See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268592538

Guidelines for Bridge Water Pipe Installations

Conference Paper · July 2001

DOI: 10.1061/40574(2001)29

CITATIONS READS
5 23,071

3 authors, including:

Rajneesh Bharil
West Virginia University
11 PUBLICATIONS 17 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajneesh Bharil on 10 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 GUIDELINES FOR BRIDGE WATER PIPE INSTALLATIONS
Raj Bharil,1 Mark Pierepiekarz, 2 and Web Chandler 3

ABSTRACT
The existing water distribution network of many established cities with growing urban population is
vast and rapidly aging. An exposed water pipeline mounted on bridge constitutes a vulnerable
portion of the pipeline network, and is often subjected to additional environmental forces and
regulations by the bridge owners. Although, the mounting of pipes on host bridges is generally more
economical than building of new independent pipe crossings, often the lack of understanding about
the bridge's performance and bridge owner's requirements could be overwhelming to pipeline
designers.
A comprehensive set of guidelines addressing such issues on the planning, design, inspection, and
maintenance aspects of water pipeline installations on host bridges was developed for the Bureau of
Water Works of the City of Portland, Oregon. This paper briefly describes the development of the
guidelines and provides an abstract version of the recommendations for the planning and design of
such installations. A brief summary of proposed pipe hanger design criteria with design forces, load
combinations, and safety factors are also included. The guidelines were specifically developed for
personnel routinely involved in the planning, design, inspection, and maintenance of water pipelines
without bridge engineering background. Many articles presented in this document can also be
applied to other locations and non-water utilities mounted on bridges.

INTRODUCTION
Water mains are typically buried underground, generally following the adjacent road profile for easy
access and repairs. When crossing a stream, steep hill, highway or railway, water mains are often
attached to the existing bridges in lieu of building an independent crossing. The existing bridge pipe
installations vary significantly in age, configuration, material, fabrication quality, structural capacity,
seismic restraint, structural condition and safety factor. These bridge pipe installations are
considered to be important as well as a vulnerable links in the water distribution network.
As a part of the ongoing water mains network rehabilitation programs of the Bureau of Water
Works, City of Portland, Oregon, a need to provide uniform installation, inspection and
maintenance standards for bridge water mains installations was identified. CES, Inc. of Olympia,
Washington was awarded a contract to make recommendations for the bridge water pipe installation
guidelines. The primary objective was to investigate current practices for the design, inspection, and
maintenance of new and existing water pipes and pipe hanger systems attached to host bridges, and
1
Principal, CES Inc. Consulting Engineers – Bridges and Structures, 1211 East Fourth Avenue East,
Olympia, WA 98506; Web-site: www.ces-inc.net; E-mail: r_bharil@ces-inc.net
2
Associate, EQE International, Seattle, WA
3
Senior Associate, S. G. Pinney & Associates, Olympia, WA
recommend a set of guidelines for adoption by the Bureau. The guidelines apply primarily to the
above ground portion of the pipeline installations (aerial crossings) that are mounted on host
bridges. “Host bridges” are defined as structures primarily designed to carry highway, railroad, or
pedestrian traffic. Submerged pipe crossings, undercrossings, and dedicated pipe bridges are
excluded since their configurations could vary significantly and require special designs, inspection,
and maintenance.

DEVELOPMENT OF GUIDELINES
Our preliminary literature search indicated that there was no precedence of any guidelines on bridge
water pipe installations. Textbooks as well as various publications provided a very limited discussion
on this topic. The project team was led by CES as bridge/structural engineers and the project
principal investigator. Other members of the team included EQE International to address the pipe
and seismic issues, and S. G. Pinney & Associates for corrosion/coating issues. One of the
objectives was to bridge the information gap between the needs of the bridge owners and pipeline
owners.
The team began their work by meeting with the Bureau project staff team to discuss their major
concerns, past performance and maintenance issues, problems with the existing bridge pipe
inventory, existing database needs, and prevalent bridge and installations types used by the City.
During the course of development, various requirements from the neighboring state departments of
transportation (Oregon, Washington, and California) were evaluated, and a literature search of
available publications on this topic was performed. The latest catalogues from the suppliers and
manufactures of various water pipes and hangers, OIM (Operation, Inspection, and Maintenance)
manuals for bridges (Ref. 7), and various publications from AASHTO, FHWA, ASCE, AWWA,
NACE, ASTM, SSPC, and DIPRA were also reviewed.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN

In an attempt to provide uniform design standards and a reliable factor of safety, the following
design guidelines are proposed for new bridge water pipe installations. These guidelines are intended
to standardize design and installation practices of water piping systems on bridges.

Host Bridges
Usually, the easiest way to construct a pipeline across an obstacle is to attach it to an existing bridge
or new bridge under construction. Use of a host bridge offers pipe alignment in an established
corridor, lower pipeline cost, reduced environmental impact, and simplified and faster permitting
process when compared to building a dedicated crossing. Unlike other cable/telephone utility lines,
water pipelines (as well as sewer and gas lines) are considered to be one of the “high-risk” utilities by
many bridge owners since its failure could damage the structure, endanger the public or create a
traffic hazard. In general, many provisions of guidelines governing natural gas pipelines (e.g.:
Caltran’s guidelines on gas pipelines, Ref. 8) can also be applied to water pipes.

