A cement and concrete industry publicationPrecast Concrete Arch Structures A state-of-the-art report Technical Guide No. 12 Acknowledgements The Concrete Bridge Development Group is pleased to publish this report on behalf of the Highways Agency. The CBDG also wishes to acknowledge Ove Arup & Partners who were the consultants that produced this report on behalf of the Highways Agency. This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of the Highways Agency, and it is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party. CBDG is pleased to acknowledge Techspan (ReCo), Matiere (AMB Group) and Bebo (Bebo) who provided comments on the draft and gave permission to use the illustrations and photographs used in this publication. CBDG acknowledges financial support fromThe Concrete Centre, part of the Mineral Products Association, in the production of this publication. www.concretecentre.com Published for and on behalf of The Concrete Bridge Development Group by The Concrete Society Riverside House, 4 Meadows Business Park, Station Approach, Blackwater, Camberley, Surrey GU17 9AB Tel: +44 (0)1276 607140 Fax: +44 (0)1276 607141 www.concrete.org.uk CCIP-035 Published December 2009 ISBN 978-1-904482-58-1 © Concrete Bridge Development Group Order reference: CBDG/TG12 CCIP publications are produced by The Concrete Society on behalf of the Cement and Concrete Industry Publications Forum – an industry initiative to publish technical guidance in support of concrete design and construction. CCIP publications are available from the Concrete Bookshop at www.concretebookshop.com Tel: +44 (0)7004 607777 All rights reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be addressed to the Concrete Bridge Development Group. Although the Concrete Bridge Development Group (limited by guarantee) does its best to ensure that any advice, recommendations or information it may give either in this publication or elsewhere is accurate, no liability or responsibility of any kind (including liability for negligence) howsoever and from whatsoever cause arising, is accepted in this respect by the Group, its servants or agents. Printed by Information Press, Eynsham, UK Precast Concrete Arch Structures Contents 1. 2. Introduction Summary of previous usage 2.1 Precast arch systems 2.2 Documents reviewed 2.3 Types of proposed structure 2.4 Key characteristics of the arch structure 2.5 Case histories 2.6 Structure geometry Current Practice 3.1 Design 3.2 Specification 3.3 Construction 3.4 Maintenance 3.5 Monitoring Recommendations 4.1 Design 4.2 Specification 4.3 Construction 4.4 Maintenance provisions 4.5 Monitoring Risk management 5.1 Interactions between parties 5.2 Sensitivity of design 5.3 Construction geometric control and tolerances 5.4 Verification of design during construction 5.5 Load–deflection serviceability criteria 3 4 4 5 6 6 11 11 17 17 21 26 28 28 29 29 31 33 34 34 36 36 36 37 37 37 3. 4. 5. 6. Checklist 6.1 Procurement stage 6.2 Design 6.3 Segment casting 6.4 Delivery 6.5 Site storage 6.6 Construction 38 38 38 38 39 39 39 40 Bibliography 2 There is a third system currently marketed by Asset International called the BEBO system. The work also identified potential benefits from the use of modular arch structures in infrastructure projects in the UK. The review covered masonry and modular arch structures. It provides guidance on good practice for the use of such structures utilising the experience of the industry suppliers. the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) undertook a comprehensive review of arch systems for buried structures on behalf of the Highways Agency (HA). This demonstrates the adaptability of arch span structures and there are many more in the rest of Europe and elsewhere. of which there are some 66 throughout the UK and Ireland.5–361 m. There are two main types of precast concrete arch products currently used in the UK. This document is also intended to enable the HA to continue benefiting from appropriate use of such structures. These structures have spans in the range 3–20 m and a length of 2. This document has been largely compiled using technical details provided by the first two companies. This report note also refers to the following HA standard documents: Specification for Highway Works (SHW) Series 500 – Drainage and Service Ducts SHW Series 600 – Earthworks BD 74/00 – Foundations BD 31/01 – The Design of Buried Concrete Box and Portal Frame Structures BD 37/01 – Loads for Highway Bridges BD 2/05 – Technical Approval of Highway Structures 3 . Reinforced Earth Company (RECo) supplies TechSpan products while ABM markets Matiere structures. This report provides guidance on the use of precast concrete arch structures. It is not intended to be a detailed design guide but to provide guidance for experienced structural engineers and advisers on the use of such structures. This report is only applicable for highway structures constructed using precast arch techniques that do not require mechanical ventilation provisions. namely RECo and ABM.Introduction 1 1. and from experience gained by Arup in this type of structure. Information for the BEBO system provided by Asset International has been included in Sections 2 and 3. Introduction In 1999. ABM Design & Build and ABM Precon.1. Canada. however. http://www. a Swiss company. are supplied by Reinforced Earth Company (RECo) and ABM Group (ABM) respectively. ABM Group is made up of ABM Construction.3 BEBO system The third precast arch system reported in the 1999 TRL report is the BEBO system. Germany. abmeurope.com). 2. 4 .com). Australia. The system has been widely used in Ireland and there is growing interest in the UK.2 Summary of previous usage 2. is (except for the USA.1.1.com). BEBO Arch International AG (see http://www. 2. A third system. how many are arch structures.2 Matiere system The Matiere system originated in France in 1982. RECo is a wholly owned subsidiary of Freyssinet Group and it supplies the TechSpan system in the UK. at the time of writing (2008) the two most commonly used precast arch structures in the UK. The ABM Group official website cites more than 10 000 installations across 20 countries using buried precast concrete for arch and box structures.1 TechSpan system The TechSpan system was developed in Spain by Groupe TAI (http://www. 2. has recently been marketed by Asset International. the USA. Development of the BEBO arch system began in Switzerland in 1966. namely TechSpan and Matiere. This TechSpan arch system was introduced into the UK.beboarch. ABM Group is a Dublin-based construction company founded in 1991 and is distributor of the Matiere system in Ireland and the UK. In 2008 there were approximately 1000 custom-designed installations in the world utilising such structures. ABM Precon was formed in 2005 and it specialises in the manufacture of precast reinforced and prestressed concrete for the UK market. where the rights to the system belong to the BEBOTech Corporation) the worldwide owner of all rights to the BEBO system. However.recouk.1 Precast arch systems 2. Malaysia and Australia.com) in 1989 and it is currently used worldwide and supplied by the Reinforced Earth Company (RECo. It has since been used in Switzerland.groupetai. It is not clear. BEBO. systems (http://www. Canada and the USA in the early 1990s. Summary of previous usage There are several types of precast arch structures reported in the 1999 TRL report. 2.6 Miscellaneous articles/ documents A new method for the construction of buried structures . part of the Hill & Smith IPG Group (see http://www. 2.2. performance versus prediction Seismic Analysis of Buried Arch Structures 2.2.2. The system is marketed in the UK by Asset International. approximately 500 BEBO arch structures have been built in Europe.foundation of structures Matiere Patented Structures .Summary of previous usage 2 Since the system’s inception.3 Design guidance ABM Design and Build Technical Note (Design Philosophy) 2.2.lateral backfills 5 .co.5 Papers Application and Design of Segmental Precast Arches Non-linear Analysis of Buried Arch Structures Analysis of Buried Arch Structures.2 Documents reviewed The following subsections list documents reviewed during the course of the production of this publication.4 Construction guidance documents TechSpan Construction Manual and Quality Control Manual Matiere structures construction guide BEBO Arch System .2.uk).Instructions 2.assetint.2 Other documents Matiere Precast Concrete Arch Structure – Draft AIP Model Document Technical Approval of Highway Structures (RECo) Greater Bargoed Community Regeneration Scheme — Railway Bridge SWM2 (BEBO) 2.1 Specifications Technical Specifications for TechSpan Precast Arch System Standard specification for the manufacturing and installation of Matiere precast concrete structures.2. 