Extradosed Bridge

Technology in Japan
and the New Pearl Harbor
Memorial Bridge
Prepared by the Delegation

Joseph E. Chilstrom Louis N. Triandafilou William R. Stark

FHWA, Group Leader FHWA Connecticut DOT

Robert P. Zaffetti Christopher P. Gallucci Franco R. Liberatore

Connecticut DOT Connecticut DOT Connecticut DOT

Steven Stroh James Platosh David Stahnke

URS Corporation URS Corporation URS Corporation

Anthony A. Moretti Vijay Chandra Kate E. Giordano

Parsons Brinckerhoff Parsons Brinckerhoff Howard/Stein-Hudson

For the
Federal Highway Administration / U.S. Department of Transportation
and
The Connecticut Department of Transportation
September, 2001
 Contents

Section 1: Extradosed Bridge Technology in Japan

Executive Summary
Introduction
- Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1
- Trip Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 1
- Delegation Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 2
- Itinerary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 3
• Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 3
• Field Visits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 4

Japanese Contacts and Meeting Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 5

Japanese Extradosed Bridges

- Odawara Blueway Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 10
- Shinkawa Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 11
- Miyakodagawa Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 13
- Kiso and Ibi River Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 14
- Okuyama Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 17
- Tsukuhara Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 19

Mission Questions and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 20

Section 2: The New Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge

Bridge Type Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 24
Bridge Type Study Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 25
Architectural Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . p. 27

Appendix A: Design Papers

Appendix B: What is an Extradosed Cable-Stayed Bridge?
Appendix C: Materials Distributed by Delegation
Appendix D: Reference Materials Received by Delegation
Appendix E: List of Individuals, by Company, Who Attended Each Meeting
Appendix F: Delegation Team Firm Description and Biographical Data
Appendix G: Detailed Delegation Itinerary

Cover photo: Miyakodagawa Bridge, Second Tomei Expressway

Acknowledgements – This mission was made possible through the generous support of the United States
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. Planning and coordination assistance was
provided by numerous colleagues in Japan, a gesture sincerely appreciated by the delegation.

Notice – Information contained in this report was collected by the authors throughout the mission.
The contents do not necessarily reflect the position of the firms visited or the author’s parent institutions.
 Introduction

Overview
This report is a summary of the September, 2001 trip to Japan that included meetings with
designers, owners, and builders of extradosed bridges as well as field visits to several bridge sites.
The FHWA and ConnDOT sponsored trip was not a typical “scanning” tour; it was specific to a
bridge replacement project in Connecticut. In 1996 the bridge, which carries
Interstate 95 (I-95) over the Quinnipiac River in New Haven, was designated
by legislation as the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. During the trip it was
referred to as more commonly known locally, the “Q” Bridge.
The Pearl Harbor Memorial (“Q”) Bridge will be replaced as part of
the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing (NHHC) Corridor Improvement
Program1 . The new structure will be not only a “signature” bridge for the
New Haven region, but also the first extradosed bridge constructed in the
United States. Extradosed (ex-strah-dosed) bridges are common in Japan; the
Sunniberg (or Pont del Poya) Viaduct and the Gunter Bridge on Simpleton
Road can both be found in Switzerland. A hybrid between cable-stayed and
box-girder bridges, the extradosed bridge fulfills the geometric and structural
criteria for the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge while providing an aesthet-
ically pleasing structure that is economically viable (see Appendix B).
In order to investigate extradosed technology, engineers from several
agencies visited Japan during the month of September, 2001. The purpose of
the trip was to explore design, construction, maintenance, and inspection tech-
niques as experienced in Japan and to gather information useful for the new
Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. The information obtained by the group was
Aerial view of the existing Pearl Harbor
invaluable for the design and construction of the new bridge, under design by Memorial Bridge (far right).
URS Corporation. The successful design details developed within the
Japanese highway industry are being investigated in the design and may be
incorporated into construction of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. Contacts were
established within the Japanese industry that may be utilized for consultation as design and/or
construction issues arise on the project.

Trip Planning
In early 2001, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) personnel suggested a mission to Japan
for the benefit of the reconstruction of the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. A delegation of
engineers from FHWA, the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT), Parsons
Brinckerhoff (PB), and URS Corporation (URS) was assembled and began to list mission

1 The I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing (NHHC) Corridor Improvement Program includes proposed improvements to approx-
imately 11.5 kilometers (7.2 miles) of Interstate 95 in New Haven, East Haven and Branford. The program limits extend from
Interchange 46 (Sargent/Long Wharf Drive, New Haven) to Interchange 54 (Cedar Street, Branford).

1
questions both as a working guide for their own objectives, as well as a vehicle to communicate
their interests to potential Japanese host companies.
Delegation members researched the locations and the designers, builders, and owners of numer-
ous extradosed bridges in Japan. PB was engaged to coordinate the mission with staff in its Tokyo
office. Once the delegates had established a rough itinerary, it was forwarded to Tokyo and significant
dialogue between the two offices led to a successful and productive experience for the delegation.

Delegation members from left to right: Back Row – Louis Triandafilou, David Stahnke, Steven Stroh, William Stark,
Kate Giordano; Middle Row – James Platosh, Vijay Chandra, Robert Zaffetti, Christopher Gallucci; Front Row –
Franco Liberatore, Joseph Chilstrom, Anthony Moretti

Delegation Members
The group consisted of engineers from FHWA, ConnDOT, Parsons Brinckerhoff, and URS and was
led by FHWA Connecticut Division Bridge Engineer Joseph Chilstrom. Appendix F lists the group
members, their affiliations and company/agency descriptions, and short biographies.

2
 Itinerary
The delegation departed the U.S. for Japan on the morning of September 7,
2001 arriving in Tokyo the afternoon of September 8, 2001. The mission
business began with four meetings in Tokyo. Subsequently, bridge field
visits were made and final meetings were held on Friday, September 14,
2001, the last day of business for the group.

Dates City
September 8 – 11 Tokyo
September 12 Hakone
September 13 Nagoya
September 14 – 16 Kobe
Bridges and cities visited by delegation.

Meetings
As outlined below, the group met with six firms throughout the tour (see Appendix E). A
PowerPoint presentation was made at four of the meetings – Japan Highway Public
Corporation, CTI Engineering, Sumitomo Construction, and Hanshin Public Expressway
Corporation. The presentation included: a background of Connecticut depicting the location
of the project; a description of the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement
Program, with maps and photosimulations to illustrate the work included in each contract;
as well as plans, elevation views, and preliminary renderings of the new Pearl Harbor
Memorial Bridge as part of a detailed discussion of the bridge contract. Gifts and a certificate
of appreciation were presented to each company. For each bridge field visit, the delegation
was accompanied by individuals from one or more host firms.

Group Leader Joseph Chilstrom with Kate Giordano at The Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge
Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge cable cross-section

3
Date Meeting Relation to extradosed
bridges visited on tour

September 9, 2001 Parsons Brinckerhoff International

(Trip Coordination Meeting)

September 10, 2001 Japan Highway Public Corporation (JHPC) Owner: Odawara Blueway,
Miyakodagawa, Tsukuhara,
Shinkawa, and Kiso and Ibi
River Bridges

CTI Engineering, Ltd. Designer: Odawara

Blueway Bridge Blueway Bridge

Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd. Builder: Shinkawa and

Kiso River Bridges

September 12, 2001 Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd., Shinkawa Bridge

Shinkawa Bridge Field Office

September 13, 2001 JHPC Yokkaichi Works office at Tomeihan Kiso River Bridge
Nagashima Interchange

September 14, 2001 Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation Owner: Okuyama Bridge
Japan Bridge & Structure Institute Designer: Tsukuhara Bridge

Field Visits
Delegation members were able to visit six of the twenty extradosed bridges in Japan. Technical infor-
mation specific to each bridge can be found in the Extradosed Bridges Toured section.
Date Bridge visited Accompanied by

September 11, 2001 Odawara Blueway Bridge Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd.
and CTI Engineering, Ltd.

September 12, 2001 Shinkawa Bridge Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd.,

Japan Highway Public Corporation,
PS Corporation, and CTI Engineering, Ltd.

Miyakodagawa Bridge Japan Highway Public Corporation,

CTI Engineering, Ltd.

September 13, 2001 Kiso River Bridge Japan Highway Public Corporation,
Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd.,
CTI Engineering, Ltd.,
Parsons Brinckerhoff International, Interpreter

September 14, 2001 Okuyama Bridge Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation,

CTI Engineering, Ltd.,
Parsons Brinckerhoff International, Interpreter

Tsukuhara Bridge Japan Bridge and Structure Institute,

CTI Engineering, Ltd.,
Parsons Brinckerhoff International, Interpreter

Akashi-Kaikyo Bridge Near Kobe,

the longest suspension bridge in the world,
with a main span length of 1991m

4
 Japanese Contacts
and Meeting Notes

Parsons Brinckerhoff International, Japan (PBIJ)

Part of the international Parsons Brinckerhoff network, PBIJ is focused on marketing activities
on Japan-related overseas projects involving Japanese government funds/loans and projects
initiated by Japanese firms. In July, 2001 PBIJ was awarded a consulting contract for Auditing
and Project Management by Singapore Telecom (SingTel) for its Tokyo Data Center project.
Future projects include highway design consultation for Japan Highway Public Corporation.

