Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
20% of the length of the second span are casted together. The construction of
the next bridge segment follows after the application of the prestressing force,
while keeping the immediate prestress losses within normal levels. The final
loading of the bridge due to the self-weight of the superstructure is varying with
time due to the influence of the creep effect [3] [4].
A new bridge construction method is investigated in this paper. The method has
similarities with the balanced cantilever method. The connection of the
cantilevers is achieved by the use of tendon couplers. The tendons are straight
and the scaffolding, which is used for the deck casting, is removed after the
application of the prestressing force. The applicability of the proposed
construction method has been attempted to a cast-in-situ benchmark bridge
actually built along a major motorway that runs across Northern Greece.
negative prestressing, would not be compatible with the rational use of tendons,
which are typically utilised in order to compensate for the vertical loading.
P1
a-a
c-c
h3=0,80m
h2=0,80m
b-b
h1=2.20m
A1
bearing
centre of gravity
of the deck
A2
Figure 1. The first stage of the proposed construction method with alternative abutment
configurations.
lowered
tendons
straight
tendons
(Detail)
backfill
retaining
wall
counterbalance
cantilever
structural
tie
bearing
Detail
2,75
2,75
R=30m
pile cap
150mm
450mm
R=30m
The minimum height of the deck cross section is proposed to be not smaller
than 0,80 m. After the curing of the casted cantilevers, the tendons are stressed.
The design of the prestressing force is based on the objective of the method that
is to provide a slight pre-cambering of the cantilevers that is a slight bending
deflection upwards. Therefore, at this stage the cantilevers of the deck are set
higher than the final design height of the bridge. After the application of
prestressing, the steel formwork is removed and the construction procedure is
repeated for the adjacent spans. The tendons of the subsequent spans are
coupled with the ones of the casted cantilever and the adjacent cantilever is
constructed. A detailed description of the prestressing application and the rebar
of the deck is given in section 3 of the paper.
After the completion of the deck construction and the application of the
prestressing force, positive bending moments, which are caused due to the
eccentricity of the straight tendons from the decks centre of gravity, are
induced along the deck. These positive bending moments overbalance the
negative ones that are imposed by the self-weight of the deck. Hence, the
aforementioned pre-cambering of the cantilevers is achieved. The precambering was deemed necessary in order to compensate for the pre-determined
long-term prestress losses due to the creep and shrinkage of the deck and due to
the relaxation of prestressing steel. The rest of the vertical loads of the deck that
are the additional permanent and the variable loading [7] are imposed after the
completion of the total bridge system. Thus, the frame action of the total bridge
structure, in which the meeting cantilevers are connected, receives the
additional vertical loading. The final bridge system is then checked against the
resulting bending moments, the shear actions and the torsion effects after
considering the re-distribution of actions. In particular, the design of the deck
against shear actions is facilitated due to the beneficial inclination to the
horizontal of the compression zone of the deck in the critical section for shear,
namely where the maximum shear stress is acting. Possible deficiency of the
deck at the supports against the bending moments caused by either the ultimate
or the serviceability limit states [6] [8] shall be covered by additional
3.2 Results
The benchmark bridge was re-analysed and re-designed according to current
code provisions concerning serviceability [6] [8] and earthquake resistance [9].
The re-design took into account the construction phases of the proposed method
and the following predominant design parameters were revealed:
(1) The required number of straight tendons was less than the one needed in
case a classification category A or B was chosen, (table 4.118 in [6] [8]).
However, the total number of tendons ensures that the bridge is classified in
category C, when this requirement refers to the performance of the top fibre of
the deck, while the use of ordinary strength reinforcements in the bottom fibre
of the deck leads to the classification category D. It is noted that, the design of
the prestressing force and the resulting number of tendons aims at providing the
required pre-cambering of the cantilevers against the self weight of the bridge
deck, whose length was half of the total span length that is 45,60/2 = 22,80 m.
(2) The re-design of the prestressing showed that 15x19T15 (15 tendons of 19
wires with diameter 15mm each) of high strength steel St 1500/1770 are
adequate to receive the bending moment of the deck above its support.
Additionally, ordinary steel rebar 7616 (76 bars with diameter 16mm each)
above the support were utilized, which gradually reduced to 2816 at the bridge
mid-span. The tendons and the reinforcements needed in the top flange of the
deck are illustrated in Figure 3. The ordinary strength steel bars, which are also
required by the code [6], are the ones which allow the safe transition from the
uncracked to the cracked deck section and the avoidance of non-ductile failure
modes. The lengths of the steel bars were chosen to be sub-multiples, namely
half, of the conventionally produced ones by the steel manufactures in order to
avoid material waste. Figures 4 and 5 show in detail the reinforcement layout at
the support and at the mid-span. Figure 6 shows the steel rebar of the bottom
part of the deck. The bars are installed in couples that are 2x7125 (71 couples
of bars with diameters 25mm each) at the mid-span, while 2x4125 were found
to be required at the bottom flange of the deck at the supports. The
reinforcement splices were required to extend 2,15 m. The lengths of the bars
were selected to be 7,0 m and they were set parallel to the sides of the polygonal
shape of the bottom flange, as shown in Figure 6. (4) The thickness and the
reinforcement of the structural tie, that is the wall that restrains the vertical
movements of the counterbalance-cantilever at the abutment shown in Figure 1
and 2, were found to be 0,30m and 3x16/100 (3 lines of bars with diameter
16mm at a spacing 100 mm) correspondingly.
