A cement and concrete industry publication

Modular Precast Concrete

Bridges
A state-of-the-art report
Technical Guide No. 11

Acknowledgements
The Concrete Bridge Development Group is particularly pleased to acknowledge the work of Simon Bourne
of Benaim in preparing this report and to Benaim for providing photographs and diagrams for inclusion in
this publication:
CBDG acknowledges nancial support from The Concrete Centre 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-028
Published December 2008
ISBN 978-1-904482-52-9
Concrete Bridge Development Group
Order reference: CBDG/TG11
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 Holbrooks Printers Ltd, Portsmouth, UK

Modular precast concrete bridges

Contents
List of gures
List of tables
Executive summary
1. Introduction
2. Market assessment
3. Modular precast concrete bridge
3.1 Highway bridge
3.2 Railway bridge
4. Structural details
4.1 Span variations
4.2 Width variations
4.3 Curvature
4.4 Skew
5. Construction options
5.1 Span lift construction
5.2 Incremental launching
5.3 Self-propelled modular transporters
5.4 Gantry
6. Construction programme and costs
6.1 Capital investment requirements
6.2 Case study 1: Three-span highway overbridge
6.3 Case study 2: Single-span highway overbridge
7. Conclusions
References
Appendix A. Scheme drawings
Appendix B. Construction programmes

2
2
3
5
6
8
8
10
12
12
13
14
14
15
15
17
18
19
21
21
22
25
28
30
31
37

List of gures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10

Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15
Figure 16
Figure 17
Figure 18
Figure 19
Figure 20

Completed modular precast bridge.

Typical mid-span section through modular highway bridge.
Typical longitudinal section through modular highway bridge.
Typical mid-span section through 27 m-span modular railway bridge.
Typical sections for varying span requirements.
Typical span-to-depth ratios for proposed system.
Typical sections for varying width requirements.
A51 Grenoble overbridge.
Installation of A51 Grenoble overbridge.
Span lift construction sequence.
(a) Installation of rst span; (b) installation of nal span.
Incremental launching construction sequence.
(a) Launching of rst rib; (b) completed launch of second rib.
Installation of Badhoevedorp Bridge.
Lavender Road Bridge, Kent.
Gantry system in use on Stanstead Abbotts Bypass.
Three-span highway overbridge layout adopted for Case Study 1.
Section through modular precast bridge.
Section through steel-composite bridge.
Single-span highway overbridge layout adopted for Case Study 2.
Section through modular precast bridge.
Section through steel-composite bridge.

Figure A1
Figure A2
Figure A3
Figure A4
Figure A5
Figure A6
Figure B1
Figure B2

Three-span option (202520 m) general arrangement.

Three-span option (202520 m) typical details.
Three-span option (354535 m) general arrangement.
Typical details of bridge system 1.
Typical details of bridge system 2.
Three-span option (202520 m) Span lift construction.
Case Study 1 three-span layout (202520 m).
Case Study 2 single-span layout (45 m).

Figure 11

List of tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6

Typical features of steel-composite overbridge structures.

Typical features of precast concrete beam overbridge structures.
Details of modular precast bridge system.
Capital investment costs for modular bridge system.
Cost summary for three-span overbridge.
Cost summary for single-span overbridge.

Executive summary
The bridge market in the UK is set to grow steadily over the next ve to ten years due in
part to the major improvements to the highways network. This publication outlines the
development of a new modular precast concrete bridge system, which offers a real alternative to steel-composite construction for medium-span bridges. It is considered that
this modular precast concrete bridge system has the potential to place concrete as the
preferred option for medium-span (1550 m) bridges in the UK. The system combines the
best features of steel-composite, precast concrete, and in-situ concrete into a solution that
can deliver the highest value at the majority of bridge locations. The system makes use of
concrete shell units that are precast off site and builds upon the recent, successful and
innovative use of segmental and incremental launching technology used on two projects
in Ireland, namely the Taney Road Bridge for Graham Construction and the River Shannon
Bridge for Irishenco Construction.
The system benets from relatively light, 2.5 m long, precast concrete shell units that can
be easily transported to site for assembly. Permanent prestressing cables are then placed
and are covered by in-situ concrete to provide additional composite action as well as the
required protection. The focus on precast concrete elements and off-site construction also
ensures that a high-quality product is constructed within a safe environment. A further
benet is that the construction methodology can be varied to suit specic bridge sites and
demands of the project programme. The exibility of the system is such that it can enable
the use of incremental launching, lifting using mobile cranes, lifting using transporters and
erection using a temporary gantry. This allows the contractor scope to select the construction
option that most suits the location and complexities of the project.
The modular system is shown to be suitable for a wide range of typical highway bridge
layouts. Varying span lengths, carriageway widths, horizontal and vertical curvatures, and
skew can be readily accommodated by the match-cast shell units. The system provides an
elegant solution with the benet of being relatively maintenance-free. Two typical highway
overbridge layouts are shown, which allow the construction costs and programmes of the
modular precast to be compared with steel-composite alternatives. The case studies used
are a three-span structure with spans of 202520 m and a single 45 m span. In both cases
the modular precast concrete system has been shown to offer signicant cost and/or
programme savings over a steel-composite alternative.
The modular precast concrete system only requires an initial capital investment of less
than 250k. Initial studies indicate that this can be nanced over ve to ten bridges which,
given the 80 bridges built per annum in the UK, suggests a viable return in only two to
three years.
The system places concrete as the future for medium-span bridges by offering notable
benets over alternative solutions, namely safer, faster, higher quality, less trafc disruption,
less maintenance, more sustainable, more affordable, more buildable, more elegant and
higher value.

Introduction 1

1. Introduction
A review of the highway market in the UK indicates that growth will be strong over the next
ten years. Currently in the UK there is greater use of steel-composite construction but this
approach is not generally reected elsewhere in the world. This technical guide describes
the development of a modular precast bridge system that has the potential to re-establish
concrete as the preferred option for medium-span bridges, in the range 1550 m spans.
The system combines the best features of steel-composite, precast beam, in-situ and
segmental schemes into a solution that can deliver the highest value at the majority of
bridge locations.
This guide gives an overview of the new system, which has been developed by Benaim
following the recent, successful and innovative use of segmental technology on two
alternative design projects in the Republic of Ireland, namely the Taney Road Bridge for
Graham Construction and the River Shannon Bridge for Irishenco Construction. Both
projects exhibited the ease of construction while also reducing cost and programme time.
Experience suggests that the innovations developed from these bespoke schemes have
the possibility to reduce the current steel-composite dominance on highway bridges in
the UK.

