Replacement of Bearings in the Golden Horn Bridge,

Turkey
Masahiro Yanagihara, Civil Eng.
Toshimitsu Matsuzawa, Civil Eng.
Mizsuhiro Kudo, Civil Eng.
Turgay Turker, Civil Eng.
Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co. Ltd, Tokyo, Japan

Summary – replacement of precast sidewalks by

steel sidewalks
The renovation and widening project for the Golden Horn Bridge in Istanbul
consisted of the construction of two new bridges and the repair of the existing – repair works of concrete structures
bridge, erected in 1974. During a preliminary inspection of the concrete viaduct
– replacement of surfacing asphalt,
of the existing bridge, the cylinder of one of the roller bearings was found to
drainage system and expansion
have split in the longitudinal direction. After further investigation, it was found
joints.
that the failure occurred due to fatigue and material problems. All the bridge
bearings were therefore replaced because they were all of the same design. New This report describes how the bearing
pot-type bearings were installed in the steel bridge, and elastomeric bearings in replacement work was implemented in
the concrete viaduct. In total 16 bearings were replaced in the steel bridge and 20 the framework of the renovation pro-
in the concrete viaduct. ject.

Introduction nect the steel bridges to the inter-

The renovation and widening project
for the Golden Horn Bridge had a
budget of approximately 100 million
USD and was awarded in 1991. Work
on the bridge started in 1994. The pro-
ject aimed to reduce traffic congestion
in the area of the Golden Horn in Is-
tanbul by constructing a pair of new
bridges on both sides of the old bridge,
and connecting the new bridges to the
Peripheral Highway. The total length
of new roads in the project was 4 km.
The widening part of the project com-
prised the construction of a pair of new
steel bridges, each 822 m long with
eight spans supported on concrete
piers. Three reinforced concrete ap-
proach viaducts, each 153 m long, con-
Peer-reviewed by international ex-
perts and accepted for publication
by IABSE Publications Committee
19716
change with the Peripheral Highway
Roller Bearing Replacement
(Figs. 1 and 2). During the repair works carried out on
the concrete superstructure of the
The existing bridge had a 25.2-m-wide
viaduct, constructed in the early 1970s,
carriageway accommodating six lanes,
local settlement of 15 cm and large
and 3-m-wide sidewalks on either side.
cracks on the underside of the super-
The new bridges have 11-m-wide car-
structure were observed. The cracks
riageways accommodating two lanes
were in a radial pattern and centred
on each bridge.
near the northeast pier on the P10 axis
The renovation work comprised: (P10-N1). Upon inspection of the P10-
N1 bearing, it was found that the cylin-
– replacement of the bearings on the
der of a bearing roller had split in half
old bridge
along its longitudinal axis. Half of the
– repainting the old steel bridge broken roller was sandwiched between
– fatigue stress measurements New bridge Old bridge New bridge
– repair of fatigue-induced cracks in
the steel superstructure
– strengthening of the steel super-
structure by increasing the height of
the cross beam because of the in-
crease in live load Fig. 1: Cross sections of the bridges
995 280 Total length
822 202 153362
8-span continuous steel girder 5-span prestressed
concrete bridge

