Structural Engineering International

ISSN: 1016-8664 (Print) 1683-0350 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsei20

Design of a Curved Incrementally Launched Bridge

Renaud Favre (Prof.), Marc Badoux (Prof.), Olivier Burdet (Dr. sc. techn.) &
Pierre Laurencet (Civil Eng.)

To cite this article: Renaud Favre (Prof.), Marc Badoux (Prof.), Olivier Burdet (Dr. sc. techn.) &
Pierre Laurencet (Civil Eng.) (1999) Design of a Curved Incrementally Launched Bridge, Structural
Engineering International, 9:2, 128-132, DOI: 10.2749/101686699780621064

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.2749/101686699780621064

Published online: 23 Mar 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 7

View related articles

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsei20
 Design of a Curved Incrementally Launched Bridge
Renaud Favre, Prof.
Marc Badoux, Prof.
Olivier Burdet, Dr. sc. techn.
Pierre Laurencet, Civil Eng.
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Lausanne. Switzerland

Summary

Using the example of the lie Falcon Bridge. it is shown that, given proper atten-
tion during design and rigorous quality control during construction, incremental
launching can be used successfully for the construction of a bridge with complex
geometry It is shown that acceptable longitudinal and transversal distortions can
be defined and accounted for in the design of the launching prestressing. The
effects of various systematic errors are considered. and rotation errors are shown
to compound despite match casting. Simple structural considerations are used to
make a preliminary estimate of the launching and guiding forces.

Background very similar in terms of design and

Incremental launching has become
a widely used bridge construction
method. particularly in Europe. A de-
scription of the advantages and limita-
tions of incremental launching can be
found in [1]. Recent findings have
shown that this construction technique
is very versatile and has a wide range
of applications [2. 3]. Limited at first to
the construction of relatively simple
bridges, incremental launching has
since been used successfully for the
construction of bridges with increas-
ingly complex geometry [4. 5]. The lie
Falcon Bridge under construction in
Switzerland exemplifies this trend.
This long curved concrete bridge fea-
tures varYing span lengths, girder
depths and top slab widths [6].
The first part of this article presents
the main elements of the structural de-
sign of the lie Falcon Bridge. It is fol-
lowed by a discussion of three prob-
lems of general interest for the design
of incrementally launched bridges, in
particular long curved bridges.
construction. Construction of the
north bridge started in spring 1997 and
was completed in summer 1998. Com-
pletion of the south bridge is sched-
uled for summer 1999. The north
bridge is the subject of this article.
The design of the lie Falcon Bridge was
influenced strongly by the decision to
use incremental launching for its con-
struction. The superstructure consists of
a prestressed concrete box girder with
15 spans. The span length increases pro-
gressively from 27.4 m at the abutments
to 73 m in the central portion over the
river (Fig. 2). The girder depth increas-
es from 2.15 m at the abutments to a
maximum of 3.7 m in the middle of the
bridge. A typical cross section of the
box girder is shown in Fig. 4.
The girders are supported b' short cir-
cular piers with a diameter of 5 m.
i.e. the same as the girder width. The
wide circular piers are hydraulically
favourable and provide lateral stability
to the curved girder during launching
and service. They also enhance the
Fig. I: lie Falcon Bridge under construction
bridge's overall appearance of strength
and unity [7]. The bridge has expan-
sion joints at both abutments and is
stabilised in the longitudinal direction
by fixed bearings at the middle pier.
To prevent scouring, the piers located in
or near the Rhone river bed are found-
ed on hollow shafts. The piers are found-
ed on spread footings west of the river
and on pier shafts east of the river. The
casting yard situated behind the eastern
launching abutment is founded on pier
shafts to prevent excessive settlements
during fabrication and launching oper-
ations. The projected bridge cost, un-
der USD 1000/rn2, is relatively low for
a bridge of this type in Switzerland.