2 Market assessment

2. Market assessment
In the years immediately following the publication of the Department for Transports Tenyear plan in 2000(1), investment in the highway sector was sluggish. More recently, however,
funding has returned to the highway sector, illustrated by an increase in spending by the
Highways Agency in Major improvements in the strategic road network(2) and conrmed by
the publication of The future of transport: A network for 2030(3) by the Department for
Transport in 2004. Bridge structures form an important element in the majority of highway
schemes, and hence it is expected that the bridge market will increase in line with this
overall investment.
The responsibility for the construction of highway bridges in the UK lies with the Highways
Agency (HA), local and regional authorities and private developers. Determining the total
number of typical bridges constructed in any given year is a difcult task due to the lack
of a central database of information. Two different approaches were adopted to allow a
best estimate. First, the HA website and the Glenigan construction information database
(the latter compiled for local/regional authorities and private developers) were used to
estimate the number of bridges constructed, based on data from recent years. The other
method used the HAs business plan for expenditure on major improvements to the network
for 2006/07 assuming that one bridge is built for every 10 million spent.
The results from these studies indicated that, on average, around 80 typical bridges per year
are built in the UK. A typical bridge, for the purposes of this Guide, carries about 1000 m2
of deck area.
Concrete is the material of choice for the majority of short-span bridges. However, the
use of precast concrete beams in medium-span structures has declined in recent years
with steel-composite construction controlling this portion of the market. The oftenperceived advantages and disadvantages associated with steel-composite and precast
concrete bridge types are presented in Tables 1 and 2 respectively.
Table 1
Typical features of steel-composite overbridge
structures.

Advantages
Low risk

Work at height

Fast

Aesthetics

Good quality

Maintenance

Buildability

Material economy

Good trafc management

Labour economy
Low technology

Disadvantages

Market assessment 2

Table 2
Typical features of precast concrete beam
overbridge structures.

Advantages

Disadvantages

Low risk

Work at height

Good quality

Aesthetics

Buildability

Less efcient

Good trafc management

Durability
Sustainability
Labour economy
Low technology

A comparison of the two construction types would suggest that they are similar, but with
precast beams offering a better overall solution than steel-composite due to environmental
sustainability and whole-life durability.
It is believed that this new modular precast concrete bridge system with its well-engineered
solutions, enhanced value, lower maintenance and improved aesthetics will offer a real
alternative to steel-composite construction. The cost and programme time of the system
are very competitive when compared with steel-composite solutions (see Chapter 6). The
system also offers the potential to form a pleasing, sustainable solution that will benet
clients and customers, both over the life of the bridges and through their delivery in a safe
and efcient manner.

3 Modular precast concrete bridge

3. Modular precast concrete bridge

The modular precast system outlined in this publication consists of relatively light, 2.5 m
long, precast shell units that are precast off site and can be easily transported. On site, the
units are assembled, stressed together and in-situ concrete placed. The combined units
are positioned using launching or lifting technology, dependent on the site characteristics.
Figure 1 shows a completed three-span modular precast bridge.
Figure 1
Completed modular precast bridge.

3.1 Highway bridge

Figures 2 and 3 show typical sections through the modular bridge. Where the bridge is
constructed using the Span lift method (see Chapter 5), the wall thickness of the precast
unit is reduced in order to minimise the weight to be lifted.

Figure 2
Typical mid-span section through
modular highway bridge.

3650 carriageway

2100 footway

3650 carriageway

2100 footway

Precast edge unit

6 No. 19/15 mm
profile cables

200

1500

.
100

.
2 No. 19/15 mm
launch cables

CL

200
Temporary prestressing bars
2 No. 32 Dia.
Precast concrete shell
approx. 2500 long

1000

1500
250

1000
250

1500

In-situ infill concrete

Modular precast concrete bridge 3

Figure 3

2500 typical uit

Typical longitudinal section

through modular highway bridge.

2000 to 3000 range

C
L

Launch cable
ducts

1500 typical

C
L

400
Precast unit

Diaphragm

In-situ infill

Profiled cable
ducts

Glued, match-cast or
25-50 thick grouted/
concrete joint

The system is broken down into its constituent components and explained in detail in
Table 3. Reference should also be made to the illustrative drawings given in Figures A1A6
of Appendix A.
Table 3
Details of modular precast bridge system.

System component

Advantage

Precast, segmental shell units formed as a single rib

and top slab

Reduces the required mould technology normally

associated with box forms
High-quality components constructed off site

Units that are around 5 m wide and 2.5 m long

Easily transported to site (1215 t each)

Units that can be varied in width (46 m)

Variety of road widths catered for (440 m)

Units that can be varied in depth (13 m)

Variety of spans catered for (1250 m)

Units that can be varied in length (23 m)

Variety of bridge lengths catered for (up to 150 m)

Units that can be match-cast and glued with epoxy

resin

Easily assembled on site

Vertical and horizontal curvature easily accommodated
High-quality joint between adjacent shells

Units that can be positioned using a number of

methods, i.e. incremental launching, Span lift,
transporter or gantry

Construction methods that can be adopted to suit

site characteristics and programme requirements

Shell units that are then inlled with in-situ concrete,

which houses all the internal prestressing cables

Provides continuous ducts and protection to the

cables (in accordance with Concrete Society TR47,
Durable post-tensioned concrete bridges(4))

A deck that is then prestressed internally from end to

end with proled cables that carry all the load effects

Efcient use of structural materials

A deck that can be made fully integral with bankseat Reduces future maintenance costs by eliminating all
abutments and fully monolithic with intermediate piers bearings and expansion joints

The use of the precast segmental process allows high-quality, accurate and factoryproduced units to be created in a safe and efcient manner. The use of precast shell units
also allows the in-situ inll concrete to be poured in small bays, thus eliminating most
issues associated with early-age thermal and restraint effects. In addition the use of the
shell units eliminates the complex technology needed for box moulds.

