This paper deals with a challenging bridge type, which is not very well known i.e. self-anchored suspension bridges with prestressed concrete deck. Some of these bridges were built in the 1950's over a canal around the city of Ghent after a design by Prof. Daniel Vandepitte (1922-2016). Prof. Vandepitte, passed away at the age of 94 years and was a brilliant teacher in structural analysis. He was a successor of Prof. Gustave Magnel (1889-1955) in the field of structural analysis and he designed several remarkable bridges in the early 1950's before he was appointed at Ghent University

Taerwe, Luc

English

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Self-anchored Suspension Bridgeswith Prestressed Concrete Deck:Some Historic ExamplesLuc R. Taerwe(&)Magnel Laboratory for Concrete Research,Department of Structural Engineering, Ghent University, Ghent, BelgiumLuc.Taerwe@ugent.beAbstract. This paper deals with a challenging bridge type, which is not verywell known i.e. self-anchored suspension bridges with prestressed concrete deck.Some of these bridges were built in the 1950’s over a canal around the city ofGhent after a design by Prof. Daniël Vandepitte (1922–2016). Prof. Vandepitte,passed away at the age of 94 years and was a brilliant teacher in structuralanalysis. He was a successor of Prof. Gustave Magnel (1889–1955) in the ﬁeld ofstructural analysis and he designed several remarkable bridges in the early 1950’sbefore he was appointed at Ghent University.Keywords: Historic concrete  Self-anchored suspension bridge  Prestressedconcrete1 General Concept and Survey of Existing BridgesThe principle of self-anchoring eliminates massive anchorage structures, which have towithstand large horizontal forces, and which are necessary for classical suspensionbridges. Instead, the cables are secured to each end of the bridge deck, which resists thehorizontal component of the cable tension. Therefore, the end supports resist only thevertical component of the cable tension, an advantage where the site cannot easilyaccommodate external anchorages (Ochsendorf and Billington 1999). Because thestiffening girders support the cable tension, these girders must be placed before themain cable can be erected. This construction sequence, which is opposite of that of aconventional suspension bridge, limits the self-anchored form to moderate spans andsuitable site conditions (Ochsendorf and Billington 1999).Vandepitte (1955, 1966) points out that when the concept of self-anchoring isapplied to a steel bridge, a considerable amount of additional steel is required in thesuperstructure as compared to that of a true suspension bridge in order to enable thestiffening girders or trusses to resist the thrust as well as the bending moments withoutbeing endangered by instability. The large thrust produced in the suspended bridgedeck is, on the contrary, highly beneﬁcial in the case of a concrete deck. In this case itacts as a prestressing force in the stiffening beams and helps them to withstand thebending due to live load. In the concrete case, instability is normally not a problem ofany consequence, owing to the cross-section being naturally more sturdy than that of a© Springer International Publishing AG 2018D.A. Hordijk and M. Luković (eds.), High Tech Concrete: Where Technologyand Engineering Meet, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-59471-2_320steel suspended structure. For the same reason, a prestressed concrete suspensionbridge is much stiffer than its steel counterpart and aerodynamic instability is also muchmore unlikely. However, most of the self-anchored suspension bridges have a steeldeck, as the advantage of the absence of massive anchorage blocks apparently pre-dominates the mentioned disadvantages.The self-anchored suspension bridge can also be obtained from a conventionallypost-tensioned concrete bridge deck where, instead of keeping the tendons inside theconcrete section, the tendons leave the girders (Vandepitte 1955, 1966). This allows toobtain signiﬁcantly larger eccentricities which leads to a more economical solution incase of signiﬁcant dead weight. The hangers provide the connection between thesuspension cables and the bridge deck and transmit the upward forces created by thecurved cables to the bridge deck.The ﬁrst self-anchored suspension bridge with a concrete deck was built in 1950 atSaint-Germain-au-Mont-d’Or (France), with a main span of 57.9 m and side spans of21.8 m, very similar to the bridge W13 which is discussed in the next section. As far aswe know, Vandepitte was not aware of the existence of this bridge.Jörg Schlaich and his partners designed several remarkable self-anchored pedes-trian bridges throughout Germany. The San Francisco Oakland Bay bridge, opened fortrafﬁc in 2013, is the largest single tower self-anchored suspension bridge in the world,with a main span of 385 m.2 Original