Ownership of the host-bridge:

Most host bridge situations will involve a railroad or highway bridge owned by an agency with its
own standards for attaching utilities to their bridges. The most important concept regarding the use
of host bridges for pipeline crossing is to recognize and accept the primacy of the host bridge
agency’s guidelines.

2
Bridge type, size & configuration:
Each bridge type dictates its own specific requirements for attaching utilities. The following rules-of-
thumb should be considered:

If the proposed pipeline will add more than 10% weight to the member it is attached to (such
as slab & girder unit supporting the pipe weight), a stress check of the supporting member
should be performed.

If the size of pipeline is more than a third of the superstructure depth (visible part of the bridge
thickness spanning between piers and/or abutment but not including railing or concrete
barrier), special structural assessment of the bridge elements is required.

If the size of the opening to accommodate the pipe and its relative movement is substantial
when compared to size of the abutment wall or pier diaphragm (say about 1/3 to 1/2 of main
member depth), special analysis, stress check, and/or strengthening of the abutment wall
should be performed.

If pipe size is too big relative to the bridge superstructure, consider splitting the pipe into two
smaller pipes and routing them on either side of the bridge (Ref. 5). A dedicated pipe bridge or
buried pipe undercrossing may also provide a cost-effective solution under such circumstances.

Existing condition of the bridge:

If the bridge fails, the pipeline fails. The planned design life and criticality rating of the proposed
pipeline need not exceed the adequacy of its host bridge. The existing condition of a host bridge
could affect the pipe routing in the following ways:

Overall condition rating of a bridge may affect the decision to route or not to route the pipeline
via the bridge.

Local condition of the bridge members where new hanger attachments/ mountings will be
installed should be adequate to transmit the pipe load to bridge structure.

If a bridge is not designed to survive a major flood, its use as a host bridge should be avoided
for all except the smallest, non-critical, local pipelines.

Load carrying capacity of the bridge:

If the bridge is posted for load (typically load limit signs are visible near the bridge) the pipe routing
may not be desirable at that bridge without further evaluation of the bridge structure.

Pipe locations on bridge:

Once a bridge has been chosen to be a host bridge, the routing or location of the pipe on the
structure becomes important. The following criteria should be kept in mind:

A visible bridge pipeline is not desirable from aesthetic, vandalism, and safety points of view.

If external placement of the pipeline cannot be avoided, the utility should be located on the
downstream side of the bridge.

Utility locations and supports shall be designed so that a failure will not result in damage to the
bridge, or the surrounding area, or be a hazard to traffic.

Some means of access to the pipeline and its support system should always be provided for
maintenance and inspection purposes.

3

If the pipe is located between the girders, the bottom of the pipe should be at least 1 foot
above the bottom of the girder. (Ref. 2).

Cutting of new holes for pipe routing through pier and intermediate diaphragms of a bridge
requires special analysis and/or strengthening of some bridge members.

All utility supports should be designed such that the loads imposed by the utility installation do
not overstress the conduit, the supports, or the bridge members.

Since all water pipes for municipal distribution are pressurized, they should not be embedded
(or encased) in the concrete elements such as barrier rail or deck slab.

When water pipes are placed inside the box girder bridges, there should be provisions for
adequate drainage to handle unexpected pipe ruptures.

All formwork for the interior portion of concrete box girder bridges should be removed to
allow adequate access for utility installation and inspection.

Conflict with other utilities on bridge:

Many other utilities such as sewer, gas, high-pressure fluids, telephone, and electrical may share the
host bridge. Interference with other utilities may cause safety hazards or serious alignment
problems. Placement of naturally conflicting utilities such as water and sewer, gas and electric, and
water and high voltage lines at a single location should be avoided.

Aesthetics considerations:
In general, many bridge owners prefer any utility installation to not be prominently visible to the
general public. The visual impact of the pipeline can be reduced by:

Locating the pipe trough the interior bay of girders or inside the box girder. Next
consideration should be given to placing the pipeline under the exterior slab overhang,
preferably on the less visible side

Locating pipes to match the vertical and horizontal lines of the bridge.

Sealing the pipe penetration through the abutment walls.

Painting the pipes and hanger supports to match the color of the bridge.

Coordination with future bridgework:

If the host bridge is undergoing or programmed to undergo a retrofit or rehabilitation in the near
future, the placement of the pipeline should be coordinated with the bridge work to take advantage
of the contractor’s mobilization at the site.

Bridge Pipes
The next important element of the system is the pipe itself. Typically, the same type of water pipe
which is buried underground is carried over the bridge. However, special considerations apply since
the buried pipe is now exposed fully to the surrounding environmental forces and is supported on
rigid hangers.

Pipe material:
The material for the pipe and its support system has a big impact on the system’s ductility, durability,
seismic performance, corrosion resistance, and application of coatings. The most appropriate

4
materials for aerial water pipe crossings are ductile iron pipe (DIP) and welded steel pipe (WSP).
Other pipe materials do not have a track record for bridge applications, and should not be used
without extensive testing and evaluation.
Pipelines should conform to appropriate design specifications such as American Water Works
Association (AWWA) specifications, and ASTM specifications for sizes and types not covered by
AWWA.