A1 P4 P5 P6
A2
P1 P2 P3 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12

New bridge Old bridge

A1 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 A2

New bridge
P9a A3
P10a
Fig. 2: General view of the bridges

Structural Engineering International 2/2000 Reports 121


Fig. 3: Damaged P10 roller bearing
the superstructure and the substruc-
ture (Fig. 3), while the other half was
found at the base of the pier. This loss
of the bearing cylinder had been re-
sponsible for the many cracks and the
settlement. Upon inspection of the
bearings of other piers, another bear-
ing in the steel bridge was found that
had cracks in its roller.
Further investigations were under-
taken to determine the cause of the
failure in the bearing roller. First, the
material grade of the broken roller was
checked. The roller was made of stain-
less steel containing 0.4% carbon and
13% chromium. Similar types of dam-
age had been reported in Germany [1],
but long-term investigations had been
unable to reach a clear conclusion
regarding the cause of such failures.
However, the material content was
very sensitive to repeated concentrated
loads in laboratory loading tests, and
concentric collapse of the roller oc-
curred in a sudden and brittle manner.
All other bearings were of the same
design as the damaged one. Therefore,
it was decided to replace all the roller
bearings with a new type of bearing
(Fig. 4).
the bearing replacement works. Since
the working area was quite small and
located at a high elevation (about 25 m
above sea level), special safety mea-
sures were required.
To prevent damage of the existing struc-
ture, jacking up of the superstructures
was kept to a minimum (maxima of 10
mm for the steel superstructure and 20
mm for the concrete superstructure).
The slope of the girder changed (up to
0.6%) due to jacking up. However, this
slope is negligible for safe traffic pas-
sage. Since the fixed non-roller bearings
at A1 and A2 were not replaced, no gap
occurred at the ends of the bridge dur-
ing bearing replacement.
The steel superstructure was lifted with
the aid of temporary lifting brackets.
These brackets were connected to the
web panels of the main girder from out-
side and inside by high-strength friction
bolts at the piers. Therefore, the strength
of the connections and the stress limits in
the related welds were analysed.
1150
Fig. 4: New pot bearing (left) and old roller bearing (right)
By means of a Teflon plate on the jack,
all the horizontal reactions due to tem-
perature or wind were released, thus
preventing any additional stress in
superstructure.
The replacement work was performed
in the following sequence: P1, P2, P3,
P4, P5, P8, P7 and P6 of the steel
bridge and P10, P11, P12, P9 and P8 of
the concrete viaduct. The bearings at
P8, which connect the steel bridge and
the concrete viaduct were replaced at
the same time in order to prevent any
damage to the expansion joint located
at P8. The two columns on each pier
axis were jacked up simultaneously in
order to prevent damage to the cross
beams and floor system.
The cylinder capacity of the jack was
determined from the maximum reac-
tions, including the live load (Table 1).
Reactions of the steel bridge were
measured under light traffic loads
(at night), while reactions of the con-
crete viaduct were measured under
heavy traffic loads (during the day).
940

Selection of New Bearing Type Bridge Pier Dead load Live load Design reaction Actual reaction
(MN) (MN) (MN) (MN)
To decide on the type of new bearings,
the following conditions were consid- Steel bridge P1 8.10 7.43 15.5 7.87
ered. The height of the new bearings P2 7.55 6.68 14.2 7.08
should be lower than that of the old P3 8.76 7.20 16.0 7.99
ones in order to minimise the site P4 8.14 7.14 15.3 7.30
works. The transmission of forces, es- P5 9.47 7.60 17.1 9.13
pecially horizontal forces, between the P6 8.48 7.72 16.2 7.53
new bearing system and the old parts P7 7.84 7.96 15.8 7.30
of the bearing should be considered P8 4.08 4.25 8.33 3.65
carefully. The stability of the substruc- Concrete P8-N1 4.89 1.82 6.71 3.14
tures should be checked, because the viaduct P9-N1 6.93 2.21 9.14 7.08
friction forces of the new bearings and P9-N2 6.93 1.83 8.76 10.7
the eccentric load due to movement of P9-S3 6.28 1.94 8.22 11.4
the superstructure will be increased. P9-S4 6.28 2.37 8.65 11.2
P10-N1 6.15 2.13 8.28 11.2
P10-N2 6.15 1.74 7.89 6.85
Bearing Replacement Works P10-S3 5.67 1.85 7.52 6.85
P10-S4 5.67 2.28 7.95 8.90
Conditions P11-N1 6.36 2.10 8.46 9.13
P12-N1 8.24 2.27 10.51 9.81
The bridge is under the heavy traffic,
which could not be interrupted during
Table 1: Reaction forces at the piers