2.the “Matiere Method” A review of arched systems for buried structures Matiere Patented Structures . 31 Single-segment system founded on a continuous concrete raft structure Two-segment system founded on a continuous concrete raft structure forming a three-pinned arch Three-segment system forming a two-pinned arch structure Two-segment system forming a three-pinned arch structure Single.1 Details of arch structures. In the majority of cases.3. The arch structures currently supplied by the three companies are given in Table 2. Twin-leaf system has a cast-in-place crown joint Single. The walls are designed to be stable without external support.8. Type Matiere system Matiere CM2 Matiere CM3 Matiere CM4 TechSpan system TechSpan BEBO system E-series C-series T-series Span (m) Description 1.6 . The joints (balland-socket type) are inclined at 45°.2b).2c).2 Summary of previous usage 2. Installation of this type of arch structure involves positioning the walls on pre-prepared foundations before lifting the roof onto the walls.and twin-leaf precast circular segments forming a twopinned arch.4 Key characteristics of the arch structure The following section outlines the main characteristics of each of the three arch systems discussed in this report. the CM2 and CM3 (see Figure 2.25.and twin-leaf precast elliptical segments forming a twopinned arch.1 Matiere structure The most commonly used Matiere arch system is the CM4.5 .12.0 .0 Up to 20 3.1 .1.20. Twin-leaf system has a cast-in-place crown joint Single-leaf shallow arch forming a two-pinned arch 2. This structure is developed from its predecessors. the roof can be placed before casting of the in-situ floor slab or the external heel (Figure 2. which is maintained for all standard units.6 9. 6 .4. The CM4 system has two variations: the closed-cell system and the open-cell system (see Figures 2.8 7 .0 2. the three-segment system.3 Types of proposed structure Table 2. see Figure 2.2a) and 2.5 . The improvement made has led to a larger-span structure with added standard features to simplify casting of the precast segment and site installation.2d).1).0 3. 2. Photos: ABM Roof Joint Wall In-situ reinforce concrete extern heel In-situ floor slab a) Closed cell system b) Open cell system c) Placement of roof structure on the walls (CM4) d) Preparation of the in-situ heel (CM4) 7 .1 The Matiere CM2 and CM3.2 The Matiere precast arch system.Summary of previous usage 2 Figure 2. Figure 2. Unlike the Matiere system.3 The TechSpan precast arch system Photo: RECo C Structure L Crown beam Arch segment Shallow foundation Keyway cast as part of the foundation to provide lateral restraint to the segment Foundation Deep pile foundation a) Major components of a TechSpan arch b) Foundation for the TechSpan system c) Erection of the first two segments d) Image showing erection process 8 .2 Summary of previous usage 2. as shown in Figures 2. where the walls are self-supporting. Figure 2.3(d).4.3(b). However. generally the structure will be stable under these temporary erection conditions.3(c) and 2. see Figure 2.2 TechSpan structure The TechSpan system is made up of three main components: the foundations. temporary support may be needed for special conditions where the geometry of the segment may dictate its temporary stability. The foundations are cast with a keyway to provide lateral restraint to the arch segment during installation. The crown beam can be cast at any time up to placing the backfill to crown level. This crown beam provides the tie along the length of the structure at the crown and it does not form a moment connection at this point. the arch segments (two halves) and the crown beam (see Figure 2. Once four segments are in place.3(a)). the TechSpan segments are installed initially in pairs and staggered longitudinally to provide support for subsequent panels. this two-leaf system behaves as a three-pinned arch. Similar to the TechSpan system.4a The BEBO system crown joint prior to casting.Summary of previous usage 2 2. However. 9 .4a & 2. the foundations and the crown joints. The precast system is similar to the TechSpan system and comprises three main components: the arch segments.or two-leaf segments.4b.4. these segments are founded on shallow strip foundations or piled foundations.4a shows the crown joint with its reinforcement prior to casting. as shown in Figure 2. the cast-in-place crown joint of the BEBO’s twoleaf system is designed to provide full structural continuity along the full length of the arch.3 BEBO system The BEBO system is a system of overfilled reinforced concrete arches that can be precast or cast in place. The arch is made up of either single. unlike the TechSpan system. Figure 2. During installation and prior to the casting of the crown joint. Figure 2. 1 to 12.no counterforms Bridges with up to 45o skew and more Ideal for low overfill applications Type T30 Type T84T T102 T90 T80 T70 T50 T60 T40 T30 T20 c) d) T-series (shallow arch) 10 .4 to 4.5 metres Single and twin leaf precast elements Standard overfill heights of 0.8 metres Single and twin leaf precast elements Standard overfill heights of 0.5 Designed for extreme traffic loads Type E24 Type E84T E48 E84T E72T E60T E36 E24 E16 E12 E20 E42 E30 E54T E66T E78T a) b) E-series (elliptical segments) Type C30T Type C42T 30 circular shapes .5 metres Dedicated design for up to 100 metres overfill Optimised high overfill elements and foundations C42T E20 C30T E12 E16 E24 C36T b) C-series (circular segments) c) Shallow arch shapes: span to rise ratios up to 10:1 Any span between 7 and 31 metres or more Precast or cast-in-place .4 to 4.2 Summary of previous usage Figure 2.spans of 9.4b The BEBO system.6 to 25. 80 elliptical shapes -spans of 3. Summary of previous usage 2 2. ABM provided 28 case histories of the use of their Matiere system since 2000. The distribution of the span of such structures together with the year of installation is shown in Figure 2.5. with three of these in the UK.5 Case histories During the course of this project.5 shows the range of structural spans supplied by RECo and ABM for precast arch structures installed in the UK and Ireland. with the TechSpan system used from 1992. Based on the case history data provided. RECo provided a total of 38 case histories of the use of the TechSpan arch structures since 1992 in the UK and Ireland. The use of the Matiere system did not begin in the UK until 2003. The maximum span for a TechSpan system is 20. From these records it can be seen that the precast arch structure was first used for the construction of modern underground structures in the UK in the early 1990s. the maximum height of such structures is approximately 9 m. The thickness of such structures is between 200 and 350 mm.25 m while the corresponding value for the Matiere system is 17.6 Structure geometry Figure 2. It is the physical size and the ability to lift and transport the precast segments that tends to govern the geometries of such structures. 2. 11 .5 m. with exceptional cases of up to 400 and 520 mm. with 31 of these in the UK. 25 20 Span (m) 15 10 5 0 1992 1994 1996 1998 Year 2000 2002 2004 2006 a) TechSpan system 20 16 Span (m) 12 8 4 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 b) Matiere system 12 .2 Summary of previous usage Figure 2.5 Precast arch structures in the UK and Ireland since 1992. 6a and 2. Figure 2. From the information supplied by RECo on 38 arch structures.6 also shows that the structures installed by ABM with the Matiere system generally have a span/height ratio of less than or equal to 2 while the majority of those installed by RECo with the TechSpan system have ratios greater than 2. nine with a span/height ration greater tah 3 (span/height>3). there are a limited number of structures with spans greater than 13 m installed by ABM. From the information supplied by ABM on 28 arch structures there are eight with span/ height ratio greater than 2 but less than 3. while this number is much higher with the TechSpan system.1 Span–height distribution Figures 2.6b show the span–height distribution of the arch structures. 