3 Modular precast concrete bridge

The use of the launching or lifting processes allows safe and easy construction, minimising
disruption to trafc and considerably reducing the amount of work at height over the road,
which can generally be kept open throughout; when closures are required, they are short and
compact. The deck can be fully aligned and formed before the launch or the lift, enhancing
the speed and quality of construction.
The modular system can cater for a variety of deck congurations as detailed in Chapter 4.
In addition, the construction methodology can be varied to suit the site characteristics and
project requirements. This is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 5.
Chapter 6 looks at the cost and programme implications for two typical bridge layouts. On
both counts the proposed modular system is shown to be very competitive compared with
a steel-composite solution.

3.2 Railway bridge

Figure 4 shows how the modular bridge system can be adopted to suit the UK railway
environment. The main longitudinal ribs are located to the side, thus permitting a shallow
construction depth.

Figure 4
Typical mid-span section through 27 m-span
modular railway bridge.

Structure gauge
at zero cant

In-situ stitch

In-situ infill

Approx. 2500 long

precast unit

The characteristics and benets of the system are similar to those of the highway bridge
option, i.e. a buildable and economic structure with a clean aesthetic and simple details,
which is robust to impact, and has low maintenance and enhanced safety through its offsite and off-line construction. The construction methodology can also be varied to suit
specic bridge sites and demands of the project programme.

3.2.1 Medium-span bridges

10

There are a number of construction options available, which are discussed further in
Chapter 5. Those of particular merit for medium-span (1540 m) modular railway bridge
structures are as follows:

Modular precast concrete bridge 3

Launched method The deck is built, as a kit of parts, off-line from the railway, and from

the road over which it will cross. From this off-line platform, it is assembled, stitched
and prestressed, and then launched in its complete form over the roadway to a position
alongside the existing bridge, where it becomes supported on slide tracks. From here,
the new concrete bridge would then be slid sideways during a possession period. This
whole process significantly reduces the work at height over the roadway.
Sliding method The deck is assembled adjacent to its final position, either at road
level during a medium-term road closure, or on a gantry at high level. The deck is then
stitched and prestressed, and during the possession period jacked onto slide tracks and
slid sideways.
Self-propelled modular transporter (SPMT) method The deck is fully assembled and
prestressed off line. The entire deck is then transported and lifted into position during
the possession period.

3.2.2 Short-span bridges

Shorter-span bridges in the range 1015 m comprise the majority of railway underbridges
in the UK. The construction options for such bridges are similar to those for medium-span
bridges. However, the lower deck weights (of around 150 t for a double-track structure) also
permit the use of a large mobile crane that would be capable of lifting the entire structure
into position during limited possession time.

11

4 Structural details

4. Structural details
This chapter examines the ability of the modular system to cope with a variety of bridge
layouts and congurations. Reference should also be made to the illustrative drawings
given in Figures A1A6 in Appendix A.

4.1 Span variations

The modular precast system is adaptable to varying span requirements. Figure 5 shows how
the depth of the shells can be varied to allow different spans to be achieved. Preliminary
calculations have been undertaken for typical single-span, two-span and three-span highway
overbridge layouts as part of this design study.

Figure 5
Typical sections for varying span
requirements.

C
L

1000 1500

Minimum section: Spans 15-25 m

C
L

Precast
units

Launch
cables

In-situ stitch

1500 2000

In-situ infill
Profiled
span cables
Typical section: Spans 25-35 m

CL

2000 3000

Maximum section: Spans 35-50 m

For typical spans between 25 m and 35 m, the section depth would vary between 1.5 and
2.0 m. The minimum depth for shorter spans is 1.0 m, increasing to a maximum of 3.0 m
for longer spans of between 35 and 50 m. Figure 6 shows the range of span-to-depth
ratios for typical schemes.

12

Structural details 4

Figure 6
Typical span-to-depth ratios for proposed
system.

3.5
Max depth
3.0

Depth (m)

2.5

2.0

1.5
Min depth
1.0
Maximum (1:15)
Typical (1:17)
Minimum(1:20)

0.5

10

20

30

40

50

Span (m)

4.2 Width variations

The modular precast system is also adaptable to varying width requirements. Figure 7
shows how the width of the bridge deck can be changed through a variation in unit width
and/or varying the width of the central in-situ stitch.

Figure 7
Typical sections for varying width
requirements.

4000

1000

4000

CL

Narrow deck: 9 m

5000

1500
C
L

5000

Typical deck width: 11.5 m

6000

2000
C
L

6000

Wide deck: 14 m

13

4 Structural details

4.3 Curvature

4.4 Skew

The modular precast units can also be match-cast, thereby allowing any curvature to be
achieved. Match-casting ensures that units are easily assembled on site and provides a
high-quality joint between adjacent precast units.

Figure A5 in Appendix A shows a typical three-span highway overbridge with skews of

7.5, 15 and 30. The modular system can cater for skew by:
forming a skew end with the precast end units, which can be readily achieved by using

an additional stop end in the mould;

spanning square between the abutments a slight increase in span is required but the
cost of additional material is minimal;
spanning skew between abutments with cast-in-situ end sections, which are poured
with the integral abutments.

14

Construction options 5

5. Construction options
A number of easily constructible options have been developed with the purpose of
identifying the most suitable option for the UK highway market.

5.1 Span lift construction

Span lift construction is an attractive method of construction that has been developed as
part of this study. This method provides a more efcient structural form while utilising
traditional UK bridge construction skills, i.e. heavy lifting technology.
As noted in Chapter 3, where a bridge is constructed via the Span lift method, the wall
thickness of the precast unit is reduced in order to minimise the weight to be lifted. Figure A6
of Appendix A details the typical construction sequence and shell units.
The construction sequence for a typical single-span bridge is as follows:
Shell units are transported to site and aligned at road level close to the bridge site.
Permanent external prestress is applied to the shell units alone.
The complete 5 m-wide rib is lifted into position using a large mobile crane.
Infill concrete is poured into ribs.
Further permanent prestress is applied to the composite section.
Adjacent ribs are stitched together.
Parapet edge beams and finishes are applied.