122 Reports Structural Engineering International 2/2000

The actual reactions of the viaduct were
higher than the design values. This dis-
crepancy may have been due to the fol-
lowing reasons. After settlement at pier
P10-N1, the reactions at the other piers
(in particular, the adjacent pier P10-N2)
may have changed extremely. Further-
more, long-term settlement could stiff-
en the concrete of the superstructure in
that position, and the jacking could
have induced reactions higher than
those under balanced conditions.
Based on the calculated reaction
forces, six jacks were used to lift and
temporarily support the girders of the
steel bridge, and four jacks were used
for the concrete viaduct. The margin of
jack capacity at maximum reaction
during implementation was 1.38 for
the steel bridge and 1.49 for the con-
crete viaduct.
Temporary Tension Beams
Because of a structural defect, the
lower flanges of the main steel girders
move outwards. According to the
records for the old steel bridge [2], the
old bearings were fixed immediately
after the installation of the web panel
on the bearings, then the mid-deck was
installed and asphalt pavement works
were carried out. These dead loads,
which only came into effect after the
fixing of the bearing, created a hori-
zontal force that pushed out the top
plate of the bearing.
Fig. 5: Tensioning beam
To overcome this internal force, a ten-
sion beam was installed between the
east and west webs at every pier. The
temporary tension beam was divided
into two pieces and connected by high-
strength friction bolts. A pretension
force (200 kN) was applied by intro-
ducing a small gap (0.3 cm) before fas-
tening the friction bolts (Fig. 5).
Replacement Procedure
The roller bearings of the steel bridge
were replaced as follows (Fig. 6).
The scaffolding was installed around
the pier, and the pier top was levelled
with mortar to allow installation of the
Structural Engineering International 2/2000
Erection beam
Scaffolding
Temporary bracket
Temporary bracket Electrical
chain block
Jack equipment
Scaffolding
Lever block
Jack equipment
Fig. 6: General scheme of replacement works
jacks. The connection plate was then
welded to the vertical stiffener, in
readiness for the lifting equipment.
After removal of the movable gantry
rails, the temporary tension beams
were positioned. The high-strength
friction bolts were fastened, thus intro-
ducing pretension.
Temporary brackets were erected, and
the friction bolts were fastened. The
jacks, electric pumps, steel fillers,
blocks and related accessories were in-
stalled, and the rigid beams and filler
plates placed on the jacks.
The uplift attachments were removed
from the old roller bearings, and the
bridge was lifted up (maximum 10 mm).
The roller, top plate and related parts of
the bearing were removed, leaving only
the bottom base plate and its anchor in-
tact. Reinforcement bars were placed
on the old bottom plate, and the under-
side of the lower flange was flattened.
Small supports were installed and the
new pot bearings were positioned with
the help of chains (Fig. 7).
After assembly of the formwork, non-
shrink mortar mixed with aggregate
was poured under the bearing and
cured to obtain the specified compres-
Fig. 7: Installation of bearing
HTB of temporary bracket
Tensioning beam
HTB of tensioning beam
Pier POT bearing
Erection beam
Tensioning beam
sive strength. The pre-set value of the
pot bearing was adjusted, and a thin
plate was inserted between the lower
flange of the girder and the top plate
of the bearing, if a gap was present.
The bridge was then jacked down,
and the top plate of the bearing was
welded into place.
Concluding Remarks
In the bearing replacement work, the
most important issue was the selection
of the most convenient bearing type,
because the new bearing must work
safely and not damage any part of the
superstructure or substructure. Since
the work was carried out in a narrow
space and at high elevation, necessary
safety measures were taken. The re-
placement of old roller bearings by pot
bearings was implemented between
April and September 1998 without any
accidents or damage to the existing
structure. The cost of renovation of the
old bridge, including the replacement
of the bearings, was less than 10% of
the total project cost. However, such
repair works pose a number of prob-
lems and are of great importance.
References
[1] Damage in the stainless steel roller bearings of
bridges. Report No. 11D8-43630-002/93, State
of Bayern Ministry of International Affairs
Supreme Construction Department, Munich,
13 February 1994.
[2] NARUSE, T. Design of Golden Horn Bridge
(Turkey). Ishikawajima-Harima Engineering
Review, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1974.
[3] YANAGIHARA, M. Renovation and Widen-
ing Project for Golden Horn Bridge. Ishikawajima-
Harima Engineering Review, Vol. 31, No. 1, 1998.
Reports 123