13 . there are 14 with a span/ height ration greater than 2 but less than 3 (2>span/height<3). Also. and and 14 with a span/height ratio less than or equal to two (span/height <=2).Summary of previous usage 2 2. Only one structure has a span/height ratio greater than 3.6. 2 Summary of previous usage Figure 2.5 2 No each Height (m) 7 5 Span / Height = 3 3 1 3 5 7 9 11 Span (m) 13 15 17 19 21 a) TechSpan system 12 10 Span / Height = 2 Span / Height = 2. 11 Span / Height = 2 9 Span / Height = 2.6 Span–height distribution of precast arch structures in the UK and Ireland.5 8 Height (m) 2 No each 6 Span / Height = 3 4 2 No each 2 0 3 5 7 9 11 13 Span (m) 15 17 19 21 b) Matiere sytem 14 . 3.6 4 Span /height ratio 3 2 1 2 No each 0 3 5 7 9 11 Span (m ) a) TechSpan system 5 13 15 17 19 21 4 Span /height ratio 3 2 No each 2 1 2 No each 0 3 5 7 9 11 Span (m) a) Matiere system 13 15 17 19 21 15 .7a & B show a general trend of an increasing span/height ratio with span. Figure 2.7 Distribution of height/span with span. 5 6.Summary of previous usage 2 Figures 2. 8 Figure 2. 600 500 400 Thickness (m) 300 200 100 2 No each 0 3 5 7 9 11 13 Span (mm) 15 17 19 21 16 .8 Thickness of the arch structures for the TechSpan system. Thickness data have not been provided for the Matiere system.2 m span and 520 mm thick segments for a span of 18.6. The thickness increases to 350 mm between a span of 8 and 13 m and thereafter remains fairly constant up to a span of 20 m. 500 mm thick segments used for a 15. However.2 m. three were shown to have segment thickness greater than 350 mm: these are 400 mm thick segments used for a 20.2 Summary of previous usage 2.2 Segment thickness The data provided by RECo show a minimum thickness of 200 mm for structural spans of less than 8 m.25 m span. The distribution of the segment thickness is shown in Figure 2. 17 .1 Temporary conditions The segments are precast offsite and transported for installation on-site. handling and storage on site and handling during installation/erection are considered in the design of the segments.1. see Bibligoraphy The concept of forming a three-pinned arch using a catenary curve to achieve a compressive structure is the basis used to achieve an efficient arch structure. The design philosophy behind segmental precast arches for the TechSpan system is summarised by Hutchinson. Temporary conditions involving casting.2 below. The principal aspect of precast arches covered in this document is that.1. namely RECo.Current practice 3 3. This involves separate load cases for lifting for transportation and installation. The structure is then designed using a soil–structure interaction approach described in Section 3. transportation. ABM and BEBO. an arch structure used for conditions with small cover above the crown has a height-to-span ratio of 30–40% while that with significant overburden above the crown has a height-to-span ratio of 60–70% (See Bibliography). 3. the design is based on a conventional beam-spring soil–structure interaction approach using beam to represent the structure and subgrade reaction modulus representing soil behaviour. Recommendations will be give in Section 4 of this report for each of the main headings identified below. handling and storage in the casting yard. For the Matiere and BEBO systems. the strength of an arch can also depend on the uniformity of the loads. Normally. The degree of uniformity of the radial loading applied around the arch needs to be close to that assumed when the shape of the arch was chosen by the designer. 3. whereas the strength of most modern structures depends on the magnitude of the applied loads. Current Practice This section of the report summarises current practice adopted by the three suppliers of precast arch structures.1 Design An arch structure in backfill is a very efficient structural form which relies on compressive forces following its shape to carry the applied loads. This approach is adopted by the TechSpan system and. If the input parameters are correctly derived and calibrated. Three design approaches have been identified: 1. The forces are then factored to obtain the equivalent ultimate limit state (ULS) values. In any of the above three methods of analysis. the design methodologies allow the following essential aspects of the soil–structure system to be captured to various degrees of precision: initial erection of the arch prior to soil loading backfilling operation/sequence compaction efforts introduced during filling operation connection/fixity details between the precast segments and their foundations forces from the soil supporting the structure. beam-spring (pseudo finite-element) method 3. as close as possible. The second beam-spring approach is based on the assumption that the arch structure is a beam supported by ground springs representing the fill surrounding the structure. more recently. This approach does not allow for any effects of soil–structure interaction. These forces are equivalent to a design based on the serviceability limit state (SLS) consideration.2 Erection and working conditions Currently the design of buried arch structure involves different levels of complexities in the design analysis.3 Design codes Although all the three systems (Matiere. This approach is used by ABM and for the BEBO system.3 Current practice 3.1. These are acceptable assessment methodologies commonly adopted by geotechnical engineers in the design of underground structures. some level of soil–structure interaction behaviour is modelled. full finite-element method. 3. The first simple elastic approach is based on linear elastic calculations of a linear elastic member with a series of applied vertical and horizontal loads representing soil pressure loading. the BEBO system. The third approach is a full finite-element method where a soil–structure interaction response is modelled to reflect. the behaviour of the soil–structure system of the arch structure. simple elastic analysis 2. TechSpan and BEBO) use design criteria in accordance with appropriate parts of BS 5400. the forces are derived from the soil– structure interaction analyses. 18 .1. Sensitivity studies identifying the contribution of these parameters have been recognised by the designers.1. 3.5 Key design parameters As mentioned earlier.6 Serviceability design considerations RECo has not given any specific settlement limits for its TechSpan system. achieving uniformity of load is crucial in the design of the arch structure.4 Joint design The arch structure is designed as a conventional reinforced concrete structure and the joint is designed for the bursting pressures induced by end bearing forces.1. as shown schematically in Figure 3.Current practice 3 3. Design parameters which increase the eccentric loading on the arch structure are critical to the behaviour of the structure. These limits. These limits are site-specific and should be agreed with the client from site to site. one of the key design parameters affecting the forces in the structure is the stiffness assumed for the springs. the removal of load can be as significant as the application of additional load.1. Depending on the plant and working practice. For the soil–structure interaction design approach. however. This parameter has a large range of values depending on various factors.1. 19 . 3. tests carried out in Ireland on Class 6N granular material gave a range of values between 40 and 250 MPa. It is worth noting that. despite the flexible nature of the structure which could tolerate larger movements. the actual compaction pressure imparted into the fill material adjacent to the arch could affect the performance of the finished structure. ABM has specified the following serviceability limitations for its Matiere system: 2 mm transversely between adjacent segments 10 mm longitudinally over the span and 1/1000 of the overall transverse length. In the Design and Build Technical Note provided by ABM. because it is uniformity of load that is important. a more than sixfold variation. Another design parameter that could potentially have significant variation is the compaction effort introduced during the backfilling operation. This variation is generally larger than other design parameters such as strength values and coefficients of earth pressure. The difference in fill level is another parameter that could contribute to the eccentric load. The methods of controlling the above design parameters have been defined in the Quality Control Manuals of the specialist suppliers and they require tight site control to ensure that the assumed design ranges and variations in the parameters are not exceeded on site during construction. 