Arup Presentation Iqpc Warschau 03112010

1

Sander den Blanken

Managing Contractor (MC): Renovation of 8 bridges (NL)

Bridge renovation to provide extended life of minimum 30 years to 8 orthotropic deck steel bridges with minimum traffic hindrance

2

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future developments

Content

31. The Project

4

Experience RWS:• Until 2000 own engineering department• 2 Pilot projects: Moerdijk & Hagestein• Preferred solution: HSC overlay• Phd Study: HSC solution• Lessons Learned document• Several laboratorium tests• Reference Plan MC

1. The project

5

The Project:• Incentives contract for engineering firms: Managing Contractor• EPIC - Engineering, Procurement, Construction (traditional) • Asset Management: 8 major steel highways bridges 1960-1990• Whole life cost assessment• Extending the life of existing assets > 30 Years• Orthotropic steel decks: Fatigue cracks & static strength issues• Local & global strengthening• Renovation in 6 years (2009-2015)• Incentive contract for 3 combinations for construction

1. The project

6

Main requirements:

• Further 30 years life without significantly increased maintenance

• Renovation with minimum/no traffic disruption

• Implement high strength concrete overlay to improve deck fatigue performance

1. The project

7

Responsibility of Managing Contractor:• Delegated Client position• Project & contract management• Traffic & Environmental management• Project administration/project control• Technical Management:

• Inspection 8 structures• Assessment 8 bridges, existing & strengthened condition • Design and engineer enhancement measures• Preparing tender documents

• Management and supervision of the contractors

1. The project

8

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future developments

Content

9

Contract: Costs Plus Incentive Fee (1)• Framework contract MC - RWS: 17 part orders (2 per bridge + 1)• Payments:

• Costs: 2.8 x Gross Year Salary/2080 < SAL +OHC• Hours: approx 25.000 per bridge• Plus: Fixed Fee after finishing each part orders• Incentive Fee: Bonuses

• Framework contract RWS/MC – Contractors (3):• Mini-tender per bridge• Same incentives as MC, and therefore same as RWS

2. The contract

10

Reference plan vs. Incentives MC• Reference plan made by Client based on own experience• Bonuses:

1. Minimise Traffic Hindrance: availability of lanes2. Minimise Building Costs3. Safety: no safety incidents + no shortcomings4. Customer Evaluation: increase public opinion5. Mobility

2. The contract

11

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future situation

Content

12

General approach:

MC Renovatie Bruggen – BrIM strategie

• JV Royal Haskoning & Arup, Greisch

• Get the best of each JV partner and cooperate

• Working in the same office as Client with complete team

• BrIM solutions to facilitate teams • Development MC along the project duration

• Product & process development with contractors

3. MC approach: General

13

BrIM: Bringing pieces together

MC Renovatie Bruggen – BrIM strategie

•3D modelling of complex geometry• Creating of 2D drawings• Structural analysis• Document control• Availability of information

3. MC approach: BrIM

14

Project Wise• Working at same documents

remotely• Document control• Storage of documents• QA system:

• Control is automated• Notifications send for checking

and approval • Documents only issued when

trial is followed

MC Renovatie Bruggen – BrIM strategie3. MC approach: BrIM

15MC Renovatie Bruggen – BrIM strategie

http://mcportal.arup.com/

3. MC approach: BrIM

16MC Renovatie Bruggen – BrIM strategie3. MC approach: BrIM

17

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future developments

Content

18

Phased technical approach:1. Initial global assessment: are the bridges

adequate for strength with current lane layout

2. Detailed global strength and fatigue assessment & Detailed local fatigue assessment

3. Concept, scheme and detailed design of global and local strengthening

3. MC approach: Technical

19

Local fatigue assessment (1)

• NEN-EN 1993-1-9:2006 - Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures – Part 1-9• Load Model 5:

• Weight in motion study (completed on Moerdijk bridge)• Trend factor to give vehicle numbers and axle loads

• Current use and current layout• Convoy loading included • Influence of two lorries side-by-side included

3. MC approach: Technical

20

Local fatigue assessment (2)

Important parameters influence on the estimation of fatigue damage:• Lane positions of lanes in relation to the main supporting structure• The lateral deviation of the trucks from lane centre (weave)• Influence of asphalt stiffness variation with temperature• Historical positions of the lanes• The distribution of traffic between on/off, slow and 1st fast lanes• Cracked / uncracked concrete

3. MC approach: Technical

21

Classification fatigue details:

Detail category information taken from:•Kolstein’s Fatigue Classification of Welded Joints in Orthotropic Steel Bridge Decks•Eurocode 3, Part 1-9

3. MC approach: Technical

22

Local FEM for fatigue analysis of deck structure

3. MC approach: Technical

23

Validation• Compare with previous FE models (left)• Compare with strains measured on bridges (right)• Mean SN curves and mean stresses with actual damage

3. MC approach: Technical

24

Truck position• Position of vehicle compared to main structure• Variation of lateral position (Weave)

3. MC approach: Technical

25

Damage calculation

VBA programme combines inputs from: - FE analysis - Loading regime (historic & future) - Weld characteristics - EC3 fatigue damage assessment

3. MC approach: Technical

26

Deck fatigue results

Trough to deck plate joint:

crack in weld

Trough splice joints

Trough to crossbeam joints

(on trough)

Trough to crossbeam

joints(on web)

Trough, deck plate

and crossbeam

joint

Crossbeam to deck plate

Deck plate butt

welds

Detail Category 50 36 124 71 125 100 36

Fatigue Detail 2 3 4 4a 5 6 7

Predicted Damage in 2010PD-2010

10.90 26.55 0.13 0.01 1.23 0.00 0.04Predicted damage 2040 Cracked-HSB, no steelwork repairs 2010

