms between the new beams and the
existing beams for the purposes of matching
deflections across the deck width
I - Beam U - Beam
Aesthetics
13
design
development
3.0
14
Design and Loading
Standards for
Widening Scheme
The design criteria adopted for the new widening
works are presented in Appendix A. The structural
design of the components of the widened portion is in
accordance to the British Standard; BS 5400 and the
loadings are according to BD37/01.
3.2
The construction sequence needed to account for the
transfer of load between the new construction and the
existing structure, along with the need to minimize
disruption to traffic. This led to the sequence for the
construction of the new works as indicated in Figs
3.2.1 to 3.2.5.
The staging of the construction was programmed in
five stages, as follows:
Stage 1: Construct new piles adjacent to the
existing pier supports
Stage 2: Construct the new column on top of the
new pile cap extension
Stage 3: Place the new precast beams and
construct the in-situ concrete deck diaphragms
Stage 4: Construct the new deck slab widening
and new parapet, and install street lighting on
the new parapet
Stage 5: Cast the in-situ concrete stitch between
the existing and new pile caps
Fig 3.2.1
Fig 3.2.5
Fig 3.2.4
Fig 3.2.3
Fig 3.2.2
3.1
Construction
sequence
15
16
3.3
For the reasons given in Section 2.4, the use of driven prestressed spun concrete piles or low-displacement
driven steel tabular pile were not recommended. Bored/cast-in-situ reinforced concrete piles would minimize the
risk of differential settlement and the risk of damage to the existing spun concrete raked pile foundations during
construction of any new piles. Correspondingly, this low-displacement pile solution was adopted for the design.
Finalization of the pile location, size and number of new piles was constrained by the spacing, rake angle and
rake direction of the existing piles. Further, the size of pile cap in the longitudinal direction was constrained by the
fact that there was to be no additional obstruction to the tidal flow because this could result in excessive local
scour at the pile group. It would also have made the pile caps more visually obtrusive than the existing simple
rectangular plan shape.
In addition, any new piles had to be located sufficiently far from the outer face of the existing bridge parapets to
allow a piling rig and other piling equipment to work safely at all times, without disruption to traffic on the existing
bridge.
Figs 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 show the typical layout of piles in the existing foundations - these illustrate the dimensional
constraints applying to design and construction in adding new piles to extend the foundations.
Fig 3.3.1
Fig 3.3.2
Constraints Imposed by the Existing Pile Foundations
17
3.4
The subsoil conditions at the Penang Bridge site are
highly variable, but are generally characterized by a
deep layer of soft marine clay (typically 15 m to 20m
deep, but reaching depths of between 40m and 60 m
at certain sections on the eastern side), overlying
medium dense silty sands and silty clays. In some
locations, the silty sands overlay residual soils formed
from the weathering of the granite bedrock. The depth
to the bedrock horizon varies considerably across the
site and is deepest on the eastern side of the crossing
where it occurs at depths of over of 100 m.
On the western side of the crossing, the bedrock is
found at shallower depths of between 50 m to 80 m.
The silty sand layers are also denser on the western
side of the crossing. The soil profile (as shown in
Appendix B) indicates the variability of along length of
the bridge.
A total of 70 boreholes, to depths between 35 m and
80 m, were drilled to establish the soil characteristics
across the site.
Sub-Soil Conditions
18
Durability Considerations
A design life of 120 years was specified for all
elements of the bridge widening works. Durability of
the piles, pile caps, piers and superstructure was
ensured in the design by a combination of the
following measures:
Limiting the flexural crack width in reinforced
concrete members
Limiting the tensile stress in prestressed
concrete
Specifying appropriate values of minimum cover
to the embedded steel reinforcement
For concrete mixes, specifying maximum
water/cement ratios and minimum proportions of
pulverised fuel ash (pfa) or ground granulated
blast furnace slag (ggbs) cement replacement
For the bored piles and concrete structures exposed
to aggressive marine conditions, dense and durable
concrete was recommended. In order to ensure
adequate durability, a minimum proportion of 60% of
ggbs or 25% of pfa was specified to be mixed with
Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC).
For the deck stitch, silica fume and polypropylene
fibres were specified in the mix design in order to
provide early-age strength and resistance to early-
age cracking.