1). d < 2 mm 2 mm transversely between adjacent segments Differential settlement.1) 15 mm over 10 m length of each foundation (transverse displacement in Figure 3.25 Differential settlement over this region is most severe Overall length Settlement profile The BEBO system has the following displacement limits: 1 in 1000 lateral spread over the arch span 1 in 200 vertical displacement between opposite foundations (longitudinal displacement in Figure 3.00 299. d d Differential settlement. 20 . d < 10 mm 10 mm longitudinally over the span Slanted head 299.1 Tolerances for the Matiere system.3 Current practice Figure 3. 2. For casting control (chords and diagonals). these will be based on the tolerances stipulated in the (SHW 1700 Series) for precast concrete.Current practice 3 3.1 RECo Table 3. RECo adopts the tolerance values given in Table 3.1. 21 .1 RECo tolerances.2 m measured with a straight edge These tolerance values are normally specified in the contract document and.4 >14. Structure span (m) 0 – 4.8 – 9.1 Casting 3.1.4 Arch segment (mm) 5 8 12 20 Average (mm) 5 5 6 10 Element width: –5 mm to +5 mm Element thickness: –5 mm to +15 mm Surface finish: 5 mm over 1. in the UK.2 Specification 3.8 4.6 – 14.6 9.2. All supplied materials are manufactured in plants either operated or carefully selected by the local supplier of the TechSpan system. 2 Reinforcement tolerances The HA’s Interim Advice Note 95/07 Revised guidance regarding the use of BS8500 for the design and construction of structures using concrete (2006) suggests that reinforcement fixing tolerance should be 5 mm for precast concrete made in factory production conditions. The HA document indicates that nominal cover should allow for the minimum cover plus the reinforcement fixing tolerance. 6 mm 9 mm 12 mm 6 mm 12 mm Flatness Maximum deviation from a 1.1.5 m straight edge placed in any position on a nominal plane surface should not exceed 6 mm 3.3 of BS 8110 Part 1: 1997. cross-section and straightness or bow are those from the SHW document.1.2.5 m 4.2. 22 .3 Current practice 3.6. 3.2 ABM Table 3.12 m Additional deviation for every subsequent 6 m ± 6 mm ± 9 mm ± 12 mm ± 12 mm ± 6 mm ± 9 mm ± 3 mm ± 6 mm ± 9 mm ± 12 mm ± 6 mm Squareness (longer of the two adjacent sides should be taken as base line) Up to and including 1.2 m but less than 1.3 BEBO The BEBO system requires all dimensions to be accurate to ±6 mm. which are in accordance with Section 6.8 m and over Twist Up to 600 mm wide and up to 6 m in length Over 600 mm wide and for any length Note *The tolerances for length.8.2. The cover required for any concrete is a function of the exposure conditions. Table 3.2.4.2 ABM tolerances Tolerances Length* Up to 3 m 3.5 .2 gives the ABM tolerances.5 .8 m 1.0 m Additional deviation every subsequent 6 m Cross-section* Up to 500 mm 500 .750 mm Additional deviation for every subsequent 250 mm Straightness or bow* Up to 3 m 3-6m 6 .2 m Over 1. C Structure L Zone1 Zone2 Zone3 1m 1m 23 . Light compaction plant is allowed within the 1. if a two-leaf system is used.2. The fill is recommended to be placed at 250 mm lifts and with a maximum difference in level between the opposite sides of less than 0. The size of the plant is governed by the specifications. 3.0 m zone to 2. as shown in Figure 3. For the Matiere system this operation can only commence once the heel concrete is fully cured and the roof segment is in place.5 m to avoid eccentric loading of the structure panels.0 m zone from the structure (Zone 1). The moisture content during backfilling is recommended to be a minimum of 2% less than the optimum moisture content. Testing requirements are defined in the Techspan systems specifications.0 m measured from the footing/base of the structure (Zone 2).2. Outside the 2. the concrete for the crown joint have achieved the required strength.1 Testing and placement requirements of fill material Figure 3. For the BEBO system. compaction efforts and equipment used are crucial elements in the successful construction of the arch structure.3 Backfilling Backfilling of the arch structure is one of the critical operations of the construction process. this operation is only allowed to commence once the grout of the keyway and.2. Backfilling of the TechSpan system is only allowed to commence once the grout at the bases/footings has been completed and cured. Control of the backfill type. Heavier non-vibratory compaction plant is allowed outside the above 1. Three compaction zones are currently specified. TechSpan system Granular backfills are generally specified as fill materials for such structures.3.2 Compaction zones for the TechSpan system.Current practice 3 3. vibratory compaction is allowed (Zone 3).0 m zone. Compaction zones for the BEBO system are shown in Figure 3. the Matiere system has a tighter tolerance of 0.4b. Outside this zone normal compaction plant is allowed. Compared to the TechSpan system. These fills.6 m. as shown in Figure 3.3 Current practice Matiere system Class 6 granular fill has been specified for the Matiere structure. Plate bearing tests have been specified to verify the stiffness value of the fill material on site.3 m layers with maximum difference in levels between opposite sides of 0.4a.3. are predominantly granular soils.4b and the following are applicable: Only hand-operated compaction plant allowed within 0. There is no clear guidance on the compaction equipment between the above two regions. The compaction zones are depicted in Figure 3. Only hand-operated compaction plant is allowed within 2 m of the structure.3 m of the structure. divided into Zones A to C. Figure 3.3 Compaction zones for the Matiere system. as shown in Figure 3. 24 . and applies to vibration frequencies of more than 30 revolutions per second. Placement of fill is restricted to 0.25 m for the difference in backfill level between the opposite sides. Hand operated compaction plant only 2m 2m BEBO system Backfill types and testing requirements are defined in the BEBO System Instructions document. Heavy vibrating compaction equipment is only allowed outside the limits where dumping is allowed. Zone A soil should be of similar quality and density to Zone B material and extends over a lateral extent of at least one arch span outside the footing of the structure. 4 Fill and compaction zones for the BEBO system.Current practice 3 C A A ¾H B H B A o 45 Zone A: Existing soil. 25 . constructed embankment or overfill Zone B: Fill which is directly associated with bridge installation Zone C: Road structure a) Zones of backfilling for the BEBO system Dumping allowed Dumping not allowed Dumping allowed b) Zones of compaction for the BEBO system Figure 3. 3. handling and storage TechSpan system The segments are transported to site on flatbed trailers. The unit should be stored on its curved edge and not be left in the inverted position for longer than is necessary to lift it to the upright position. has been used. Where bitumen paint is used with filter cloth.2. or equivalent to be approved by RECo. especially while rotating the unit from its edge to the inverted position.3.2. Bituthene 3000 membrane by W R Grace and Company.1 Transportation. the following requirements unique to each system need to be considered. Matiere system When watertight conditions are needed. To ensure that the strips remain in place during backfilling. the strips must be bonded to the precast elements with an adhesive compound. Lifting points cast into the top edge of the segment allow easy handling on site. BEBO system BEBO recommends waterproofing the structures by means of caulking the joints (40 mm diameter preformed mastic).3 Construction During construction.4 Loading All the three precast arch systems require that the structures be designed to live loads stipulated in BD 37/01. high-density polyethelene (HDPE) membrane is used. Bituthene 3000 or equivalent).2. 3. 