NR/CIV/TUM/1700

Rev C
June 2010

TECHNICAL USER MANUAL

for
CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGES

Standard Detail and Design Drawings

Page 1 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Summary

This technical user manual is applicable to concrete underbridges. It provides guidance on the
selection and application of Network Rail’s suite of standard drawings. The standard designs
and details within these drawings will generally be used for new‐build structures, and part
replacement e.g. deck replacement.

Issue record

This technical user manual will be updated when necessary by distribution of a complete
replacement. A vertical black line in the margin will mark amended or additional parts of
revised pages.

Revision Date Comments

A January 2010 Draft issue
B April 2010 First issue
C June 2010 Second Issue ‐ Eurocode update

Page 2 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

CONTENTS
GLOSSARY 5

1 INTRODUCTION TO STANDARD DESIGNS AND DETAILS 6

1.1 Network Rail’s Requirements 6
1.1.1 Delivery Requirements 6
1.1.2 Functional Requirements 6

2 GUIDANCE FOR USE OF NETWORK RAIL STANDARD DESIGNS AND DETAILS 8

2.1 Approval of Schemes Using Standard Designs & Details 9
2.2 Drawing Selection Flowchart 11

3 CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGE APPLICATION DETAILS 13

3.1 Check List of Standard and Non‐Standard Items 13

4 DETAILS OF STRUCTURAL FORM 15

4.1 Geometry and Configuration 15
4.2 Deck Types 15
4.3 Span 16
4.4 Skew 16
4.5 Construction Depth 18
4.6 Deck Width 18
4.7 Deck Joints 19
4.7.1 No Connection 19
4.7.2 Shear Connection 20
4.7.3 Post Tensioned Connection 21
4.8 Bearings 21
4.9 Cill Units 22
4.10 Lateral Restraints 25
4.11 Uplift Restraints 26
4.12 Clearances 26
4.12.1 Structure Gauge Clearances 26
4.12.2 Clearances Limits Affecting Design. 26
4.13 Track Arrangement 27
4.14 Cant and Deck Super Elevation 27
4.15 Ballast Depth 27
4.16 Sleeper and Rail Details 27
4.17 Site Constraints 27
4.18 Direct Fastening Systems 28

5 INSTALLATION GUIDANCE 29

Page 3 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

5.1 Trial Erection 29

5.2 Installation Tolerances 29
5.3 Lifting Guidance 29
5.4 Check List for Installation Options 30

6 GUIDANCE FOR USE OF THE CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGE STANDARD DESIGNS AND DETAILS 32
6.1 General Arrangement Drawing 32
6.2 General Assembly Drawings 32
6.3 Details Drawings 32
6.4 Concrete and Reinforcement Drawing 32
6.5 Bar Bending Schedules 33
6.6 Bearing Details and Schedules 33
6.7 Protective Treatment, Waterproofing and Deck End Drainage 33
6.7.1 Basic Principles and General Comments 33
6.7.2 Protective Treatment 34
6.7.3 Waterproofing 34
6.8 Drainage 34
6.9 Substructure and Ancillary Items 35
6.10 Bonding/Stray Current/Insulation 35

7 FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION 36

7.1 Fabrication 36
7.2 Construction 36

8 SAFETY/CDM AND ENVIRONMENTAL 37

LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Schedule of Standard Drawings
APPENDIX B Design Assumptions
APPENDIX C Hidden Parts
APPENDIX D Draft 12 of NR/L2/CIV/020 Design of Bridges & Culverts

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Flowchart to show the use of Network Rail’s Standard Details and Designs 8
Figure 2.2: Process using the Standard Drawings and Technical User Manuals 10
Figure 2.3: Process to determine the Standard Details and Designs to use in detailing a Standard
Concrete Underbridge 12
Figure 3.4: Check List for Standard and Non Standard Items 14
Figure 4.5: Deck Type Selection Matrix 17
Figure 4.6: Indicative Span to Depth Ratio for longitudinal Spanning Concrete Decks 18
Figure 4.7: Selection Criteria for Cill Units 24

Page 4 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

GLOSSARY
Bearing The elements between the cill/impost and the main girders on which
the deck is supported.
Bridge A deck and its supporting structure (e.g. cill/ impost, abutment or
piers).
Cill Alternative name for impost. The (usually) concrete beam on which
the lower part of the bridge bearings are located.
Deck A pair of main girders and a floor.
Designer The person responsible for selecting the relevant standard designs
and details to suit the specific requirements for a particular scheme.
Dowel Restraint A device to transmit load effects between deck, cill and abutment
support
Filler Beam A steel and concrete arrangement comprising longitudinal spanning
steel sections encased within and acting compositely with a concrete
slab.
Impost Alternative name for cill. The (usually) concrete beam on which the
lower part of the bridge bearings are located.
Protective Treatment A treatment applied to structural elements to protect them from
environment.
Scheme Any planned work that involves the replacement of an existing bridge
or deck.
TUM Technical User Manual
SBB Solid Box Beam
SDD Standard Designs and Details
Walkway A standard detail comprising brackets attached to web stiffeners and
longitudinal spanning members positioned to allow railway personnel
traverse the bridge away from the track.
Waterproofing Measures applied to handle and remove water off the deck and away
from structural elements.

Page 5 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

1 INTRODUCTION TO STANDARD DESIGNS AND DETAILS

The development of the Standard Designs and Details (SDD) has been taken by Network Rail to
improve safety, asset reliability and increase efficiency. Their development is linked to Network
Rail’s overall business objectives, to improve reliability of the railways and reduce the funding
requirements for the on‐going management and maintenance. The basis of the SDD focuses on
two main areas that derive from these issues:

• Ensuring that the design meets Network Rail’s requirements

• The design is as successful as the designs of previous railway engineers, who built and
maintained bridges that have given good service for approaching 150 years.

1.1 Network Rail’s Requirements

Network Rail’s requirements are split between two areas, delivery and function:

1.1.1 Delivery Requirements

The SDDs have been taken to a stage where Form As and Bs for each aspect covered
(underbridge design, ancillaries etc.) have been submitted and approved. This leads to the
following benefits:

• A reduction in the design development timescales and costs.

• Minimising contractor and sub‐contractor costs associated with uncertainties in
detailing requirements.
• Streamlining the technical approval process for commonly used designs and details.

1.1.2 Functional Requirements

The SDD have been designed to ensure satisfactory performance of the asset under both
normal operations and abnormal operations (both planned and unplanned). A further
consideration has been Network Rail’s requirement to reduce the volume of maintenance and
management costs through the adoption of good practice. This leads to a number key design
drivers including:

• Failure modes: Critical failure modes should give warning, and alternative load paths
should be provided for potential local failures.
• No hidden details: All main structural elements should be visible from at least one side.
• Robustness: It is desirable for elements of the structure to have a degree of robustness
so that they are not damaged by unforeseen events disproportionate to the cause.
• Capability to support load.

Page 6 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

• Acceptable deformations.
• Structure gauge requirements: The underbridges have been designed to cater for a
range of positions of the structure gauge allowing their wide use.
• Safe working environment: The bridges have been designed to minimise the risk to
people on or about the bridge.
• Resistance to “bridge bash”: The bridges have been designed minimise the risk of
catastrophic failure in the event of a “bridge bash”.
• Resistance to derailment: The bridges have been designed to cater for the codified
derailment loads, as well as protecting the structure whilst mitigating damage to the
surrounding structures.

These functional requirements are requirements of draft Network Rail standard NR/L2/CIV/020.
Draft 012 of this standard has been used and the requirements therein met in designing the
concrete underbridge details.