The delegation was assisted by Parsons Brinckerhoff International, Japan in

the planning and execution of the mission. PBIJ, with other Japanese firms,
established the travel route along which the Delegation visited field and
home offices as well as extradosed bridges built and under construction.

Japan Highway Public Corporation (JHPC)

Known in Japan as Nihon Doro Kodan, Japan Highway Public
Corporation was founded in 1956 and owns numerous types of bridges,
Anthony Moretti, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & including girder, segmental, cable stayed, and suspension bridges. They
Douglas, and Yuichi Sagawa, Parsons oversee 6,666km of national expressways, national highway and regional
Brinckerhoff International Japan
roads, and employ nearly 9,000 individuals (4,000 engineering, 4,000 cleri-
cal, and other technical). Japan Highway Public Corporation is in the forefront of bridge building
technology, owning six extradosed bridges, of which three are in service and construction of three
others has been completed. With spans ranging up to 275m in length, extradosed bridges provide
JHPC with an important link between segmental and cable-stayed bridge types in their span range.
JHPC has utilized extradosed technology for bridges up to three lanes in each direction of traffic.

To date, all of Japan Highway Public Corporation’s

extradosed bridges are post-tensioned (p/t) con-
crete box sections2. Boxes are designed to resist a
certain percent of the negative moment, while the
stay cables are needed to take up the remainder of
the load. Fatigue testing of stay cables for concrete
extradosed bridges is generally not required; wind
tunnel testing is performed only in the case of par-
allel bridge construction. JHPC did acknowledge Conceptual illustration by PB’s Vijay Chandra
that wind tunnel testing of an extradosed bridge with a steel superstructure
would be prudent. For post-tensioning, external tendons are generally employed (JHPC does not

2 The new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge will carry five lanes, with full inside and outside shoulders, in each direction.
Accordingly, an alternative lighter steel box girder design is also being pursued along with the concrete box girder design.

5
 allow the use of internal tendons on their proj-
ects). JHPC recently patented vinyl chloride clear
transparent sheathing (see below right) that is
designed to resist grouting pressures up to
10Kg/Sq. cm. All of their extradosed bridges
have been designed to avoid uplift conditions at
the anchor piers. There is concern with shear lag
on very wide, conventionally reinforced concrete decks.

William Stark exchanging business cards with The stay cables are damped for rain-wind vibra-
JHPC representative.
tion by rubber dampers or viscoelastic dampers at
the superstructure level. Cables are erected in the cantilever fashion out
from the piers, to take up some of the Dead Load. The cables are typical-
ly epoxy-coated strands (Flo-fil with grit called Flo-bond); however,
greased and sheathed strands inside a HDPE wax-filled pipe have been
used on three of JHPC’s new extradosed bridges. Most extradosed
bridges have saddles in the towers with grouted saddle areas. Saddle
technology in Japan has evolved to where it is possible to replace individ-
ual cables traveling through the saddle.
Joseph Chilstrom and Franco Liberatore inspect
vinyl chloride clear transparent sheathing.
CTI Engineering Company (CTI)
The first consulting engineering firm established in Japan, CTI was founded in 1945 just prior
to post-war reconstruction. With an annual gross revenue of about $250 million, CTI employs
nearly 1000 people. They are the third largest among Japanese Consultants.

The CTI Engineering Company has over 40 years of experience with

suspension and cable-stayed bridges. They utilize polyethylene to protect
individual wires and grout to protect strands. CTI designed the
Miyakodagawa Bridge (See page 13 for more details).

Sumitomo Construction Company (Sumitomo)

Sumitomo is an international construction company involved in a wide
range of bridge and other civil engineering construction activities. They
were formed in 1962 with the merger of Beeshi Construction (founded
Delegation members with representatives from CTI. 1950) and Katsuro-Gumi Construction (founded 1882).

6
 Working within the design/build standard (customary with most
Japanese bridges), Sumitomo has been involved in many of Japan’s extra-
dosed bridges. Some of Sumitomo’s are:
• Odawara Blueway Bridge (See page 10).
• Tsukuhara Bridge (See page 19).
• Kanisawa Bridge – With main spans of 180m, the Kanisawa is two parallel
concrete bridges with a gap of 30m between them. There have been no wind
issues with this bridge. Saddles are used in the towers and stays are greased and sheathed strands
inside a Polyethylene pipe. Sumitomo performed an elasto-plastic dynamic analysis as part of their
superstructure detailed design.
• Shikari Bridge – The concrete, single-tower bridge has five spans, with a
140m center span. A fatigue test was performed on the stay cables, of
which there are three planes. The post-tensioning utilizes external tendons.
• Yashiro Bridge – Built for the Shinkasen, or bullet train, the bridge features
a yellow high-density polyethylene pipe for stays with Hone-type dampers
at the base. A strength test was performed for the saddles for this design.
• Kiso and Ibi River Bridges (See page 14 for more details).

Sumitomo is working to develop the use of steel webs and concrete

slabs for extradosed bridges but have encountered difficulties with cable anchorages. They use
limit state design for stay cables, which includes fatigue limit state, service limit state and ulti-
mate limit state. For the fatigue limit state, they use 2,000,000 cycles. Stay cables are
designed for 40-80% of Dead Load + Live load forces (see Appendix A, Design Papers).

The lowest angle used for cables at the anchorage zone is 18 degrees. On the Kanisawa Bridge,
Sumitomo used 0.4 x fpu for allowable stresses, with three cables continuous through the boxes (see
Appendix A, Design Papers).

Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation (HEPC)

The Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation, similar to the turnpike
authorities of the U.S., employs over 800 individuals and serves the
transportation needs of the Kobe, Osaka, and Kyoto regions. HEPC was
founded in 1962 and had its greatest challenge after the Great Hanshin-
Awaji Earthquake of 1995. The entire route connecting Kobe and Osaka
was closed; since then the implementation of seismic counter-measures
has increased greatly throughout all of Japan. With an annual toll col-
lection of roughly $1 billion, the HEPC manages 221.2km of highways
Joseph Chilstrom and William Stark with Mr.
Naganuma and Mr. Miyaguchi, HEPC

7
 with an innumerable number of bridges of all types. Bridge types include
many beautiful cable-stayed (the Higashi Kobe Bridge), suspension (the
Shin-Inagawa Bridge), extradosed (the Okuyama Bridge, also known as the
Shin-Karato Bridge), truss (the Minato Bridge), and arch bridges (the
Nakajima and Kanzaki Bridges).

Mr. Miyaguchi and Mr. Kanaji discussing the

Japan Bridge and Structure Institute (JBSI)
Interpreter Ms. Miyanishi with JBSI representa-
tives and delegation members.
Okuyama bridge
Japan Bridge and Structure Institute (JBSI) was
founded in 1962 when Japan’s first express highway, the Meishin and
Tomei Expressways, and the Shinkansen Bullet Train Railway were con-
structed. By 1996, JBSI had designed nearly 4,000 bridges, including
1,639 steel, 1,596 prestressed concrete, and 652 reinforced concrete
bridges. JBSI’s design calculation programs dealing with time difference
of concrete shrinkage and creep for prestressed concrete bridges are used
extensively throughout Japan by consulting engineers. International
affiliations have been developed through work with the Japan Bank for
International Cooperation (JBIC) and Japan International Cooperation
Agency (JICA). JBSI firm employees over 200 individuals.

Recent JBSI projects include the following:

• Consulting Services for Bai Chay Bridge Project (Vietnam, JBIC, Precast Cable-Stayed Bridge)
• The Second National Highway No. 1 Bridge Rehabilitation Project (Phase II-3) (Vietnam, JBIC)
• Sri Lanka - Japan Friendship Bridge Widening Project (Sri Lanka, JBIC)
• Southern Transport Development Project (Sri Lanka, JBIC)
• Reconstruction of Small and Medium Bridges on Dhaka - Chittagong Highway (Bangladesh)
• Master Plan Study on Bridge Development (Sri Lanka)
• Kiso River Bridge (Precast Continuous Box girder Extradosed Type Cable-Stayed Hybrid
Bridge, L=1,145m)
• Ibi River Bridge (Precast Continuous Box girder Extradosed Type
Cable-Stayed Hybrid Bridge, L= 1,397m)
• Tengenji Bridge (Precast 3-span continuous girder cable-stayed bridge,
L=426m)
• Megami Bridge (3-span Continuous Steel Cable-Stayed Bridge,
L=880m, Span: (200+480+200)m)

The Japan Society of Civil Engineers’ (JSCE) Tanaka Award has been
granted to the JBSI firm numerous times for outstanding bridge design.