3. The units are checked for damage at each stage and care must be taken to protect the units during handling. 3. This type of waterproofing membrane is only recommended when the cover above the crown is more than 600 mm.6 Waterproofing Generally waterproofing has not been specified by the specialist suppliers. Continuous weld joints at laps are also used.g. there is limited coverage of the foundation soils in the system documents provided by the suppliers. It is important to have well-prepared firm ground for storage of these units. 26 . with subsequent covering of the joints with 300 mm wide membrane strips (e. it is only intended to prevent loss of fines.3 Current practice 3. TechSpan system For the TechSpan system an impermeable geo-membrane.5 Foundation soils Although the foundation system is an integral part of the structure. BEBO will also provide a representative for the first day of installation. 3.Current practice 3 Matiere system The segments are lifted by anchors cast into the units. Maximum allowable vertical offset between opposite segments at crown: < 20 mm. It is not recommended to store the arch elements on site. The arch elements are lifted through the use of the anchors at specific designed positions. Centreline offset of the inside edge of the keyway along a 2. BEBO system BEBO arch elements are designed to be stored in the casting yard and hauled in the position in which they are cast. For the BEBO system. Generally.3. i. a crane having two independent drums with equal capacity. all BEBO system arch elements should be handled with a double-drum crane.e. 3. When using the Matiere system.3. 27 . RECo specifies the following: Offset between the centreline of the structure to the inside edge of the keyway: +0 to –5 mm. They are transported in the position in which they are cast. an experienced representative will attend a preconstruction meeting to provide installation instructions to the installation contractor. BEBO engineers will be able to develop appropriate installation procedures.5 m length in the longitudinal direction: < 3 mm.2 Construction geometry control and tolerances TechSpan system For installation geometry control.3 Site presence In the UK. ABM will provide its own crew to install the structure. Alternatively the company will recommend the use of an erection subcontractor who has had previous experience of installing these types of structure. Where no such equipment is available. RECo usually provides on-site assistance for the first day of erection. Tolerance values for installation are specified as: Maximum allowable horizontal offset between any adjacent segments: < 25 mm. Matiere system ABM has the following requirements for construction geometry control: Flatness of the screed ±3 mm over 6 m (survey at 2.5 m grids). Vertical tolerances (including sloping footing) at the base of the keyway: ±5 mm. the following are indications that such structures require a low level of maintenance provision: Such structures are buried and therefore remote from the carriageway. However.3 Current practice 3. The structure is precast offsite under a strict quality controlled environment and therefore contact surfaces and concrete covers will meet the design tolerances. problems associated with ingress of chlorides is greatly reduced or eliminated.4 Maintenance There is no clear guidance from the suppliers with regard to the maintenance requirements of the arch structure. 3. The waterproofing layer will act as an effective barrier preventing water ingress from the concrete surface. consequently. 28 .5 Monitoring At the time of writing there are no special requirements to monitor the structures to confirm their behaviour with regard to the design predictions. 4. 4. 4. Recommendations The following best-practice recommendations have been based on experience of reviewing and designing a number of these precast concrete arch structures and on discussions with and contributions from the specialist suppliers.Recommendations 4 4. the numerical model should allow for a temporary backfill profile of the earthworks such that the boundary conditions do not affect the behaviour of the soil–structure system. Proposed lateral extent and geometry of the filling operation.1. When the horizontal extent of the backfilling cannot be maintained symmetrically. This is in line with the requirement of BS 5400 which states that: The configuration of the structure and the interaction between the structural members should be such as to ensure a robust and stable design.1.2 Erection and working conditions In this section of the guidance note.1 Temporary conditions Temporary loadings due to casting. Since the most fundamental design assumption for this type of structure is the maintenance of uniformity of load.1 Design Due to the complex soil–structure interaction. it is essential that this type of structure is designed using appropriate numerical modelling techniques. handling and transporting shall be considered in the design of the precast segment. 29 . Different numerical modelling methods are adopted by the three respective suppliers and there are no fundamental objections to the use of these methods. it is assumed that the designer has sufficient experience and knowledge of the derivation of input parameters for the soil model to be used for the design analysis. it is essential that the design assessment (a) covers the loading sequence that produces non-symmetrical loading during erection and (b) continues through to long-term conditions. The use of a symmetric model representing horizontal layers of fill is not always valid. The structure should be designed to support loads caused by normal function. The modelling of soil–structure interaction behaviour of buried arch structures using any numerical modelling tool shall incorporate the following considerations: Proposed construction sequence. but there should be a reasonable probability that it will not collapse or suffer disproportionate damage under the effects of misuse or accident. the arch structure shall be designed to DA1 taking the worst case for Combinations 1 and 2. soil input parameters and interface/fixity types. All future dead and live loads on the structure and the combination to generate the highest possible eccentric loading.1. where appropriate.4 Tolerance for joint and joint design It is common that the installation of the precast segments is unlikely to produce a continuous contact due to casting and construction tolerances. Short. 4.1. Appropriate boundary conditions of the finite-element or the beam-spring model. 30 . effects of consolidation on the foundations of the structure. If fine-grained soil is present. Appropriate interface/fixity provisions for soil–structure and structure–structure connections at the foundations and the crown. The selection of design situations shall be ‘sufficiently severe and varied so as to encompass all conditions that can reasonably be foreseen to occur during the execution and use of the structure’ (Clause (3)P BS EN 1990).4 Recommendations Any potential source of eccentric loading conditions due to difference in ground level of filling operation must be identified and addressed in the design model. 4. in order to comply with the requirements of EC7. Consequently. Provision of compaction effort during filling operation.3 Eurocodes In the UK it has been decided that EC7 Design Approach 1 (DA1) will be used for geotechnical design. Sufficient sensitivity analyses to address the issues relating to site variations such as compaction effort. This requires the consideration of DA1 taking the worst case of Combinations 1 and 2 (DA1/1 and DA1/2). The supplier shall provide details of acceptable joint tolerance values for its system and the joint design shall allow for stress concentrations resulting from these casting and construction tolerance values. Sensitivity analyses on critical parameters shall be undertaken to derive the range of forces to allow for determination of design values.and long-term behaviour of the foundation soils. 