A library of standard designs and details for a range of half through and concrete deck type
underbridges forms meeting these requirements has been produced. This document contains
guidance on the use of these standard drawings, including advice on the following:
• The elements and options contained within the suite of standard designs and details.
• Instruction on configuring a design using the standard designs and details
• Specific design restrictions and design assumptions
• Installation guidance
• Safety/CDM/environmental issues

The library will be maintained and distributed by Network Rail to its stakeholders and key
external suppliers for adoption across the network at a national level.

Page 7 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

2 GUIDANCE FOR USE OF NETWORK RAIL STANDARD DESIGNS AND DETAILS

The underlying philosophy of this standard is that a design details are provided, together with
general details of the other components (i.e. cill beams, bearings, walkways, protective
treatment, waterproofing etc.) which go to make up a standard concrete underbridges.

This allows the designer to produce a specific bridge design to suit the particular span, skew,
track geometry, cable ducting and walking route requirements of any particular location, so
long as they are within the limits of validity of the standard.

The flowchart in figure 2.1 demonstrates the use of the technical user manual and standard
drawings. The designer should analyse the constraints and requirements that exist for the
specific project site. This information should be used in conjunction with the design advice
contained within the technical user manual, to decide which elements can be taken from the
suite of standard designs and details and which items, if any, need bespoke design. This
designer output, and the series of standard drawings can be combined to produce the final
concrete underbridge solution.

Figure 2.1: Flowchart to show the use of Network Rail’s Standard Details and Designs

This manual describes the 2009 standard for rail underbridges using concrete deck type
construction arrangements with longitudinal spanning concrete slab, filler beam or prestressed
concrete to suit on or off line construction techniques. It is intended to be read in conjunction
with the set of standard drawings listed in Appendix A.

This manual is intended to aid the designer in producing an individual bridge design using this
standard, or in comparing this standard with other solutions. The manual discusses issues that

Page 8 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

will need to be covered in a contract specification for a bridge of this type, but is not intended
to form part of any contract documentation.

General arrangements have been developed for reinforced concrete, filler beam and
prestressed beam decks including associated cill beam arrangements. The designer will still
have to determine the most suitable bridge layout and structural arrangement of components
and carry out scheme specific design of the superstructure and substructure as necessary.

The decks and other components have been detailed to cater for a wide range of spans, skews
and track geometry within the limits of each of the deck arrangements. For situations outside
these parameters, the standard cannot be assumed to be applicable.

In all cases, the scheme specific design will need approval, full design, and an appropriate
check.

2.1 Approval of Schemes Using Standard Designs & Details

The SDDs for the concrete underbridge forms have been submitted and approved by Network
Rail at both Form A and Form B (including a category II check) stages of the Network Rail
approvals process.

The purpose of the concrete underbridge SDD was not to develop a deck design as these deck
forms currently appear not to be widely used and furthermore considered straight forward to
design. However, the advantage and significant benefit in developing the concrete underbridge
SDD was to produce a set of standard details for various types of concrete deck solutions that
are considered to be good practice.

The flowchart in Figure 2.2 demonstrates the general process of using the SDDs and TUMs. The
blue shaded boxes assist the designer to select the appropriate details or confirm the suitable
options available. A list of typical site parameters to consider in determining the appropriate
details or confirm the suitable options available is included in section 4.

Page 9 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Figure 2.2: Process using the Standard Drawings and Technical User Manuals

Page 10 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The designer will need to produce a scheme specific Form A for the site under consideration.
This Form A will detail the site specific parameters and the SDDs that will be used. As discussed
previously the SDD Form As have been approved and a site specific Form A is to be produced to
gain approval for use of the particular SDDs selected on the scheme.

Following Form A approval the designer will need to produce a full suite of scheme specific
drawings, including general arrangement drawings, detailed design drawings, reinforcement
schedules and scheme specific details based around the SDD.
The level of checking required is:

• Category I Check of the application of the standard designs and details

• Category II Check of the site specific concrete deck design, general arrangement
(including site survey information), detailed design drawings and bar bending schedules

2.2 Drawing Selection Flowchart

The following flowchart assists the designer in deciding the options to select and which
drawings to use in detailing a standard walkway and approach:

Page 11 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Figure 2.3: Process to determine the Standard Details and Designs to use in detailing a Standard
Concrete Underbridge

Page 12 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

3 CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGE APPLICATION DETAILS

The standard Concrete Underbridge design may be used at any suitable location in UK and
complies with The Railways (Interoperability)(Amendment) Regulations 2007 (S.I No. 3386).

The standard drawings provide a complete set of preferred details for a range of concrete deck
forms and cill beam arrangements. For a particular bridge, the designer needs to determine the
specific layout, choose the appropriate deck form and associated cill beam drawings and modify
the arrangements to suit site specific dimensions.

The standard drawings are generally applicable for spans between 2.5m to 20m for a range of
skews up to 50°. Although, it is acknowledged that certain deck forms can be taken beyond
these limitations, their use is not often exploited as the increased weight and construction
depth are generally prohibitive and other deck forms are often adopted for spans over 20m.

The designer should therefore choose the relevant drawings for his particular bridge skew
range from the full set of standard drawings and modify them as appropriate to suit the site
specific contract. Refer to flowchart in Figure 2.3.

The standard drawings were not developed to be used as fabrication drawings and fabricators
may have to produce accurate bridge specific drawings.

3.1 Check List of Standard and Non‐Standard Items

Such is the range of possible concrete decks applications, the concrete deck forms and cill
beams were developed to a low level of standardisation.

The check list (not exhaustive) in Figure 3.4 lists the standard and non‐standard items, design
responsibilities and notes.

Page 13 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGE STANDARD DETAILS – DESIGN RESPONSIBILITIES

Element Item Standard Detail or Notes
Designer to
Determine
General Arrangement Span Designer Site specific
Deck Skew Designer Site Specific
Deck Width Designer Site Specific
Construction Depth Designer Site Specific
Deck Concrete Designer Designer to confirm concrete
constituents in accordance with BS
8500 – 2: 2006.
Steelwork Designer Designer to confirm section / plate
sizes
Bearing Stiffener Designer Designer to consider requirement
for bearing stiffener through all
stages of construction
Reinforcement Designer Designer to confirm reinforcement
arrangement and provide bar
bending schedules
Pre‐stressing Designer Designer to confirm strand
arrangement and confirm pre‐
stressing information
Joints Standard Designer to confirm requirement
and select joint as appropriate.
Bearings Elastomeric Pads Designer Designer to confirm elastomeric pad
size and provide bearing schedule.
Uplift Restraint Designer Designer to confirm requirement for
uplift restraint. Refer to Technical
User Manual
Lateral Restraint Designer Designer to confirm requirement for
Lateral restraint. Refer to Technical
User Manual
Protective Treatment Standard ‐
Waterproofing and Deck Standard Refer to Drawings NR/CIV/SD/1740
End Drainage & 1741
Walkways Standard Designer to confirm anchorage
requirements
Lifting Arrangements Designer Designer to confirm lifting
arrangements

Figure 3.4: Check List for Standard and Non Standard Items

Page 14 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

4 DETAILS OF STRUCTURAL FORM

The standard concrete forms comprise single, double or multiple track deck type longitudinal
spanning arrangement of reinforced concrete, filler beam or pre‐stressed solid box beam
construction.

Refer to the figures in Appendix D for general arrangement details.

4.1 Geometry and Configuration

The designer will need to utilise the following Railway Group Standards (or their successors,
where appropriate):

• GE/RT8073 – Requirements for the Application of Standard Vehicle Gauges.