LONGITUDINAL SECTION
N1ORTF-I BRIDGE
Design and Launching of the I UNNELS -

lie Falcon Bridge ---- —fl-— - -

-
- —
U --U- H
The LIe Falcon highway bridge crosses
the Rhone river in the mountainous 3i AN
Valais region of Switzerland (Fig A
1—3). The project consists of two paral-
lel curved bridges, which are approxi-
mately 720 m long. Both bridges are -4 -
—

RHO E
Peer-reviewed by international
experts and accepted by the LABSE
Publications Committee
Fig. 2: Plan viet and elevation of the lie Falcon Bridge

128 Reports Structural Engineering International 2/99

 CROSS SECTION A-A

556 - - 52 537

:r5

3oo

Fig. 3: Permanent and temporary piers of the north bridge Fig. 4: Cross section A-A oft/ic north bridge girder

Geometry of the Box Girder
The project requirements resulted in a
girder geometry that is unusually com-
plex for an incrementally launched
bridge. Vertically. the top slab is
curved to match the curvature of the
roadline (r = 24 900 m). Variable gird-
er depth was obtained by selecting a
larger vertical radius of curvature
for the intrados of the bottom slab
(r = 60 000 m). Horizontally, the road-
line consists of a circular middle seg-
ment and clothoidal (spiral) end
segments. Because of these clothoidal
end segments, the roadline does not
have a constant curvature. The hori-
zontal girder curvature was neverthe-
less kept constant in order to avoid
complicated casting and launching
operations (r = 850 m). The vertical
curvature. An elegant technique has
been developed that uses a casting
form that can be rotated horizontally
to create an angle between two casting
stages. The angle can be used to vary
the effective curvature over the length
of the bridge. (This illustrates the con-
trolled use of the phenomenon dis-
cussed below; Fig. 8.) This technique
was used at the Schnaittach Bridge.
Germany. to launch a section of a
bridge girder combining segments of a
straight line and of a clothoid [5].
However, variable girder curvature
substantially complicates launching
operations. and launching saddles are
required that can be shifted transver-
sally during launching to accommo-
date the variable position of the girder.
Also. the piers must allow the trans-
construction load (1 kN/m2). It was
verified that the tensile stresses do not
exceed 3 MPa when the effects of
launching tolerances (Fig. 6) are added.
The post-launching prestressing con-
sists of parabolic cables placed in the
girder webs. All longitudinal cables are
comprised of conventional prestress-
ing bonded with the section through
injection. The use of exterior cables
with a trapeze trajectory. which could
have served both for the launching and
permanent prestressing, was consid-
ered. However, this possibility was re-
jected because bonded interior pre-
stressing has superior behaviour in the
It
-- is
—

versal sliding of these launching sad-

and horizontal curvature of the girder dles, and temporary widening of the
result in an intrados shaped as a helix pier caps might be required.
—-

inscribed on a cylinder with an axis

slightly inclined from the vertical [8]. .t

The variable eccentricity between the Longitudinal Prestressing

I3t5-—--——————————' —

alignment of the constant curvature

box girder and the roadline was ac-
commodated by allowing the top slab
position to slide laterally with respect
to the box girder. Fig. 5 shows that the
horizontal eccentricity exceeds 1 m in
some sections. It also shows the longi-
tudinal variations of the top slab width,
the cantilever width. and the girder
depth. The top slab width varies to
accommodate an additional highway
lane at one end of the bridge. The
resulting girder section is. therefore,
very asymmetrical. The geometrical
complexity of the bridge is atypical for
incremental launching and demanded
1
At the Ile Falcon Bridge. the longitudi-
lmL
nal prestressing consists of a set of ca-
bles tensioned prior to launching. aug-
mented by cables installed once the
bridge has been launched in its final
position. The centroidal launching pre-
stressing. consisting of linear cables lo-
cated in the top and bottom slabs, cre-
ates a uniform state of compression in
the sections. This compression ranges
from 1.8 MPa in the deeper sections to
over 4 MPa in the shallower sections.
As the girder moves during launching,
the moments vary, alternating from
positive to negative in each section. 2 t5

an exceptional level of attention at the The launching prestressing is designed 720 96

design and construction stages to define such that the tensile stress would not
and implement the correct geometry. exceed 1 MPa in any point of any
It is possible to build incrementally section of the girder during launching Fig. 5: Iai,, geometrical parameters of the
launched bridges with a variable girder under its self-weight and a nominal north bridge girder

