Increasing the Load Capacity of Major Bridges

Peter G. BUCKLAND
Principal
Buckland & Taylor Ltd.
North Vancouver, Canada
pbuckland @b-t .com

Peter G. Buckland received his
engineering degree from the
University of Cambridge in
1960. After five years with a
steel fabricator and seven more
with consultants, he co-founded
Buckland & Taylor Ltd. in
1972.

Darryl D. MATSON
Vice-President
Buckland & Taylor Ltd.
North Vancouver, Canada
dmatson @ b-t.com

Darryl D. Matson received his
B.A.Sc. in 1987 and his M.A.Sc.
in 1989, both from the
University of British Columbia.
He joined Buckland & Taylor
Ltd. in 1989 and became Vice-
President in 2001.


Summary
By the use of examples from the Authors experience, various methods are shown of increasing the
load capacity of major bridges, while keeping traffic flowing all or most of the time. These
methods include refined calculations of loads and load factors, prestressing the hangers of a
suspension bridge, altering load paths, converting a suspension bridge into a cable-stayed bridge,
replacing the suspended structure of a suspension bridge, altering the steel grade of a suspension
bridge, and making the roadway deck composite with the main structure.
Keywords: bridge; existing; major; suspension; cable-stayed; load; upgrading.
1. Introduction
As traffic loads increase, more lanes of traffic are required, and bridges deteriorate, the bridge
engineer is faced with the dilemma of how to increase the capacity of bridges safely and
economically. Adding strength to a bridge at the design stage is not normally problematic, but once
the bridge is built a small increase in capacity can incur a large cost. The larger the bridge, the
more this is so.
A key element is the need to keep traffic flowing during any alterations. This is not just a matter of
traffic flow: it also introduces the question of appropriate structural safety when the public is using
the bridge during reconstruction, given that bridge failures are disproportionately more common
during construction, and tight deadlines for the contractor are a prerequisite.
2. Guidelines
Buckland [1] has given guidelines or principles to be applied when increasing the load capacity of
suspension bridges. In general, these same guidelines apply to most bridges, and examples of this
are given herein. The guidelines can be summarized as follows:
determine as accurately as possible the true stress condition of the bridge, such as by the survey-
and-analysis method, in which a survey of the bridge geometry is compared to a computer
model, and any discrepancies are explained and accounted for;
determine the dead and live loads as accurately as possible;
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
Fig. 1 Seaway International Bridge
Fig. 2 Pelly River Bridge
establish appropriate load and resistance factors using probabilistic methods, precedence and
good sense;
keep the weight of any new material as light as possible, if necessary discarding old heavy
material and substituting lighter material;
look for ways of altering load paths or otherwise minimizing the amount of strengthening
required;
remember that the work must often be done during short occupancies - constructibility is key to
success;
solve first for gravity loads, but design to enhance, not diminish, the behaviour of the bridge in
wind and earthquakes;
take the opportunity to improve maintainability;
as a last step, switch on the computer - the analysis can be sophisticated and complicated, but it
must serve the design, not drive it.
3. Examples
The following examples illustrate some of the guidelines listed in Section 2. Not all of the
examples are of large bridges, but those that are not can be considered as prototypes for larger
bridges.
3.1 Seaway International Bridge, Cornwall, Canada
Following a health study by the
analysis-and-survey method, it was
determined that stiffening trusses of
the bridge (Fig.1) would be seriously
overloaded by modern traffic
loading. The solution was to replace
the overstressed chord members of
the stiffening trusses with steel
members of the same size but of a
higher strength steel. Because the
stiffness of the system did not
change, the load sharing between the cables and the stiffening trusses also did not change, and the
higher strength steel was able to take the applied loads without overstress.
3.2 Pelly River Bridge at Faro, Yukon, Canada
The Pelly River Bridge at Faro (Fig.2)
was required to carry heavier loads in
order to make transport from a nearby
mine more economical. Some main truss
members required strengthening, which
was not too difficult, but conventional
engineering would have also required that
all the stringers (longitudinal beams
supporting the open grating steel deck)
would also need to be strengthened. It
would have been almost impossible to
strengthen the existing stringers, and
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
Fig. 3 Port Mann Bridge, general view