• GC/RT5112 – Loading Requirements for the Design of Bridges.
• GC/RT5203 – Infrastructure Requirements for Personal Safety in Respect of Clearance
and Access.
• GC/RT5212 – Requirements for Defining and Maintaining Clearances.
• GE/GN8573 – Guidance on Gauging
• NR/L2/CIV/020 – Design of Bridges and Culverts (a copy of draft 12 appended to this
TUM)
• GC/RC5510 – Recommendations for the Design of Bridges.

4.2 Deck Types

There are three deck arrangements, a reinforced concrete, filler beam and pre‐stressed solid
box beam options.

All options can be pre‐cast off site and transported from the shop in manageable sections and
assembled on site in their final position which should be suitable for the majority of schemes.
Alternatively, should there be a longer period over which the railway is blocked then options for
cast on site have been provided, noting that these would also apply to constructing
immediately offline and transporting into position during a possession.

The selection of the preferred deck arrangement is dependant upon many factors and Figure
4.5 highlights the key constraints to each of the deck types. Two variants to the filler beam have
been detailed with the encased sections being preferred. The alternative exposed bottom
flange arrangement is often utilised where construction depths do not permit the fully encased
option and also the arrangement lends itself to being erected piecemeal allowing formwork to
span between bottom flanges eliminating the need for significant falsework to construct.

The preference would be to reduce the number of joints within the deck but is recognised that
this is not always possible due to the various site constraints.

Page 15 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

4.3 Span

The span range of the standard concrete forms considered in the SDD is the span measured
between centres of bearings and is 2.5m to 20.0m.

4.4 Skew

The skew range, measured between the bearing centre line and perpendicular to the track
centreline, is 0° (square) to 50° (maximum), with limitations on the Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam
(SBB) where manufacturing constraints limits the skew ends to 45°. However, special
consideration and detailing of the beam ends will need to given when skews in excess of 45° are
to be adopted.

Page 16 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Deck Type

Segmental Segmental Fully Segmental Exposed Exposed Bottom

Reinforced Fully Encased Filler Pres‐stressed Solid
Description Reinforced Encased Filler Beam Bottom Flanges Flanges Filler Beam
Concrete Slab Beam Deck Box Beam
Concrete Slab Deck Filler Beam Deck Deck

Typical Span Between 5m and Between 5m and Between 5m and Between 5m and Between 10m and Up
Up to 6m Up to 6m
Range up to 15m up to15m up to15m up to15m to 20m

Typical Skew
Up to 50° Up to 50° Up to 50° Up to 50° Up to 50° Up to 50° Up to 45°
Range

Typical Depth 1 in 10 short span 1 in 10 short span 1 in 15 short span 1 in 15 short span 1 in 15 short span 1 in 15 short span
1 in 18
of Section 1 in 18 long span 1 in 18 long span 1 in 25 long span 1 in 25 long span 1 in 25 long span 1 in 25 long span

Typical width
Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited
Range

No connection for N/A No connection for No connection for N/A N/A Shear connection
spans < 6m (refer spans < 6m (refer spans < 6m (refer
to 4.7.1 for to 4.7.1 for to 4.7.1 for
limitations) limitations) limitations)
Deck Joint
Shear connection Shear connection Shear connection
Selection
for spans >6m for spans >6m
Post tensioned for
skews less than 10° Post tensioned for Post tensioned for
skews less than 10° skews less than 10°
and >6m and >6m
All Types All Types All Types All Types All Types All Types Type 2, 2A & 2B
Cill Unit
Type 1A (preferred) Type 1 (preferred) Type 1A (preferred) Type 1A (preferred) Type 1 (preferred) Type 1 (preferred) Type 2A (preferred)
Selection

Figure 4.5: Deck Type Selection Matrix

Page 17 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

For the reinforced concrete and filler beam decks there is the option to cast on site (final
position). This approach is not common to most schemes as this would be more appropriate to
a new build railway or where a lengthy closure has been granted to an existing railway line.

The last option available to all deck forms would be to erect the new structure adjacent to the
final position on temporary works and manoeuvred into position. Again this option is not
common to most schemes, and is often not cost effective and tends to be adopted where
constraints, either inherent with the site or where possessions are to be kept to the minimum
that permit the whole structure to be removed and installed within a short period.

4.5 Construction Depth

The total construction depth should be the summation of the span to depth ratios as given in
the Figure 4.6 and track form which has been assumed to be the following: depth of track (rail,
rail pads and sleeper) of 368mm, the nominal ballast depth, waterproofing (assumed as 15mm
thick) and the chosen floor type depth.

The construction depth varies for each deck form and associated span. Indicative span to depth
ratios have been provided on the drawings and summarised in Figure 4.6 below. These are for
guidance purposes only to aid the designer in selecting the appropriate deck form to suit the
site specific constraints.

Reinforced Concrete Slab Filler Beam Deck Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam
Span Ratio Span Ratio Span Ratio
<2.5m Min 250mm slab n/a n/a n/a n/a
2.5m<>5m 1:10 to 1:12.5 <5m Min 400mm slab n/a n/a
5m<>10m 1:12.5 to 1:15 5m<>10m 1:10 to 1:12.5 n/a n/a
10m<>15m 1:15 to 1:18 10m<>15m 1:12.5 to 1:15
10<>18m 1:18 *1
15m + 1:18 15m + 1:15 to 1:18

Figure 4.6: Indicative Span to Depth Ratio for longitudinal Spanning Concrete Decks

*1 The span to depth ratio for Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beams are to suit manufacturing
limitations and standard mould depths.

4.6 Deck Width

There is no limit on the width of deck and the width of individual units should be such to keep
joints to a minimum and where possible away from being directly under the rails.

Page 18 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Ideally robust kerbs should preferably be set at least 1500mm from the adjacent rail running
edge (so that the back of the “offside” wheel of a derailed train will be restrained by the cess
rail before the “nearside” wheel strikes the kerb.) However, it is accepted that in many cases it
will not be practicable to achieve this with reasonable economy.

Where not practicable this dimension should be a minimum of 760mm plus any allowance for
track curvature, cant, construction and future track slue tolerances.

Deck widths and the position of any cess walkways will also be affected by the cant, curvature
and track alignment of each particular bridge location and consideration must also be given to
the existing abutment width and adjacent structures, walkway positions and bridge end access
requirements.

4.7 Deck Joints

The individual pre‐cast off site concrete units for the three alternative deck forms are to be
preferably shear connected together by an in situ cementitous stitch.

Should possession constraints be such that there is insufficient time available to prepare the
stitch and subsequently fill with a cementitous material, the joint should either be transversely
post tensioned to overcome the transfer of load between joints or in some cases a nominal gap
can be maintained between adjacent units. However, both alternatives have limitations which
are set out below.

4.7.1 No Connection
The preference is to have an integral deck but it is recognised that in some instances this is not
achievable. Having individual units placed alongside one another with no shear connection
introduces differential movement between adjacent units, especially on a multiple track railway
line where one line is loaded and the adjacent line is not. The magnitude of this differential
movement is a function of the span and stiffness of the deck units and it is recommended that
spans over 6m should have shear connected decks unless it can be demonstrated otherwise
that this differential movement reduced or alternatively accommodated between decks.

Where the decks are to be laid side by side the designer is to allow for the difference in level
and associated tolerances as specified within Section 80 of the Network Rail specification.

The designer is to consider the stability of the decks to resist lateral load effects when applied
to the robust kerb. The arrangement of the edge units and restraint on the bearings should be
suitable to resist these applied load effects.

Page 19 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The designer is to consider the ability of the individual units to resist accidental load effects and
to provide the necessary restraint mechanisms to cater for such effects.