Projects in BelgiumBridge W12. Vandepitte designed three self-anchored prestressed suspension bridgeswith a concrete deck of various spans over the ring canal around the city of Ghentbetween 1954 and 1964. This section mainly deals with one of these bridges.Fig. 1. Self-anchored prestressed suspension bridge with a central span of 100 m at Merelbeke(near Ghent).Self-anchored Suspension Bridges with Prestressed Concrete Deck 2819The bridge in Merelbeke (designated as W12), shown in Fig. 1, was ﬁnished in 1964and has a central span of 100 m, a total length of 192 m and the suspended structure is21.6 m wide (Vandepitte 1955, 1966). A cross-section of the bridge deck is shownin Fig. 2.The bridge was designed for a trafﬁc load of 4 kN/m2, over the full width of thedeck, including the cantilever parts. Also two trucks of 320 kN each were consideredand a dynamic factor of 1.075 was applied.Each of the main cables consists of 910 parallel galvanized steel wires 7 mm indiameter. The sag of the cables in the central span equals 9 m which corresponds to asag to span ratio of 1/11.1, which is smaller than the ratios mentioned before for thesteel bridges. The two stiffening girders are continuous box girders with a constantdepth of 1.93 m which corresponds to 1/52 of the central span length. These girders areprestressed by the action exerted by the suspension cables only. There are no pre-stressing tendons in the suspended structure itself, which is independent of the towers.The tensioning of the cables and consequently the prestressing of the superstructurewas achieved by jacking up both towers with respect to the piers, which was a quiteaudacious and spectacular operation.Fig. 2. Cross-section of the bridge deck.Fig. 3. Front view of a tower and cross-section of bridge deck.2820 L.R. TaerweThe two cables are supported above each pier by a tower consisting of two legs, aflat arch connecting their tops, and two coupling beams connecting them underneaththe roadway (Fig. 3). On top of each leg, a cast iron saddle is positioned. The towersare wholly independent from the roadway structure and from the V-shaped bearingsconnecting the deck with the pier. These V-shaped bearings consist of concrete wallswhich at both ends have Freyssinet hinges (Fig. 4). They are located in between thetwo coupling beams with sufﬁcient spacing.The plane of the hangers and the cables almost coincides with the plane of the outerwebs of the box girders. The distance between the hangers equals 5 m. At each of theselocations, a transverse beam is positioned below the bridge deck (Fig. 2). These trans-verse beams are partially prestressed, which was not a common technique at that time.Each tower was cast 0.67 m below its ﬁnal design position, before the main cableswere built up, wire by wire, without any tension. These cables were connected to theconcrete structure at their ends by means of the cable bands and of the hangers. Pre-stressing of the superstructure was achieved by jacking up both towers (not the roadwaystructure) with respect to the piers. Hydraulic jacks placed under the tower legs wereused for that purpose (Fig. 5). The jacking forced the cables to elongate and hencetensioned them, and it simultaneously produced a total prestressing force of 43.9 MN inthe longitudinal girders, for which a lifting force per tower leg of 17.5 MN was needed.In Fig. 5, the positioning of the ﬁnal supporting block is also shown. The topsurface of this block is slightly rounded and serves as the lower part of the Freyssinethinge located at the bottom of the tower leg. The mortar layer between the top part ofFig. 4. Freyssinet hinge at lower part ofV-shaped bearing wall.Fig. 5. Jacking up of the towers and positioningof the supporting concrete block.Self-anchored Suspension Bridges with Prestressed Concrete Deck 2821the concrete block and the bottom part of the leg measures 135 cm by 38 cm. Thelocally wider part at the bottom of the tower legs, which was necessary to position thejacks, was removed after the jacking operation.At the abutments, the horizontal component of the cable force is transmitted to thelongitudinal girders as prestressing force, but its vertical component also needs to beresisted. This is achieved by ﬁxing a concrete box ﬁlled with sand, below the transverseend beams.The sags f and f1 of the parabolic cables in the central span and lateral spansrespectively were chosen such that f/L2 = f1/l2 with L and l the corresponding spanlengths (Fig. 6). This means that the upward force per unit length exerted by the cableon the bridge deck is constant over the full length of the bridge. As this load waschosen to be initially 19% higher than the dead weight of the bridge deck, upwardreaction forces occur at the bridge piers under certain loading arrangements. Hence, theV-shaped bearings, mentioned before, were post-tensioned vertically to compensate