Fig. 4 Cross-section, Port Mann Bridge Approaches
showing (above) the original cross-section, and
(below) the cross-section with deck extensions
supported on small beams and brackets, with lateral
bracing and diaphragms to resist torsion.
replacing them would be equally difficult as a heavy truck using the entire bridge width crossed the
bridge every 15 minutes 24 hours per day.
The solution was to invoke the new section of the Canadian Bridge Code Evaluation of Existing
Bridges (then in draft) that sets load factors based on a number of criteria, including how well the
loads are known, and the consequences of a failure should it occur. In this case the loads were very
well known, because it was almost impossible to overfill an ore truck. Thus, failure of a
compression chord of the truss, for example, would be sudden and catastrophic, and would demand
a large load factor. However, failure of a stringer by bending would be ductile, its load would be
shared to its adjacent stringers, and failure would not be catastrophic; therefore, it demanded a
lower load factor, and expensive strengthening was avoided.
3.3 Port Mann Bridge, Vancouver, Canada
The Port Mann Bridge (Fig. 3), opened to
four lanes of traffic in 1963, carries the
8,000 km long Trans-Canada Highway
over the Fraser River. By the twenty-first
century traffic had increased to the point
that another lane was required. The fifth
lane was installed by widening the
concrete deck of the approach viaducts,
and by removing access walkways on the
arch spans, and trimming off outstanding
flanges of the arch ribs to make more
room (and reinforcing them). The extra
capacity was obtained on the approaches
by adding lateral bracing to the bottom
flanges of the steel girders to resist
eccentric loading by torsion instead of by
bending (Fig 4). Extra capacity was
gained on the arch spans by using current
limit states design rules, including the
evaluation load factors described in 3.2.
Because dead load is dominant and has a
low load factor, there was capacity to take
the extra factored live load.
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
Fig. 6 Rock Creek Canyon Bridge