4.7.2 Shear Connection

The stitch joint between the units needs to be filled with a cementitious material with the
following general properties:
• Rapid strength gain and high early strength (dependent on design requirements and
time to loading/trafficking);
• Adequate longer‐term strength;
• Easy to place and compact within the congested area of the joint;
• Low shrinkage or shrinkage‐compensated;
• Intrinsic durability and provision of good protection to reinforcing steel from chlorides,
carbonation etc.
The designer should consider the requirement for early strength dependent on structural
requirements and the length of possession. The early‐age strength of the joint filling material
should be specified as appropriate (eg. ‘10 N/mm2 at 12 hours’) but should not be higher than is
required as this is likely to unnecessarily restrict the choice of available materials and may
create other problems (see below).

Proprietary rapid‐hardening cements are available for site mixing with suitable aggregates. Pre‐
mixed one‐part and two‐part bagged mortars and ‘microconcretes’ are also available, which
can be extended with coarse aggregates (maximum aggregate size should not exceed 10mm to
allow adequate placement and compaction). Rapid hardening cements are likely to include a
range of accelerators and other chemical and mineral additives, and strengths of up to 20
N/mm2 can be attained in an hour using magnesium‐phosphate cements. The materials used
should also meet the longer‐term requirements of the stitch by achieving suitable 28‐day
strengths and having a low shrinkage (proprietary materials may be shrinkage‐compensated).

Requirements for on‐site mixing, placement, compaction and curing are also very important
considerations. Given the congested area of the joint, the filling material should ideally be
pourable/pumpable and self‐compacting or compactable with minimal effort. This may be
difficult to achieve with some very rapid hardening concrete mixes, which may be stiff and also
tend to have very short working times.

Manufacturer’s recommendations for mixing and placement should be followed, but typically
the concrete surfaces of the box beam sections which will be in contact with the joint filler
material should be clean and free from laitance, oil, grease etc. and should normally be pre‐
wetted (but surface‐dry at the time of filling). The base of the joint should be sealed and during
filling a continuous flow of pumped or poured material should be ensured. If poured, a header
box should be used to maintain a head of material throughout the pour.

Page 20 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Ambient temperatures may be a consideration, and can significantly affect the rate of strength
gain. Rapid hardening materials typically generate a lot of heat so are less sensitive to cold‐
weather working than ordinary cementitious materials, but may suffer from resulting from
thermally‐induced cracking particularly in hot weather.

Proprietary rapid hardening materials are specialist products with a wide variety of
characteristics and manufacturers should be consulted to ensure selection of materials which
will meet performance requirements, and to determine requirements for mixing, placing,
compaction and curing.

4.7.3 Post Tensioned Connection

An alternative to having a fully integral deck but having some form of transverse distribution is
to install pre‐stressing steel ties / bars in ducts across the width of the deck and applying a post
tensioning force sufficient to generate a contact pressure between units to overcome the
applied load effects.

Post tensioning of skew decks is recommended for either square spans or low skews of no more
than 10°.

Adjacent pre‐cast concrete units are to be match cast against one another to obtain the
appropriate fit up between units.

Sufficient tolerance on alignment of transverse holes should be considered and the diameter of
the hole should generally be equal to at least twice the bar diameter.

4.8 Bearings

The standard details and designs assume that elastomeric bearing pads will be used to support
the bridge deck with lateral and longitudinal fixity of the deck provided by stainless steel
dowels.

The arrangements shown on the drawings show the minimum number of elastomeric bearings
required but the designer should confirm the most efficient number and arrangement to suit
the span, skew, width and loading requirements.

Where segmental units are shown two bearings have been shown and in the case of filler beam
decks, the steelwork filler beam in the middle does not have a bearing which will provide space
for restraint systems.

Page 21 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The designer is to consider the stability of the pre‐stressed solid box beam when placed on a
single bearing and the size of the bearing may have to be increased to suit construction
methodology.

The installation of the bearings should be in accordance with the manufacturer’s

recommendations including the bedding requirements.

4.9 Cill Units

Three types of cill unit have been detailed to cover a range of application to suit both the deck
form and site constraints. The selection of the cill unit arrangement can vary to suit certain
criteria as highlighted in Figure 4.7 which is dependant upon the bearing plinth and ballast wall
arrangement as follows:

Cill Beam Type 1 (integral ballast wall), 1A (separate ballast wall) and 1B (Block wall ballast wall)
have discrete plinths in which the main deck units are supported from, which improves the
access to the bearing shelf area. There is also the opportunity to post grout holding down
restraints once the deck has been placed.

Cill beam Type 2 (integral ballast wall), 2A (separate ballast wall) and 2B (block wall ballast wall)
have a raised full length bearing shelf, which provides flexibility on the position of bearings.

The integral ballast wall is recommended where one or more of the following would apply: time
constraints do not permit the lifting of separate ballast walls and/or reinstatement of backfill
needs to be carried out immediately after placing the cill; construction tolerances are adequate
to place a deck between two fixed walls; access to the rear of the bearings is not required when
placing the deck. Where this is not the case, consideration can be given to having separate
ballast walls at either one or both ends to suit site constraints.

The block wall ballast wall is recommended where either the spans are less than 6m (small
movements) or where sheet membrane is used to waterproof the deck.

There is an option to have an exaggerated chamfer on the leading edge to improve access to
the bearings and bearing shelf to assist both maintenance and bearing replacement activities.

A typical gap between the end of the deck and cill unit / ballast wall should be 75mm (±25mm).

The merits of locating the drainage channel in the cill unit towards the front of the cill unit was
considered but not recommended on the basis that the water would have to run passed the
bearings in order to drain away and also the position of the drainage channel would impinge on
the temporary jacking area to remove the bearings.

Page 22 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Although access to maintain the drainage channel at the rear can be problematic, the designer
is to consider potential locations where rodding / cleaning points can be made to suit site
constraints.

Page 23 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Cill Type Type 1 Type 1A Type 1B Type 2 Type 2A Type 2B

Selection Suited for all bridge spans Generally as Type 1 but Suited for bridge spans Suited for all bridge Suited for all bridge Suited for bridge spans
Criteria and deck forms provides flexibility and of small movements spans and deck forms spans and deck forms of small movements
more tolerance on (spans of 6m or less). (spans of 6m or less).
An integral ballast wall Lateral restraints to be Permits access to rear
placement of deck
reduces the number of Suited for use with installed at the same of deck to install Suited for use with
crane lifts and other site Permits access to rear sheeted membrane time as deck longitudinal stitch sheeted membrane
activities such as back fill of deck to install installation. reinforcement and
Permits access to rear Permits access to rear
material to can be placed longitudinal stitch installation of
of deck to install of deck to install
immediately after cill unit reinforcement and cementitous material
longitudinal stitch longitudinal stitch
/ back of wall drainage installation of
reinforcement and Lateral restraints to be reinforcement and
has been installed. cementitous material
installation of installed at the same installation of
Permits variation in Introduces additional cementitous material time as deck cementitous material
bearing levels (skew ballast wall to cill installation.
Lateral restraints to be
decks) by altering plinth dowelling activity
installed at the same
heights during the possession.
time as deck
Cill Holding down Permits access to rear installation.
restraints in between of bearing during deck
plinths can be post placement.
grouted after deck
Level of ballast wall can
installation.
be marginally adjusted
Provides good access to to suit line and level
drainage that deck has been
placed.
Option to chamfer leading
edge to improve access

Figure 4.7: Selection Criteria for Cill Units

Page 24 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

4.10 Lateral Restraints

Lateral forces are to be resisted at all interfaces between the deck and supporting substructure.
The deck is to be adequately restrained against the cill unit and likewise the cill unit is to be
adequately restrained against the existing substructure.