The steel casing to the bored piles was considered to
be sacrificial in the original design of the bored piles
constructed with short casings under bentonite.
Structural
Element
Grade Cement
Replacement
Maximum
Water:
Cement
Ratio
Location Nominal
Cover
(mm)
Design
Crack
Width
(5)
(mm)
In -situ
concrete
bored piles
(cased)
40 60% ggbs 0.35 Faces
adjacent
to casing
75 N/A
Pile cap
precast
shell
(offshore)
50 60% ggbs 0.40 Exposed
faces
Internal
f aces
50
45
0.10
n/a
Pile cap in -
situ pour
(offshores)
40 60% ggbs 0.45 Exposed
faces
65 0.13
Piers (in -
situ)
40 60% ggbs 0.45 Exposed
faces
Bearing
plinths
65
65
0.13
0.13
Deck
beams
(precast)
60 60% ggbs 0.35 Exposed
faces
Internal
faces
45
(1)
45
(1)
0
(2)
0
(2)
Deck slab
(in - situ)
50 60% ggbs 0.45 Top
surface
Soffit
40
(3)
35
(4)
0.25
0.15
Parapet
plinths (in -
situ)
40 60% ggbs 0.45 All faces 55 0.17
The deck slab concrete uses cement with 5 8% silica fume and 25% pfa or 50% ggbs. Elsewhere, the cement
includes either 60% ggbs or 25% pfa.
3.5
19
4.0 award of contract
20
4.0
Tenders for the construction of the proposed Penang
Bridge widening works were invited in October 2005.
In April 2006 the contract was awarded to UEM
Construction Sdn Bhd in three packages, namely:
Toll plaza
Main approaches and ramps for Bridge Nos 3, 7
& 8
Two ramps over the North-South Highways
Award Of Contract
21
5.0
scope of widening
works
22
5.1
In total, 620 1 m diameter bored piles were
constructed for the main viaduct widening, with a
further 92 1 m diameter bored piles constructed for
the Bridges 3, 7 and 8 widening works. The majority
of these piles were constructed over water within full -
depth permanent steel casings using barge-mounted
Reverse Circulation Drill (RCD) rigs for pile
excavation. Between Piers 114E and 123E (eastern
abutment) on the Prai Shore approach viaduct, where
the viaduct runs over land, piling was undertaken
using land-based RCD machines, again using full-
depth casings.
Twenty land-based piles for the Bridges 3, 7 and 8
widening works were constructed under bentonite,
using a conventional rotary percussion drilling rig. A
further 45 marine piles on the western low level
viaduct (where full length casings could not be
installed fully to the target geotechnical design depth
due to ground conditions) were completed by RCD,
using bentonite to stabilize the open bore below the
partial -depth casing toe.
In-situ reinforced concrete structural infill to the
precast pile cap shells was then completed, followed
by in-situ concrete construction of the new circular
columns and new extensions to the existing
crossheads.
At the land area at the eastern end of the Prai Shore
approach viaduct, wholly in-situ pile cap extensions
were provided at nine of the pier supports.
At the stitching gap between the existing and new pile
caps, dowels were provided at regular intervals
across the interface in order to prevent differential
vertical displacement once the new pile cap extension
was finally stitched to the existing structure. Holes for
the dowels were drilled into the existing pile cap side
face, and galvanized dowel bars placed into the holes
and secured using a proprietary chemical anchoring
system. The dowel bars were then cast into the stitch
concrete.
Similar construction techniques were adopted for the
widening of the sub-structure to Bridges 3, 7 and 8. A
total of 24 precast concrete permanent formwork
shells were placed at marine piers. Where two
supports to Bridge 3 and seven supports at Bridge 7
were located on land, wholly in-situ pile cap
extensions were possible.
5.1.1
A total of 288 precast reinforced concrete pile cap
shells were cast for the low-level viaduct widening
works. The shells, each weighing approximately 40 t,
were precast on specially constructed casting beds at
two separate precasting yards close to the Prai side
of the bridge. At the marine piers the shells were
installed using cranes mounted on barges. The shells,
incorporating soffit holes at pile locations, were lifted
over the pile tops and supported on steel brackets
welded to the permanent steel pile casings.