Pier
Y
X
28O16
L=14,0m
couplers
76O16
52O16
L=7,0m L=14,0m
52O16
L=7,0m
28O16
L=14,0 m
lapping
3,50 m
Figure 3. The layout of the straight tendons and the ordinary strength steel bars of the decks top
flange at the support, (the scale is distorted: 1 unit at X equals 2 units at Y axis).
Pier
7,00
8,50
5,50
7,00
5,50
8,50
1,00
L=14,0 m
tendons
Figure 4. Detail of the straight tendons and the ordinary strength steel bars of the decks top
flange at the support.
lapping
3,52
14,00
7,00
7,00
couplers
tendons
structural joint
Figure 5. Detail of the ordinary strength steel bars of the decks top flange at the mid-span and
coupling of the tendons.
~4,50m
2,0-2,50m
straight tendons
top flange
7,0m
2X4125
pier
polygonal
bottom
flange
7,0m
2X5125
d=150mm
d>150mm
7,0m
2X5125
splicing
length
2X6125
2X7125
mid-span
structural joint
l=35,0-50,0m
Figure 6. Detail of the ordinary strength steel bars at the bottom flange of the deck.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper proposes a new bridge construction method, which can be used as a
design alternative to the conventional construction practices. The method has
many similarities with the balanced cantilever method. The prestressing tendons
are straight and installed within the top flange of the deck cross section, while
ordinary strength steel is utilized for the reinforcement within the bottom
flange. The deck has a variable cross section height along its longitudinal
direction. A benchmark bridge, actually built along the Egnatia Motorway by
the conventional segmental cast-in-situ method, was utilized to identify the
applicability of the proposed method. The bridge was checked according to the
current code provisions and the study came up with the following findings:
The application of the proposed construction method revealed significant
structural benefits. The use of straight tendons for the prestressing of the
deck facilitates and accelerates the construction of the bridge. The tendons
are installed within the upper slab of the decks cross section, which is more
preferable than using tendons which are installed in the webs of the box
girder. It is noted that the use of tendons in the webs of the box-girder decks
is not allowed according to current code design, at least for bridges
constructed by the balanced cantilever method. Furthermore, the prestressing
losses due to friction are significantly reduced when the proposed
construction method is employed. The dead load of the bridge deck, which
typically constitutes the largest portion of the bridges vertical loading, is
decreased due to the reduction in the height of the deck cross section.
However, the variation of the deck cross section along the bridge deck
obstructs the falsework as the scaffolding is more demanding in terms of
geometry, compared to the conventional segmental bridge construction.
The bridge aesthetics are significantly improved compared to the
conventional segmental bridge construction. This is due to the refined archtype view of the bridge constructed by the proposed method and the reduced
deck cross section height.
As far as it concerns the cracking of the deck, the proposed construction
method can be utilized for the construction of bridges with short to medium
spans up to 35 m. The check against cracking due to the short term vertical
loading of the deck, namely against the infrequent loading, showed that the
deck does not exhibit cracking. In case of bridges with longer spans up to
50m the use of partial prestress shall be used.
The deflections of the deck were significantly reduced due to the objective
set during the design of the prestressing force, which ensured that the
cantilevers had a pre-cambering upwards, at least when the scaffolding was
removed.
Possible differential settlements of the piers can be received by the resulting
bridge system without developing high bending loading to the deck, due to
flexibility of the arch-type superstructure.
REFERENCES
[1] CALTRANS, Bridge Design Aids Manual, California Department of Transportation,
Sacramento, 1994.
[2] Chen WF and Duan L, Bridge Engineering Handbook, CRC Press Boca Raton London, New
York Washington, D. C., 1999, Chapter 1.
[3] Trost H., Lastverteilung bei Plattenbalkenbrucken, Werner Verlag, Dusseldorf, West
Germany, 1961.
[4] Kwak H-G and Son J-K, Determination of design moments in bridges constructed with a
movable scaffolding system (MSS), Computers and Structures, Vol. 84, Issue 31-32, pp.
2141-2150, 2006.
[5] EN 1992-1-1:2004 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures, Part 1-1: General rules and
rules for buildings, 2004.
[6] DIN-Fachbericht 102, Betonbrcken, DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung e.V, 2003.
[7] EN 1991-2:2003 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures - Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges, 2003.
[8] EN 1992-2:2004 Eurocode 2: Design of concrete structures-Part 2: Bridges, 2004.
[9] EN 1998-2:2005 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance, Part 2: Bridges,
2005.