4. Segment suppliers shall provide adequate evidence from previous projects of the track record of their casting facilities in the production of the required segments to the quality and standards specified.1.2. The sequence of filling shall be specified with a minimum difference in fill level to maintain uniform loading on the structure.5 Design check The appropriate design checking category needs to be selected based on scheme-specific requirements.2 Backfilling Backfill material shall be Class 6N/6P or similar. the design shall also include assessments to derive clearly defined verification criteria in order to confirm the performance of the structure during construction and future working conditions of the structure. crown and base settlements and spread of bases. stiffness for the Matiere system shall be undertaken in accordance with the testing procedure agreed with the client.1 Geometry control during casting All arch segments shall be measured for compliance to the casting and design specification prior to delivery to site. 4. This depends on the nature of the structure and its intended use.6 Verification criteria The designer shall consider if it is appropriate to carry out site verification to confirm the structural design intent. These shall be in the form of measurable parameters. 4.1 Casting Casting tolerances proposed by the three suppliers are similar across the three respective systems (see Section 3. They shall be inspected for any damage before and after being loaded onto the transporter for delivery to site. if there are specific needs to adopt a more complicated compaction procedure. There are no specific needs to undertake Category 3 checks (BD 2/05) because of the structural form of the precast arch. or other materials to be agreed with the client.Recommendations 4 4. Where appropriate. the site operatives shall be thoroughly briefed in order to avoid any misunderstanding during construction. 4. e.1.g. Testing of the selected fill material shall be specified in accordance with SHW Series 600 and additional tests to verify any design parameters. 31 .2 Specification 4.1).2.1. It is recommended that backfilling operations should involve the minimum number of compaction zones in order to prevent confusion in site control during construction.2.2. for example. However. Details of the treatment of overlapped dispersion zones of the wheel load can be found in BD 31/01. 4. However. whichever is the more onerous. If a waterproofing system is included then consideration should be given to an appropriate interface friction between structure and soil in the design. which penetrate the structure.4 Recommendations 4. The combination resulting in the worst eccentric load shall be used for the design. for these precast arch structures.5 Foundation soils The foundation shall be designed in accordance with BS EN 1997-1.2. 4. The specialist designer shall state the performance requirements of the foundation soils. e. methods of waterproofing proposed by ABM.2. other systems may be considered appropriate if manufacturers’ information and independent test data are available to confirm their resilience. RECo and BEBO are acceptable with the following considerations: Special measures for fittings and fixings. with an accompanying design assessment of the effects of surface loading on the structure. The nominal carriageway loading shall be HA or HB loading as described in BD 37. Where appropriate. The contractor shall confirm such requirements can be met on site.5 m above the crown is acceptable. watertightness and long-term durability.4 Loading Live loads shall be applied in accordance with BD 31/01.6 Waterproofing and drainage measures Waterproofing of the concrete decks of HA structures usually involves the use of an approved bridge deck waterproofing system which may be either a spray-applied system or a sheet system. An understanding of the structural behaviour under operational loading to identify vulnerable locations. 4.2. overhead lighting. 32 .3 Minimum cover above crown A minimum cover of 0. Details of waterproofing to be provided for the precast arch structure shall be agreed with the client to suit the specific operational requirements and the constraints of the site.2.g. Dispersion of a wheel load through the fill may be assumed to occur both longitudinally and transversely from the contact area at ground level to the level of the top of the structure at a slope of 2 vertically to 1 horizontally. This is a specific requirement of HA irrespective of the type of structure. Such design assessment shall incorporate a combination of loading which would produce the worst eccentric loading on the structure. this type of structure may be classified as a Geotechnical Category 31 structure due to its unusual form.3.5 on Design check 33 . Under Eurocode 7’s Design Requirements.2 Damage inspection All segments shall be inspected prior to installation. 4. its use and the design groundwater assumption in a project. Both casting plant and site storage areas shall be carefully prepared to provide sufficient storage space and adequate support to prevent damage to the segments prior to delivery and installation. 4.3. For the following reasons it is recommended that the structure be monitored during erection as part of the construction tolerance control: It is a flexible structure vulnerable to unsymmetrical/non-uniform loading. The supplier shall visit the site to inspect the storage area and agree with the contractor the necessary preparation and confirm by subsequent visit(s) that such measures have been implemented before the segments are delivered on site.3 Construction 4. If a well-prepared concrete surface is not available.1. This should also be linked with its scheme-specific requirements – see also Section 4. Definition in accordance with Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design – Part I: General rules.3.3 Construction inspection and control Construction inspection and control is essential to ensure future performance of this type of structure.Recommendations 4 Drainage requirements for the arch structure are entirely dependent on the location. 4. 1.1 Transportation and storage The supplier shall outline clearly the expected potential handling-induced damages of the precast segments. Non-uniform loading tends to occur or be more critical during the construction stage. Therefore drainage shall be provided in accordance with SHW Series 500 to suit the site requirements. All handling damages during transportation and storage shall be recorded in detail. There is limited experience in the use and performance of such structures in the UK. engineered and wellcompacted surfaces may be used for storage purposes. Any unexpected damage observed on the segment prior to installation shall be checked for structural integrity before it is allowed to be installed. 5 Monitoring Following construction. Intermediate construction stages during backfilling operation. Where appropriate. 34 . measurement of crown and base movements to ascertain overall performance of the structure compared with design prediction. adequate provision shall be incorporated in the long-term monitoring scheme to confirm the design behaviour of the arch structure. If this is needed. design checks shall be undertaken to confirm that the out-of-tolerance structure does not pose future performance problems. further monitoring may be required to confirm the performance of the structure during operation. The tolerance values specified shall be linked and checked with the permissible deformation limits and trigger criteria derived from the design. the designer should review the construction monitoring data to confirm that the precast arch structure has performed in accordance with the design intent.3). When there is any concern about the performance of the structure. Where monitoring during operation is required. If the structure is installed out of tolerance. Final installation stage when the structure is fully backfilled.4 Recommendations In accordance with EC7. 4. 