8
 Japanese Extradosed
Bridges Toured

Bridge Name Location Owner Year of Structural Bridge Span Length (m) Width (m) Tower Tower Girder
Completion Type Length (m) Height Height Height
Full Effective from Below (m)
Deck (m) Deck (m)

Odawara Kanagawa Japan 1994 3-Span Rigid 270.0 73.3 - 122.3 - 73.3 13.0 9.5 10.7 37.2 3.5 -2.2
Blueway Bridge Prefecture Highway Frame

Shinkawa Hamamatsu Shizuoka 2002 5-Span 386.0 38.5 - 45.0 - 90.0 25.0 20.5 13.0 11.2 4.0 - 2.4
Bridge City Prefecture (est.) Continuous - 130.0 - 80.5
Beam

Miyakodagawa Shizuoka Japan 2001 2-Span Rigid 286.0 133.0 - 133.0 19.9 16.5 20.0 83.0 6.5 - 4.0
Bridge Prefecture Highway Frame

Kiso River Mie Japan 2001 5-Span 1145.0 160 - 275 x3 - 33.0 29.0 30.0 24.3 7.3 - 4.3
Bridge Prefecture Highway Composite 160
Beam

Ibi River Mie Japan 2001 6-Span 1397.0 154 - 271.5 x 4 - 33.0 29.0 30.0 24.8 7.3 - 4.3
Bridge Prefecture Highway Composite 157
Beam

Okuyama Kobe Hanshin 1998 3-Span 285.0 74.1 - 140.0 - 69.1 16.5 14.1 22.3 43.4 3.5 - 2.4
Bridge City Expressway Continuous
Beam

Tsukuhara Hyogo Japan 1997 3-Span Rigid 323.0 65.4 - 180.0 - 76.4 12.8 9.3 16.0 57.0 5.5 - 3.0
Bridge Prefecture Highway Frame

9
 Odawara Blueway Bridge
Elevation

Cross-section
and elevation
reprinted from the
Odawar Blueway
Bridge brochure.

Cross-Section
The Odawara Blueway Bridge is located on the coast in Odawara city, southwest of Tokyo. It
was not only the first extradosed bridge built in Japan, but also the first bridge in the world to
use external exposed cables. It is a three-span continuous structure with two planes of cables
in a fan shape arrangement. The spans are 72-122-74m. The segmental-type superstructure is
a two-cell concrete box accommodating one lane of traffic in each direction, with 13m width
out-to-out. The depth of the superstructure is 2.2m at center of main
span and at the ends of flanking spans and 3.5m at the towers. It was
constructed using the balanced-cantilever method. A CCD camera was
used to check segment shapes; segments weighed 400 tons and were
cast in 4 days each.
The height of the concrete towers is 1/12 the length of the main
span. (The extradosed tower height is much less than that of a cable-
stayed bridge). Changes in cable stress due to live load are reduced to
about 1/4 of the cable-stayed bridges. Accordingly, the allowable
cable stress is 0.6 fpu (fpu stands for the ultimate strength of prestress-
ing steel), which is the same as for conventional post-tensioning. View of the Odawara Blueway Bridge from the north.

The tower saddles are made up of a double pipe structure to

accommodate replacement of the stays. The stays are anchored outside
the saddle to prevent strand slip inside the saddle area, which otherwise
would create a difference in cable force from one face of the saddle to
the other.
The stay cable strands are of the Flo-Bond seven wire type (simi-
lar to our Flo-Fil but with grit on the outside). The stay pipe is a vari-
able blue color FRP pipe with cement grout covering the epoxy strands.
This is the only Japan Highway Public Corporation bridge where a
grouted stay was used. The stays are comprised of 19-15mm strands.

Driver’s perspective of the Odawara Blueway

Bridge. Note longitudinal rail lighting.

10
 At the anchorages double sheathing is provided to allow for relative ease in replacement of
cables. High damping rubber dampers (3-5% logarithmic damping) are used to overcome rain and
wind vibrations with polymer cement, amenable to elongation, corrosion protection and crack
resistance. Testing was done for the flexural fatigue resistance of the stay cables and the per-
formance of dampers.
The bridge aesthetics and lighting treatment were unique. Longitudinal line lighting along
the railing at a height of 2m was adopted (note photo on page 10). As part of the aesthetic plan,
the steel railing was painted a dark blue color. With a contract value of $18 million, the bridge
was completed in 35 months. It was constructed by a Joint Venture between Sumitomo
Construction Company Ltd. and Kajima Corp.

Shinkawa Bridge
Elevation

Cross-section
and elevation
reprinted from the
Shinkawa Bridge
brochure.

Cross-Section
Also a concrete extradosed highway bridge spanning a river, the Shinkawa Bridge
is located between Odawara City and Nagoya. The bridge was under construction
at the time of this mission. The superstructure is of the
cast-in-place balanced-cantilever type and accommo-
dates four lanes of traffic, two in each direction. Two
parallel planes of stays in the center median are provid-
ed. The superstructure is a five-span continuous unit
with spans of 38.5-45-90-130-80.5m. The last three of
the five spans are supported by the stay cables. The
first two, as well as part of the third span, are on a horizontal curve.
The superstructure is a three-cell box girder with a parabolic soffit in
Delegation with Mr. Kudo, Project Engineer, and
the extradosed spans. It is 25m wide out-to-out and is 2.4m deep at
other staff of Sumitomo Construction.

11
 the approaches and the midspan of the main span. It is 4m deep at the towers, which are 13m
in height.
The substructure is unusual. Due to high scour potential the tower piers in the river are
oriented in the direction of flow in an effort to reduce the effect of scour. The main pier foun-
dations are well foundation type: cellular structures with concrete
filled steel pipe piles. The approach piers are on cast-in-place circular
piles. However, the pier caps at the tower piers are skewed to the pier
shafts, so as to be perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the bridge.
The stay cables are comprised of thirty-seven 15.2mm diameter
epoxy-coated Dywidag (DW) strands. The cable system is provided by
Freyssinet. Four different types of post-tensioning systems are used in the
box girders. They are DW bar system with 32mm diameter in the box gird-
er with Freyssinet 12-12.7mm strands. In the cross-beam, Freyssinet 12-
Cable system in tower 15.2mm strands are used and in the deck slab 28.6mm bars are used for
transverse post-tensioning. The saddles in the towers are of double pipe
type similar to Odawara Blueway Bridge. However the entire saddle system for all the stay cables is
prefabricated and placed on the tower, including the inner pipe. This concept provides higher accura-
cy in the setting of the stay cables and avoids field issues associated with individual saddle installa-
tion. Additionally, there are associated cost and schedule benefits. The prefabricated saddle is then
encased in concrete.
High load rubber bearings are used at all
piers, similar to our base isolation lead cored
bearings to reduce the seismic forces on the sub-
structure elements. The superstructure is to be
jacked and the bearings reset after construction.
The stay cable damping system is very
similar to the Odawara Blueway bridge (see
Appendix A, Design Papers).
The time-frame for bridge construction was
anticipated to take three years and was reported to
Model of Shinkawa Bridge cable saddle system
be on schedule. The bridge was due to be com-
pleted in late 2002. Construction of the highest quality was observed at the site, especially in the
Cast-in-Place superstructure. Post-tensioning vents are of the clear reinforced plastic type with dif-
ferent colors for different locations of tendons and had about 2m of extension above the deck. They
were intact and well supported to prevent any breakage and prevent intrusion of water.
The Shinkawa Bridge is anticipated to cost approximately $50 million. It is being built
by Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd.

12
 Miyakodagawa Bridge

This bridge is on the second Tomei Expressway near Hamamatsu city in Shizuoka prefec-
ture over the Miyakodagawa River. The bridge is a two-span continuous concrete rigid frame
with three towers supporting both roadways.
The superstructure is composed of two twin-cell concrete box girders fixed to the tower piers.
They are each 19.91m wide each. Each roadway accommodates three
3.75m wide lanes. The superstructures were built using the Cast-in-Place
balanced-cantilever method of construction. The segment lengths were
typically 3m in length, with the segments near the tower at 2.5m in length.
One unusual feature of this bridge is its substructure. The pier
columns are of the composite type. They consist of multiple steel pipes
with post-tensioned hoop tendons for confinement and vertical rebars on
the outside for crack control. The use of pipes reduces costs and improves
seismic performance. During construction, pipes can support concrete
formwork and scaffolding. This is an interesting
View of Miyakodagawa Bridge from adjacent
river crossing concept utilized for tall piers, especially in high
seismic regions. The pier columns are founded
on spread footings. The towers are 20m in height above the roadway.
The stay cables consist of 7-wire strands covered in High Density
Polyethylene. Twenty-seven 15.2mm strands make up a stay cable. The
outer pipe is of High-Density Polyethylene type with polyethylene filler,
similar to the other bridges. High-density rubber dampers are used at the
superstructure level to control vibration. At the towers, prefabricated sad-
dle frames encased in concrete are used. The stays are anchored on either
side of the saddles to prevent the stay cable movement inside the saddle. Fan cable arrangement on the Miyakodagawa Bridge

13
 A double-pipe system is used in the saddles with the inner removable pipe filled with grout.
The substructure and superstructure cost $17 million and $38 million, respectively, to con-
struct. The bridge was designed by CTI consultants for the Japan Highway Public Corporation.
The bridge was completed this year and received the Japan Society of Civil Engineering (JSCE)
“Tanaka Prize” for distinguished bridges in 2001.

Cross-section
and elevation Kiso and Ibi River Bridges (also known as the Kisogawa and Ibigawa Bridges)
reprinted from the
Kiso & Ibi River
Bridge brochure.