Ductile Iron pipe

Ductile iron pipe is generally manufactured in 18 to 20-foot lengths, diameter from 3” to 64”,
typically with push-on or mechanical type joints. These are rubber-gasketed joints that allow a
certain amount of longitudinal movement and lateral deflection, while maintaining the hydrostatic
integrity of the joint. Pipe thickness varies depending on the required pressure class and is typically
set by the pipeline owners.
When ductile iron pipe is supported at intervals, such as on a bridge, at least one support is required
directly behind the bell of each pipe. (This configuration results in having a support near each end of
a pipe segment.) The pipe bell provides additional localized stiffness and reduces the effect of
increased localized pipe stresses at support locations. Although ductile iron pipe is heavier than steel
pipe (a thicker wall is required for a comparable pressure rating), it is more than adequate to support
the weight of the pipe and water. A minimum of two supports per pipe length are generally
adequate, and the pipe can be designed as a simply supported beam. The deflection of pipe under
gravity loads between joints is usually not a significant consideration.

Welded Steel pipe

Steel pipe is normally furnished in 40-foot or 50-foot lengths and can be welded together in the field
resulting in a continuous pipe run. High beam strength, low weight-to-span ratio, and an inherent
toughness make steel a very attractive material. AWWA M11 design manual addresses design criteria
for intermittently supported steel pipe. The primary design consideration is adequate flexural
strength of the pipe section to resist bending stresses near the supports. The deflection of steel pipe,
particularly small diameter pipes, should be analyzed if the spans exceed 40 feet.

Thermal movements:
Pipe will expand and contract as the temperature increases and decreases. Change in water
temperature, air temperature, and sun exposure will change the pipe temperature. Similarly, the
bridge span will expand and contract, being affected by air temperature and sun exposure. A
conservative design is recommended, assuming that the pipe and bridge temperature does not
change at the same time. Water temperature can vary from 32 (winter) to 60 (summer) degrees
Fahrenheit. Air temperature varies from 0 to 100 degrees Fahrenheit. The most extreme condition
could be an empty pipe heated to 120 degrees in direct sun light in the summer. AASHTO
specifications (Ref. 4) for new highway bridge designs stipulate a range of 0 to 120 degrees
Fahrenheit in moderate climate and –30 to 120 degrees in cold climate.
As a rule of thumb, pipe expansion joints should be provided near all active expansion joints of the
bridge. Active joints typically exhibit visible signs of thermal movement. Typically, most hanger
supports are not designed to resist longitudinal forces, and therefore, the longitudinal restraint for a
pipeline may be present only on bridge end backfill. Also, transfer of large longitudinal thermal
force to bridge members may not be acceptable to the bridge owners. For long runs of water pipes

5
(say 600 feet or more), care must be taken to locate the expansion joint in the pipes with longitudinal
load-carrying supports. (Ref. 1).
The following provisions are recommended:

Bridge length up to 600 feet: Generally, pipe expansion assembly should be located at one
abutment and near an active intermediate bridge expansion joint (intermediate restraint
necessary), if present. For smaller bridges (say up to 100 feet), provisions for pipe thermal
movements are not necessary.

Bridge length more than 600 feet: Pipe expansion assembly should be located at each abutment
and spaced at minimum 300 feet intervals (intermediate locations) preferably near bridge
expansion joints.

Freeze protection:
During colder weather coupled with low water usage period, the exposed pipe could freeze and
rupture. If freezing of pipe is found to be a concern, pipe can be insulated (a variety of proprietary
products are available, see AWWA "source book") or heat-traced (typically used in severe climates
only). Use of electricity should not be relied on for long-term freeze protection.

Casing pipe:
Casing (unpressurized pipe shell, encasement, or double pipe system) is required if a utility pipe
carries a volatile fluid (such as petroleum or natural gas) through the bridge in order to minimize the
risk of damage to bridge components and injury to traveling public. The partial casing at specific
locations may be necessary if there is a potential for:

Undermining of the footing (such as pipe location near the footing),

Endangerment of the traffic (such as pipe location above a busy roadway) in a rupture/leak or

Water pipe failure (high in general) or impact damage to the carrier pipe

Abutment & diaphragm penetration:

Often times, the pipe is designed to pass through the abutment, pier diaphragms, and in-span
hinges. Two general alternatives are available, a rigid penetration, or a “flexible” penetration. A rigid
penetration would be held in place using a wall thimble which has a flange cast in the wall to resist
thrust. Alternatively, a flexible penetration may allow limited longitudinal, transverse, or vertical
movement.

Depth of earth cover:

In order to protect the pipeline from freeze/thaw cycles as well as wheel load impacts (under the
traveled portion of the bridge approaches), the pipes should be buried at least 36 inches (or frost
depths based on the local experience) below the finished grade upon exiting the bridge abutments.
Use of casing pipe extending from the abutment opening to 5 feet beyond the traveled portion of
the approach road is recommended. (Ref. 1)

Pipe Hangers
Pipe hangers (also referred as pipe supports) are essential in maintaining the integrity of the carrier
pipe over aerial crossings and as such these systems should be properly designed, installed and

6
maintained. A poorly designed or installed hanger support system not only can undermine the
pipeline durability but also could cause significant damage to the host bridge.