This method is suited to both single- and multi-span bridges. In the case of a multi-span
bridge, cast-in-situ segments are required at the pier locations, prior to the installation of
full-length continuity prestressing cables.
The method is more attractive to the UK industry as it employs well-known technology in
the form of large mobile cranes. Mobile cranes of up to 1000 t capacity are now available,
which allow a 35 m rib of around 125 t weight to be lifted at a radius of over 30 m. More
widely available, and more easily rigged, mobile cranes of 800 t capacity would allow the
same 35 m rib to be lifted at a radius of about 25 m.
As the initial prestress is applied to the shell section alone, its structural efciency is signicantly enhanced, thus reducing the total amount of prestress required. The method also
avoids the need for investing in launching/gantry equipment, thus reducing the initial
capital investment cost, and the cost required in constructing temporary props.
A similar method has recently been used during the construction of a bridleway overbridge
on the A51 in Grenoble by Vinci (Figure 8). Although it differs signicantly in terms of its
section, this scheme is very similar with regard to the construction method.

15

5 Construction options

Figure 8
Cross-section of A51 Grenoble overbridge.

140

120
1640

2100

Figure 9
Installation of A51 Grenoble
overbridge.

The 190 t bridge was constructed at road level parallel to the road, and then lifted and
turned through 90 during a road closure (Figure 9), in a similar vein to that proposed for
the modular precast bridge solution.

16

Construction options 5

a) Installation of rst span

b) Installation of nal span

Figure 10
Span lift construction beginning and end
stages.

Figures 10(a) and 10(b) show a graphic representation of part of the sequence of construction
for the Span lift scheme. It is believed that this method offers great potential, and the
associated cost and programme implications are investigated further in Chapter 6.

5.2 Incremental launching

The concept of the modular bridge system began with incremental launching as the
envisaged construction methodology, and it is thought that this method should generally
be the preferred option at most multi-span locations. Figure A2 of Appendix A details the
typical construction sequence.
The major advantages associated with launched construction include safety, due to minimal
work at height over the carriageway; minimal trafc disruption, due to the smaller number
of short closures that are required; and a higher quality because of the off-line construction.
This system can be developed with or without the need for temporary propping. However,
the use of temporary propping reduces the length of the launching nose and the amount
of central prestressing steel required.
The construction sequence for a typical multi-span bridge is as follows:
Shell units are transported to site and aligned behind the abutment.
Units are stressed together longitudinally with prestressing bars.
Infill concrete is poured into ribs.
Adjacent ribs are stitched together transversely.
Permanent launching prestress is applied to the composite section.
The complete bridge deck is pushed into position using launching jacks and a nose,

possibly using temporary props.

Further permanent prestress is applied to the launched section.
Parapet edge beams and finishes are applied.

17

5 Construction options

a) Launching of rst rib

b) Completed launch of second rib

Figure 11
Incremental launching construction sequence.

Figures 11(a) and 11(b) give a graphic representation of part of the sequence of construction
for the launched scheme.
This method is very suitable for many bridge types/locations, especially multi-span structures,
and the associated cost and programme implications are investigated in parallel with that
of the Span lift method in Chapter 6.

5.3 Self-propelled modular

transporters

Self-propelled modular transporters (SPMT) are beginning to be used in the UK on bridge

projects. SPMT allow very large loads to be lifted and moved in a controlled manner. The
four- and six-axle line units can be assembled into any combination to allow the required
load to be moved. The units offer 360 steering, hydraulic suspension and electronic control
of individual wheel units.
For the modular precast bridge system, the SPMT are believed to be most suitable for
moving large or unusual single-span structures. They offer improved safety conditions as
the bridge is constructed off-line and then transported to site and lifted in place during a
single road closure. Their use would also be very suitable for the railway sector.
Recent examples of SPMT in use on bridge projects include the Badhoevedorp Bridge in the
Netherlands and the Lavender Road Bridge in Kent, UK In the case of the Badhoevedorp
Bridge (see Figure 12), a 120 m-long deck weighing 3300 t was lifted and moved into
position in a two-hour period.

18

Construction options 5

Right: Figure 12

Installation of
Badhoevedorp
Bridge.
Photo: Mammoet

Far right: Figure 13

Lavender Road
Bridge, Kent.
Photo: Birse/ALE-Heavylift

Figure 13 shows the movement of the 1200 t Lavender Road Bridge deck in Kent during
the widening of a road. The bridge was moved from its original piers, stored off-line and
then repositioned on new piers 9 m to the east of the original location.
Although the SPMT have a number of signicant advantages, they can be expensive for
use on typical highway bridge projects. For example, the cost of installing a 45 m singlespan modular bridge (weight of the entire deck approximately 1200 t) would be in the
region of 100 000. With a total superstructure cost of only around 250 000, the SPMT
method is costly when compared with other methods (see Chapter 6) but there will be
situations where project requirements could favour this option.

5.4 Gantry

The modular precast bridge system is also suited to construction using temporary gantries.
In this method, the gantry is used to support the shell units as they are aligned in their nal
position. The shells are then stressed to support the inll concrete, which is cast in-situ.
Further permanent prestress is then applied.
This option is suited to both single- and multi-span structures, and requires lighter cranage
for the single shell units, which weigh only 1215 t each. The technology is well known and
in certain circumstances may offer the most economical method of construction even
though an investment in a gantry system is required. However, the method requires most
of the operations to be undertaken at height, unlike some of the other construction options.
Figure 14 shows an example of an under-slung gantry system in use on the Stanstead
Abbotts Bypass in the UK.

19

5 Construction options

Figure 14
Gantry system in use on Stanstead Abbotts
Bypass.
Photo: Benaim

In the early 1990s, a precast segmental channel bridge system was developed by Jean
Muller in France as a new concrete cross-sectional shape for freeway overpasses. This was
further developed in the USA in the mid-1990s. The system is of relevance to this report
as it employed an under-slung gantry to position the precast units, although the units
were solid and internally prestressed.