Temporary horizontal prestressing was then applied
to locate the precast shells firmly to the existing pile
cap, following by the installation of a steel bracket
designed to allow relative vertical movement (but not
relative horizontal movement) between the new shell
and the existing pile cap.
Sub-structure
Longitudinal Precast Post-tensioned Beams
The precast post-tensioned beams were cast at a
precasting yard established adjacent to the bridge site
on the Prai shore. The precasting yard included four
casting beds for the I -beams and eight casting beds
for the U-beams, along with stressing beds and a
beam storage area. Each I-beam weighed
approximately 80 t, whilst each U-beam weighed
approximately 130 t.
For the beams required for the widening of Bridges 3,
7 and 8, a separate precasting yard was set up on the
Penang Island shore.
5.1.3
Bridge Structural Works
Pile Foundations
5.1.2
Superstructure
23
A total of 576 precast post tensioned beams were
cast and stressed on site for the main bridge viaduct
widening, along with 70 beams for the widening to
Bridges 3, 7 and 8.
For Bridges 3 and 7, the single-sided widening
generally comprised an additional I -beam and U-
beam. With the Bridge 7 widening width being
tapered into the existing carriageway, the use of
either single U-beam or single I-beam widening was
adopted.
24
construction
challenges &
innovations
6.0
25
Changes to Bored Pile Construction Method
Following contract award, the Contractor submitted to
the Employer an alternative proposal to the design
approach which involved under bentonite with short
casings installed through the alluvial cohesive soils,
This new proposal was to construct the piles using
full-depth permanent steel casings (refer Fig 6.1.1.1).
This proposal was accepted by the Employer on the
basis of the Contractor s advice that it would eliminate
the risk of collapse of the pile shaft. This acceptance
was given despite the reservations held by the
Engineer that it would radically increase the length of
the piles and would be likely to cause settlement and
risk damage to the welded joints of the existing spun
piles.
6.1.1
On the eastern side, many casings were prematurely
stuck at dense residual soil at various depths before
reaching required geotechnical length. Arising from
this, extensive and rigorous monitoring of piers and
existing sub-structure were implemented, comprising
visual inspections, leveling of settlement monitoring
pins and vibration meter recordings. These measures
were essential in ensuring that any signs of damage
or distress to the existing structure were detected
before they became excessive.
6.1.2 Casing Installation
6.1
Full Depth Permanent
Steel Casings
26
At locations where the casing could not be installed to the
full geotechnical depth, a series of innovative solutions were
adopted to overcome critical delays. These included the
following:
Additional soil investigations to further study the nature
of dense layers and to revise the casing installation
method accordingly
Redesign of the new pile foundations to adopt a three-
pile group, with shorter pile depths to achieve the
equivalent design load capacity
Changing from the original vibro-hammer installation
method to drop hammer methods with controlled drop
height and re-driving of stuck casings
Partial boring and removal of soil within the stuck
casing
Use of additional inner casings
27
For all marine piles, the pile shaft excavation was completed using RCD rigs. Initially, excavation of the pile shaft
was completed using muddy seawater as a stabilizing fluid. This was done whilst maintaining a 3 m head above
mean sea level, leaving a 3m to 5 m plug of soil undisturbed at the casing toe.
In some cases, this construction method resulted in the plug blowing in before the concrete could be placed. This
risk of blow-in was avoided by raising the pile and toe level to leave a longer soil plug in the casing. However, this
method was not satisfactory where the casings could not be installed to the target toe level for the pile and instead
bentonite was used.
6.1.2 Pile shaft excavation
28
Installation of Reinforcement Cages for Piles
The Grade 460 high yield reinforcement cages were
assembled on land in 12 m lengths and transported to
the pier location on barges, where they were lowered
by crane into the pile shaft and spliced by lap welding.
6.2
29
Protecting the Existing Bridge against Damage
The control limits defining refusal, as set out below,
were imposed during casing driving in instances
where dense/ hard layers were encountered. Casing
driving activity was stopped immediately if refusal
was encountered.