Type selection:
Hanger selection depends on numerous factors such as bridge type, pipe type, joint type, new vs. old
installation, and retrofit vs. replacement. Other factors such as: loading, pipe cradle type, hanger
function, field tolerances, and placement location within the bridge should be considered during
hanger type selection:

Design criteria:
In general, the design criteria for pipe supports are specified by the hanger manufacturers. However,
the designer is ultimately responsible for the structural integrity of the pipe system and perhaps the
bridge to some extent. Use of conservative design criteria using higher than normal factors of safety
is highly recommended to offset heavy dependence on the prefabricated parts and relatively poor
quality control on the fabrication and installation of hangers. The following paragraphs briefly
describe some of the important design parameters and should be used supplement the
manufacturer’s recommendations.

Design Loads
The supports must be able to withstand thrust forces, support the weight of the pipe and its
contents, and sustain other applicable loading and conditions, such as seismic events or buildup of
thermal differential in cold weather. They must provide for all normal as well as occasional loads.
When pipe hanger load and movement calculations are required, the following must be considered
using appropriate provisions of UBC, AASHTO, and/or AWWA:

Factor of Safety (Fs) : Care should be taken to count the factor of safety only once. The use of
“factor of safety” is quite common in the design of ductile iron pipes and pipe supports. The
following values are recommended:
TABLE 1 – Factor of Safety
Description Typical Value Reference
Min. Factor of Safety based on the Yield Strength 2.0 AWWA M41
Min. Factor of Safety based on the Ultimate Strength 1.5 AWWA M41

Typical Pipe Design Parameters: The following is a brief summary of typical values used for
Ductile Iron Pipes:
TABLE 2 – Typical Design Parameters
Design Parameter Typical Value
Common Pipe Class 52 (ANSI Thickness Class)
Modulus of Elasticity (Epipe) 24,000,000 psi
Tensile Strength (Fu) 60,000 psi
Yield Strength (Fy) 42,000 psi

7

Deadweight Loads (D): Self-weight of carrier pipe, carrier pipe contents, pipe casing, insulation,
hanger weight, etc. should be included under dead weight of the system. Some of the
commonly used unit dead weights for pipe hanger design are as follows
TABLE 3 – Deadweight Loads
Material Usage Unit Weight (pcf or lbs/cu. ft.)
Steel Pipes, Hangers, Casing 490
Iron Pipes 450
Concrete Pipes, Bridge elements 150
Lining Internal pipe coating Ignored or included in pipe weight
Water Pipe content 62.4
Coating Felt, Foam, or Asphalt Paper for external Generally included in the pipe unit weight unless
pipe coating/insulation special lining is used (e.g.: mortar -lined steel pipes)

Refer to individual pipe manufacture’s catalogue for the weights of internal lining, joints, and
other standard fixtures. The following table (TABLE 4) shows standard dimensions of
commonly used Class 52 Ductile Iron pipes as provided in the Mc Wane’s 2000 Publication,
“Pipe Economy” (Ref. 10):
TABLE 4 – Ductile Iron Pipe Properties
Nominal Outside Average Pipe Thickness
Pipe Dia. Diameter Inside Nominal Service Casting Net Design
Diameter Thickness Allowance Allowance Thickness
Dn (inch) Do (inch) Dai (inch) tn (inch) ∆ts(inch) ∆tc(inch) tnet (inch)
4 4.80 4.22 0.29 0.08 0.05 0.16
6 6.90 6.28 0.31 0.08 0.05 0.18
8 9.05 8.39 0.33 0.08 0.05 0.20
10 11.10 10.40 0.35 0.08 0.06 0.21
12 13.20 12.46 0.37 0.08 0.06 0.23
14 15.30 14.52 0.39 0.08 0.07 0.24
16 17.40 16.60 0.40 0.08 0.07 0.25
18 19.50 18.68 0.41 0.08 0.07 0.26
20 21.60 20.76 0.42 0.08 0.07 0.27
24 25.80 24.92 0.44 0.08 0.07 0.29

The following table (TABLE 5) shows average linear weights (based on 18’ of laying length) of
commonly used D. I. pipes for water supply:
TABLE 5 – Pipe Weight for Class 52 D. I. Pipe with Mechanical Joints
Nominal Pipe Unit Weight of Empty Unit Weight of Water Unit Weight of Pipe filled
Diameter Pipe (including Bells) (Pipe Content) with Water*
Dn (inch) W empty (lbs./ft.) W water (lbs./ft.) W full (lbs./ft.)
4 13.4 6.1 19.5
6 20.4 13.4 33.8
8 29.0 24.0 53.0
10 37.9 36.8 74.7
12 47.7 52.8 100.5

8
 14 59.3 71.8 131.1
16 69.5 93.8 163.3
18 79.9 118.8 198.7
20 90.9 146.7 237.6
24 114.1 211.4 325.5
* The unit weight of the pipe running full is computed assuming the maximum internal pipe
diameter (Di = Do - tnet ).