4. Inspection of any fixings or fittings within the structure. This includes the following important stages during construction: Initial installation stage under structural dead weight. At the end of construction. the designer shall decide if longer-term monitoring of the arch structure is necessary (see Section 4.3. for unusual structures. Revisiting the design shall be undertaken under the Technical Approval procedures BD/02. detailed surveys of the internal profile of the structure shall be undertaken. records shall be maintained of the following: significant ground and groundwater features sequence of works quality of materials deviations from design as-built drawings results of measurements and of their interpretation observations of the environmental conditions unforeseen events.4 Maintenance provisions The following areas shall be covered during routine maintenance of the structure: Visual inspection for watertightness of the structure based on design and operation requirements. Detailed surveys of the internal profile of the structure at selected cross-sections along the structure are also recommended. Monitoring during operation is not generally required unless the designer recommends such work to be undertaken due to unexpected measurements during installation or unexplained structural behaviour being observed that warrants further investigation. progress of settlement until long-term conditions under working conditions. 35 .Recommendations 4 For structures installed in fine-grained soils. Monitoring shall cover the vertical movement of the crown and the horizontal and vertical movements of the two bases. The monitoring shall be referenced to a fixed datum to allow possible long-term monitoring and for comparison between different stages of the work. 1 Interactions between parties Interaction between the specialist contractor supplying the arch structure. 5. This needs careful management. Management of the interaction between parties early in the project clarifies the responsibilities of all parties and should reduce potential future misunderstanding and conflicts. Construction geometry and tolerance control. Risk management This section of the report covers risks specific to the use of precast arch structures. To minimise any handling damage a clear division of responsibility between the specialist contractor and the main contractor is needed with respect to the handling of segments delivered to site. Storage facility on site. Control of backfill and verification of material placed. which will be covered by any competent contractor.5 Risk management 5. with the contractor providing plant and labour to assist the specialist contractor in its installation work. This can only be properly controlled with the specialist contractor maintaining full-time site presence. This allows proper management of the installation process so that critical parameters or operations can be closely monitored on site. This needs clearer guidance from the designer on the assumptions made and any site verification requirements. especially the foundation soils. It is not intended to cover all aspects of risks on a construction site. the contractor on site and the client’s representative is essential to ensure successful installation of the arch structure. 5.2 Sensitivity of design Sensitivity of the structure to the design parameters shall be clearly quantified by the designer prior to the construction phase of the work. 36 . The following matters will need to be addressed for a successful installation to be achieved: Derivation of the design parameters. 3 Construction geometric control and tolerances This is a vital part of the construction process. where appropriate. Again. Such control allows the effect of any out-of-tolerance dimensions to be investigated in order to ascertain how it affects the structure. This allows identification of critical damage and. Recording of handling damages provides useful data to assess performance of the structure for serviceability criteria. Light fittings or fixings in the structure are also likely to be affected.5 Load–deflection serviceability criteria Precast arch structures are inherently very flexible. it is important to be able to call on the input of the designer during the construction phase to provide any necessary further design analysis when the structure performs differently to the design prediction. Controlling the geometry and construction tolerances within the preset limits ensures validity of the original design dimensions. This affects operation headroom. 37 .4 Verification of design during construction Adequate monitoring provision is needed in order to confirm the behaviour and performance of the structure under temporary construction loads. back-analysis can be undertaken to reassess the performance of the structure to confirm any unforeseen behaviour/ measurement is within the intended design limits. It is important to be able to call on the input of the designer during the construction phase to provide any necessary further design analysis when the structure is out of tolerance. Monitoring can also form part of the longer-term maintenance strategy for the structure. An understanding of their load– deflection characteristics is therefore important in order to determine whether the structure lies within its design serviceability criteria. Measurements made during installation allow site verification and. 5. 5. water¬tightness and aesthetics of the structure. corrective measures implemented to prevent future durability problems.Risk management 5 5. if at all. if needed. Detailed trigger criteria derived for the purpose of monitoring and verification during construction. Adequate sensitivity analyses. Any damage repair methodology. 6. Evidence of past experience of the casting facility/plant supplying the segments. Ensure supplier allows for adequate support of the designer during and post construction to evaluate adequacy of the as-built structure. especially at the joint. Outline all temporary design cases. Identify design coordinator to lead the design process. Design has allowed for stress concentration from construction tolerance provision. especially on backfill and stiffness parameters. Design has covered installation and working conditions. Identify responsibilities of all parties for construction stage. Provision of detailed construction sequence. Ensure supplier allows the cost of providing adequate site support for the whole duration of the project.6 Checklist 6. Any specific requirements relating to the use of the structure. Sufficient storage area in the plant is available. Type of marking used to identify individual segments and orientation of storage and transportation. List of potential handling damages. Identify design responsibility of the structure. Adequate considerations on the approach of site verification for design assumptions used. 6.3 Segment casting All relevant certificates and evidence to support the quality of materials used to cast the segment. Dimension checks of the moulds. Provisions for lifting points.1 Procurement stage Evidence of past experience of the construction of such structures. 38 . Identify potential non-symmetrical geometry and load conditions. Checklist It is assumed that Technical Approval procedures are required for any construction site.2 Design Detailed design methodology. 6. Source of input parameters and design assumptions made. The following is a list of checks recommended for the precast arch structure at different stages of the construction process. 4 Delivery List of potential handling damages. adequate provision of designer input to such works. Geometry checks prior to delivery. Adequate provision for the designer to evaluate any out-of-tolerance construction. Undertake monitoring during construction.1 Section 1: prior to construction Preconstruction workshop to give the designer/supplier the opportunity to explain to responsible individuals from all parties the critical aspects of the construction and performance of such structures. e. 39 .6.g. 6.5 Site storage Agreement between supplier and contractor on storage facilities. Complete all geometry checks of prepared foundation system. the designer to make further design assessments to explain the difference and to quantify the effects on the structure. Identify individuals from all parties responsible for construction stage. Any damage repair methodology.2 Section 2: during construction Recording of as-built details.6. Damage inspection before and after delivery. 6. Review as-built details of the contact at the joint. for all stages of the construction phase. using pro forma. Review handling damages prior to backfilling. Concise installation procedure. Damage inspection upon delivery to site.checklist 6 6. Adequate storage facilities. If installation is out of tolerance. 6. Sufficient and adequate storage area on site. Outline monitoring strategy. the designer to confirm with supporting design documents that the effect on the structure is not problematic. Agreement of construction sequence to be adopted between the designer and the contractor. 