These two extradosed bridges owned by the Japanese Highway Public Corporation are
large, advanced state-of-the-art, and the first hybrid extradosed bridges constructed in the world.
They are on the New Meishin Expressway in the Mie Prefecture. These two bridges and their
approaches were completed in 2001. The Kiso River and Ibi River Bridges are 1145m and
1397m long, respectively. The substructure and superstructure were constructed in separate con-
struction contracts.
Both bridges are multiple-span extradosed-type bridges. The main spans are of hybrid
construction with precast segments at the piers and steel boxes were used to reduce the weight of
the structure in the mid spans. The transition between the steel spans and precast concrete seg-
ments is provided by a special hybrid segment (see photo on page 15). Thus the concrete side
matches with the precast concrete segments coming from the Tower piers, connected through a
cast-in-place closure, with the steel section mates with the midspan steel sections. The steel-to-
steel connection is through a field splice, while the concrete-to-steel connection in the hybrid
segment is through post-tensioning as well as shear stud connection. The steel main span is not
directly supported by stay cables.

14
 The pylon is integral with the deck, but separated from the sub-
structure with inertia force distributing type rubber bearings.
The Ibi River Bridge is a six-span continuous structure with all
spans supported by stay cables; the Kiso River Bridge is similar but
with only five spans. The spans lengths for the Ibi River Bridge are
154-271.5-271.5-271.5-271.5-157m where as the span lengths for the
Kiso River Bridge are 160-275-275-275-160m. In both bridges the
steel boxes in the main spans are 100m long. The concrete box girders
cantilevering out from the towers are of the precast segmental type
with a three-cell box. Each box segment Pier contour of Kiso and Ibi River Bridges
weighed from 300-400 tons. A total of 360
5m deep segments were cast; they were erected using a 600 ton crane.
They are 33m wide out-to-out (effective width = 29m) with 4m depth at
the shallow ends near the abutments, 4.3m deep at the interface with the
steel sections in the main spans and 7m deep at the towers. The soffit
of the concrete superstructure is parabolic. Concrete segments were
transported to the site on barges from an 80,000 sq.m precast plant, built
for the project and located 10-15km from the
Cable damping system of Kiso and site. The concrete segments were precast using
Ibi River Bridges the short line match cast method. Each pier has
three segments with each weighing 400 tons.
The steel cross-section in the main spans is 4.3m deep and is a three-cell
box section. In both bridges the steel boxes in the main spans are 100m
long. The 2000 ton steel spans were hoisted to position with a derrick.
The riding surface is comprised of 75mm thick asphalt overlay with a
waterproofing membrane.
The foundations for the main tower piers
Akio Kasuga, Sumitomo Construction Company,
are rectangular caissons 28m x 30m and 39m with delegation en route to Kiso and Ibi River
Bridges
deep. Steel pipe piles with interlock were used
for the cofferdams. Pipe piles filled with con-
crete support the piers inside the cofferdam. The cofferdams were dewa-
tered and tremie filled before the pier was constructed in the dry. It took
nine months to construct all nine piers for the two bridges.
The towers above the roadway are in the form of a sail looking
from the river, which complicated the forming at the base. They are 30m
Inspection of steel span transition segment by
Joseph Chilstrom, Franco Liberatore, Mr. high above the roadway and support two parallel planes of stays in the
Nakamura (JHPC), David Stahnke, and
Christopher Gallucci median. From the top of the foundation the top of the towers are about

15
 54m in height. The stays are at 5m intervals. At the top of the towers prefabricated cable anchor-
ages are used and are encased in concrete. Saddles were not used in these bridges.
The stays were provided by Skinko and are comprised of galvanized strands in extruded
polyethylene sheathing with a wax coating. The outer pipe for the stays is a white High Density
Polyethlyene pipe. Polyethylene beads are used as filler inside the High Density Polyethlyene pipe.
There are no spiral beads on the High Density Polyethlyene pipe to over-
come rain-wind vibration. Stay cables are provided by BBR and are pre-
fabricated with Hi-Am & Dina anchors. In these bridges, stay cables also
support the precast concrete segment weights as well as steel main span
section weights in addition to live load. The cable vibration was tested in
a wind tunnel. Since there are two planes of cables close to each other,
wake galloping was considered, but was not an
issue. High damping rubber shock absorbers are
used at the base to reduce the vibration effects.
Wind tunnel testing was not performed on the
Span view of Kiso River Bridge overall structure for this project.
A construction Joint Venture on the Kiso
River Bridge included Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd., D.P.S.
Bridge Works Company, Ltd., and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. The
Kiso River Bridge substructure and superstructure were completed in 33
months. The total construction cost was $37.5 million.
Tower cable anchorage on Ibi River Bridge

Field office meeting with JHPC and Sumitomo representatives

16
 Cross-section
and elevation
reprinted from the
Okuyama Bridge
Okuyama Bridge (Shin-Karato Bridge) brochure.
Elevation Cross-Section

The Okuyama Bridge is owned by the Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation. It is

located near the town of Shin-Karato, Kobe. The Hanshin Expressway Kita-Kobe Route hugs
the mountain in the Karato area behind Mount Rokko, Kobe. These are
two parallel structures offset from each other. The eastbound bridge
has a length of 260m, a height at mid span of 120m, and is on a curve
of 400m. The westbound bridge is slightly longer at 285m and higher
at 140m but with the same radius as the eastbound bridge. Both
bridges are on a horizontal curve. Because of seismic considerations,
the superstructure and the towers are intergrated and sit on bearings
over hammerhead piers.
The Okuyama Bridge tower height/span ration is 1/10. The east-
bound structure is a two-cell box with parabolic haunch soffit at the
towers. The spans are 66.1-120-72.1m. The Depth is 2.5m at the ends Driver’s perspective of the Okuyama Bridge
and mid-span and 3.5m at
the towers. Two planes of stays support the
superstructure. The cables are anchored on either
side of the box under the cantilever. The towers,
12.243m high above the roadway, are supported
on base isolation rubber bearings. Because of dif-
ficulty to access the site, all rebar cages were pre-
assembled off site (including piers and towers)
with the post tensioning and erected, saving con-
View of the Okuyama Bridge from a nearby village struction time. Due to closer rebar spacing, the

17
 allowable concrete slump is close to 12cm rather
than 8cm. Pregrouted transverse tendons were
used for the first time on this bridge. The tendons
are in epoxy resin inside a polyethylene pipe.
Epoxy curing time was set to about three to six
months to account for construction time lag.
Internal post-tensioning was used inside the
boxes.
The west-bound bridge superstructure is
similar in all respects to the east bound bridge. Integral superstructure and tower on pier
However it is a three-cell box structure with cen-
ter cell smaller than the two outside ones. The span lengths are 74.1-140-69.1m; the roadway
widens from roughly the middle of the main span to the west end.
A prefabricated saddle system was used similar to other bridges described above. The
stay cables were stressed to 0.60fy. The stay cables consisted of bare strands (no protection)
with grout inside a high density polyethylene pipe installed in place. A Dywidag cable anchor-
ing system was used for the stay cables; all
saddles were grouted before erected in towers.
As per Post-Tensioning Institute
Recommendations for stay cable design, testing
and installation, the tensile stress for all stay
cables shall be 0.45f’s for AASHTO Group 1
loading (f’s Guaranteed Ultimate Tensile
Strength). To measure cable tension, applied
vibration and measured acceleration period are
Joseph Chilstrom with HEPC representatives utilized. The natural frequency is measured at
the middle of the cables.
During construction, a monitoring program was in place to measure tension of cables,
stress in girders, pier tilt and the temperature of both cables and girders. This was performed
to verify the bridge actual behavior that was assumed during design; a significant correlation
was found.
The project was built by a PS and Oriental Nippon Koatsu Joint Venture. Total cost of
these two bridges were $34 million. The substructure and superstructure were completed in
eight and fifteen months, respectively. The bridges were completed in March 1998.

18
Cross-section
and elevation
reprinted from the Tsukuhara Bridge
Tsukuhara Bridge Elevation
brochure.
Cross-Section

This structure consists of two parallel highway bridges, each accommodating two lanes (spanning
Lake Tsukuhara) on the Sanyo expressway in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture.
They are both three-span continuous extradosed bridges with a single-cell
concrete box girder for the superstructure. The box is fully integrated
with the substructure. The V-shape substructure features a large V-shaped
void in the middle. The towers extend outward, following the V-shape
above the roadway level.
The superstructure for each bridge consists of a single-cell box,
12.8m wide out-to-out, accommodating two lanes. The box is 3m deep at
the abutments and mid-span and 5.5m deep at the
towers. The soffit is parabolic and the span
lengths are 65.4-180-76.4m. Cast-in-place bal-
anced-cantilever construction was used for the
superstructure; the segment lengths were about 7m and thus required an
extra large form traveler.
The tower piers are 35.5 and 27.5m tall below the box girders. The
lower 10m of the piers are solid and sit on caissons erected using the
pneumatic caisson method. One of the tower foundations is located in
20m of water with the bedrock slope at 45 degrees. This pier construction
required construction of an artificial island as well as and pre-boring in the
rock and other ground improvements.
Un-grouted semi-fabricated cables were used for the stay cables. The strands are extruded with
polyethylene and made into 27-strand bundles. The bundles are inserted into the high density poly-
ethylene pipe, with polyethylene filler used between the strands and the inside of the pipe. A prefabri-
cated saddle was used in the towers, similar to the other bridges described above. Vibration reduc-
tion dampers are used at the superstructure level. The dampers consist of high damping rubber.
The Tsukuhara Bridge was constructed in 36 months by Sumitomo Construction Company,
Ltd. for a cost of $42 million. The bridges were completed in 1997.