Structural Engineering International 2/99 Reports 129

 THEORETICAL AND ACTUAL INTRADOS
ACTUAL &
THEORETICAL
INTRADOS
-J
0 ACTUAL&
Z THEORETICAL
SADDLE
SADOLE =
ACTUAL &
THEORETICAL
INTRADOS
ACTUAL& - —-
z< THEORETICAL
SADDLE
tw..=,,
Fig.6: Actual and theoretical positions of the inirados in the longitudinal and transversal
direction during launching
ultimate limit state, and requires sig-
nificantly less prestressing forces be-
cause of the higher sag of the cables.
The parabolic prestressing is designed
to limit long-term midspan deflections
to a maximum of 100 mm. The degree
of compensation for the permanent
load defiections (factor f3) is about
55%. which is a reasonable value for
an incrementally launched bridge. The
low value of f3 for incrementally
launched bridges, compared with that
for bridges built by other construction
methods, is due to the important com-
pression induced by the launching pre-
stressing. At the lie Falcon Bridge. the
calculated long-term stresses exceed
1.5 MPa of compression under perma-
nent loads. This high level of perma-
nent compression should limit the
opening of cracks, which are likely to
form during launching [6].
Construction and Launching of
the Superstructure
The launching of the bridge required
41 weekly launching stages (38 full
stages and 3 half stages). The spans
were built on a 9.125-m module, and a
full launching stage was 18.25 rn long.
The casting sequence is illustrated in
Fig. 7. The girder was cast in three
stages. Each week the U-shaped trough
of a new stage was cast, together with
the top slab of the previous stage and
the parapet of the last-hut-one stage
[9]. Offset casting of the trough and top
slab was required because of the vary-
130 Reports
THECRETICAL
INTRADOS
POSITIOR * W SETILEMENT
— of 2.7%. In the first design scenario
- •WOU
B mode). friction was assumed to he
THEORETICAL
INTRADOS
=w,
ing web depth. The specifications
required a concrete with 360 kg/rn3 of
CEMI 42.5. and a water/cement ratio
of less than 0.43. The specified 3-day
compression strength was 30 MPa to
allow tensioning of the transversal
prestressing in the top slab and of the
longitudinal launching prestressing.
Since the bridge is horizontally curved,
a lateral guiding system was required
for launching. Lateral guides were
placed on every permanent pile, but
only a limited number (placed about
every 250 m) were activated. The other
guides would only have been activated
if the girder's alignment had been in-
correct by more than 40 mm. which
was not the case for the north bridge.
Because the road passes directly into a
tunnel at the lower western abutment.
and in order to reduce the launching
forces. the girder was launched from
the higher eastern abutment. Downhill
launching requires a launching system
that is able to push the bridge to initi-
ate movement and hold it back once
AUNCNG 0 RECON
82
/
., • SSCO'.CSEE VCV
PREVIOUS V .CVEE
V
Fig. 7: Casting sequence
the initial frictional resistance at the
launching saddles is overcome. The
friction at the launching saddles was
increased in the last launching stages
by using timber plates instead of
Teflon plates at some of the saddles.
The design of the launching installa-
tion was based on a girder weight of
200 MN during the final launching
stage. with an average downward slope
(push mode). a global friction coeffi-
cient of 4% was assumed and added to
the restraining force of a permanently
acting safety system with a force of
1000 kN. In the second scenario (hold
zero. The global friction coefficient can
be evaluated on the basis of the push-
ing and restraining forces measured
during launching. These measure-
ments indicate that the global friction
did not exceed 5% (initial friction) and
decreased to 1% during movement
(cinematic friction). The global friction
includes the friction at the launching
saddles and at the lateral guides. Addi-
tional information on the thrust-brake
launching system and launching opera-
tions have been reported [10].
Measures to Limit Cracking
during Construction
Incrementally launched bridges are of-
ten subjected during construction to
some of the most severe loading condi-
tions that they will experience during
their lifetime [11. 12]. For durability
reasons. it is desirable to prevent, or at
least limit, cracking of the girder dur-
ing fabrication and launching. Careful
attention was given to this issue during
design and construction of the lie Fal-
con Bridge. Measures taken to reduce
tensile stresses during launching in-
cluded the use of a launching nose (26
ni long), launching prestressing cables.
and temporary piers. Temporary pre-
cast concrete or timber piers were in-
stalled for spans of 45.6 m or longer.
The girder's effective slenderness ratio
is exceptionally high (3.70 m/22.$ m =
0.162) when the deeper portions of the
girder are located in the shorter tem-
porary spans. A typical slenderness ra-
tio for incrementally launched bridges
is approximately 0.067. Because of this
slenderness, the girder was particularly
sensitive to differences between the
theoretical and actual positions of
the launching saddles and inirados
(Fig. 6). Rigorous requirements were
Structural Engineering International 2/99