Controls on Casing
Installation
The following instrumentation and monitoring works
are carried out:
Precise leveling
Vibration monitoring
Tilt meter monitoring
Pier Monitoring and
Settlement Mitigation
6.3
6.3.1 6.3.2
7 t Vibro
10 t Vibro
13 t and 14 t Vibro
20 t drop hammer
500 mm/ 10 minutes
500 mm/ 5 minutes
500 mm/ 5 minutes
100 mm/ 40 blows at 400 mmheight drop
Hammer Weight Minimum Penetration Rates before Refusal
30
6.4
Solutions adopted for the various scenarios of stuck casings, defective piles, etc, are as set out in Table 6.4.1.
Problem Solution
Blocked or dislodged tremie pipes Concentric casings for marine piles
Prematurely stuck casings at land
piles
Smaller inner casing
Casings damaged by dredging
barge
Provide new raked casings and cut off
damaged casing just above sea bed
6.5
At the earlier stage of marine bored pile construction,
the Contractor s temporary jetties and dredged canals
beside the existing bridge on the Prai shore had not
been established. Instead, Lafarge s private jetty at
Prai was used for concrete delivery by towed barges.
This involved the transfer of batched concrete from
ready mix trucks on the land into trucks on the
barges.
The resulting double-handling and towing of the barge
to the specific pier position often took about 1
hours. With the volume of concrete poured into the
bored piles varying between 30 m3 and 60 m3,
depending on pile design, the duration of pour could
vary between 4 and 8 hours. Along with difficulties
faced in overcoming blocked tremie pipes on piles,
this often extended to 12 hours. Correspondingly,
concrete workability retention was therefore very
important in the concrete mix design for piles.
As a result, before starting any marine concreting
operation, the Contractor was required to
demonstrate and confirm the following to ensure
quality assurance:
Mix design workability retention of between 8
and 12 hours duration for tremie-poured
concrete
Concrete quality consistency from the seven
ready mix suppliers chosen by sub-contractors,
based on work breakdown structure of the main
Contractor
Availability of the Prai Lafarge jetty (private jetty)
for delivery/transfer into ready mix trucks on
towed barges
Lane closure approval for concrete delivery from
the existing viaduct deck to trucks on barges
(permitted from 12 midnight to 6 am)
Required water depth availability for the use by
concrete delivery barges of the temporary
dredged canal at the Prai shore
Innovative Remedial Solutions for Stuck Casings and Defective
Piles
Marine Concrete Pours - Workability and Delivery Logistics
31
32
Jacking sledge
Fixed Gantry mounted on
crosshead
Fixed leg resting on existing parapet
Beam Launching over Marine and Land
With approved traffic management procedures in place, the precast I-beams and U-beams for the spans over land
were transported to site by day, using multi-axle low loaders. The beams were erected on the same night as they
were delivered, using two 100 t cranes located on the land adjacent to the bridge. This approach was applied in
place of the initial proposals by the Contractor to deliver the beams for the land spans via the existing deck prior to
placement.
6.6.1
The challenges in erection of the precast beams for the marine spans involved detailed traffic management
planning. These in turn included slow lane closures, contra flow and the delivery of beams every night for 12
months. The whole operation was restricted to a 6-hour time window from 12 midnight to 6 am each weekday
night, in accordance with restrictions imposed by LLM, in order not to disrupt traffic flow on the bridge.
The Contractor planned and obtained permission to deliver all beams via the existing deck using a tractor unit and
jinkers travelling in the cordoned-off slow lane for both the eastern and western viaducts.
Two methods for launching the beams were planned, as listed below, but only method II proved to be successful:
(i) Method I - Beam launching using Jacking Gantry System: For this method, the Contractor undertook full-scale
trials using a purpose-fabricated gantry supported on an extended crosshead. The launching gantry comprised a
fixed frame, a temporary moveable leg (prop), top beam, 60 t hydraulic jack and jacking sledge.