19
 Mission Statement

The Connecticut Department of Transportation has chosen an extradosed bridge to replace the
Interstate-95 (I-95) Pearl Harbor Memorial “Q” Bridge over the Quinnipiac River in New Haven,
Connecticut. This design meets the traffic, geometric, and structural criteria for the site, while
providing an aesthetically pleasing structure that is also economically viable.
The Delegation will visit Japan in September to gain additional depth and perspective in our
knowledge base of Extradosed bridges. The information obtained in the scanning tour will be
invaluable in the design and construction of the “Q” Bridge that is currently under design. The suc-
cessful design details that have been developed in Japan will be utilized in the design and incorporat-
ed into the construction of the “Q” Bridge. Aspects related to maintenance and inspection will be
investigated to determine the best details to incorporate for the longevity of the bridge.

Specific goals include a study of:

• Design parameters;
• Constructibility issues;
• Inspection techniques; and
• Maintenance and repair procedures.

The delegation will establish contacts within the Japanese industry to be utilized for consultation
when design or construction issues arise on the “Q” Bridge project.

Mission Questions
Design
During design development, are both steel and concrete superstructures considered?
What are some Japanese extradosed bridge cross sections?
Is there any special detailing to keep in mind during design?
What is the design vehicle load in Japan?
What design software is used?
What are some typical tower height-to-span ratios?
Does Japan have any design codes or guides specific to extradosed bridges?
What is the strength of steel and concrete used?
Have you used any high-performance steel or concrete?
What type of deck joints are typically used?
What system is used for stay cables, allowable stress, anchorage details and corrosion protection?
Where used, how are stay cable rubber dampers performing?

20
Are there any alternative cable damper designs to resist wind and rain vibrations?
What type of bearings are used (if not integral with tower pier)?
What type of roadway and accent lighting details are used?
Discuss wind tunnel tests along with other testing of a scale bridge model.
Review of Japanese contract plans and selective specifications.
Review of “Q” bridge layout and solicit comments.

Construction
What is an example of construction duration/schedule?
What superstructure erection techniques were used?
What types of foundations were used?
What were some installation techniques used for piles/caisson?
Are cofferdams used?
Is there uplift at end spans either during construction or permanently? If so, how is the struc-
ture held down?
Are there specialty contractor qualifications (i.e. cable installer, cable grout installers, etc.)?
Were there any difficulties during construction?

Inspection
What bridge components are inspected?
What are the inspection intervals for bridges?
What inspection techniques/devices (movable or fixed inspection platforms) are used?
Are any monitoring systems used (i.e. strain gauges, corrosion sensors, temperature readings)?
Are bridge-specific inspection and/or maintenance manuals prepared by the designer/contractor?
What has the performance history been for these types of bridges?
Have there been any early warning signs of problem areas?

Maintenance
Are deck overlays used on Japanese extradosed bridges? If so, which kind?
What kind of waterproofing membrane, if any, is used?
How is deck rehabilitation handled?
How are cables replaced, if necessary?
Are bearing replacement procedures built into the design (i.e. jacking provisions)?
What painting systems are used for steel components?
Describe climate and what chemicals are used for ice/snow removal.
How is bridge drainage handled?
What preventative maintenance is recommended?

21
Answers to select design mission questions, provided by
Japan Bridge and Structure Institute, as they pertain to
the design of the Tsukuhara Bridge.

Q: During design development, are both steel and concrete superstructures considered?
A: On design development, we performed a comparative study of a steel arch bridge, a
reinforced concrete arch bridge, and an extradosed pre-stressed concrete bridge. We
concluded that the extradosed pre-stressed concrete bridge excels the two alternatives in
constructibility, economics, and bridge aesthetics.

Q: Is there any special detailing to keep in mind during design?

A: Regarding main tower height, the larger the main tower height becomes, the smaller the
bending moment on the intermediate support. However, if the main tower height becomes
excessively larger, allowable stress for stay cable tends to be larger. Allowance of stay cable
cannot be set at 0.60 fpu. Unless we pay appropriate attention to the housing (or vessel) of
anchorage at main girder, or cable stay anchorage installation at recess, aesthetics is
deteriorated. At the Tsukuhara Bridge, the housing of the anchorage is hidden behind the
main girder, enhancing the aesthetics of the bridge.

Q: What design software is used?

A: • Frame Analysis by Infinitesimal Deformation Theory
• Calculation of cross section power and creep analysis, taking into consideration
construction procedures
• Use FEM analysis for the anchorage and saddle of stayed cables.

Q: What are some typical tower height-to-span ratios?

A: The past records of extradosed bridges: H/L 1/8 – 1/14; Tsukuhara Bridge: H/L = 1/11.3;
Note: H: Height of Main tower above deck, L = Span length

Q: Does Japan have any design codes or guides specific to extradosed bridges?
A: There are no design codes or guides regulated by public sectors. However, there is a guide
published by Japan’s Pre-stressed Concrete Engineering Association; which is denominated as
PC Cable Stayed Bridges & Extradosed Bridges, Designing & Construction Guides (draft)-
November 2000.

22
Q: What is the strength of steel and concrete used?
A: Strength of concrete main girder: 400kgf/cm2
Strength of concrete main tower: 350Kgf/cm2
Yield strength of reinforced steels: 3500kgf/cm2

Q: What type of deck joints are typically used?

A: Maurer joints are used.

Q: What system is used for stay cables, allowable stress, anchorage details and corrosion
protection?
A: Type of stay cable: cable 27T15.2 Corrosion protection of stay cable: A stranded cable
15.2mm diameter, consisting of seven wires, is completely grouted in the inner and exterior
clearance by high density polyethylene. An extradosed cable is made of twenty-seven strands
with seven wires, the exterior part of which is plated with high-density polyethylene. The
extradosed cable is dually corrosion protected. Allowable stress of stay cable: 0.60 fpu.
Note: pu: tensile strength.

Q: Where used, how are stay cable rubber dampers performing?

A: High damping rubber bearings are set to a place where primary natural frequency of stay
cable is below 3.0HZ (frequency of rain vibration).

Q: What types of bearings are used (if not integral with tower pier)?
A: The Main tower and main girder adopt a system of rigid connection, so bearings are not used
on girder edges. However, on the anchorage, sliding rubber dampers (similar to isolation
rubber bearings) are used.

Q: What type of roadway and accent lighting details are used?

A: Roadway and accent lightings are not installed.

Q: Discuss wind tunnel tests along with other testing of a scale model of the bridges.
A: At design development of Tsukuhara Bridge project, no wind tunnel tests were performed.
However, we had done wind resistance oversight based on the guides set by Japan Road
Association.

23
 Section II: The New Pearl
Harbor Memorial Bridge

Bridge Type Selection

Structure Investigation
The selection of an extradosed structure type for the main spans of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial
“Q” Bridge involved a two-step process. The first step consisted of the preparation of a Structure
Type Screening Report. Structural alternatives were evaluated in this report using qualitative crite-
ria developed to provide a relative means of comparison between alternatives. Structural alterna-
tives which received high ratings were then advanced into a second phase, formal Bridge Type
Study Report. This detailed study involved a quantitative analysis of all viable alternatives with
regard to project specific criteria. A description and results of these two studies are as follows:

Structure Type Screening Report

The purpose of the Structure Type Screening Report was to define viable alternative structure types
for the main span portion of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge with regard to:

1. Relative Initial Construction Costs;

2. Life Cycle Cost;
3. Constructability/Construction Staging Requirements;
4. Aesthetics;
5. Inspectability; and
6. Environmental Impact.

Based on the project objectives, ten alternative structure types were developed for preliminary
screening evaluation, which consisted of the following:

1. Composite Steel Plate Girder;

2. Composite Steel Box Girder;
3. Cast-in-Place Segmental Concrete Box Girder;
4. Precast Segmental Concrete Box Girder;
5. Single-Tower Asymmetrical Conventional Cable Stayed;
6. Twin-Tower Steel or Concrete Extradosed Cable Stayed;
7. Twin-Tower Conventional Cable Stayed;
8. Variable Depth Through Truss;
9. Through Truss with Deck Truss End Spans; and
10. Steel Tied Arch

Bridge design is subject to change until Final Design is completed. Renderings are current only as of publication of this report.