therefore imposed on the accuracy of
the positioning of the launching saddles
and on the fabrication of the girder.
In addition, a monitoring system was
installed so that distortions would be
corrected during launching if they be-
came significant. The vertical reactions
at the launching saddles were mea-
sured by means of load cells (Fig. 8)
and compared with calculated values.
Excessive differences indicated distor-
tions that could be corrected by the ad-
dition or removal of stainless steel
plates at the sliding interface of the
launching saddles and girder. The
largest correction during the launching
of the north bridge required the use of
a 4-mm-thick shimming plate.
In addition to limiting tensile stresses
due to the launching operations. it is
important to limit girder stresses gen-
erated by the thermal shrinkage in the
days following the concreting opera-
tions. Of particular concern at the lIe
Falcon Bridge was the effect of the off-
set casting sequence (Fig. 7). The con-
traction of the top slab is restrained by
the previously cast U-shaped trough.
Self-equilibrating stresses are generat-
ed in the girder that could lead to early
cracking of the top slab. These stresses
depend on the heat generation during
the hydration of the cement and on the
temperature differential between the
old and the new concrete. Extensive
numerical simulations of the stresses
generated by thermal shrinkage in the
days following concreting were used to
evaluate the risk of cracking and to
compare possible thermal treatments.
It was decided to cool the formwork of
the top slab by water circulation and,
in cold weather conditions. to heat the
previously cast concrete (U-shaped
section) to between 15 and 25° C.
Design Issues for Incrementally
Launched Bridges
The launching of a bridge such as the
lIe Falcon Bridge raises a number of
Fig. 8: Monitoring of the bearing loads during launching
Structural Engineering International 2/99
problems specific to incrementally
launched bridges, three of which are
discussed in the following.
Systematic Casting Errors
One of the key advantages of incre-
mental launching is that the construc-
tion is rationalised through the multi-
ple use of a fixed formwork. A metallic
formwork similar to that used in pre-
cast plants is usually used. and ever'
new stage is match cast behind the pre-
vious one. The repetition raises the
question of the influence on the geom-
etry of the girder of a systematic cast-
ing error that is repeated many times.
Fig. 9 illustrates the influence of four
types of systematic geometrical form-
work errors. It shows which types of
error compound to produce a bridge
position that differs significantly from
the theoretical position. The actual
shape and position of the girder in the
horizontal plane are shown after six
launching stages. A straight bridge
with match casting of each new stage
against the previous one is considered.
For the sake of simplicity, it is assumed
that, throughout the launching, the lat-
eral guiding system keeps the girder in
its theoretical position at both ends.
but imposes no correction in-between.
A skew error does not compound. and
the overall position of the launched
girder is not affected by the systematic
error. Similarly, a warping error, which
could be a permanent deformation of
the formwork or could result from in-
fluences such as different exposure of
the sides of the metallic formwork to
the sun. affects the shape of the girder.
but not its overall position. The errors
are corrected at each cast, and the geo-
metrical errors do not exceed that of
an individual casting stage.
The situation is different for a system-
atic rotation error. In this case, the
casting errors accumulate and the axis
of the girder diverges from the its the-
oretical position. The divergence in-
creases as the number of casting!
launching stages increases. The angle
DATA
PROCESSING
AND
CONTROL
CENTER
ELEvA1IO
I
I
PLAN
VIEW
d
Fig. 9: Influence of different systematic geo-
metrical errors at casting on the geometry of
the girder of a in ate/i-cast launched bridge:
(a) no systematic casting error; (b) skew
error; (C) warping error: (d) rotation error
at the launching abutment tends to-
ward the angle of the systematic error
(a). A systematic angle error leads to
the fabrication of a girder with vari-
able curvature. If this error is signifi-
cant. the girder's geometry will have to
be corrected by the lateral guiding svs-
tern. Rigorous topographical control
of the casting bed is therefore critical,
particularly for the launching of
bridges with a large number of cast-
ing/launching stages.
Launching Tolerances
Inaccuracies in the positioning of the
launching saddles and in the shape of
the girder intrados are a particular
problem for incrementally launched
bridges [13]. As the intrados slides
over the launching saddles. these inac-
curacies can generate undesirable
stresses in the girder. In the case of
concrete bridges, additional tensile
stresses can increase the risk of girder
cracking. Girders with low slenderness
ratios during launching. such as the lIe
Falcon Bridge. are particularly sensi-
tive to these inaccuracies. Their struc-
tural effect can be compared to the ef-
fect of differential foundation settle-
ments. Because launching is not a slow
process. creep cannot reduce the effect
of these inaccuracies.
Inaccuracies in the launching saddles
are normall due to inaccuracies in the
implantation of the launching saddles
and to vertical deformations of the
piers (permanent and temporary) and
foundations. Formwork tolerances are
the primary cause of inaccuracies in
the shape of the intrados. Rigorous
quality control can reduce the inaccu-
racies. but cannot eliminate them en-
tirely. A certain level of inaccuracy. i.e.
Reports 131