Figures 6.6.2.1a to 6.6.2.1d Principal Details of Gantry and the Trials
Beam erection on Marine Spans
Installation of Gantry from
Barge (Stage 1)
Diagram 1 : Installation of Top
Beam 1, Jacking Sledge and
Fixed Leg
6.6
Beam erection on land spans
6.6.2
Fig 6.6.2.1a
33
Moveable
Leg
Installation of Top Beam 2 &
Moveable Leg
Fig 6.6.2.1b
Installation of Gantry and movable
leg on bridge (Stage 2)
Diagram 2 : Installation of Top Beam 2, Moveable Leg
Folded Moveable Leg
6.6
Beam Launching From Deck
Diagram 3 : Move the jacking sledge to beam lowering position
Fig 6.6.2.1d
Beam Launching over Marine and Land
34
Stage 3 Delivery and Erection of Precast Beams
(ii) Method II - Beam Launching by Marine Crane Barge: Beams for marine spans were successfully launched
using two 350 t capacity crawler cranes mounted on a large modified barge. Each crane had a lifting capacity of
78 t at a working radius of 17m. For this exercise, the barge was maneuvered and controlled by a 1600 hp tug
boat and experienced crew to ensure safe mooring and launching of beams. In total, 544 out of 576 low-level
viaduct marine span beams were transported over the bridge slow lane and successfully launched over a 12-
month period from March 2008 to March 2009 in the 5-hour available time window each night. The maximum
output achieved was six beams per night.
35
Fig 6.6.3.1b
Fig 6.6.3.1c
36
Innovative Method Used to Shift Layby Beams
The widening scheme included the removal and
reconstruction of nine laybys on extended pier
crossheads at locations on either side of the
carriageway along the low-level viaducts. The original
design involved demolition of part of the existing deck
slab over water, breaking out the existing diaphragms
and removal of the existing I-beams below the
existing layby for temporary storage and re-use in the
widened layby span. This method imposed critical
time and cost constraints because the works involved
barging, heavy lifting and marine logistics to handle
and store the existing I-beams, and re-launching at
the outer edge of the new deck after deck widening.
An innovative alternative approach, proposed during
the construction period by Consultants HSSI, and
adopted after detail study by the Contractor, involved
the retention, unmodified, of each complete layby
deck unit. In this approach, the entire unit was shifted
sideways in order to allow the standard widening
works to be constructed in the resulting gap. This
process was facilitated by the structural
independence of the layby deck unit and the
existence of the longitudinal joint between the layby
deck and the main deck. The adoption of this
alternative approach resulted in the successful in-situ
jacking and lateral shifting of nine complete layby
span units with only minimal demolition to remove
existing dowel bars at the layby diaphragms.
6.7
37
Each layby span unit weighed about 300 t and comprised two 40m long I-beams, complete with deck slab and
parapet. The procedure applied was as follows:
The whole layby unit was jacked up 300 mm above its existing position - the four lifting jacks and their
supports had a maximum jacking capacity of 800 t, with a 500 t horizontal pushing capacity
The unit was then moved horizontally into its new position on the extended crosshead, using a drag and
skidding system working from temporary towers erected on the exi sting and extended pile caps
The temporary works and jacking operations are shown below.
38
Deck Stitching
The new widening deck slab was progressively
stitched to the existing deck once all additional dead
load from the widening works was carried on the new
piles, and after the extended pile caps were stitched
to the existing pile caps. In this way, load transfer
from the new works construction to the existing
structure was minimized.
Prior to the start of the stitch concreting works, a
vibration monitoring study was carried out by the
Institute of Noise and Vibration, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia. For safety reasons, the monitoring was
performed at layby areas. The UTM report indicated
that PPV from vibrations due to ambient traffic are
high (up to 22 mm/s maximum PPV) during the
daytime, but with a marked reduction in both average
PPV and maximum PPV values recorded during the
hours from 12 midnight to 5 am.
Further monitoring on newly extended sections was
also carried out to confirm the initial monitoring and to
ensure that vibration during and immediately after
stitch concreting was maintained within the permitted
limit of 5mm/s PPV.
Vibration mitigation measures included traffic lane
constriction, speed reduction measures, traffic
management plans and providing a high early
strength grade for the stitch concrete.