24
 The project criteria were used to develop a weighted comparison matrix, or Kepner-Tregoe
(K-T) analysis (so named after the management consultant firm that developed this method), to aid
in selecting preferred structural alternatives. This matrix provides a systematic means of evaluating
a number of unrelated selection criteria. Criteria weighting was developed to define the relative
importance of the design criteria with respect to the project objectives, as defined above on the
basis of a (5) most important to (1) least important scale. Structural alter-
natives are assigned a high (10) to low (1) rating for each of the evaluation
criteria based on the level of compliance with the criterion as defined in
the Structure Type Screening Report.
The K-T analysis was developed by calculating a weighted rating
value for each alternative for each criterion. The weighted rating value
is obtained by multiplying the alternative rating by the criterion weight-
ing factor to provide a weighted score. The weighted scores are then
summed with the highest total score representing the alternate that best
meets the selection criteria. Conceptual view of the steel alternative from west
Values assigned to Criteria Grading Categories and individual shore, facing north

weighting scores were developed jointly by Connecticut Department of Transportation

(ConnDOT), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), URS Corporation (URS) and Parsons
Brinckerhoff (PB). Criterion weights and ratings were assigned based on experience and sense
for the relative importance of the categories. In consideration of the results of the K-T analysis,
the following structure types were advanced into the Bridge Structure Type Study Report:

1. Composite Steel Plate Girder;

2. Composite Steel Box Girder;
3. Cast-in-Place Segmental Concrete Box Girder;
4. Precast Concrete Box Girder;
5. Concrete Box Girder Extradosed Cable Supported; and
6. Steel Box Girder Extradosed Cable Supported.

Bridge Type Study Report

A detailed quantitative analysis was performed for the six (6) structure types advanced from the
Structure Type Screening Report. This detailed analysis was prepared to evaluate alternative
structure types with regard to initial construction cost, life cycle cost based on a 100-year design
life, constructibility, maintenance, aesthetics, and environmental impacts.

25
 This report, dated January 10, 2001, recommended that the extradosed cable stayed steel box
girder bridge be advanced into final design. This recommendation was based on the following:

• Economics
The steel box extradosed bridge was one of the least costly structures estimated for this crossing.
This was the result of efficient use of materials and the placement of main bridge piers further away
from the navigational channel to avoid the need for a fendering system.

The extradosed cable stayed alternate provided a potential for cost savings
on two additional counts. These are:

1. The steel box extradosed alternate has the least superstructure depth of
all the alternates studied. This will allow the establishment of the lowest
roadway profile over the navigational channel. As a result, all the main
channel piers and approach piers will be shorter than the other bridge
options and, therefore, cost less.
Conceptual view of the steel alternative from west
shore, facing south
2. The need for architectural embellishment as would be required with the other bridge alternates
is minimized due to the inherent nature of the structure. With the extradosed bridge, the cables
and main pier towers are the aesthetic focal point of the bridge. End pylons were incorporated in
order to distinguish the extradosed bridge from the east and west structure approaches.

• Navigation
The 157m (515 ft) main channel span for the extradosed cable stayed alternate will accommodate
significant improvements to the navigational channel under the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge.
Current analysis of the barge traffic using the Mill River just north of the bridge indicates that turn-
ing radius is not ideal. With the extradosed bridge pier layout, improvements can be done to
increase the channel width under the bridge, if desired by the Coast Guard and Corps of Engineers.

• Aesthetics
The extradosed cable-stayed alternate will provide a dramatic gateway structure for New Haven
and the harbor. None of the other alternates offered significant aesthetic value in comparison
with the extradosed bridge with its main pier towers and cable stays.

• Impacts in Watercourse
The steel box extradosed bridge alternate has the least foundation footprint area impacts within the
Quinnipiac River as compared to the other bridge alternates. This is largely due to its light-weight.
In contrary, the concrete alternates have the most impact.

26
• Avoids Conflict with Existing Bridge Foundations
Due to the longer span capability of the extradosed bridge alternates, conflicts with the existing
eastern bridge channel pier can be avoided. All the other bridge options studied have an over-
lap of new and existing pier at this location. This will require partial removal of the existing
pier and then drilling shafts through the base portion remaining. A new cap would then be
constructed on the existing pier base. This work and the potential for contractor claims due to
unforeseen obstacles is minimized with the extradosed bridge option.

• Concrete Box Extradosed Bridge Alternatives

Prior to beginning Final Design on this project, it
was decided to advance both the steel box and
concrete box extradosed cable stayed alternatives
into design. The reason for advancing dual
designs is the ability to further evaluate the con-
struction cost estimates as the designs are refined.
It was deemed appropriate to take a conservative
approach to the utilization of the steel option, as Driver’s view of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge
no steel superstructure extradosed bridges have
yet been designed or built anywhere in the world. It was determined that at project milestone
submissions, review of the alternate designs would determine whether to continue to advance
one or both designs to contract advertisement. If ConnDOT and FHWA continue to develop
both alternatives through final design and potentially bid both alternates in construction, a
significant cost savings for the project might be realized.

• Conclusion
In conclusion, the extradosed structure type had significant advantages over other structure types,
primarily in the increased span ability and its superior aesthetic characteristics to warrant selection
for this location. The extradosed bridge alternate received unanimous endorsement from the
ConnDOT, FHWA, URS, PB and the local community.

Architectural Design

URS is currently in the final design phase of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge. Commonly
known in Connecticut as the Q-Bridge, renderings have now been developed to illustrate the
design elements that have been selected for its final form.

27
 Importance of Appearance
Aesthetics are a significant component of this bridge for a number of reasons. Despite the fact that
the bridge is often referred to by its nickname, the Q-Bridge, the Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge is
just that—a memorial to the losses our nation suffered at the start of our entry into World War II.
As a memorial to this event, its design should be sophisticated and significant. This bridge also
serves as a very prominent gateway structure for the City of New Haven. As such, its design
effects the way the City is perceived and should serve to bolster the pride of its residents.
Although the extradosed cable-stayed structure has already been
formally selected by the Connecticut Department of Transportation
(ConnDOT) as the type of bridge to replace the old structure, the aesthet-
ic appearance of the bridge has been under discussion since this decision
was made.

Aesthetics Committee
The final design is the result of a collaborative effort of a committee spe-
cially formed by ConnDOT to determine the aesthetics of the new Q-
Bridge. This aesthetics committee consists not only of members of
Conceptual view of the steel alternative from the
west shore, facing north
ConnDOT, the FHWA, PB and URS (with H2L2, an architecture/planning
firm, as subconsultant), but representatives from the City of New Haven
and the New Haven Chapter of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) as well. This committee
has been working, through meetings and workshops, to develop alternatives and to refine the plans
into a visually pleasing design for this signature structure.

Final Design Elements

The structure that has resulted during the final design process features elliptical shaped towers rising
approximately 23m (75 ft) above the bridge deck, an improvement over the concave panel towers ini-
tially proposed. The cables of the bridge have been designed to enter cleanly into the towers and will
be arranged parallel to each other in a “harp” arrangement. Approach pylons will visually mark the
beginning of the main span of the bridge and separate this main span from the approach spans. They
will also be elliptically shaped and rise above the deck for approximately 6m (20 ft). The main span
approach pier on the west side of the bridge will also contain a cantilevered walkway at its base that
will be incorporated into the City’s waterfront trail system in the future.

Steel vs. Concrete

Both steel and concrete superstructure alternatives are currently being designed for the bridge.
Although not yet finalized, careful consideration is also being given to the illumination of the
bridge so that it may have a substantial presence both day and night.

28
Steel Alternate cross-section and elevation.

Concrete Alternate cross-section and elevation.

29
Appendix A: Design Papers

30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
Reprinted from Development of Technology for Expressway Bridges Brochure—Japan Highway Public Corporation

81
Reprinted from Development of Technology for Expressway Bridges Brochure—Japan Highway Public Corporation

82
Appendix B: What is an Extradosed Cable-Stayed Bridge?

Reprinted from The Bridges Over Kiso & Ibi River Brochure—Japan Highway Public Corporation

83
Appendix C: Materials Distributed by the Delegation
At each meeting and field visit, an informational folder was distributed to all attendees. The
folder contained the following fact sheets:

• Delegation Mission Statement and Questions

• Delegation Team Member and Firm Description
• Itinerary
• Information on the State of Connecticut

In addition, the folders contained a Certificate of Appreciation, featured below. A thank-you card, also
included below, was signed by all delegation members and presented representatives of each company.

Thank -you card translation:A picture is worth a thousand

words. Many thanks for your hospitality. September 8-14, 2001.