Fig. 5 Hagwilget Bridge
3.4 Hagwilget Bridge, BC, Canada
This small, but spectacular, single-lane
bridge (Fig. 5) was designed in 1928 to
carry single 13.5 t trucks. It was
required to increase its capacity to two
55 t trucks. This was accomplished,
without strengthening, by several
methods [2]. First, it was determined by
the survey-and-analysis method that the
cables, towers and anchorages would be
able to support the increased load. The
cables were unwrapped in places where
damage was most expected.
Fortunately, although they appeared to be ungalvanized, they were in excellent condition. The two
main problems were: uneven loads in the hangers, and the inability of the stiffening trusses to take
the increased loads. The former was solved by adjusting hanger lengths, the latter by two methods.
The first was to make the open grating deck composite with the top chords of the stiffening trusses,
which reduced stresses in both the top chords and the lateral bracing system. This was made easier
by the need to replace the deck in any case. The second was to further adjust the hangers so that the
trusses were given an upward, hogging moment under dead load. When the traffic load is applied,
the trusses first return to zero stress, and then are stressed in sagging moment. The bending moment
diagram is complex, and bi-modal along the span, but suitable tuning the technique worked.
The important feature of the renovation is that the load capacity of the bridge was significantly
increased without strengthening.
3.5 Rock Creek Canyon Bridge,
BC, Canada
Rock Creek Canyon Bridge (Fig. 6) is
a two-lane steel deck-truss bridge,
286 m long over a 90 m deep canyon,
with a concrete deck supported by
steel stringers spanning between
transverse floorbeams. It was designed
to AASHTO HS 20 loading. In the
early 1990s it was required to widen
the bridge to 10 m between curbs and
increase the capacity to CS-600
loading, while keeping at least one
lane open to traffic. To minimize the amount of strengthening required to carry a thicker, wider
deck with heavier (and more eccentric) traffic, the new deck was made composite with the main
trusses. This added capacity to the top chords, and increased the moment arm to reduce demand on
the bottom chords.
The deck replacement project and upgrading (including seismic improvement and painting), was
completed in 1992 - on time, under budget, and for about half the cost of a new bridge.
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
Fig. 8 Lions Gate Bridge, general elevation
Fig. 7 Elevation, Belgo Bridge: (a) original suspension
bridge, (b) bridge party supported by suspension system,
and partly by cable-stayed system, (c) renovated bridge in
cable-stayed configuration.
3.6 Belgo Log Conveyor Bridge, QC, Canada.
This small suspension bridge, with a main span of 183 m (600 ft.) carries only logs on a conveyor.
Using the survey-and-analysis technique, it was found that for a variety of reasons [3], some
members of the tower were overstressed by a factor of up to 2.75.
The bridge was immediately secured by applying a permanent upward force at the centre of the
main span, which relieved the stresses in the most affected members by about 10%. They were still
overstressed by any known code or theory, but they were at least 10% short of failure.
The long-term solution was to erect
a new tower near, but not at, mid-
span, and progressively turn the
bridge into a cable-stayed
configuration (Fig. 7). An interesting
challenge was that the bridge had to
survive a Qubec summer and
winter, with a temperature variation
of about 70
o
C (125
o
F) in the half-
completed state shown in Fig 6b. A
suspension bridge rises and falls
with changes of temperature far
more than a cable-stayed bridge
does, so on a cold day the
suspension structure wanted to lift
the new cable-stayed components,
which it did not have the capacity to
support; and on a hot day the
suspension structure wanted to drop,
inducing high shears at the end of
the cable-stayed structure. Designing
the structure to accommodate these
effects added considerable interest.
So far as is known this was the first full conversion of a suspension bridge to a cable-stayed bridge,
but this prototype has shown that with care the technique can be applied to larger spans.
Following this success, plans were prepared to convert the Lions Gate Bridge in Vancouver, with a
main span of 472 m, from a three-lane suspension bridge to a four- (or five- or six-) lane cable-
stayed bridge. In the end, it was decided to keep the Lions Gate Bridge as a three-lane structure,
but the analysis had shown that the scheme was viable for a larger suspension bridge.
3.7 Lions Gate Bridge, Vancouver, Canada
3.7.1 The Lions Gate Approach Viaduct
The Lions Gate Bridge in
Vancouver (Fig. 8) consists of a
three span suspension bridge and a
670 m long approach viaduct on the
north end. The bridge was opened
to traffic in 1938. The approach
viaduct had a 178 mm thick
reinforced concrete deck supported
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.