tolerance, should therefore be allowed
for in the calculation of the stresses
during launching. For the worst-case
scenario, the inaccuracies in
launching saddles and intrados com-
bine to give a total inaccuracy (w) at a
given launching saddle (Fig. 6). From a
structural point of view, it is the differ-
ential inaccuracy .iv that matters. In
the structural model. .;v has a longitu-
dinal component (L\liong) and a trans-
versal component (1t'trans). Fig. 11: Equilibrium of the launching, fric-
At the Ile Falcon Bridge. differential tion and guiding forces during launching of
a curved bridge
inaccuracies of 1VIong = 5 mm and
L.Ittrans = mm were allowed for in
2
the structural calculations. These low
values are realistic, as confirmed indi-
rectly by the monitoring of the launch-
ing saddle reactions.
Forces during the Launching of a
Curved Bridge
Fig. JO shows the main forces acting in
the horizontal plane during the launch-
ing of a curved bridge. Normally. the
launching force is applied along the
girder axis at the launching abutment.
The friction forces oppose the move-
ment at each launching saddle. For a
curved bridge, guiding forces perpen-
dicular to the girder axis are required
to keep the girder on the right course.
These launching. friction and guiding
forces need to be calculated prior to
construction in order to design the sub-
structure and the launching system.
A preliminary estimate can be made
on the basis of simple reasoning (Figs.
a)
LAUNCHING
DIRECTION LAUNCHING
NOSE
I Vol. 468. 1988. pp. 124—128.
• FRICTION
AT THE
LAUNCHING
BEARINGS
GUIDING
FORCES
-- LAUNCHING
ABUTMENT
TOFSC
CENTER
R1—2Ir-an
Fig. 10: Qualitative representation of the main
ho rizontal plane forces during launching of a
curved bridge: (a) longirudinaifriction forces
and transversal guiding forces: (b) vectorial
sum of i/ic longitudinal friction forces
I'- R epor S Structural Engineenng International 2/99
___--
the
J 1i R1
THEORETICAL R1
AXIS OF THE
SUPERSTRUCTURE
10 and 11) for a simplified situation. It
is assumed that the piers are uniformly
distributed over the length of the gird-
er, that the saddles are in a horizontal
plane. that the value of the longitudi-
nal saddle friction forces is the same at
every pier. and that perfectly stiff and
frictionless lateral guides act at every
pier. Under these assumptions. the fol-
lowing applies.
The vectorial sum of the longitudinal
friction forces (R1) can be obtained by
analogy with the calculation of the
shear flow in an open section (Fig. JO).
The determination of the vectorial sum
of the friction forces becomes a classic
problem of engineering mechanics.
with the girder corresponding to the
section and the friction forces (I) to the
shear stresses. Vector R is on a line per-
pendicular to the bisecting line of angle
a and passing through the torsion cen-
tre of the section. The value and posi-
tion of R1 are shown in Fig. JO. and the
value of the launching force is P = fcc,.
The vectorial sum of the lateral guid-
ing forces (R1) can be evaluated by ap-