84
Appendix D: Reference Materials Received by the
Delegation
Materials are available in the following locations:

Division Bridge Engineer URS Corporation

U.S. Department of Transportation 500 Enterprise Dr., Suite 3B
Federal Highway Administration Rocky Hill, CT 06067
Region One – Connecticut Division Phone: 860.529.8882
628-2 Hebron Ave., Suite 303 Fax: 860.529.3991
Glastonbury, CT 06033-5007 Email: dave_stahnke@urscorp.com
Phone: 860.659.6703
Fax: 860.659.6724
Email: joseph.e.chilstrom@fhwa.dot.gov

Consultant Design – Bridge *Official Copy Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade

Connecticut DOT & Douglas, Inc.
2800 Berlin Turnpike 148 Eastern Blvd., Suite 200
Newington, CT 06111 Glastonbury, CT 06033
Phone: 860.594.2000 Phone: 860.659.0444
Email: William.stark@po.state.ct.us Fax: 860.633.8117
Email: moretti@pbworld.com

From 9/10 meeting with the Japan Highway Public Corporation

Booklet: National Expressway Practices in Japan, Bridge (English)
Booklet: Meiko West Bridge, 10 pages (English)
Booklet: Meiko Central Bridge, 16 pages (English)
Booklet: Meiko East Bridge, 6 pages (English)
HiAm & DINA, 14 pages (English and Japanese)
Booklet: Development of Technology for Expressway Bridges, 26 pages (English)
Brochure: Kiso & Ibi Rivers, New Meishin Expressway, Kiso River Bridge, Ibi River Bridge,
Construction of Substructure (English)
Brochure: Kiso & Ibi River, New Meishin Expressway, Kiso River Bridge, Ibi River Bridge,
Construction of Superstructure (English)
Brochure: Kiso Ibi Bridge Construction Document (Japanese)
General Information, JHPC, 2000 (English)
Map: Road Network in Nagoya District (English and Japanese)
Map: New Meishin Expressway Constructed by Yokkaichi Construction Office, L=25.9km (English,
Japanese)

85
From 9/10 meeting with CTI Engineering Co., Ltd.
Booklet: CTI Engineering Co., Ltd., 20 pages (English)
PowerPoint: “Design of Miyakodagawa Bridge” by Takayuki Tsuchida and Hideaki Tanaka, 36
slides (English)
Spreadsheet: Major Extradosed Bridges in Japan (Mainly Constructed by Japan Highway Public
Corporation and bridges expected to be visited) September 10, 2001 (English)

From 9/10 meeting with Sumitomo Construction Company

Paper: “The Draft for Insertion and Tensioning of the Stay Cable.” November 25, 1998,
Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd., 14 pages (English)
Paper: “Prefabricated Saddle System for Extradosed Bridge.” November 25, 1998, Sumitomo
Electric Industries, Ltd., 6 pages (English)
Binder: Various papers, booklets, and brochures related to Sumitomo projects

From 9/12 visit to the Shinkawa Bridge

Brochure: Shinkawa Bridge (Japanese)
Brochure: Epoxy Coated Prestressing Strand Flo-Gard/Flo-Bond, Flo-Tech Systems/Sumitomo
Electric (English)
Paper: “New After Bond Strand with Moisture Reactive Resin Technology” 5 pages (English)
Spreadsheet: Schedule of Shinkawa Bridge Project, 1 page (English)
Info sheet: Shinkawa Bridge, 1 page (English)

From 9/13 visit to the Kiso and Ibi River Bridges

Video: Bridges for the 21st Century, New Meishin Expressway, Kiso River Bridge and Ibi River
Bridge (Revised Version Dec., 1999). Presented by JHPC, Yokkaichi Construction Office,
Nagoya Construction Bureau. Produced by Kajima Vision.

From 9/14 meeting with Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation

Booklet: The Work of the Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation, 49 pages (English)
Brochure: Okuyama Bridge (Japanese)
Booklet: Structures and Techniques, Hanshin Expressway Public Corporation, Kita Kobe Route,
35 pages (English)
Booklet: Techno Gallery, Structures and Technologies of the Hanshin Expressway, 85 pages (English)
Paper: “Shin-Karato Bridge in Kobe, Japan” by Minoru Tomita, Keigyoku Tei, and Suda Takashi.
Structural Engineering International. February, 1999, p. 109-110. (English)
Map: Hanshin Expressway Guide
Video: Construction of the Okuyama Bridge (Japanese)

86
From 9/14 meeting with Japan Bridge & Structure Institute
Various specifications, elevations, etc., on photocopied 11 x 17 pages, 17 pages (English)
Answers to Mission questions, 2 pages (English)
Paper: “A Characteristic and Design of PC Bridges w/Large Eccentric Cables (PC E.B.)” JBSI,
Inc., Dr. Masahisa Komiya, March 16, 1999. (English)

Miscellaneous
Brochure: Sanianigawa – 2nd Bridge (PC Superstructure) Construction Works (English)
Brochure: Rittoh Bridge, New Meishin Expressway (English)
Brochure: Miyakodagawa Bridge (English)

87
Appendix E: List of Individuals, by Company, Who Attended
Each Meeting

Sunday:
Luncheon with PBIJ at Hotel
Yuichi Sagawa

Monday:
Japan Highway
Tomoaki Murakami – Chief Engineer
Minoru Mizoe – Deputy Director
Katsuhiko Nakamura – Senior Engineer
Keiichi Aoki – Registered Engineer
Makoto Yanaka – Construction Dept.
Also present: Yuichi Sagawa (PBIJ), Akira Komiya (CTI)

CTI
Kazuya Ohshima – Executive Director, Vice President
Also Kamitakahara, Tomonaga, Komiya, Shimomura, Tanaka, Tsuchida,
Nakajima, Nishiya and Kido
Also present: Yuichi Sagawa (PBIJ)

Sumitomo
Hiroshi Tomoyasu – Executive Vive President
Akio Kasuga – Chief Engineer
Ken’ichi Saito
Also present: Yuichi Sagawa (PBIJ), Mr. Ono (CTI)

Tuesday:
Odawara Bridge
Ken Saito (Sumitomo)
Akira Komiya (CTI)
Ewa Maria Kido (CTI)
Mr. Ono (CTI)

Wednesday:

88
Sumitomo Works Office, Shinkawa Bridge under construction
Mr. Tatsuro Kudo – Project Manager (Sumitomo)
Mr. Hidenao Honda – Deputy Project Manager (Kajima-Sumitomo Joint Venture)
Mr. Kato Yuji (PS, Sumitomo)
Mr. Matsumoto
Mr. Makoto Yanaka (JH)
Mr. Ono (CTI)

Miyakodagawa Bridge site visit

Mr. Toshiharu Torii (JH)
Also present: Akira Komiya (CTI)

Thursday:
Kiso River Bridge site visit, meeting at JH Nagashima Field Office, Ibi River Bridge view
Kuniaki Nakamura – Head (JH)
Kazuyuki Mizuguchi – Project Manager of Kawagoe (JH)
Mr. Yanaka – Construction Department (JH)
Also present: Akio Kasuga (Sumitomo), Yuji Kozawa and Akira Komiya (CTI),
Ryoko Miyanishi (Interpreter), Atsuko Tanizaki (PBIJ)

Friday:
Hanshin
Toshihiko Naganuma – Manager
Tomoki Miyaguchi – Chief Engineer
Hide Kanaji – Senior Bridge and Structural Engineer
Takashi Suda – Manager of P.S. Corporation.
Also present: Akira Komiya (CTI), Atsuko Tanizaki (PBIJ), Ryoko Miyanishi (Interpreter)

Okuyama Bridge visit

Accompanied by HEPC engineer
Also present: Akira Komiya (CTI), Atsuko Tanizaki (PBIJ), Ryoko Miyanishi
(Interpreter)

Tsukuhara Bridge, meeting wiith JBSI

Hisahiro Nishizawa – Manager
Kazuhiko Kanoh – Construction Expert
Also present: Akira Komiya (CTI), Atsuko Tanizaki (PBIJ), Ryoko Miyanishi (Interpreter)

89
Appendix F: Delegation Team Firm Description and
Individual Biographical Data

FHWA

PB ConnDOT URS

U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is part of the United States Department of
Transportation and is headquartered in Washington, D.C. with field offices in each of the 52
States. The FHWA administers the Federal-Aid Highway Program, an annual multi-billion dollar
program of financial assistance to the States to construct and improve the National Highway
System. As such, the Connecticut Division provides approximately $400 Million per year for
highway and bridge projects within the State of Connecticut. The FHWA Division Office pro-
vides technical assistance, guidance and coordination with the Connecticut Department of
Transportation (ConnDOT) and the design consultants for major projects such as the I-95 Bridge
over the Quinnipiac River (Q Bridge).

Joseph E. Chilstrom, Division Bridge Engineer, U.S. DOT FHWA, Region One – Connecticut
Division, Glastonbury, Connecticut
As a Structural Engineer with the FHWA, Joseph Chilstrom has worked on numerous bridge proj-
ects in Connecticut and throughout the country. Major Connecticut projects include the Baldwin
Bridge, Old Saybrook, and the new Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge in New Haven. Mr. Chilstrom
has been employed for 35 consecutive years by the FHWA, 24 in the State of Connecticut. Prior
to working in Connecticut he served FHWA as a Design Engineer in the Washington, D.C. Bridge
Office and as an Assistant Structural Engineer in the State of Washington Division Office. He
received his BSCE from South Dakota State University.

Louis N. Triandafilou, High Performance Structural Materials Specialist, U.S. DOT FHWA
Eastern Resource Center, Baltimore, Maryland
Lou Triandafilou has been with the FHWA for 27 years, holding positions as construction project
engineer in California, assistant Division Bridge Engineer in Massachusetts, Division Bridge Engineer
in Ohio, and Regional Director of the Office of Structures in Baltimore. He has experience in bridge
design, construction, fabrication, specifications, maintenance, inspection and NDE/T, management,
research and materials. His current position involves the promotion of new technology nationwide
related to high performance concrete, steel, fiber reinforced polymer composites, and corrosion-resist-
ant rebar. He received his BSCE and BA in Business Administration from Rutgers University, and

90
holds a PE license from Ohio. A member of ASCE and a TRB committee on Concrete Material, he
also serves on regional and national committees related to concrete and steel bridges.