Lateral restraints between the deck and the cill unit are to be provided by using either the
elastomeric bearings or stainless steel dowels. Lateral restraints between the cill units and the
substructure are to be provided using stainless steel tie rods effectively anchoring the cill unit
to the masonry abutment / pier at suitable spacing and depth to generate sufficient lateral
resistance.

The Elastomeric bearings are to be designed to resist lateral load effects utilising their friction
capacity in accordance with BS5400 Part 9. Where insufficient resistance exists alternative
lateral restraints are to be provided on the basis that all the applied load effects are to be
resisted by the alternative mechanism, i.e part contribution between elastomeric bearings and
alternative restraints is not permitted.

Subject to design calculations, double or multiple track bridges (integral or shear connected
units) of spans 10m or above with a minimum of 5 elastomeric bearings do not generally
require lateral restraints as they can rely on the inherent mass of the concrete deck to provide
the necessary frictional capacity from the elastomeric bearings alone to resist the applied
effects. However, single track bridges would generally require lateral restraints up to and
around 20m.

Double or multiple track bridges (integral or shear connected units) of all spans do not generally
require lateral restraints between the cill unit and substructure as they can rely on the inherent
mass of the concrete deck to provide the necessary frictional capacity between the
substructure and cill unit interface. For the purposes of calculating the frictional resistance
between the underside of the cill unit and mortar bed / masonry abutment a nominal
coefficient of friction can typically range between 0.4 and 0.6, with the factor of safety against
sliding generally assumed to be 1.5.

Single track bridges would generally require lateral restraints up to and around 10m.

Where restraints are required between the cill unit and substructure, these are generally
anchored to the masonry abutments by having pre formed pockets in the cill unit whereby an
oversized hole can be cored through the holes provided in the cills into the existing abutment
to the required depth to achieve an effective embedment.

A threaded stainless steel tie rod is placed into the hole and a pourable cementitous grout is
then pumped to fill the void between the bar and masonry core to the level of the top of the cill

Page 25 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

unit, whereby a holding down plate and nut is hand tightened to provide the anchorage. The
depth of embedment will vary depending upon the lateral load effect to be resisted but it is
generally relied upon and subsequently sized by the vertical load effect from a vehicle collision
(Refer to Section 4.11)

4.11 Uplift Restraints

Vertical forces are to be resisted at all interfaces between the deck and supporting
substructure. The deck is to be adequately restrained against the cill unit and likewise the cill
unit is to be adequately restrained against the existing substructure.

Uplift restraints between the cill unit and the substructure are generally the same restraint as
the lateral restraint mechanism by introducing a grouted tie rod to the required embedment.

For short span single track bridges of around 6m span or less, special consideration should be
given to uplift restraints as generally there is insufficient inherent mass to resist the applied
load affects both in terms of the deck itself and the abutments.

The uplift restraint between the deck and cill unit will be bespoke depending upon the residual
vertical load effect that is to be resisted. These bespoke connections can be anchored into the
stitch area or connected directly to the concrete or steel soffit of the bridge.

4.12 Clearances

4.12.1 Structure Gauge Clearances

The designer should:

• Ensure that adequate clearance is provided between existing and proposed vehicles and
the structure.
• Ensure that the structure gauge considered for the standard designs is suitable for the
line considered for each specific scheme, in accordance with current Network Rail and
Railway Group Standards.
• Ensure that the required track radius and cant (if any) will not result in encroachment on
the structure gauge by any part of the deck or walkway.
• Prepare a gauging diagram(s) at Form A Stage.

4.12.2 Clearances Limits Affecting Design.

Generally, clearances will not affect the design of the deck. A robust kerb must be provided and
an absolute minimum clearance of 25mm to the Lower Structure Gauge should be assumed.

Page 26 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The maximum vertical distance between the rail and top of robust kerb considered in the
standard designs is 350mm. Note that the designer should assess if this is acceptable for
specific bridges, i.e. permanent way clearances and requirement to maintain gauge, track
maintenance requirements, or construction and installation tolerances, as a minimum
clearance of 50mm is desired for possible future works

4.13 Track Arrangement

An absolute minimum clearance of 25mm to the Lower Structure Gauge should be allowed for,
although it is recommended that where possible, a minimum clearance of 50mm should be
provided for possible future works.

The designer should ensure the effects of curved track (end and centre throws) does not cause
the structure gauge to foul the structure and that sufficient installation tolerances are provided.

4.14 Cant and Deck Super Elevation

The designer should ensure that the effects of cant, such as cant throw do not cause the
structural gauge to foul the structure.

4.15 Ballast Depth

The desired ballast depth is 300mm at mid span under the low rail. Shallower ballast depths
may be used, to a minimum of 200mm, however permanent way approval will be required.
The maximum ballast depth below the sleeper shall be generally limited to 400mm averaged
over the span.

4.16 Sleeper and Rail Details

The total depth of the rail, chair and sleeper has been taken as 368mm. The designer should
ensure that the chosen rail and sleeper combination will not cause the structural gauge to foul
the structure and sufficient distance is provided between the sleeper ends and the robust
kerbs. A minimum distance of 50mm is assumed between the robust kerb and sleeper end with
a lateral positioning tolerance of 25mm to ensure the 50mm is maintained.

4.17 Site Constraints

The designer will need to consider the site constraints, including but not limited to: OLE,
existing abutments, S&T, location of cess etc. Headroom above highways or waterways should
be maximised where possible and appropriate signage fixed to the structure (ideally to the bash

Page 27 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

beam or walkway). Refer to ancillary details in NR/CIV/SD/1800 series). Note that the signs will
be the responsibility of the local authority, Highways Agency or similar authority.

4.18 Direct Fastening Systems

The standard concrete underbridges have not been developed specifically to accommodate
direct fastening systems but the use of the standard drawings does not limit their use to
ballasted track. Where a direct fastening system is required for a specific scheme, the designer
shall select the suitable standard design with the required track/structure performance.
Additional design checks will be required to ensure suitability of the chosen detail as the
intensity of the railway loads will be greater than for ballasted track. Form A and Form B
submission and approval will be required.

Page 28 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

5 INSTALLATION GUIDANCE
It has been assumed that the standard concrete underbridges will be either constructed in situ,
piecemeal erected in situ using mobile road and rail cranes or constructed offline and lifted,
slid, jacked or transported into its final position using self propelled lifting vehicles (SPLV).
Specific details will need to be determined by the designer.

Where possible, to minimise railway possession times, the designer should consider installing
the deck with bottom ballast in place, though the designer should ensure it’s stability and that
the ballast is suitably retained.

5.1 Trial Erection

As stated on drawing NR/CIV/SD/1702 the bridge should be fully trial erected: The trial erection
should include all superstructure and ancillary items such as walkways, cill/impost, ballast walls
and cover plates. This is particularly important for skew bridges.

5.2 Installation Tolerances

The typical tolerances to be assumed in the standard design are usually for the installation of
the deck units by crane. The designer should develop the scheme to allow for the decks to be
typically positioned within 10mm and the track placed within 15mm of the design position on
plan. Vertical positioning tolerance should typically be 10mm on the assumption that the track
profile could be locally adjusted on site if necessary.

Installation by alternative methods will require these tolerances to be reviewed.

The designer should check that the effects of curved track (end and centre throws) does not
cause the structure gauge to foul any parts of the structure and that sufficient installation
tolerances are provided.