Fig. 9 Lions Gate Viaduct, original cross-section
Fig. 10 Lions Gate north viaduct, present cross-
section
Fig. 12 Lions Gate Bridge, open to daytime traffic
while partially completed.
on transverse crossbeams that rested on two steel plate girders, as shown in Fig. 9. However, the
deck had only 22 mm of concrete cover over the top reinforcing steel, and no wearing surface, and
it succumbed to the effects of de-icing salts that were applied after 1955.
By 1972, corrosion of reinforcing steel
was spalling the concrete, and 1,000
pot-holes were being repaired each
year. The problem was how to replace
the three-lane deck while maintaining
traffic of 60,000 vehicles per day. A
temporary bridge over the work area
would be too heavy, have unacceptable
grades, and provide very restricted
access.
In 1975, the concrete deck of the Lions
Gate Approach Viaduct was replaced
by a wider, lighter, steel orthotropic
deck during six-hour night-time
closures of the bridge.
The solution adopted in 1975 was to
close the bridge entirely to traffic from
23:30 to 06:00, remove a 12 m
transverse strip of concrete deck,
complete with the crossbeams
supporting it, and replace it with a
wider, but lighter, orthotropic steel
deck (Fig 10), ready for traffic in the morning. The traffic lanes were widened, as were the
sidewalks, a barrier was placed between traffic and pedestrians, drains were installed, and 38 mm of
epoxy asphalt was applied. The new deck is composite with the trusses for live load, which adds
considerably to the ultimate capacity. The technique was a great success, and has since been
adopted on other bridges, including George Washington, Golden Gate, Throgs Neck, and
Champlain Bridges.
Lessons learned, which were invaluable for the major work on the suspended spans to come later,
included the need for a high level of planning and management by both engineer and contractor,
and a design that was tolerant of errors: there was no time for correction in the middle of the night.
The contractor was required to have stand-by equipment in case of breakdown. Fifty-five panels
were installed, and the bridge opened on time every morning except for an hours delay on the first
and last pieces the most difficult.
3.7.2 The Lions Gate Bridge
suspended spans.
The Lions Gate Bridge (spans 187-
472-187m) was opened in 1938 as a
two-lane bridge, but by the 1960s it
was carrying three lanes of dense
traffic. Eventually, in 2000 and 2001
the entire suspended structure was
replaced (Fig. 11) during 10-hour night-
time closures (and a few weekends)
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
Fig. 12 Lions Gate Bridge, new deck piece being lifted
without interruption of daytime commuter traffic (Fig. 12). The project has been well reported
elsewhere [4, 5, 6, 7], and exemplifies all of the principles presented earlier in this paper.
The survey-and-analysis method
was developed on this bridge. It
showed that, in addition to
settlement of one tower, and an
increase in dead load over the
years, both of which were
known, the main cables had
stretched, which was both
unknown and unexpected. Also,
the cables had slipped slightly
through the cable bent saddles.
Thus, the stresses were
accurately determined, and in
some cases found to be
unacceptably high.
Early concern about traffic loading prompted a study of long-span bridge loading, the first of its
kind, based on a probabilistic approach, that later influenced both the American AASHTO-
LRFD and Canadian bridge design codes.
Project-specific load and resistance factors were derived, based, in part, on variability of loads
found during the study.
In order to save weight, while making the bridge almost 50% wider and adding paving where
none had been before, the stiffening trusses were replaced with new, lighter, tubular members,
and the orthotropic steel deck was made to act compositely with the trusses as well as with the
stiffening troughs and floorbeams.
To relieve high bending stresses in the north cable-bent caused by cable stretch and slippage,
instead of attempting to strengthen, the cable-bent legs were changed from fixed to pinned
at their bases.
A method of erection was fundamental to the replacement scheme and was worked out in
considerable detail during the design, so that bidders could understand what would be needed
for replacement during 10-hour closures.
While improving the traffic capacity of the bridge, the aerodynamic stability and seismic
performance were both enhanced at little extra costs.
Although the bridge is 47% wider, the amount of steel to be painted is only about half what it
had been, and almost entirely under the roadway deck, protected from salt spray.
Some pioneering computer programs were written and used for this project, but the fundamental
principles of the renovation design came from creative thought.
4. Conclusions
Examples have been given of the use of the guidelines outlined in Section 2 to increase the capacity
of seven bridges of different types and using various methods. In all cases, traffic was kept running
except for one lane closures on Seaway, Port Mann and Rock Creek Bridges, and short full night-
time closures of Hagwilget and Lions Gate Bridges.
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.
5. References
[1] BUCKLAND, P.G., Increasing the load capacity of suspension bridges, Journal of Bridge
Engineering, Amer. Soc. Civ. Eng., Vol. 8, No. 5. 2003, pp 288-296.
[2] BUCKLAND, P.G., MEDILEK, G.C. and MATSON, D.D., Hagwilget suspension bridge:
increasing capacity without strengthening, Proc. Bridge Management 3, Guildford, UK, 106. E
& FN Spon, London, UK, 1996, pp 867-874.
[3] BUCKLAND, P.G. and MORGENSTERN, B.D., Conversion of a suspension bridge into a
cable-stayed bridge, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1991, pp 273-281
[4] BUCKLAND, P.G., The Lions Gate Bridge investigation, Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1981, pp 241256.
[5] BUCKLAND, P.G., The Lions Gate Bridge renovation, Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1981, pp 484-508.
[6] BUCKLAND, P.G., Lions Gate: contributions to suspension bridge engineering, The
Structural Engineer, I. Struct. E., 81, No. 10, 2003, pp 26-30.
[7] BUCKLAND, P.G. & MATSON, D.D., The reconstructed Lions Gate suspension bridge,
Vancouver, Bridge Engineering, Proc. Inst. Civil Eng., BE3, 2003, pp125-133.
IABSE, Maintenance and Rehabilitation of Large Infrastructure Projects, Bridges and Tunnels, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2006 May 15-17.