plication of the principle of equilib-
rium (Fig. 11). Vector R1 is on a line
passing through the centre of the circle
and A (the intersection of the lines
supporting vectors P and R1). The an-
gle between this line and the line pass-
ing through the centre of the circle and
the launching abutment is one third of
a. This is in agreement with the obser-
vation that the lateral guiding forces
are largest near the abutment and de-
crease progressively along the girder
toward the front guide. This decrease
matches the decrease of the launching
force in the girder. which is maximal at
the launching abutment and decreases
at each launching saddle in proportion
to the saddle's frictional contribution.
In the usual push mode (Fig. 10). the
guiding forces are exerted by the later-
al guides located on the exterior face
of the girder. In a hold mode (bridge
launched downhill). however, the nor-
mal launching force in the girder
changes from compression to traction.
and the direction of the guiding forces
is inverted. Lateral guides located on
the interior face of the girder are re-
quired. A transition from a push to a
hold mode is therefore linked with an
inversion of the direction of the guid-
ing forces. Such an inversion was ob-
served at the lIe Falcon Bridge.
References
[11 ROSIGNOLI. NI. Incremental Bridge
Launching. Concrete International. Febru-
ary 1997. pp. 36—40.
[2] NIETZLER. H.: HAVERESCH. K.-H.
Talbriicke 511/ic — Autobahnhrücke mit ver-
starkba rem Langstragsvstem. Beton- und
Stahlbeton, Vol. 3. March 1998. pp. 61—o$.
[3] SKEET. J.. LESTER. W.B.. \IcCLARY.
C. Incremental Launch: the Stoner Trail
Bridge. Concrete International, February
1998. pp. 53—57.
[4] BEYLOUNE. R. Les viaducs des Vaux.
Routes et Trafic, Vol. 5. May 1998. pp.
163—1 70.
[5] RIEDMANN. E. Talbriicke Sclznaittach.
Beton- und Stahlbeton. Vol. 4, April 1998.
pp. 98—102.
[6] FAVRE. R.: LAURENCET. P Viaduc
Ile Fa/con — Poussage cadence dun grand
pont a géoinérrie variable. IBAP/ISS/ DGC/
EPF-Lausanne. Publication No. 146. June
1998. 36 pp.
[7] NIANGEAT. V. Ccci ii 'e pas un pont.
Bulletin Technique de Ia Suisse Romande.
Vol.21, October 1998. pp. 37 1—372.
[8] GILLET, G.: JACQUET. P. L'ouvrage
33 sur l'autorouie A55 a Marseille. Annales
[9] ROBYR. J.: FAVRE. J. ('onception ci
construction de ía superstructure. Bulletin
Technique de Ia Suisse Romande. Vol. 21.
October 1998. pp. 379—382.
[10] PRALONG. C. Le poussage cadence.
Bulletin Technique de Ia Suisse Rornande,
Vol. 21. October 1998. pp. 382—387.
[11] ROSIGNOLI. NI. Launched Bridges:
Prestressed Concrete Bridges built on the
ground and launched into their final posi-
tion. ASCE Press, New York. 1998.
[12] CALGARO. J.A.: VIRLOGEI'X. NI.
Projet et construction des pants — Analyse
sructurale des tabliers des pont. Presses de
l'Ecoles Nationales des Ponts et Chaussées.
Paris. Tome 2. 1994.
[13] ROSIGNOLI. M. li.sJI/acc,nent of
Launching Bearings in PC Launched
Bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering,
Vol. 3, November 1998.