5.3 Lifting Guidance

Where the deck units are installed by lifting them into position by lifting eyes / brackets
attached to the deck units, the designer should ensure that lifting points are located
perpendicularly opposite to one another. Details are not given on the standard drawings but
have assumed that proprietary lifting eyes cast into the concrete will be provided.

The designer is to check that section has sufficient capacity to span between lifting points and
to ensure that provision has been made for additional local reinforcement to the lifting eye (if
necessary) to prevent it from punching out of the deck.

Page 29 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The lifting points should ideally be located between the quarter and third points of the span. In
all cases the designer must ensure that during the lift, the stresses (a safety factor of 2.0 is
recommended) in the deck does not exceed the theoretical permanent load stresses at the end
installation.

5.4 Check List for Installation Options

The following check list (not exhaustive) lists checks to be undertaken and items to be designed
or checked by the designer for the scheme specific installation option. Where appropriate, a
separate Form C will be required.
• The effect of the proposed lifting / support arrangement on;
o the lifting lugs (where applicable),
o the load distribution to each lifting / support point,
o the effect on the deck unit. Twist during installation or fabrication shall be
minimised. No one bearing shall move more than span/500 vertically compared
to the plane of the other three bearings.
• The suitability of the substructure:
o check the load effects from the new deck including pressure at base and under
the impost / cill beam,
o check overturning and sliding stability with and without the new deck in place.
• Undertake suitable geotechnical investigation to determine soil properties.
• Check that the differential settlement predicted does not exceed at SLS, 1 in 1000 along
the abutment
• Check installation tolerances noting that methods of installation other than by crane
may be more suited for installation in short (8 hour) possessions but may require
additional installation tolerances.

Page 30 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

The following check list (not exhaustive) lists typical issues to be considered by the designer for
the particular scheme when deciding on the available options to install the deck.
• Access to site
o Clearances to street furniture, overhead cables etc.,
o Road profile (horizontal and vertical): Proximity to hump back bridges, tight
curves etc. that may restrict access to site or plant movement.
o Location for site compound.
• Services: Highway / waterway.
o Services in or alongside the highway or waterway must be protected from bridge
installation activities.
• Services: Railway.
o Services may restrict or complicate installation of new bridge decks. Some
methods of installation will be more suited for sites with numerous railway
services, e.g. if services cannot be raised, this may preclude installation with
SPLV.
• Access around site
o Consider size of compound to construct the deck off line, rig cranes, store plant
and materials, store bridge elements, staff accommodation and welfare
provision.
• Site properties
o Strength of ground (ground reinforcement or piling for cranes or temporary
works),
o Access to site (haul roads and access agreements with land owner),
o Environmental issues (minimise damage to habitat, restrictions due to the
presence of rare or protected fauna and flora, relocation of rare or protected
fauna and flora, limitations on time of year to do the work to minimise impact on
flora and fauna).
o Working above water.
• Available possessions
o Minimise all possession times.
o Railway possessions. Strive for an 8 hour railway possession. Installation with
SPLV is usually quicker, thus minimising railway possessions, but will need larger
installation tolerances (refer to Section 5) and will not be suitable for all sites.
o Highway and waterway possessions may be limited at certain times of the year,
depending on the site location, e.g. a highway possession will be unlikely in
December if the site adjacent to a retail outlet, and a waterway possession
unlikely in July and August if heavily trafficked with recreational vessels.

Page 31 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

6 GUIDANCE FOR USE OF THE CONCRETE UNDERBRIDGE STANDARD DESIGNS

AND DETAILS

6.1 General Arrangement Drawing

General arrangement drawings should be produced in line with Network Rail’s requirements for
the specific site. However it is expected that this drawing should normally include the
following:

• Plan, bridge elevation and a cross‐section through the bridge including the elevation of
one abutment and the bridge seating arrangement.
• Geotechnical information, details of services (railway and other), details of land
ownership and details of adjacent infrastructure,
• Principal dimension information such as span, skew, clearances from rail to main girders
and walkway parapets, six foot gap (where applicable), bearing, bridge soffit, rail,
walkway and parapet levels, clearance to road (or river or rail as applicable).
• Lower sector gauging diagram(s).
• List of drawings forming the complete bridge design.

6.2 General Assembly Drawings

The setting out and arrangement of components will be unique in most instances and
dependent upon many variables including, bridge span, abutment skew and clearance
requirements.

Scheme specific general assembly drawings should be provided.

6.3 Details Drawings

The designer should provide detailed drawings of all components except the standard details
provided for concrete profiles, interfaces between units, waterproofing and end of deck
drainage.

6.4 Concrete and Reinforcement Drawing

All detailed concrete outline and reinforcement drawings and bar bending schedules are to be
prepared by the designer. In addition to the general guidance given on the standard drawings,
the designer shall consider:

Page 32 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

• Reinforcement and cover to any steelwork should be maintained.

• The position of the edge steel section with respect to the reinforcement within the
robust kerb to avoid clashing with the top flange
• The anchorage of reinforcement from the robust kerb
• The placement of links within the stitch area should be staggered with respect to
adjacent units to avoid clash
• The radius bend of the link around the steel sections within each unit and the
requirement to have a minimum edge distance between steel flange and outer concrete
face. This would also apply to the deck end.

Floors should be detailed to allow easy placement of reinforcement as well as meeting all
relevant design requirements.

6.5 Bar Bending Schedules

Production of deck specific bar bending schedules to accompany the deck drawings are
necessary in all instances.

6.6 Bearing Details and Schedules

Production of deck specific bearing details and schedules to accompany the deck drawings are
necessary in all instances.

6.7 Protective Treatment, Waterproofing and Deck End Drainage

6.7.1 Basic Principles and General Comments

The basic principles are as follows:
• All buried surfaces beneath or at the sides of the track are protected by a waterproofing
arrangement designed to ensure water and other train related pollutants do not come
into contact with the bridge superstructure and support/end units.
• Drainage arrangements, such as providing a longitudinal fall, should be incorporated in
the overall bridge design to minimise maintenance requirements.
• Steel surfaces permanently exposed in the final structure are specified as receiving a
protective treatment in accordance with NR/GN/CIV/002 and agreed with the scheme
sponsor.

Both protective treatment and waterproofing should be carried out as far as possible in shop
conditions to ensure the maximum integrity and quality. Details are shown on the standard
drawings of the residual site joint protection involving hand applied protective treatment and

Page 33 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

waterproofing system. It is envisaged that some remedial site painting will be required, to be
carried out in accordance with the Network Rail Specification.

6.7.2 Protective Treatment

The standard steelwork protective treatment specified is a type N1 system in accordance with
NR/SP/CIV/039. The standard drawings show details in accordance with NR/GN/CIV/002.
Where no guidance is provided the requirements of NR/GN/CIV/002 shall apply. Points to note
are include:

• Areas fully encased in concrete (e.g. Filler Beam section) should remain untreated, only
loose rust or mill scale removed.
• Exposed areas of partially encased sections in concrete (e.g. exposed bottom flanges of
filler beam section) should receive full paint system.
• Where the concrete finishes the protective treatment for the adjacent area should be
extended not less than 25mm into the concreted area and a sealant applied in a rebate
in the concrete to minimise the risk of water ingress at the steel/concrete interface.
• Where appropriate, concrete surfaces that may be exposed to chlorides (e.g. decks
above highways) should receive a hydrophobic pore lining impregnant in accordance
with Highways Agency Document BD43/03.

6.7.3 Waterproofing
The waterproofing system shown is based upon either an acrylic spray or sheet membrane
system protected with a protective layer against local damage. The waterproofing details are
shown on drawing NR/CIV/SD/1740 & 1741. Deck ends are waterproofed to ensure water
drains from the deck to the back of deck drainage.