Thrust Force (TH): Changes in the bridge pipeline geometry, configuration, or alignment can
induce hydrostatic and hydrodynamic forces commonly known as Thrust Forces. For water
supply applications, hydrodynamic forces can be ignored. Thrust force is a constant force on
an active waterline and must be properly accounted for when designing bridge pipe supports.
Common examples where thrust forces should be included in the design are: presence of
bends, tees, dead ends, couplings, or reducers. Such condition typically occurs near abutments
where the normal alignment of the pipe is altered to suit the existing bridge/roadway profile.
For ductile iron pipes supported by horizontally curved bridges, thrust can be present at all
bells.
TABLE 6 – Typical Water Pipe Pressures
Design Parameters Typical Value
Working/Operating/Static Pressure* (Pw) 100 psi
Surge/Water Hammer Allowance (Ps) 100 psi
Max. Design Pressure (P = Fs (Pw + Ps)) 200 psi
(use Fs = 1.0 for hanger force calculations, 2.0 for internal pipe stress checks)
* Test pressure should also be considered which is normally higher than operating or static
pressure.
Common formulae for thrust on bridge pipeline are shown as follows:
Pipe Bend:
θ/2)
TH = 2 P A Sin (θ
P = Maximum Design Pressure; A = Internal Area of the Pipe;
θ = Angle for change in pipe alignment. Use “0“for straight alignment, and “90” for
full 90 degree bend.
Reducer:
TH = P (A1 – A2)
A1 = Internal Area of the Larger Pipe; A2 = Internal Area of the Smaller Pipe
Dead End or Closure Valve on Bridge Pipeline:
TH = P A
A = Internal Area of the Pipe being dead ended or connected to valve
The computed force (TH) should be resisted by a suitable restraint (such as multi-directional
hangers, struts, or concrete blocks). The restraint element should be located within two joint fittings
(for D. I. Pipes) from the pressure change point in the direction opposing the force. Unrestrained

9
pipe joints or expansion joints in the vicinity should be treated as special circumstances since they
relieve thrust forces.
Water Hammer (WH): Sudden change in the pipe pressure can cause magnification of pipe thrust
forces and induce a significant longitudinal force on pipe supports. Typically, a standard surge
allowance of 100 psi and factor of safety (Fs) of 2.0 to compute maximum design pressures is
enough (400 psi of maximum design pressure will account for 300 psi surge allowance above the 100
psi operating pressure). AWWA Manual M41, Section 9.3.3 describes the computation process
involved for ductile iron pipes. For steel pipes, use AWWA Manual M11, and for concrete pipe use
AWWA Manual M9.

Thermal Load (T): The routine expansion and contraction of bridge and pipe can induce
longitudinal forces in the pipeline. The relative difference between the thermal coefficient of
bridge and pipe material and respective thermal lengths should be accounted in the design of
the supports. In “moderate climate” zone, the average mean installation temperature of 52 °F
and thermal range of -10 °F to +120 °F (steel structures) per ODOT bridge office practice
manual (Ref. 9). Therefore, typical temperature ranges for steel or ductile iron pipes are:
Temperature Range (∆ t ) for:
Temperature Rise = 120 °F - Installation Temperature = 68°F
Temperature Drop = -10 °F – Installation temperature = - 62°F
∆ t ) = 65 °F for both temperature rise and fall
Use Average Range (∆
TABLE 7 - Coefficients of Thermal Expansion (α):
Material Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (α): Application/Usage
Ductile Iron 6.2 x 10-6 in./in. Pipes
Steel 6.5 x 10-6 in./in. Pipes and bridges
Concrete 6.0 x 10-6 in./in. Pipes and bridges
Timber 0.0 in./in. Bridges

The resulting longitudinal force (T) to be resisted by the water pipe and its support system due to
differential thermal expansion of bridge and pipe can be computed using the following formulae:
Where,
Lbridge = Out to out length of bridge
Lpipe = Exposed length of pipe mounted on the bridge
Apipe = Average cross-sectional area of the pipe
Epipe = Modulus of Elasticity of pipe material
Shanger = Average hanger spacing
Thermal movement of water pipe (∆pipe ) = αpipe ∆ t Lpipe
Thermal movement of bridge (∆bridge ) = αbridge ∆ t Lbridge
If the length of pipe and bridge is essentially same:

10
 Lpipe = Lbridge = L
Differential thermal movement between the bridge and pipe
( ∆L ) = ∆pipe - ∆bridge = (αpipe - αbridge) x L x ∆ t
It is assume that the pipe will expand and contract from the geometrical center of the pipe length.
The exact nature of thermal expansion for bridge is much more complex due to the presence of
expansion joints, stiffness of superstructure and intermediate piers, bearings, and many other
factors. Assuming both pipe ends are fully restrained by the bridge approach fills, the average
Longitudinal Thermal Force in Pipe
(Tpipe) = Apipe x Epipe x (∆L/L)/2 = Apipe x Epipe x (αpipe - αbridge) x ∆ t /2
Assume the bridge pipe is supported on saddle rolls (Yoke Pipe Roll) or hung from bolts (Standard
Clevis) allowing a relatively free longitudinal movement of the pipe with respect to the bridge. The
pipe hanger will experience longitudinal force due to “in service” friction between the pipe
saddle/hanger and pipe.
This friction force can not exceed µR, where R ( = wfull x Shanger) is the vertical reaction on the pipe
hanger due to dead load, µ is the Coefficient of Static Friction between pipe and pipe support, and
wfull is the unit weight of water pipe running full.
Unless, more reliable information is available from the manufacture, assume µ value as 0.20 for
ductile iron pipe seating on lubricated saddle rolls, or between hanger bolts and pipe clamps.
Therefore, the unit longitudinal thermal force resisted by the hanger (T) will be the minimum of Tpipe
or µR /Shanger:
T αpipe - αbridge) x ∆t /2
= Apipe x Epipe x (α
Or
T = µ x wfull
Whichever is less.