Connecticut Department of Transportation

The mission of the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) is to provide a safe,
efficient and cost-effective transportation system that meets the mobility needs of its users.
ConnDOT is comprised of five bureaus: the Bureau of Aviation & Ports, the Bureau of Finance &
Administration, the Bureau of Public Transportation, the Bureau of Policy & Planning, and the
Bureau of Engineering & Highway Operations, which is responsible for the design, construction,
and maintenance of the state highway system. The Bureau of Engineering & Highway Operations
is undertaking the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement Program, involving 7
miles of highway and bridges valued at nearly $800 million dollars, including the construction of
the first extradosed bridge in the country.

William R. Stark, Transportation Principal Engineer

William Stark is a career employee with ConnDOT. He started with the State in 1969 after
attending Hartford State Technical College in Hartford, CT and Northeastern University in
Boston, MA. Within the Engineering Bureau of ConnDOT, Mr. Stark has held positions in the
areas of surveying, highway construction and design, facilities design, and bridge rehabilitation.
In his current position, he is in charge of the Consultant Bridge Design Unit, which oversees the
design of all bridge work being performed by consulting engineers for the State of Connecticut.

Robert P. Zaffetti
Robert Zaffetti received a BS Degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University
of Rhode Island and an MS Degree in Structural Engineering from the University of Connecticut.
He has 20 years experience in the private and public sector with the last 16 years at the
Connecticut Department of Transportation. Beginning as a Structural Designer on various proj-
ects, he has since 1992 been a Project Manager in the Major Bridge Group of the Consultant
Design Office. Mr. Zaffetti is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, past chair of
the Connecticut Society of Civil Engineers Structural Technical Group and member of the New
England Precast Concrete Institute Technical Committee.

Christopher Gallucci, Project Manager, Construction

Chris Gallucci is a Project Manager with the Connecticut Department of Transportation’s
District 3 Construction Office in New Haven. He received an A.S. in Liberal Arts and
Sciences from Manchester Community College and an A.S. in Civil Engineering from
Hartford State Technical College. He has 20 years of experience in the administration of vari-
ous types of construction contracts awarded by the Department. Currently Mr. Gallucci has

91
been assigned the construction liaison responsibilities during the engineering and construction
phases of the I-95 Corridor Program. Once construction commences, he will closely oversee
and monitor the daily construction operations for each contract.

Franco R. Liberatore, Manager, Bridge Operations

Franco Liberatore received his BSCE from the University of Connecticut and has been with the
Connecticut Department of Transportation for 31 years. During his tenure, he has held positions
in Bridge Design as Project Engineer; in Consultant Design (Bridge) as Project Manager; and,
currently, in Bridge Maintenance as Manager of Bridge Operations. Mr. Liberatore has con-
tributed to numerous State projects, including the Charter Oak Bridge, the I-84/I-91 Interchange,
the I-91/I-291 Interchange, the I-84/I-384 Interchange, and the I-84/Rte 15 Interchange.

Parsons Brinckerhoff
Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB), founded in 1885, is one of the oldest continuously operating engineer-
ing firms in the world. Recognized as a leader in consulting, planning, engineering, program man-
agement, construction management, operations and maintenance and design-build for all types of
infrastructure, PB is employee-owned and has close to 9,000 people in more than 250 offices on six
continents. PB provides comprehensive services for virtually every type of infrastructure and facili-
ties project in both the public and private sectors. PB's portfolio, which features many award-win-
ning efforts, includes some of the world’s largest and most important public works projects. PB is
Program Manager of the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement Program.

Anthony A. Moretti, PE Deputy Project Manager

Anthony Moretti received his BSCE and MSCE from the University of Connecticut and has 20
years of design and project management experience on major highway and bridge related proj-
ects. He is an Assistant Vice President and Senior Project Manager with Parsons Brinckerhoff
Quade & Douglas, Inc. in Glastonbury, CT. He has been with PB for over 17 years and is cur-
rently their Deputy Project Manager for the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor
Improvement Program in which PB is providing ConnDOT general design and construction pro-
gram management services. Mr. Moretti is a member of the ASCE.

Vijay Chandra, PE Senior Vice President

Vijay Chandra received his BSCE from the University of Mysore, India, and his MS in Advanced
Structural Analysis from the University of London, England. Mr. Chandra has been with Parsons
Brinckerhoff for more than thirty years. He currently manages major bridge projects such as the
William Natcher Cable Stayed Bridge in Kentucky and the Charles River Crossing and other seg-
mental bridges that are part of the Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston. Mr. Chandra serves
on the PCI Bridge Committee and is chair of the PCI Subcommittee for Integral Bridges.

92
URS Corporation
URS is a global, full-service organization, 15,800 strong. The industry's finest planners, engi-
neers, architects, scientists and program and construction managers make up our professional
staff. URS serves clients' needs from more than 300 offices in 30 countries. URS was ranked
number one on ENR's list of the top 500 design firms and second in transportation. In addition,
URS was named by Fortune magazine to its list of America's 1000 largest companies. As part of
the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor Improvement Program, URS is designing the first
extradosed bridge in the United States.

James A. Platosh, PE Vice President and Project Manager

James Platosh is a Vice President and Project Manager with URS Corporation. He is a registered
Professional Engineer and is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the
Institute of Transportation Engineers. Of his 29 years of experience, 16 years have been with
Connecticut office of URS where he is in charge of the Transportation Group. He is responsible
for the management and technical execution of transportation projects. Currently, he is the
Project Manager for the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Improvement Program, Contract B,
which includes the design of the new Pearl Harbor Memorial (Q) Bridge.

Steven L. Stroh, P.E., Lead Engineer, Q Bridge Main Span Unit

Steven Stroh is the lead engineer for the Extradosed Prestressed Bridge design. He is the
bridge group manager for URS’ Tampa Office and is a Vice President of the firm. Mr. Stroh
received a BSCE and MSCE from the University of South Florida and presently serves on the
adjunct faculty there. He has 25 years experience in bridge design including numerous long-
span cable-stayed bridges. Mr. Stroh is a member of the Board of Directors for the American
Segmental Bridge Institute and is the current Chairman for the American Concrete Institute
committee on Concrete Bridges.

David K. Stahnke, P.E., Deputy Project Manager

Dave Stahnke received his BSCE from the University of Connecticut and has 22 years of design
and project management experience on major highway and bridge related projects. He has been
with URS for 6 years and currently manages the Bridge Group for the Connecticut Office. As
Deputy Project Manager for Contract B of the I-95 New Haven Harbor Crossing Corridor
Improvement Program, Mr. Stahnke oversees all bridge design work performed by the firm for
the Contract, including the design of the new Q-Bridge. Mr. Stahnke is a member of the
American Society of Civil Engineers, American Concrete Institute and American Railway
Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way- Association.

93
 Appendix G: Detailed Delegation Itinerary
Date Departing Destination 1 Destination 2 Destination 3 Destination 4

Saturday, Sept. 8 Arrival

Airport shuttle bus to Ginza Daiichi Hotel

Sunday, Sept. 9 12:00 Meeting with Mr. Sagawa at Ginza Daiichi Hotel

Monday, Sept. 10 AM Ginza Daiichi JH Headquarters, CTI Engineering Sumitomo 1st floor Ginza Daiichi
Hotel 15th Floor 6th floor Mr. Kasuga Hotel
Mr. Komiya

Subway/Taxi 13:30 16:00 18:30

Tuesday, Sept. 11 AM Ginza Daiichi Odawara Blue Way Hakone Fujiya

Hotel Bridge Hotel

Chartered Bus 15:30

Wednesday, Sept. 12 AM Hakone Fujiya Shinkawa Bridge Miyakodagawa Marriott Hotel

Hotel Bridge Nagoya

Chartered Bus
Thursday, Sept. 13 AM Marriott Hotel Kiso River Bridge Kobe Harborland
New Otani
16:30

Chartered bus
9:50 Higashi Meihan Nagashima IC a Plaza after the booth
10:00 Dai-Ni-Meishin Wangan IC
10:10 Site inspection
11:00 Meeting with JH
11:50 Departure from JH office
14:00 Nagoya – Kobe by bullet train

Friday, Sept. 14 AM Kobe Harborland HEPC, Headquarter Okuyama Bridge, Tsukuhara Bridge Kobe Harborland
New Otani 11th floor (HEPC) (JH) New Otani

9:00 Chartered Bus 14:00 16:00 18:30

10:00-11:30 Site inspection &
meeting at
observatory

Saturday, Sept. 15 AM Kobe Harborland Visit Kyoto Kobe Harborland

New Otani New Otani

Sunday, Sept. 16 AM Kobe Harborland Itami Airport Narita Airport USA

New Otani

Aircraft

Chartered Bus

94