Where there are no limits on application, the use of a tightly bonded system (spray applied
acrylic) is much preferred to a loose laid system (sheet membrane). This is because, with the
former, leakages through defects are much likely to be small and, hence, affect only a small of a
deck and so have little detrimental effect on the service life of the bridge.

6.8 Drainage
Positive drainage should be considered where possible. Details of drainage provision options
are shown on drawing NR/CIV/SD/1740 & 1741. Generally, drainage locations and thus the
profile of the back of the cill/impost unit may be governed by the abutment thickness. A
narrow abutment invites a simple arrangement of deck end and upstand aligned vertically with
the rear of the abutment. Ideally the drainage pipe should be located below the final top of the
existing abutment. This should ensure that water will not permeate along the underside of the
impost and then down the abutment face.

Page 34 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Where the existing abutment is much wider and the new deck stops short then providing drains
in the impost at the deck end and below cill/impost to the rear of the abutment is often
preferred even to the extent of terminating the waterproofing at the cill/impost drain.

6.9 Substructure and Ancillary Items

Within the standard detail suite of drawings, details are provided for underbridge ancillary
items (drawing series NR/CIV/SD/1800 and associated technical user manual).
To ensure a smooth transition from the stiffness of the bridge approach to the stiffness of the
deck and then the stiffness of the deck to the stiffness of the approach, the designer should
consider the use of a suitable transition detail.
Where an existing substructure is being reused the scheme design should ensure that there is
no significant change in the loads or points of application, and also the acceptability both the
re‐use of the existing substructure and foundations.

The design of the standard deck details covered in this TUM have assumed a maximum
abutment differential settlement at SLS of 1 in 1000. The load applied shall be in accordance
with BS 5400‐2:2006 and include railway loads. The designer shall determine the soil
parameters and ensure that the maximum design settlement is not exceeded. Refer to the
check list in Section 5.4 for guidance and limits on differential settlement allowed for in the
standard designs.

6.10 Bonding/Stray Current/Insulation

The designer must ensure that suitable details are provided to ensure that the structure is
adequately bonded/insulated/protected from stray current effects.

Page 35 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

7 FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION

The details are generally straightforward and a competent fabricator or contractor should be
able to determine their own procedures for ensuring the required quality is achieved. The areas
where the details require particular attention are discussed below.

7.1 Fabrication

The fabricator must also pay due attention to the reinforcement location and orientation to
ensure holes in the steel beams (filler beam floors) are suitable to facilitate the accurate fixing
of reinforcing bars and concreting.

7.2 Construction

When constructing the concreted areas, the contractor must be careful to ensure suitable
clearance between reinforcing bars is provided to allow concrete to surround all reinforcing
bars.

The contractor should consider the use of vibrating shutters where the reinforcement is
congested and limited access for pokers,

Page 36 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

8 SAFETY/CDM AND ENVIRONMENTAL

The general (non site specific) risks associated with the bridge design, construction and
operation are listed on drawing NR/CIV/SD/1702. In addition there may be others arising from
site‐specific considerations, such as the presence of overhead line equipment (OHLE) or
vulnerable services.

Environmental issues can only be determined on a site by site basis, bridge aesthetics including
its colour, should be considered also.

The effect of renewing the protection scheme on the environment, particularly any
watercourses, should be taken into consideration during the selection of the elements of the
protection scheme.

Page 37 of 37
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Appendix A SCHEDULE OF STANDARD DRAWINGS

Description Drawing
NR/CIV/SD/1700 Index of Drawings
NR/CIV/SD/1701 General Information Concrete Underbridge Forms ‐ Key to Types
NR/CIV/SD/1702 General Notes and H&S Risk Register
NR/CIV/SD/1710 Cast on Site Reinforced Concrete Slab General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1711 Pre‐cast off Site Segmental Reinforced Concrete Slab General
Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1712 Cast on Site Fully Encased Filler Beam Deck General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1713 Pre‐cast off Site Fully Encased Filler Beam Deck General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1714 Cast on Site Exposed Bottom Flange Filler Beam Deck General
Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1715 Pre‐cast off Site Exposed Bottom Flange Filler Beam Deck General
Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1716 Pre‐cast off Site Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam Deck General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1720 Cast on Site Reinforced Concrete Slab Details
NR/CIV/SD/1721 Pre‐cast off Site Segmental Reinforced Concrete Slab Details
NR/CIV/SD/1722 Cast on Site Fully Encased Filler Beam Deck Details
NR/CIV/SD/1723 Pre‐cast off Site Fully Encased Filler Beam Deck Details
NR/CIV/SD/1724 Cast on Site Exposed Bottom Flange Filler Beam Deck Details
NR/CIV/SD/1725 Pre‐cast off Site Exposed Bottom Flange Filler Beam Deck Details
NR/CIV/SD/1726 Pre‐cast off Site Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam Deck Details
NR/CIV/SD/1727 Pre‐cast off Site Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam Robust Kerb Alternative
NR/CIV/SD/1730 General Information Cill Units – Key to Types
NR/CIV/SD/1731 Cast on Site Reinforced Concrete Slab Cill Unit General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1732 Pre‐cast Segmental Reinforced Concrete Slab Cill Unit General
Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1733 Cast on Site Fully Encased Filler Beam Deck Cill Unit General
Arrangement.
NR/CIV/SD/1734 Pre‐cast off Site Exposed Bottom Flanges Filler Beam Deck Cill Unit
General Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1735 Pre‐cast off Site Pre‐stressed Solid Box Beam Deck Cill Unit Arrangement
NR/CIV/SD/1736 Cill Unit & Ballast Wall – General Details
NR/CIV/SD/1740 Deck End – Waterproofing & Drainage Details Sheet 1 of 2
NR/CIV/SD/1741 Deck End – Waterproofing & Drainage Details Sheet 2 of 2
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Appendix B DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS

Structural Models
The proposed new decks should be analysed using a linear elastic model of a complete deck.
One bearing should be fixed in position, usually in one corner of the deck. Other bearings should
allow rotation and movement longitudinally, laterally or in both directions. A quasi‐static
approach should be used.

The simple approach to fatigue assessment (without damage calculation) should be used.

Loading
The following is a summary of the design loads under current UK standards, BS 5400 and draft
Network Rail standard, NR/L2/CIV/020 (draft 12):

Dead Loads
Item Density/Load Load Factor (gfL)
Concrete 25 kN/m3 1.2
21 kN/m3 – depth 575mm over full floor area
between webs of main girders (appropriate to
300mm depth under sleepers with additional
Ballast 1.75
average 100mm allowance for variations in
ballast depth due to cant, track gradients,
deflections etc)
2.514 kN/m (per track, including extra over
Track ballast, for 113A (continuously welded) rail and 1.2
F27 concrete sleepers and pads)
0.36 kN/m2 over floor area (equivalent to 15mm
Waterproofing 1.2
thickness at 24 kN/m3
1.0 kN/m (equivalent to 7 no. solid 40mm
Trackside Cables 1.2
diameter lead cables)
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Live Loads
Load Reference Notes
RU Loading BS5400‐2:2006 An additional a factor of 1.1 has been applied to
Clause 8.2.1.1 provide adequacy in accordance with TSIs for high
NR/L2/CIV/020 speed lines, or gdet for standard lines.
Dynamic Effects BS5400‐2:2006 Factor taken as 2 for shorter span bridges, as
Clause 8.2.3 detailed below.
Centrifugal Force* BS5400‐2:2006 Value based upon Vt = 120kph, R = 654m
Clause 8.2.9 Maximum line speed 200kph.
Fatigue BS5400‐10:1980 Simplified Method adopted
Clause 9.1 Maximum traffic 42 MTPA
Walkways+ NR/L2/CIV/020 – Uninformly Distributed load: 5.0 kN/m2
Draft 12 Single Point Load: 2.0 kN
Parapet Lateral Load on top rail: 0.74 kN/m
Longitudinal BS5400‐2:2006 The track is assumed not continuous over the
Clause 8.2.10 bridge for the purpose of distributing longitudinal
live loads off the bridge, i.e. all longitudinal load
resisted by the bridge.