20

Construction programme and costs 6

6. Construction programme and costs

Two typical highway overbridge layouts have been chosen to allow the modular precast
concrete construction costs and programmes to be compared with a steel-composite
alternative. The rates used in the study have been determined through experience on
similar projects and are therefore believed to offer robust estimates. For the purposes of
this Guide, costs have not been attributed to lane closures. Such costs can vary widely
dependent on the road location and can only be considered on a bridge-specic basis.
The construction programmes have also been developed through recent experience on
similar projects. However, they serve mainly as a comparative tool and exact details will
differ from contractor to contractor, at different locations.

6.1 Capital investment

requirements

Standardisation of the construction process requires investment in a kit of parts that would
allow the modular system to be used at a variety of locations. The essential components
of the kit required to cast and align the shell units on site are:
two moulds within a casting shed
unit transporter/low-loader
cranes to lift approximately 1215 t units
temporary packs and jacks to align the units
prestressing bars to hold the units together.

As noted in Chapter 5, the system can be constructed using a number of techniques. For
the Span lift and SPMT options, the remaining construction cost is covered by a specialist
subcontractor. In the case of the incrementally launched option, investment in further
items is required, namely:
launching nose
possible temporary props and foundations
jacking equipment
launch bearings, jacks and lateral guides.

The capital investment costs for the modular bridge system are outlined in Table 4.
Table 4
Capital investment costs for modular bridge
system.

Item

Cost

Moulds (2No.)

80k

Low loader

25k

Prestressing bars

5k

Launching nose

25k

Intermediate props

10k

Pulling beams

5k

Strand & jacks

5k

Launch bearings

5k

Total

160k

21

6 Construction programme and costs

Typical precast segmental schemes using box sections have been shown to be economic
for bridge deck areas of more than 10 000 m2. However, a study of the capital investment
costs for this modular bridge system indicates that 5000 m2 of bridge deck would be
required for it to be cost-effective, i.e. about ve to ten typical highway bridges. Therefore
in the following cost comparisons, 10% of these capital investment costs has been added
to the cost of the modular bridge options, as a capital repayment.
With approximately 80 bridges under construction in the UK each year, it is believed that
the market is large enough to make the recovery of this investment gure attainable in the
short to medium term. This is based on the premise that of these 80 bridges, approximately
half would be suitable for the proposed system, of which a single team could expect to
bid for 20 and win a minimum of 25%, i.e. ve bridges per year. A return on investment
cost could therefore be expected within a rather short period of two to three years.

6.2 Case study 1: Threespan highway overbridge

Figure 15 shows the three-span highway overbridge chosen for the study. The bridge has
spans of 202520 m, typical of overbridges crossing both carriageways of a two-lane
dual carriageway.

Figure 15
Three-span highway overbridge layout
adopted for Case Study 1.

Figure 16 shows the cross-section of the proposed modular precast bridge. The shell sections
are 1.5 m deep giving a span-to-depth ratio of approximately 17.
Two construction options were investigated for this bridge type. The rst considered the
Span lift option, which offers the advantage of using more traditional UK construction
skills. Construction via two stages of incremental launching was also investigated, as
shown in Figure A2 of Appendix A.
Figure 17 shows the cross-section of the steel-composite bridge adopted for this study. A
ladder deck layout was chosen as it has been shown to be the most economic form in
recent projects. The main girders are 1.25 m deep with a 250 mm deck slab, also giving a
span-to-depth ratio of 17. It is proposed that the bridge is constructed by traditional means,
i.e. the main beams lifted in position, followed by the cross-girders, with the in-situ slab
cast on permanent, participating formwork.

22

Construction programme and costs 6

Figure 16
Section through modular precast
bridge.

2100

3650

3650

2100

Footway

Carriageway

Carriageway

Footway

CL

Figure 17
Section through steel-composite
bridge.

2100
Footway

3650
Carriageway

3650
Carriageway

2100
Footway

1250

23

6 Construction programme and costs

6.2.1 Cost comparison

Table 5
Cost summary for three-span overbridge.

A summary of the costs is given in Table 5.

Item

Modular precast
Span lift

Substructure

Steel-composite
Launched

80k

80k

70k

185k

235k

Superstructure
Deck (excluding formwork)

140k

140k

29k

Equivalent formwork costs

Job specic

45k

Capital repayment

10k

195k

16k

Finishes (including abutments)

175k

175k

175k

Preliminaries

225k

220k

235k

Discounted whole-life maintenance

35k

35k

50k

Total

710k

695k

765k

Percentage saving

8%

10%

Monetary saving

60k

75k

The modular precast system shows itself to be more economic by offering a saving of
between 8 and 10% when compared to the steel-composite option. As expected, the
major cost savings are attributable to the reduced material costs for the superstructure.
Substructure costs are only marginally higher for the concrete option.
The launched option in this comparison is shown to be cheaper than the Span lift option,
due mainly to the relatively high crane hire costs required. However, a reduced initial
investment is required for the Span lift option, thereby reducing the potential exposure of
the contractor. This comparison indicates that both the Span lift and launched methods
are viable construction options.

6.2.2 Programme comparison

6.2.3 Summary

24

The construction programmes for each of the construction options are shown in Figure B1 of
Appendix B. The total construction times for the modular bridge with launched construction
and the composite steel option were found to be very similar, at around 33 weeks each,
with the modular Span lift construction offering a three-week benet in construction time.

For the case of a typical three-span highway overbridge, the modular precast bridge has
been shown to offer a well-engineered solution at a lower cost and some benets in
construction time compared with a steel-composite bridge.

Construction programme and costs 6

6.3 Case study 2: Singlespan highway overbridge

Figure 18 shows the single-span highway overbridge chosen for the study. The bridge has
a span of 45 m, which is typical for bridges over widened motorways where piers in the
central reservation are avoided due to construction difculties close to passing trafc.

Hardshoulder
Central resevation
Hardshoulder
Carriageway
Carriageway

Above: Figure 18

Single-span highway overbridge layout

adopted for Case Study 2.
Right: Figure 19

2100

3650

3650

2100

Footway

Carriageway

Carriageway

Footway

Section through modular precast bridge.