6. If monitored performance does not follow the design prediction. Identify the specialist advisor on site during installation. Technical Approval procedure shall be revisited if the installation is out of tolerance. If monitoring is necessary.6 Construction The checklist can be divided into two sections: the first section deals with checks prior to the construction activities and the second section involves checks during installation/ construction of the arch. Confirmation of adequacy of foundation formation prior to installation of the foundation system. Vol 1. Specification for the manufacturing and installation of Matiere Precast concrete structures. ABM design and build technical note (design philosophy). Matiere structures construction guide. 1999.uk BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. London. HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY. TRL. 74/6. Analysis of buried arch structures. Seismic analysis of buried arch structures. 2004.highways. 2004. London. JENKINS. 243–252. 2002. HMSO. 2000. ABM. 2006. Internal documents provided by ABM ABM. A review of arched systems for buried structures. 1988. Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. BRITISH STANDARD INSTITUTION. and JENKINS D. Geotechnical design. 2006. Project Report PR/CE/111/99. H. Geotechnical Engineering for Transportation Projects. Conference Proceedings of Concrete Institute of Australia Biannual Conference. performance versus prediction. Matiere precast concrete arch structure – AIP model document. HMSO. Techspan construction manual and quality control manual. 2002. 1990. composite and concrete bridges. New Zealand. Matiere patented structures – foundation of structures. 2005. D. Matiere patented structures – lateral backfills.Bibliography Bibliography HUTCHINSON. Technical specifications for TechSpanTM precast arch system. Application and design of segmental precast arches. TECHSPAN. London (Also available from the Highways Agency website www. D. Auckland. BS EN 1997-1 Eurocode 7.co. 1998. TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY. Non-linear analysis of buried arch structures. Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works. JENKINS. A. ASCE Special Publication. Greater Bargoed Community Regeneration Scheme – Railway Bridge SWM2 AIP. Internal documents provided by RECo REINFORCED EARTH COMPANY. 1988. Specification for Highway Works. Auckland. WOOD J. Adelaide. TECHSPAN. A. A new method for the construction of buried structures – the “Matiere method”. 2002 Internal documents provided by BEBO BEBO System – Instructions. Technical approval of highway and associated structures by Reinforced Earth Company. RECo. BSI. BSI. A. 40 . TechSpan. Guidance regarding the use of BS8500 for the Design and Construction of Structures using Concrete. D. Steel. Proceedings of Australasian Structural Engineering Conference (ASEC). pp. Interim Advice Note No. BS5400. Proceedings of Geo-Trans 2004. 1997. TechSpan. own.org. Fax: +44 (0)1276 38899 e-mail:
[email protected] BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT GROUP The Concrete Bridge Development Group aims to promote excellence in the design. the Concrete Bridge Development Group acts as a catalyst for the best in concrete bridge design.org. Membership of the Concrete Bridge Development Group is open to those who have an interest in promoting and enhancing the concrete bridge industry. . newsletters. maintain and manage concrete bridges Individual consultants By being representative of the whole industry. contractors.cbdg. construction.uk website www. study visits and publications.org. The Group provides an excellent vehicle for the industry to co-ordinate an effective approach and to enhance the use of concrete. task groups. A major programme of bridge assessment. Integral bridges Technical Guide 1 A report of a study visit in August 1997 by a CBDG delegation to North America. PUBLICATIONS FROM THE CONCRETE BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT GROUP An Introduction to Concrete Bridges A publication dedicated to undergraduates and young engineers (2006) A cement and concrete industry publication For further details please contact: The Concrete Bridge Development Group Riverside House 4 Meadows Business Park Station Approach Blackwater Camberley Surrey GU17 9AB UK Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777. With a membership that includes all sectors involved in the concrete bridge industry –bridge owners and managers. including free download.org. maintenance and management. strengthening and widening is already underway to accommodate European standards and the increasing pressures on the UK road network. written by Philip Bamforth (2006) CCIP-015 Guidance on the Assessment of Concrete Bridges Technical Guide 9 A Task Group report (2007) CCIP-024 Enhancing the Capacity of Concrete Bridges Technical Guide 10 A Task Group report (2008) CCIP-036 Modular Precast Concrete Bridges Technical Guide 11 A state-of-the-art report (2008) CCIP-028 Precast Concrete Arch Structures Technical Guide 12 A state-of-the-art report (2009) CCIP-035 You can buy the above publications from the Concrete Bookshop at www. construction and management of concrete bridges.uk for further publications.cbdg.uk. construction and management Promote an integrated approach and encourage development of innovative ideas and concepts Promote best practice in design and construction through education. Five main types of membership are available: Group membership for industry organisations and associations Corporate membership for contractors. the Concrete Bridge Development Group aims to: Address the challenge of the national bridge programme Provide a focus for all those involved in concrete bridge design.concrete. sponsored by DTI (1997) Guide to testing and monitoring of durability of concrete structures Technical Guide 2 A practical guide for bridge owners and designers (2002) The use of fibre composites in concrete bridges Technical Guide 3 A state-of-the-art review of the use of fibre composites (2000) The aesthetics of concrete bridges Technical Guide 4 A technical guide dealing with the appearance and aesthetics of concrete bridges (2001) Fast construction of concrete bridges Technical Guide 5 The report of a Concrete Bridge Development Group Working Party (2005) High strength concrete in bridge construction Technical Guide 6 A state-of-the-art report (2005) CCIP-002 Self-compacting concrete in bridge construction Technical Guide 7 Written by Peter JM Bartos (2005) CCIP-003 Guide to the Use of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete in bridges Technical Guide 8 A state-of-the-art report. training and information dissemination Make representations on national and international codes and standards Identify future research and development needs Maximise opportunities to develop the wider and better use of concrete. designers and suppliers– the Group acts as a forum for debate and the exchange of new ideas. consultants.uk and please visit www. Through an active programme of events and seminars. suppliers and specialist service companies Associate membership for academic organisations Bridge owners for all organisations that commission. Camberley. This versatility demonstrates the adaptability of arch span structures. It is not intended to be a detailed design guide but to provide guidance for experienced structural engineers and advisers on the use of such structures.cbdg. of which there are some 66 throughout the UK and Ireland.Precast Concrete Arch Structures: A state-of-the-art report This report on the use of precast concrete arch structures provides guidance on good practice based on the experience of the industry suppliers. These structures have spans in the range 3-20m and a length of 2. Surrey. 4 Meadows Business Park. Blackwater.5-361m. The document is also intended to enable the Highways Agency to continue benefiting from appropriate use of such structures.org.uk . a structural form used effectively in many locations around the world. Station Approach. CCIP-035 Published December 2009 ISBN 978-1-904482-58-1 © Concrete Bridge Development Group Riverside House. GU17 9AB Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 Fax: +44 (0)1276 38899 www.