Thermal Distortion (Pipe Snaking): In addition to imparting longitudinal force on pipe hangers,
thermal variations can cause detrimental snaking of the exposed pipeline and seriously
overstress the pipe and/or pipe joints. For ductile iron pipeline, differential thermal expansion
can cause unexpected lateral movement of joints over the laying length, and similarly, thermal
contraction can overstress the bolts located in the mechanical joints. For steel pipeline, the
distorted shape may take sinusoidal form with every lateral hanger support acting as the hinge
points. This problem can be eliminated by providing expansion joints in the exposed portion
of the bridge pipeline. A simplified method to evaluate the need for pipe expansion joints is
provided.
Ls = Laying length of ductile iron pipe (typical 18 feet)
Or Spacing of lateral pipe support for steel pipe
∆L = Thermal differential expansion for entire length = (αpipe - αbridge) x L x ∆t
Ns = Total number of pipe segments or laying length = L/Ls

11
 ∆Ls = Thermal expansion per laying length = ∆L/Ns
This thermal elongation is accommodated by shifting of pipe joints per laying length or distorting of
pipe between the hinge points.
∆s = Resulting Lateral offset per Ls
= { (Ls + ∆Ls)2 - Ls2 }1/2 Assuming right angle triangular form between bell
joints for ductile iron pipes
Or (3/8 x Ls x ∆Ls) 1/2 Assuming parabolic form between lateral supports for
steel pipes
If the resulting ∆s is small, no pipe expansion joints are needed. The limiting value of ∆s is not well
documented but it assumed to be a function of pipe diameter and laying length (or lateral hinge
point spacing). For ductile iron pipes, use the following table for allowable deflection of the
mechanical joints. These values are taken from Mc Wane Inc., Pipe Economy, 2000 publication and
an arbitrary factor of safety of 3.0 has been applied for limiting “in service” lateral deflection. This
value can be modified based on prior experience or important classification of the pipeline.
TABLE 8 – Allowable Lateral Deflection for Mechanical Joints
Nominal D. I. Lateral Deflection for Allowable Lateral Deflection Lateral Deflection
Pipe Diameter Construction (18’ laying length) in Service (Fs =3.0) /Laying Length

Dn (inch) ∆c (inch) ∆s (inch)

4 35 11.7 5.4%
6 27 9.0 4.2%
8 20 6.67 3.1%
10 20 6.67 3.1%
12 20 6.67 3.1%
14 13.5 4.5 2.1%
16 13.5 4.5 2.1%
18 11 3.7 1.7%
20 11 3.7 1.7%
24 9 3.0 1.4%

Stream Flow (SF) and Static/Dynamic Ice Pressure (ICE): These forces apply to pipes
subjected to submergence. In general, these forces can be ignored for most bridge pipe
application, since pipes are located well above the flood levels.

Snow Load (S): For bridge pipelines placed outside the bridge deck area, snow load on
horizontally projected area of the pipe and pipe tray (if present) should be considered. Since
most new bridge pipelines are not exposed to snow, the snow load is generally ignored.

Wind Load (W): This force is another significant load that should be applied to the design of
bridge pipe systems. Basic design wind speed should be 100 MPH. A minimum lateral load of
50 psf for slab/girder bridges and 75 psf for arch/truss bridges on the projected vertical area of
exposed pipe (AASHTO art. 3.15.1) should be used. If the pipe is located between the girders,
the uniform lateral wind pressure should be reduced to 20 psf. UBC or other rational methods
can also be substituted in lieu of more detailed site data or specific design requirements.

12
 D o = Outside Pipe Diameter (in feet)
For pipes located outside the exterior girders and have direct exposure to wind:
Slab, girder, or other closed system bridges:
W = 50 Do pounds per feet (plf)
Arch, truss, and other open system bridges:
W = 75 Do plf
For pipes located inside the girder bays and have only indirect exposure:
W = 20 Do plf

Live Load (L): Major pipe installations may be subjected to live loads due to inspection and
maintenance personnel if suitable pipe trays or catwalk is provided. UBC allows 40 psf live
loading on the usable portion of the catwalk. In general, a temporary live load of 40 psf is
considered adequate provided the access is restricted to general public. In general, the live
loads on bridge pipe hangers are not considered.

Impact Loads (I): Additional forces due to impacts of the vehicles using the bridge should be
accounted in the design of bridge pipe installations. The pipe supports are directly attached to
the load bearing bridge elements such as slab or girders, therefore, they may also share similar
impact forces as bridge superstructure elements do. A maximum impact factor for load bearing
bridge elements is considered to be 30% of the truck live loads. AWWA M41 uses impact of
50% for the design of shallow buried pipes. Since there is no direct live load on the bridge
pipes, a lesser impact factor of 1.3 (or 30%) applied to pipe’s deadweight is recommended to
account for effect of truck loading on the bridge system. For example, the total weight of a 16”
diameter D. I. pipe (running full with water) should be modified from 163.3 plf to 212.3 plf
(=163.3 x 1.3) to account for impact.
TABLE 9 – Impact Loads
Design Parameter Typical Value
Design Truck (Bridge Approaches and direct contact) HS-25
Max. Design Truck Wheel Load (typically needed for pipes buried in bridge approach fill) 20,000 lbs.
Impact Allowance for Bridge Pipes Supports (I) 30%