6.8
39
Challenges in relation to the deck stitching included
the following:
Vibration effects from traffic on the existing slow
lane had the potential to impair the development
of early bond strength of concrete if not
mitigated
Two lanes had to be kept opened through the
daytime on both carriageways at all times. Slow
lane closures for stitching were only permitted
between the hours of 11 pm to 6 am, although a
slow lane closure would have been preferred for
longer to keep traffic-induced vibration away
from the concrete stitch area
Vibration peak value is directly related to axle
wheel load, vehicular speed and volume of
traffic using the bridge
Penang Bridge is heavily congested and traffic
volume only reduces to low levels between 12
midnight and 5 am each night. Heavy traffic
volume at night was affected by the earlier
partial closure of the slow lane to allow concrete
delivery. This had impact on the Contractor s
planned stitching, since it was proposed to
deliver the concrete via the deck. Therefore all
stitching works were confined between 10 pm
and 6 am
It was observed that slow moving traffic during
congested hours does not materially induce
vibration in the deck. However, fast moving and
heavy vehicles such as lorries and trailers cause
deck vibrations that are of concern
Demanding traffic management solutions were
required to be implemented when stitch pours
were carried out on both carriageways
concurrently with transportation of beams for
launching and other simultaneous deck slab
works.
40
The approach to vibration mitigation and solutions for stitch concreting can be summarized as follows:
Slow lane constriction and control of vehicular speed limit approaching the particular section of deck stitch
concrete pour were implemented. Controls were introduced to keep vehicular speed to below 40 kph. The
imposition of speed humps as a means of slowing down traffic was also considered but not invoked
Traffic vibration studies were carried out to understand the nat ure of traffic volume, speed and effect of axle
loads causing vibration on the deck - this also assisted with planning timing of the night-time deck pours
Deck vibrations were controlled to below 5mm/sec PPV, although occasional peaks exceeding 15mm/sec
PPV were experienced from speeding vehicles over bridge deck joints
Lane constriction assisted in keeping wheel loads away from the freshly poured deck stitch concrete,
thuereby reducing the impact of transmitted vibration
Comprehensive concrete setting time studies were carried out on the Grade 50 concrete for the stitching
works. Initial and final set consistency and workability of design mixes had to be fine tuned to achieve the
following:
Initial set that could allow sufficient time for concrete delivery, compaction and placing without loss of
workability - this was found to vary from 2 to 3 hours
Final set that was consistent and guaranteed to be achieved before opening partial lane closures to heavy
traffic - this was found to vary from 3 to 5 hours
The use of polypropylene fibres in the deck stitch concrete mix was specified to protect concrete from
stresses at early age, given that this can cause cracking - 900 g/m
3
of microfibre was used with a super-
plasticizer to achieve high early strength and the required workability with a reduced water / cement ratio
Silicafume at 27 kg/m
3
(6% by weight of cement) was added to improve early age strength gain of the stitch
concrete
41
7.0 conclusions
42
7.0
Due to the increase of the traffic volume and to
ensure the smooth traffic flow, the widening of the
existing Penang Bridge was necessary. The approach
adopted by the Consultants HSSI and the contractor
embodied the following principles:
Whilst the scheme for widening the low-level
viaducts was simple in concept, both the detail
engineering design and construction presented
many challenges
For the successful completion of the works, it
was necessary to avoid compromising the
structural integrity or appearance of the existing
structure and with minimum disruption to traffic
Innovative mitigation measures were developed
and applied to overcome the constraints, whilst
at the same time recognizing the need to avoid
excessive construction risks and other than
minor traffic disruption
This booklet summarizes the main challenges
involved in widening the Penang Bridge. In doing so it
not only records the work that was carried out but is
also intended to provide useful information to others
involved in the design and construction of bridge-
widening projects.
