Why integral bridges?

Dilatation joints and bearing devices are singularities in the

structure of the bridge

- Loss of functionality
- Increased maintenance costs
- Increased deformability
- Reduced redundancy and robustness
 Advantages of integral Bridges

Reduced maintenance costs related to dilatation joints and bearings

and due to problems induced by malfunction of those elements

Improved functionality (comfort for the users)

Improved appearance - slenderness

Improved response towards service loads and accidental loads

(seismic, impact, etc.)
Increased residual capacity in ULS
Lower deformability

Competitive/lower construction costs

Increased redundancy and robustness

 International experience
USA & Canada – Many integral bridges built since the 60‘s
International experience
USA & Canada – Many IB built since the 60‘s
Total lenght < 90 m (normally)

Common characteristic: abutment supported by flexible

piles (steel), transition slab rigidly conected to deck
diaphragm, which also connects the head of the piles

Skew angle is limited (<30°-45°)

Design is based on practical rules

 International experience

UK – The UK Highway Agency included the consideration of integral

bridges for short to medium lengths since 1992

Knowledge/experience based on experimental campaigns

in the 90´s (England et al, 2000)
 International experience
UK – The UK Highway Agency included the consideration of integral
bridges for short to medium lengths since 1992
 International experience
Switzerland – Long tradition in integral/semi-integral bridges: 40% of the bridges of
the Swiss Federal Roads Office (FEDRO)

The design guidelines of the

FEDRO include since 1990, as a
general rule, that the dilatation
joints should be omitted in
bridges up to 60m. Nowadays,
the limitation is the maximum
displacement of the ends,
instead of the length of the
bridge.
International experience
If not possible Semi-integral Abutment
Strongly curved Additional transversal Abutments as
bridges bending moments stiff as possible
 Geometry (in plan view)

Movement length

Structural system

Limiting the Deck materials

maximum (reinforced/prestressed concrete,
displacement of composite concrete/steel, etc)
the bridge ends
Type and stiffness of the abutments
Soil conditions / Soil structure
interaction
Construction sequence
Transversal bending stiffness (for
strongly curved bridges)

Detailing of the transition slab and the transition between

deck and abutment
•

•
•

•
•
Case studies
Railway Bridge Grubental (VDE8.1), 2012

VDE 8.3

VDE 8.2

Gaensebachtal - viaduct

VDE 8.1 Grubental - viaduct

VDE 8
Case studies
Railway Bridge Grubental (VDE8.1), 2012
 Case studies

Railway Bridge Gänsebachtal, 2012

Süderelbebrücke Moorburg, A26, Hamburg