PD-2040-C

10.90 26.55 0.13 0.01 1.23 0.00 0.04Predicted damage 2040

Cracked-HSB, submerged Arc steelwork repairs 2010

PD-2040-SA-C- - - - 0.36 - -

Predicted damage 2040 Cracked-HSB, zero damage set at 2010

PD-2040-Z-C

0.90 9.39 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00Predicted damage – 2040 Cracked-HSB, Repair threshold limit of 0.66

damage set at 2010 - - - - 0.82 - -

3. MC approach: Technical

27

Deck fatigue solutions

3. MC approach: Technical

28

HSB Overlay

•C90/105 Concrete•Closely spaced reinforcement•Minimal cover •tight tolerances

HSB

4. Current situation: Muider

29

Edge Details HSB

• Formed from angle sections and plates.• Designed for prefabrication.• Welded or epoxy fixed to deck plate.•Slotted holes for flexibility.• Starterbars welded to strip.

Welded to deckplate

StripStarter barsAngle

Weld

Bolted connection

4. Current situation: Muider

30

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future developments

Content

31

What’s happening now:

• 2 bridges on-site• 1 bridge being tendered• 1 bridge at phase 3 assessment• 2 bridges beginning phase 2

4. Current situation

32

1) Muider Bridge (special)• Under construction• Built in 1969• Total length of 305m length, three spans• Two identical but structurally independent

bridges each with a 18 m with. • Main load-bearing structure consists of 3

box-type main girders• Work currently in progress for local and

global reinforcements supporting the bridge centrally with a free-standing suspended structure

• Construction ends 1 Dec 2010

Project: Managing Contractor Project4. Current situation: Muiderbrug

56

2) Arch Beek Bridge• Built in 1967• Spans a 4 tracks railway and a local road• 117 m long and 35 m of width • Steel tied arched bridge with free-standing arches• Construction starts September 2010• Construction starteded on site

4. Current situation: Beek

57

Global Strengthening Measures – Beneath Structure

• New plates• Several stiffeners• Additional flanges cross girders• Corner plates • Full penetration weld

4. Current situation: Beek

58

Global Strengthening Measures – Beneath Structure

• Interaction with railways

= 26 repairs

2 repairs

4. Current situation: Beek

594. Current situation: Beek

604. Current situation: Beek

61

Global Strengthening Measures – Above Deck

• Strengthening Rivetted Connections Arch• Strengthening above arch• Overplate deck next to arch ends

4. Current situation: Beek

62

HSB Overlay

4. Current situation: Beek

63

Edge Details HSB

4. Current situation: Beek

64

3) Scharberg Bridge• Being tendered• Built in 1972• Spans both the Maas river and the

Juliana Canal.• Total length of steel part is 301 m

over 4 spans• Twin beam and slab bridge • Construction starts April 2011

4. Current situation: Scharberg

65

Deck Plate Repair & HSB Overlay

4. Current situation: Scharberg

66

Global Strengthening Measures• Either End Bearing Stiffeners - Additional stiffeners added• Full Height Stiffeners• Panel 1 Stiffeners• Type 6 Splice Plates• Bottom flange

4. Current situation: Scharberg

67

• Widening needed due to future traffic increase: option study

• Construction starts June 2012• Phase 3 just started

4) Galecopper Bridge• Built in 1975• Canal span consists of

two separate grid suspension bridges

• Total length both bridges 320 m, width 34.6 m.

• Pylons and suspension surface

4. Current situation: Galecopper

68

5) Suurhoff Bridge• Built in 1972• 2x2 traffic lanes and one parallel road

opened for cyclists, pedestrians and agricultural traffic.

• 3 main parts: – 40 m solid abutment – Bascule bridge with a facing tail– Main 2 spans of 95 and 55.7

meters• Construction starts on May 2012• Phase 2 just started

4. Current situation: Suurhof

69

• Opened for traffic in 1976, after a construction time of almost 4 years.• A50 between Ewijk and Valburg junctions at Nijmegen • Spans the Waal and the flood plains of the Waal. • 2x2 traffic lanes, a hard shoulder and 2 parallel roads on both sides• Construction starts January 2014, phase 2 just started

6) 1st bridge at Ewijk

4. Current situation: Ewijk

70

Content:1. The project (history & start)2. The contract: Cost Plus Incentive Fee Contract 3. MC approach: BrIM & Technical4. Current situation5. Future developments

Content

71

7) Kreekrak Bridge• Opened for traffic in 1974 after a construction time of 4 years. • River span consists of two separate bridges with identical steel structure

constructed from steel plate girders. • Total length is 240 m with four support points: two pillars and two abutments.• Partial overstresses are 50, 140 and 50 meters.

• Each bridge with vehicle deck space for 2x2 traffic lanes and a hard shoulder.

Project: Managing Contractor Project5. Future: Kreekrak

72

• 2nd arch built in 1990 in order to double the lanes into twelve

• Spanning the river Maas as two fixed bridges with a steel main span and a moveable part = already replaced

• Western arch bridge 300 m span• The arch is connected by diagonal steel

tension cables to steel main girders 3.90 m in height that carry the road deck.

• Construction starts in April 2015

8) 2nd Van Brienenoord Bridge

5. Future: van Brienenoord

73

Other developments:1. Local strengthening with glued steel plates (8-20 mm) on slow lane2. HSB without reinforcement3. Standardisation: repair methods, edge details, hsb overlay4. Product development with contractors

5. Local strengthening with FRP (less stiffness, high strength)6. Global replacement by combination of steel and FRP

5. Future developments

74

Questions?

Next IQPC Bridge Symposium Frankfurt 27th of January 2010:• More results HSB & sensitivity analysis• Tests results HSB• New alternative: glued plate

E: [email protected]

5. Future developments