Conclusions
43
references
44
References
UK Ministry of Transport Memorandum No.771,
Standard Highway Loadings
UK Ministry of Transport Memorandum No.785,
Concrete Bridges and Structures
UK Department of Transport Standard BE2/73,
Prestressed Concrete for Highway Structures
British Standard Code of Practice CP110, Structural
Use of Concrete
UK Department of Transport Standard BE5, The
Design of Highway Bridge Parapets
British Standard Code of Practice CP2004,
Foundations
Jabatan Kerja Raya Loading / Design Standards, JKR
Specification for Bridge Live Loads
UK Highways Agency Standard BD 37/01, Loads for
Highway Bridges
The Penang Bridge - Planning, Design and
Construction, Tan Sri Datuk Professor Ir Chin Fung
Kee, Malaysian Highway Authority, 1988
Report on Soil Investigation for Subsurface
Exploration for Proposed Jambatan Pulau Pinang
(Parts I and II), Malaysian Soil Investigation Sdn Bhd,
Dec 1978
Pile Design & Construction Practice, MJ Tomlinson,
4
th
Edition E & FNSPON
Terzaghi and Peck, Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practices, 1967
Chang & Broms, Design of Bored Piles in Residual
Soils based on Field Performance Data, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 28, pp. 200 209, 1991
A Brief Guide to the Design of Bored Piles under Axial
Compression A Malaysian Approach, Ir Dr Gue
See Sew, Tan Y.C and Liew S.S, Seminar on
Bridges: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2003
45
Appendix A
The structural design of the Penang Bridge viaduct was carried out in accordance with the applicable British
Standard, augmented as necessary by other internationally and locally recognized guidelines to suit site
conditions. From this, the main design criteria can be summarized as follows:
Both the mainline viaduct and the ramps were to be designed for live loads type HA and HB (both 45 units
and 30 units, as appropriate) loading, as specified in the Briti sh Department Standard (DB 37/01)
Collision loads on bridge supports in the proximity to highways were as per BD60/94
The design temperature range was 13C to 37C, along with consideration of differential temperature as per
BD37/01
The design mean hourly wind speed is 27m/s
No allowance for differential settlement was made in the design of the deck slab instead, the extended pile
cap was rigidly connected to the existing structure (ie thereby eliminating any possibility of differential
settlement between the new and existing deck slabs)
Design Criteria for New Widening Works
46
acknowledgement
47
Acknowledgement
HSS Integrated Sdn. Bhd. would like to thank the following for providing the necessary information,
kind assistance and support in the implementation of this Project:
Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia
Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia
Penang Bridge Sdn. Bhd.
Penang Bridge Sdn. Bhd.
OPUS Management Sdn. Bhd.
OPUS Management Sdn. Bhd.
Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang
Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai
PLUS (Butterworth Kulim Expressway)
Jabatan Alam Sekitar Pulau Pinang
Tenaga Nasional Berhad, Pulau Pinang
TNB Transmission Sdn. Bhd
Jabatan Kerja Raya Pulau Pinang
Jabatan Kerja Raya Bukit Mertajam
Jabatan Laut Malaysia, Pulau Pinang
Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran, Pulau Pinang
Jabatan Bekalan Air, Pulau Pinang
Telekom Malaysia, Pulau Pinang
GAS Malaysia Sdn Bhd
Ketua Polis Daerah, IPD Seberang Perai
Halcrow
Halcrow
Environment Asia Sdn. Bhd.