Earthquake/Seismic (EQ): In lieu of detailed analysis, for a typical bridge pipe hanger system
design, a conservative acceleration coefficient of “0.5g” in any lateral direction can be used in
seismically active areas (Caltran’s guidelines for gas pipes, Ref. 8). Typically for most bridges,
the induced forces in the pipe systems due to earthquake motions are the strongest in lateral
direction (across bridge length), the forces in vertical and longitudinal (along bridge length)
directions can be ignored assuming that bridge and pipe move together unlike lateral excitation
mode. However, all pipes should be restrained in vertical direction without counting on the
gravity. For example, a 16” diameter D. I. pipe running full with water can be subjected to
seismic force of 81.7 plf (=163.3 x 0.5) in lateral direction.

Load Combinations: Various load combinations are needed to account for occasional loads
(lower factor of safety) such as Wind or Earthquake, and sustained loads such as Dead load and

13
 Thrust (higher factor of safety). Specific importance classification and lifeline safety needs of
the pipeline can also dictate higher than usual factor of safety.
Either UBC or AASHTO load combinations can be used. The following table illustrates
various load combinations based on modified AASHTO load combinations. Since most
pipeline designers use factors of safety as the design basis rather than allowable stresses, both
values are provided. The recommended factor of safety is based on ultimate strength and
allowable stresses are based on yield strength. Under no circumstances should a factor of safety
below 1.5 for ultimate strength and 2.0 for yield strength be used. If the pipeline classification
is very important or there is a large amount of uncertainty about the pipe forces, condition of
supporting bridge elements, and hanger quality, a factor of safety of 5 for Group I instead of 3
should be used. Safety factors for other groups can be prorated based on allowable stresses as
shown on the table below:
TABLE 10 – Recommended Load Combinations
Group AASHTO Load Combinations Allowable Overstress Min. Factor of Safety
Yield Ultimate
I D + I + TH 100% 3.0 2.5
II D + TH + W 125% 2.5 2.0
III Group I + W 125% 2.5 2.0
IV Group I + T 125% 2.5 2.0
V Group II + T 140% 2.0 1.5
VI Group III + T 140% 2.0 1.5
VII D + TH + EQ 133% 2.5 2.0

Design specifications:
Standard design specifications such as UBC and/or AASHTO (Ref. 4) should be adopted for the
design of bridge pipe supports. Bridge engineers use AASHTO specifications, building
professionals prefer UBC (with local modifications). In addition, design provisions of AISC for
structural steel and AISI for cold-formed steel sheet metal are generally applicable for the design of
pipe supports. The design specifications used along with its design parameter such as self-weight,
wind loads, live load, snow loads should be clearly noted on construction plans.
The allowable stress design (ASD, also known as working stress design or WSD) method is typically
used for design of pipe hangers. However, use of LFD (Load Factor Design) or LRFD (Load or
Resistance Factor Design) methods may be economical depending upon the ratio of permanent and
occasional loads (such as seismic or live loads).

Design stresses:
Allowable stresses should conform to applicable sections of the adopted design specifications. For
example, Table 3 of MSS SP-58 (Ref. 6) can be used. A 20% increase in allowable stress is generally
permitted for short time overloading conditions during operation.

Materials:
The preferred material for main hanger support is structural steel or steel sheet metal. Use of very
thin gauges (say below 16) in the hanger construction should be avoided. The materials of pipe
supports should be in accordance with MSS SP-58 or other design specifications adopted by the
owner. The material in contact with the pipe needs to be compatible with the piping material so that

14
neither will have a deteriorating action on the other. Materials subject to corrosion or electrolysis can
be protected as specified by the engineering design with such protection applied in accordance with
the requirements of MSS SP-58.

Hanger details:
Various elements of hanger detailing are as follows:

Hanger Manufacturers: There are several companies providing bridge pipe hangers (e.g.: Grinnell
and B-Line). Copies of current catalogues from the pipe hanger manufacturers should be
maintained and made available to the designers.

Dimensions: Hangers and supports should be sized to fit the outside diameter of pipe or the
insulation if such is specified.

Components: Hangers for the suspension of size 2½ and larger pipe need to be vertically
adjustable under load, and should be used only for their purpose and not for rigging or erection
purposes.

Spacing: Support spacing should be based on the capacity of the pipe to span between the pipe
supports, hanger capacity to support the pipeline loading, and capacity of the supporting bridge
components, such as the bridge slab. The following is a summary:
 The spacing should not exceed 20 feet without a thorough investigation and design. (Ref.
8). However, most bridge owners require a maximum spacing of 10 feet for bridge hangers.
 Spacing less than the above may be required if there are structure loading limitations.
 If periodic dismantling of a piping system is anticipated, the design engineer shall specify any
required additional supports.
 In the supporting of multiple pipe runs, provisions shall be made to keep the lines in their
relative lateral positions, using clamps or clips as required.

Anchors: all anchors, guides, and restraints should be specified on the drawings. They should be
designed for imposed loading as determined by the design engineer. For guided systems in the
absence of specific lateral loads, the guide shall be designed for 20% of the dead weight load as
a minimum. (Ref. 3).