thetensile force created by the negative support reaction.The effect of the increase in tendon force DP in a regular prestressed concrete beamdue to the deflection generated by live load is generally neglected. However, in the caseof a self-anchored suspension bridge, where the cable has a large eccentricity, thisbeneﬁcial effect is not negligible. Denoting by f the cable sag, the additional momentgenerated by the cable force increase DP equals –f. DP which reduces the positive beammoment due to live load. For the bridge W12 under consideration, the reduction of thebending moment at mid-span due to the full live load is 9.6%. For other cable andbridge geometries, this reduction can be substantially higher.The concrete bridge deck was cast on scaffolding over its full length, which wasobvious giving the particular situation that the canal to be bridged, was not yet dug atthe time of construction. As this situation is not common, this bridge type has not beenwidely used. Moreover, in the 1960’s cable stayed bridges came into use, which turnedout to be more efﬁcient in construction.Bridge W13. The bridge W12, discussed so far was the third one in a series of three.The ﬁrst bridge of this type (designated as W13) that was built over the ring canal in1954–1955, had smaller spans: a central span of 56 m only and two lateral spans of18 m. In the lateral spans no hangers are present and the cables are straight (Fig. 7).Fig. 6. Cable geometry.2822 L.R. TaerweFig. 7. First self-anchored suspension bridge designed by Vandepitte (W13).Fig. 8. Deviation of the continuous cable at one of the ends of the bridge deck: lateral and planview (bridge W13).Self-anchored Suspension Bridges with Prestressed Concrete Deck 2823This and the following bridge have in fact one continuous cable, which loops aroundthe bridge deck at its ends (Fig. 8). For this purpose, the cable is locally splayed out inthree parts and deviated in the vertical plane by means of a concrete deviation saddle.As the friction between the curved cable parts and the bridge deck was released shockwise during the tensioning operation, causing unexpected loud bangs, two separatecables were applied in the third bridge W12.Bridge W16. The second bridge in the series (designated as W16) which was ﬁnishedin 1958, is located in Mariakerke and has a central span of 100 m and lateral spans of40 m (instead of 46 m for the bridge W12). In Fig. 9 it can be noticed that the hangersare anchored in the ends of the transverse beams, which protrude from the bridge deck.This is not the case for bridge W12 (Fig. 1) where the lateral view shows a continuousbox girder, which is aesthetically more pleasing. Figure 10 shows the lower part of oneof the bridge piers where the lower flange of the I-shaped stiffening girder can benoticed. Below the legs of the towers, steel hinges are provided and the steel rodswhich are visible besides the vertical wall supports have to resist the upward reactionforce, while the walls resist the downward reaction force. As mentioned before, inbridge W12 the post-tensioned wall supports can resist both positive and negativereaction forces.Fig. 9. Bridge at Mariakerke (W16).2824 L.R. Taerwe3 Conclusions– The principle of self-anchoring eliminates massive anchorage structures, whichhave to withstand large horizontal forces, and which are necessary for classicalsuspension bridges. The large thrust produced in the suspended bridge deck ishighly beneﬁcial in the case of a concrete deck. In this case it acts as a prestressingforce in the stiffening beams and helps them to withstand the bending due to liveload.– Four bridges of this type were built in the 1950’s over a canal around the city ofGhent (Belgium) after a design by Prof. Daniël Vandepitte and still preform verywell.– The general design principles are outlined in the paper.– Prestressing of the superstructure was achieved by jacking up both towers withrespect to the piers.Fig. 10. Lower part of one of the piers of bridge W16.Self-anchored Suspension Bridges with Prestressed Concrete Deck 2825ReferencesOchsendorf, J., Billington, D.: Self-anchored suspension bridges. ASCE J. Bridge Eng. 4(3),151–156 (1999)Vandepitte, D.: Le pont suspendu à poutres de rigidité en béton précontraintes par les câblesporteurs. Annales des Travaux Publics de Belgique 5, 3–28 (1955)Vandepitte, D.: Self-anchored prestressed concrete suspension bridges with parabolic cables. In:Proceedings of International Symposium on Suspension Bridges, Lisbon, Portugal (1966).Paper no. 382826 L.R. Taerwe

Self-anchored suspension bridges with prestressed concrete deck : some historic examples

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8523840/file/8523842

Self-anchored suspension bridges with prestressed concrete deck : some historic examples

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Ghent University Academic Bibliography