Perunding Trafik Klasik Sdn. Bhd.
TRARS Konsult Sdn. Bhd.
CT Toh Consultant
Jurukur Perunding Services
Arkitek Shilpa
Dato Ir.Hj. Ismail B. Md. Salleh
Ir. Mohd. Shuhaimi B. Hassan
Pn. Hjh Suhaina Bt. Baharudin
Tn. Hj. Ir. Abd. Rahman Hassan
Mr. Muhinder Singh
Ir. Wan Meow Kwan
Pn. Hajah Rosnani Bt. Mahmud
En. Ku Jamil B. Zakaria
Ir. Abdul Aziz B. Jaafar
Ir. Hj. Husaini Hussin
En. Nik Azhar B. Abd. Samad
En. Izmal B. Ibrahim
Tn. Hj. Mohd. Abu Bakar B. Othman
En. Jamil B. Mohd. Nor
En. Sukardi B. Sukarno
Unit Trafik
Mr. Roger Buckby
Mr. Paul W Corbett
Mr. Edward Wong
Dr. Tai Tuck Leong
Ir. Amran B. Alias
Dr. Toh Cheng Teik
Mr. Wong Kam Fai
Mr. Lim Take Bane
48
Dato Ir. Haji Abu Bakar Haji Mohd Amin
Datuk Ir. S Santhakumar /
Datuk Ir. Kuna Sittampalam
Co-Project Director
Ir. Chan Kin Pooi
Chief Executive Officer
Ir. B Nitchiananthan
Chief Operating Officer
Ir. Chen Wai Peng
Project Manager
Ir. Kho Poh Teck
Design Engineer
Ir. Tan Wee Kong
Design Engineer
Mr. B Ramesh Balakrishnan
Quantity Surveyor
Mr. Anand Sharvanandan
Project Coordinator
Ir. Nor Afizza Bt. Juni
Project Coordinator
Ir. Mathew Philip
Highway
Mr. Rabindranath
Highway
Mr. Tan Joon Lye
Highway
Ir. Lee Yew Seng
Drainage / Utilities
Ir. Azman Abd Rahman
Mechanical & Electrical
Ir. Kun Goon Hong
Mechanical & Electrical
Ir. Tan Seng Guan
Mechanical & Electrical
Ir. Khairul Anuar B. Mohd. Said
Geotechnical
Design and Supervision Team
Ir. Wee Eng Leong
Chief Resident Engineer
Ir. Charles Low Boo Tean
Resident Engineer
Mr. Liew Sin Khoon
Deputy Resident Engineer
(Geotechnical)
Mr. Teng Jit Poh
Deputy Resident Engineer
En. Shamsuri Salleh
Deputy Resident Engineer
Mr. M Marimuthu
Deputy Resident Engineer
En. Al-Rifae
ARE Piling 1
En. Rahim Rejab
ARE Piling 1
En. Ku Adenan Ku Ismail
ARE Piling 2
Mr. Law Peng Swee
ARE Piling 2
En. Hussin Muhammad
ARE Casting Yard
En. Azmi Mohamad
ARE Bridge 1
En. Md. Fadzil Abd Rahman
ARE Bridge 1
Mr. P Kumaran
ARE Bridge 2
En. Zulkifli Hussein
ARE Measurement 2
Mr. Woo Wooi Lim
ARE M&E
Cik. Norhabina Mohd Aris
Environmental Officer
Mr. Donny Ramasamy
Instrumentation Officer
49
Mr. Ashokumar Ramasamy
Safety Officer
Mr. Sivabalan Arumugam
Safety Officer
Mr. Mah Kim Tong
Survey Technician 1
Mr. Tee Yoke Chuan
Survey Technician 2
En. Sabri Sharif
Survey Technician 3
Mr. K Vijayan
Material Technician 1
En. Mohd. Salam Ngajiman
Material Technician 2
Mr. Sophee Khoo B. Abdullah
IOW Traffic 1
Mr. S Seenivasan
IOW Bridge 1
Mr. Sunny Tan
IOW Bridge 2
Mr. Ramamurthy Letchumanan
IOW Bridge 3/Piling
Mr. Tan Teong Hin
IOW Bridge/Piling 4
En. Afraizal Abdul Aziz
IOW Bridge 5
Muaizam Abdul Aziz
IOW Bridge 6
Robert King Amros
IOW Bridge 7
Mr. Tan Tong Siew
IOW Piling 1
Mr. Revindran Ramakrishnan
IOW Piling 2
En. Alzahari Saad
IOW M&E 1
Design and Supervision Team
Mr. Yeoh Hun Poh
IOW Casting Yard 1
Mr. Silverster Douglas
Draughtman
Mr. S Kanathasan
Draughtman
Cik Nor Azlina Mohd. Saad
Draughtwoman
En. Fairuz Zamri Ismail
Draughtman
Mr. Jagjit Singh
Administrative Manager
Ms. Nirmala Devi
Administrative Manager
Pn. Mazni Abdul Wahab
Secretary
Ms. Mary Janet Pasqual
Secretary
Pn. Badariah Rahmad
Clerk
Cik Khadijah Abdul Majid
Clerk
Pn. Emilia Azudin
Clerk
Ms. Nanda Devi
Clerk
50
Design and Supervision Team
51
Design and Supervision Team
52
Design and Supervision Team
53
Appendix B Foundation Conditions
54
INTEGRATED
INTEGRATED
B1 (1-4) Block B Plaza Dwitasik
No 21, Jalan 5/106, Bandar Sri Permaisuri,
56100 Kuala Lumpur.. Malaysia
Tel : 603-91730355 Fax : 603-91730939
E-mail : hssi@hss.com.my