Corrosion Protection: The only sure way to protect these supports from corroding is “hot-dipped”
galvanizing after fabrication. Other types of galvanizing should NOT be accepted for pipe
supports. All steel utility supports including fasteners and anchorages, must be galvanized in
accordance with ASTM A 123 or A-153 respectively. If required by the bridge owner, all
pipelines and pipeline support surfaces, including galvanized components, should be painted
using an approved zinc-rich paint. The final coat should match the bridge color. Those
galvanized metal or aluminum utilities completely hidden from public view may be exempted
from the above painting requirements. Any painted surface damaged during construction
should be cleaned and painted as noted above. All paint splatter should be removed from the
bridge after painting.

Seismic considerations
Pipe supports and attachments to the bridge need to provide lateral as well as vertical support in a
seismically active area. Gravity should not be utilized to hold pipelines in place within the bridge as

15
pipelines can move off simple cradle supports during seismic activity, or from vibration from bridge
traffic, with consequent damage to the pipe, bridge, or both.

Seismic Analysis:
In absence of detailed seismic analysis, all pipe supports located in a seismically active area, should
be designed to accommodate pipeline design displacements and to restrain the pipeline subjected to
“0.5g” acceleration (a conservative estimate) in any direction. Lateral force multipliers smaller than
0.5g can be used provided proper justification is provided.

Pipe Stresses:
Under special conditions and particularly for welded steel pipes, combined pipe stresses from
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) and longitudinal bending (due to gravity and
seismic forces) should be checked using a generally accepted yield failure criterion such as “von
Mises” method.

Seismic movements:
Analysis of relative seismic displacement between the bridge and pipeline at all open joints, hinges,
and abutment should be performed for major crossings. Typically, provisions should be made at the
abutments for a minimum relative displacement of 4 to 6 inches. Depending on the magnitude of
expected movements, use a flexible joint, such as EBAA Flex-Tend, or restrained joint pipe with
adequate joint rotation capability. Another alternative is to use properly supported high-density
polyethylene (HDPE) to accommodate offsets. Restraint joints are recommended to accommodate
seismic movements.

Permitting
Permitting for hanger installation or retrofit on a host bridge is often minimal since work will fall
into the repair or minor retrofit category of work. In order to evaluate a request for aerial water pipe
crossings, most bridge owners will require the submittal of the following technical information along
with a completed encroachment application for the proposed installation:

Carrier pipe – type of material transported, pipe size, pipe material, operating pressure

Casing pipe –size, material, drainage and ventilation details (if casing pipe is omitted, give
explanation)

Pipe supports – type, spacing, and material

Total weight per unit length of the utility, longitudinal and lateral forces, if any

Details at abutments, piers, hinges, and diaphragms – include pipe penetration and pipe joint
details

Corrosion protection – carrier pipe, casing pipe, insulation covers, and hanger supports

Pipe isolation system – include information about emergency response such as the nearest
location of shut-off valves, fire hydrants, etc.

CONCLUSION
Bridge pipes are an essential part of any water distribution system. Unfortunately, they also present
weak links of the system. This paper attempts to clarify some of the criteria used in the planning
and design of bridge pipe installations. The guidelines presented in this paper are not specifications

16
 or codes, and are subject to changes, updates, improvements, modifications, and most importantly,
the interpretation and judgement of the qualified engineering personnel.

ACKOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper is written from selected portions of a comprehensive technical memorandum developed
under a contract with the Bureau of Water Works, City of Portland, Oregon. The authors
acknowledge the input, comments, and data provided by the Bureau of Water Works personnel, Mr.
Rick Lapp and Mr. Mike Sailing in particular. Their contributions have been essential to the
development of the original guidelines.

REFERENCES
1. California Department of Transportation (CALTRAN), “Standard Plans, Bridge Memo to
Designers, Bridge Design Aids, Bridge Design Practice, Bridge Design details, and Bridge
Design Specifications”
2. Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), “Bridge Design Manual
(Volumes 1 and 2), and Standard Plans”
3. Manufacturers Standardization Society, “MSS SP 69, “Pipe Hanger Supports – Selection and
Application,” 1996 Edition
4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1996,
“Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges”, 16th Edition with interims
5. Whiteman, Thomas H., Principal, CES, Inc., 1995 (Construction), “Widening Design
Development of Mill Creek Bridge on Tausick Way”, Details for Water Pipe & Other
Utilities, City of Walla Walla, Washington
6. Manufacturers Standardization Society. “MSS SP-58, Pipe Hangers and Supports – Materials,
Design and Manufacture, 1993 Edition
7. Whiteman, Thomas H., Principal, CES Inc., 1992-1999, Operation Inspection and
Maintenance (OIM) Manuals for: Lacey V. Murrow Floating Bridge, Homar Hadley Floating
Bridge, Riverside Lift Bridge, and Chehalis River Swing Bridge; Developed for Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)
8. Antony Gugino and others, “Development of Caltrans’ Guidelines for Natural Gas Pipelines
on Highway Bridges,” 1996, Presented at Pipeline Crossings, 1996 ASCE Proceedings of the
Specialty Conference
9. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), “Bridge Design Manual (Volumes 1, 2 and
3), and Standard Drawings for Design and Construction”
10. McWane Inc., “Pipe Economy 2000,” Published by McWane Inc. and Ranson Industries,
Inc.

17

View publication stats