Precast edge unit

In-situ stitch concrete

In-situ infill concrete

CL

Void

Figure 19 shows the cross-section of the proposed modular precast bridge. The shell
sections are 3 m deep giving a span-to-depth ratio of 15.
Two construction options were also investigated for this bridge type. The rst considered
the Span lift option. An alternative option of constructing the entire bridge off-line and
lifting it in place with an SPMT was also investigated.
Figure 20 shows the cross-section of the steel-composite bridge adopted for this study. A
ladder deck layout was chosen as it has been shown to be the most economic form in
recent projects. The main girders are 2.25 m deep with a 250 mm deck slab, giving a spanto-depth ratio of 18. It is proposed that the bridge is constructed by traditional means,
i.e. the main beams lifted in position, followed by the cross-girders, with the in-situ slab
cast on permanent, participating formwork.

25

6 Construction programme and costs

Figure 20
Section through steel-composite bridge.
2100
Footway

3650
Carriageway

3650
Carriageway

2100
Footway

CL

6.3.1 Cost comparison

Table 6
Cost summary for single-span overbridge.

A summary of the costs is given in Table 6.

Item

Modular precast
Span lift

Substructure

Steel-composite
SPMT

80k

80k

70k

275k

250k
80k

Superstructure
Deck (excluding formwork)

150k

150k

Equivalent formwork costs

Job specic

45k

Capital repayment

10k

115k
205k

10k

Finishes

80k

80k

Preliminaries

185k

215k

200k

Discounted whole life maintenance

15k

15k

25k

Total

565k

665k

625k

Percentage saving

10%

(6%)

Monetary saving

60k

(40k)

The modular precast bridge constructed by the Span lift method is the most economic
option, giving a saving of 10% of the total cost when compared to the steel-composite
alternative. Constructing the modular precast bridge using the transporter is the more
expensive option due to the high cost of the SPMT. However, the small premium in cost
of 6% can be offset by the improvement it offers in construction time (see next section).

6.3.2 Programme comparison

26

The construction programmes for each of the construction options are shown in Figure B2
of Appendix B. The total construction times for the modular bridge construction options
were found to be somewhat shorter than composite steel, within the accuracy achievable
at this stage.

Construction programme and costs 6

In particular, constructing the modular precast bridge using a transporter has the potential to
save approximately three weeks programme time when compared with the steel-composite
alternative. In addition, this option has many safety advantages, as the majority of construction work takes place away from the roadway. Constructing the modular precast bridge
using the Span lift method was also shown to be faster by around two weeks compared
with the steel-composite option.

6.3.3 Summary

For the case of a typical long, single-span highway overbridge, the modular precast bridge
has been shown to offer a well-engineered solution at a lower cost than a comparable
steel-composite bridge when constructed using the Span lift method. The construction
time has been shown to be very competitive for this method, being marginally shorter
when compared with the steel-composite solution.
Constructing the modular bridge using an SPMT has been shown to be slightly more
expensive than the traditional steel-composite solution while offering a saving on programme
time of approximately three weeks.

27

7 Conclusions

7. Conclusions
The bridge market in the UK is set to grow steadily over the next ve to ten years. The use
of steel-composite construction is almost unique to the UK, and it is believed that a wellengineered and competitive concrete option has the potential to gain considerable market
share. The modular precast bridge system which this publication addresses aims to reestablish concrete as the preferred option for medium-span bridges.
The modular system has been shown to be suitable for a wide range of typical bridge
layouts. Varying span lengths, carriageway widths, horizontal and vertical curvatures, and
skew can be readily accommodated by the match-cast shell units. The focus on precast
elements and off-site construction ensures a high-quality product is constructed within a
safe environment.
Importantly for both the developer and contractor the construction methodology can be
varied to suit specic bridge sites and the demands of the project programme. The construction options available include the following:
Span lift method
High-quality, low-maintenance precast components.
Suited to single- and multi-span structures.
Two-phase stressing technique reduces quantity of prestress steel required.
Utilises existing skills within UK construction sector.
Cheaper than steel-composite alternative for both typical single- and three-span bridges
(Case Studies 1 and 2), see section 6.2 and 6.3.
Faster than steel-composite alternative for both typical single- and three-span bridges
(Case Studies 1 and 2), see section 6.2 and 6.3.
Safer less work to be carried out at height than with steel-composite alternative.
Traffic some disruption but similar to steel-composite.
Incrementally launched method
High-quality, low-maintenance precast components.
Suited to multi-span structures.
Utilises newer technology within UK construction sector.
Cheaper than steel-composite and Span lift alternatives for a typical three-span bridge
(Case Study 2), see section 6.3.
Similar speed to steel-composite alternative.
Safer minimum work to be carried out at height, especially if temporary props are
avoided.
Traffic minimal as possessions required during launching only.

28

Conclusions 7

Self-propelled modular transporter (SPMT) method

High-quality, low-maintenance precast components.
Suited to single-span structures.
Utilises emerging skills within UK construction sector.
More expensive than steel-composite alternative.
Faster than steel-composite alternative for a typical single-span bridge (Case Study 1),
see section 6.2.
Safer minimum work to be carried out at height.
Traffic single possession required for all bridge works.
Gantry method
High-quality, low-maintenance precast components.
Suited to single- and multi-span structures.
Utilises newer technology within UK construction sector.
Requires additional work to be carried out at height.
Costs, programme times and traffic management remain to be investigated.
For the two typical case studies presented in this guide, the modular system has been shown
to offer signicant cost and/or programme savings over a steel-composite alternative, as
well as being more more elegant, efcient and robust and requiring less maintenance.
The modular system requires an initial capital investment of less than 250k. It has been
shown that this can be nanced over ve to ten bridges which, given the 80 bridges built
per annum in the UK, would seem to generate a return in only two to three years.
The system offers a large number of benets over alternative solutions, namely:
safer typically much less work at height and more factory-based work
faster simple, repetitive cycles and easy detailing
more buildable known low-technology solutions
minimal traffic disruption less disturbance to the road users
higher quality factory-based and off-site construction
lower maintenance no exposed steel, joints or bearings
more efficient sections optimisation of quantities
aesthetically pleasing clean, simple proportions, forms and details
more sustainable for the future of us all
higher value achieved on all aspects.

29

References

References

30

1.

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT. Transport Ten year plan 2000, DFT, London, 2000.

2.

HIGHWAYS AGENCY. Major improvements in the strategic road network, The Highways Agency,
London.

3.

DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT. The future of transport: A network for 2030. DFT, London, 2004.

4.

THE CONCRETE SOCIETY. Durable post-tensioned concrete bridges. Technical Report 47 (second
edition) The Concrete Society, Camberley, 2002.

1200

1:50

SECTION A - A

Monolithic piers
(reinforced concrete)
refer to drawing No
11725/011 for details

CL

Benaim drawing ref.: 11725/10-C

Three-span option (202520 m) general arrangement.

Figure A1

Precast concrete shell

First stage insitu

infill concrete

Second stage insitu

infill concrete

Hard
strip

Verge 1000

Carriageway

7360

Hard
strip

1:00

ELEVATION

Central
reservation

Hard
strip

1000 2500 1000

25000

3650
Carriageway

6 No 19/15mm
profile cables

CL

1000

CL

1:50

1:50

SECTION C - C

200

250

1500
250

1000

2100
Footway

3650

Carriageway

SECTION B - B

8 No 19/15mm
anchorages

Precast concrete shell

approx. 2500 long

1500
Temporary
prestressing
bars 2 No 32 Dia

Insitu infill concrete

Precast edge unit

Footway

2100

Hard
strip

1000 Verge

2 No 19/15mm
launch cables

Carriageway

7360

20000

200
100
1500

20000

Appendix A

Appendix A. Scheme drawings

31

32

1:500

Banaim drawing ref.: 11725/11-B

Three-span option (202520 m) typical details.

Figure A2

Temporary piers
& foundations

TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR 3 SPAN BRIDGE

Cast integral abutments

Complete finishes

Complete launch

Pour infill concrete

Couple launch cables
Stress launch cables

Launch over props

Pack units and align
form joints
Temporary stress

Pour infill concrete

Stress launch cables
Attach nose

Remove nose
Cast monolithic pier tops
Stress profiled cables
Remove props

Pack units and align

form joints
Temporary stress

Temporary piers
& foundations

Approx 8 No 32
prestressing
bars cast in
ducts to pier
head

1st stage
in-situ infill

CL

Final 1250 x
1250 pack
Initial 1000 x
500 pack

1500 x 1500
pier head

In-situ
infill
Glued, match-cast
or 20-50 thick grouted
concrete joint

Precast
unit

2000 to 3000
range
CL

PLAN

Launch cables
in continuous
ducts

1:10

JOINT DETAIL

Profiled
cable ducts
Glued, match-cast
or 20-50 thick grouted
concrete joint

Launch
cable ducts

Typical precast unit = 121

(range = 81 - 201)

Glued, match-cast
or 25-60 thick
grouted / concrete
joint

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

400
diaphragm

2500
typical unit
CL

1:50

1:50

TYPICAL JOINT / UNIT DETAILS FOR 1500 DEEP SECTION

Profiled
cables in
continuous
duct

1:20

PIER HEAD DETAIL

4 No 100
jacks

1000 x 300
launch
bearing CL

CL

BUILT IN PIER HEAD DETAILS FOR 1500 DEEP SECTION

Bar
couplers

Stressed
launch
cables

Profiled cables

2 No 32 temporary
prestressing bars

CROSS SECTION

150
typical

2nd stage
in-situ infill

1500 stitch

T16-150 crs

CL

Asphaltic
plug joint

Fall

Expansion
joint

Drain channel
and pipe

1800 x 1000
inspection
gallery

1:50

OPTIONAL JOINTED ABUTMENT

Bank seat
abutment

CL

800 thick end

diaphragm wall

1:50

PROPOSED INTEGRAL ABUTMENT

Mild steel continuity

reinforcement

In-situ end
diaphragm wall

1:20

CONCRETE JOINT BETWEEN UNITS

T12-150 crs CL

Bank seat abutment

Mortar bed to
precast units

Rubber CR pot
bearing

Precast
units

In-situ
infill

Final concrete
pack refer to
detail

LONGITUDINAL SECTION

CL

Appendix A

1:50

TYPICAL PIER SECTION A - A

monolithic piers
(reinforced concrete)

9 No 19/15mm
profile cables

CL

7300
Carriageway

Benaim drawing ref.: 11725/12-B

Three-span option (354535 m) general arrangement.

Figure A3

Precast concrete
shell

First stage insitu

infill concrete

Second stage insitu

infill concrete

Verge

3300
Hard
shoulder

11000
Carriageway

1:200

ELEVATION

Central
reservation

3100

45000

3300
Verge

Precast concrete
shell

1500

500 1000

200

260

3650
Carriageway

1:50

TYPICAL ANCHORAGE SECTION C - C

12 No 19/15mm
anchorages

CL

1:50

TYPICAL MID-SPAN SECTION B - B

9 No 19/15mm
profile cables

760 Dia. void

CL

7300
Carriageway

3650
Carriageway

insitu infill concrete

Precast edge unit

2100
Footway

Hard
shoulder

3 No 19/15mm
launch cables

11000
Carriageway

35000

1500

260

1000 500

2100
Footway

200
100

35000

Appendix A

33

2760

MAXIMUM SECTION: SPANS 35-50m

CL

TYPICAL SECTION: SPANS 25-35m

In-situ
infill

1:50

TYPICAL SECTIONS FOR VARYING SPAN REQUIREMENTS

Profiled
span cables

In-situ
stitch

Benaim drawing ref.: 11725/13-B

Typical details of bridge system 1.

Figure A4

Launch
cables

CL

MINIMUM SECTION: SPANS 15-25m

CL

Precast
units

1000
1500 - 2000

34
2000 - 9000

WIDE DECK: 14m

CL

2000

TYPICAL DECK WIDTH: 11.5m

CL

1500

NARROW DECK: 9m

CL

1000

5000

4000

6000

1:50

TYPICAL SECTIONS FOR VARYING WIDTH REQUIREMENTS

6000

5000

4000

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

No of beams

10

14
19

14

20

24

22

30

30

Overall deck width (m)

4 6

40

36

T10-160 crs

T12-150 crs

20

30
Span (m)

40

50

TYPICAL SPAN TO DEPTH RATIOS

10

Min. depth

Minimum (1:20)

Maximum (1:15 Typical depth (1:18)

1:20

TYPICAL DETAILS OF CENTRE STITCH

CL

T10-150 crs
1000 stitch

CL

1500 stitch

OPTIONS FOR INCREASING DECK WIDTH

USING A NUMBER OF ADJACENT BEAMS

Appendix A

Depth (m)

- 1500

20000

20173

20000

30

80000
24860

SCALE 1:500

25000

23094

20000

SCALE 1:500

LAYOUT 3
BRIDGE WITH 30 DEGREE SKEW
END SHELL UNITS CAST SKEW WITH IN-SITU SECTION

23094

25000

7.5

67500
25216

LAYOUT 1
BRIDGE WITH 7.5 DEGREE SKEW
END SHELL UNITS CAST SKEW

20000

Benaim drawing ref.: 11725/14-A

Typical details of bridge system 2.

Figure A5

DETAIL 2

DETAIL 1

20173
CL

Temp bearing

Abutment

End section cast in-situ

CL

Parapet edge beam

Temp bearing

Abutment

Parapet edge beam

2500

1:100

1:100

DETAIL 2

End shell unit cast skew

Precast shell units

End shell units cast skew

DETAIL 1

1850

2500

Precast shell units

20000

70000
25862

25000

20000

20706

SCALE 1:500

LAYOUT 2
BRIDGE WITH 15 DEGREE SKEW
SHELL UNITS SPAN SQUARE BETWEEN ABUTMENTS

20706

Appendix A

35

36
1:500

TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE FOR SPAN LIFT BRIDGE

Cast integral abutments

Complete finishes

Stich adjacent ribs together

Complete sections over piers
Stress full length continuity cables

Lift main span ribs into position

Demobilise crane

Mobilise crane on site

(Crawler crane illustrated however
use of large mobile likely)
Lift ribs into position

Transport precast shells to site

Assemble ribs close to final bridge
position
Apply initial prestress to shell units

Construct piers and abutments

Prepare area for deck assembly

Benaim drawing ref.: 11725/15-A

Three-span option (202520 m) Span lift construction.

Figure A6

2100
Footway

8 No 19/15mm
profile cables
750

150

CL

3850
Carriageway

1000

AS SHOWN

TYPICAL DETAILS OF SPAN LIFT BRIDGE

1:50

TYPICAL PIER SECTION

3850
Carriageway

1:50

TYPICAL END SECTION

1500

CL

1:50

250

3850
Carriageway

TYPICAL MIDSPAN SECTION

Precast concrete shell

approx 2500 long

Temporary prestressing
bars - 2 No 32 Dia

1500

CL

In-situ infill concrete

3850
Carriageway

In-situ infill concrete

Precast edge unit

2100
Footway

250

225
6 No 19/15mm
anchorages

2100
Footway

750

2100
Footway

Appendix A

1500

Case Study 1 three-span layout (202520 m).

Figure B1

Appendix B

Appendix B. Construction programmes

37

38

Case Study 2 single-span layout (45 m).

Figure B2

Appendix B

CONCRETE BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT GROUP

A cement and concrete industry publication

The Concrete Bridge Development Group aims to promote excellence in the design, construction and
management of concrete bridges.
With a membership that includes all sectors involved in the concrete bridge industry bridge owners
and managers, contractors, designers and suppliers the Group acts as a forum for debate and the
exchange of new ideas. A major programme of bridge assessment, strengthening and widening is
already underway to accommodate European standards and the increasing pressures on the UK road
network. The Group provides an excellent vehicle for the industry to co-ordinate an effective approach
and to enhance the use of concrete.
Through an active programme of events and seminars, task groups, newsletters, study visits and
publications, 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, construction and management
Promote an integrated approach and encourage development of innovative ideas and concepts
Promote best practice in design and construction through education, 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.
Membership of the Concrete Bridge Development Group is open to those who have an interest in
promoting and enhancing the concrete bridge industry. Five main types of membership are available:

Group membership for industry organisations and associations

Corporate membership for contractors, consultants, suppliers and specialist service companies
Associate membership for academic organisations
Bridge owners for all organisations that commission, own, maintain and manage concrete bridges
Individual consultants

By being representative of the whole industry, the Concrete Bridge Development Group acts as a
catalyst for the best in concrete bridge design, construction, maintenance and management.
PUBLICATIONS FROM THE CONCRETE BRIDGE DEVELOPMENT GROUP
Integral bridges Technical Guide 1
A report of a study visit in August 1997 by a CBDG delegation to North America, 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 bre composites in concrete bridges Technical Guide 3
A state-of-the-art review of the use of bre 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
An Introduction to Concrete Bridges
A publication dedicated to undergraduates and young engineers (2006)
Guide to the Use of Lightweight Aggregate Concrete in bridges Technical Guide 8
A state-of-the-art report, 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
You can buy the above publications from the Concrete Bookshop at www.concrete.org.uk and please visit
www.cbdg.org.uk for further publications, including free download.

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, Fax: +44 (0)1276 38899
e-mail: enquiries@cbdg.org.uk
website www.cbdg.org.uk.

CI/Sfb

UDC
624.21.012.3

Modular Precast Concrete Bridges: A state-of-the-art report

This publication outlines the development of a modular

precast concrete bridge system. This new system provides
designers with a concrete solution for medium span bridges
that can be used for the majority of bridge locations. The
modular system incorporates easily transportable precast
concrete shell units that support and combine compositely
with the post-tensioned, in-situ concrete core.
Guidance includes an introduction to the system followed by
structural details, construction options and example costs. Scheme
drawings and construction programmes for case study examples are
also provided.

CCIP-028
Published December 2008
ISBN 978-1-904482-52-9
Concrete Bridge Development Group
Riverside House, 4 Meadows Business Park,
Station Approach, Blackwater, Camberley, Surrey, GU17 9AB
Tel: +44 (0)1276 33777 Fax: +44 (0)1276 38899
www.cbdg.org.uk