Crane Loading KIROW KRC1 Refer to NR/L2/CIV/020 for Axle Distribution, and
(temporary case)
200UK Rail reduced partial load factors apply.
Mounted Crane

Notes:
* ‐ Maximum Centrifugal Force Factor (defined as the vertical effect of the centrifugal force on a
girder expressed as a fraction of the static RU load): 0.2P. Note that the designer must
determine the minimum track radius a deck can accommodate, considering clearances,
tolerances etc.
+
‐ These loads are used for the walkway, parapet, walkway bracket and main girder
intermediate stiffener design.

Collision Loads.
The decks and bearing arrangements are to be designed in accordance with the load
requirements of BD60/04.

For longer span decks and high ballast depths, the designer may justify not providing an uplift
bracket otherwise a suitable uplift restraint should be provided.
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Design of Deck
The filler beam floor is assumed to act compositely in the longitudinal direction and is treated as
a 'filler beam' floor (for the purposes of design to BS 5400‐5:2005). The surface area acting to
provide bond strength between the concrete and steel section shall be considered as only that
acting in compression (locally, ignoring global tension effects).

The concrete floor (and concrete specification) should be designed to reduce early thermal
cracking effects, to reduce the deck's susceptibility to chloride ingress, to limit the risk of
spalling and to improve its durability generally. The concrete class at the soffit location has
been taken as XD3 for chloride induced (corrosion, cyclic wet and dry) as the soffit is likely to be
exposed to spray from potential highways below. The top surface is protected by
waterproofing, and would be a lower classification. In determining nominal cover the value of
Dc has been taken as 10mm. The designer should consider applying a hydrophobic pore lining
impregnant in accordance with Highways Agency document BD43/03 where the deck may be
exposed to chlorides.
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Appendix C Hidden Parts

The standard designs and details have, where possible, practicable and in accordance with
NR/L2/CIV/020 (draft 12), minimised the number of structural elements that are considered, i.e.
that cannot be inspected from at least one side. The areas considered as hidden parts on the
concrete underbridges are listed below with a description of how the details are protected and
access is provided for inspection.

Filler Beam Description of hidden part Protection provided Access provided

Deck

Filler beam Longitudinal filler beam Encased in concrete that None.

Deck. section. provides protection
 NR/CIV/TUM/1700
Rev C
June 2010

Appendix D Draft 12 of NR/L2/CIV/020 Design of Bridges & Culverts

 Ref NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue 1 (Draft 12)
Date 2008

Level 2

Design of Bridges & Culverts

Endorsement & Authorisation

Endorsed by:

.................................................................................................

K. Brady, Standards and Assurance Engineer (Civil

Engineering)

Authorised by:

.................................................................................................

A. Dray, Head of Structures Engineering

Accepted for issue by:

.................................................................................................

M. McManus, National Standards Manager

This document is the property of Network Rail. It shall not be reproduced in whole or part nor disclosed to a
third party without the written permission of the Standard Owner.
© Copyright 2008 Network Rail
Uncontrolled copy once printed from its electronic source.
Published & Issued by: Network Rail 40 Melton Street, London NW1 2EE
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Issue Record
Issue Date Comments
1 ……... 2008 New standard.
Incorporates and supersedes RT/CE/S/007:
Design loading for accommodation and
occupation overbridges.

Compliance
This Network Rail standard specifies mandatory requirements and must be
complied with by Network Rail and its contractors from……………..

It is permissible for projects that have formally completed GRIP Level 4 at the
compliance date (i.e. acceptance of Form A in accordance with
NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical approval of design, construction and maintenance
of civil engineering infrastructure) to continue to comply with the Network Rail
standards and other standards and requirements as identified in the Form A
and not to comply with the requirements contained herein, unless otherwise
stipulated in the accompanying Briefing Note or Network Rail’s specific
requirements for the project.

Reference documentation

Railway Group Standards

GC/RT5021 Track System Requirements
GC/RT5112 Loading Requirements for Design of Bridges
GC/RT5203 Infrastructure Requirements for Personal Safety in Respect of
Clearances and Access
GC/RT5212 Requirements for Defining and Maintaining Clearances
GE/RT8073 Requirements for the application of standard vehicle gauges
GE/RT8025 Electrical Protective Provisions for Electrified Lines
GL/RT1253 Mitigation of DC Stray Current effects
GM/RT2149 Requirements for Defining and Maintaining the Size of Railway
Vehicles

Railway Approved Code of Practice / Guidance

GC/RC5510 Recommendations for the Design of Bridges
GE/GN8573 Guidance on gauging.

Page 2 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Network Rail Standards

At the time of publication a new reference system for Network Rail standards was
being introduced; the references given to the following standards are those anticipated
to be adopted in their next issue.
NR/L1/CIV/044 Managing structures works
NR/L2/CIV/003 Technical approval of design, construction and maintenance of
civil engineering infrastructure
NR/L2/CIV/017 Examination of Bridges and Culverts
NR/L2/CIV/035 Assessment of structures
NR/L2/CIV/037 Managing the risk arising from mineral extraction and landfill
NR/L2/CIV/039 Specification RT98 – protective treatments for Railtrack
infrastructure
NR/L2/CIV/041 Waterproofing systems for underline bridges
NR/L2/CIV/067 Design of equipment support structures
NR/L2/CIV/071 Design of earthworks, earthwork remediations and geotechnical
aspects of foundations for structures
NR/L2/CIV/076 Management of bridge strikes from road vehicles & waterborne
vessels
NR/L2/CIV/140 Control and use of model clauses
NR/L3/CIV/001 Waterproofing for underline bridge decks
NR/L3/CIV/002 Application and reapplication of protective treatments to
Railtrack infrastructure
NR/L3/CIV/008 Model clauses for specifying civil engineering works
NR/L3/CIV/025 The structural assessment of underbridges
NR/L3/CIV/202 Management of the risk of bridge strikes
NR/L3/TRK/030 Lineside security
NR/SP/ELP/21085 Design of earthing and bonding systems for 25 kV A.C.
electrified lines
NR/SP/OHS/069 Lineside facilities for personal safety
NR/SP/TRK/038 Longitudinal timbers – design, installation and maintenance
NR/SP/TRK/102 Track construction standards
NR/SP/TRK/9006 Design, installation and maintenance of lineside drainage
RT/CE/S/007 Loads for occupation/accommodation bridges (Superseded by
this standard)

Page 3 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Network Rail Structures Engineers Technical Advice Notes

SE/TAN/0038 Helical screwed pile foundations for equipment support
structures

British Standards
BS 5268 Structural use of timber:
Part 2: 2002: Code of practice for permissible stress design,
materials and workmanship
BS 5395 Stairs, ladders and walkways:
Part 3: 1985: Code of practice for the design of industrial type
stairs, permanent ladders and walkways
BS 5400 Steel, concrete and composite bridges:
Part 1: 1988: General statement
Part 2: 2006: Specification for loads
Part 3: 2000: Code of practice for design of steel bridges
Part 4: 1990: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges
Part 5: 2005: Code of practice for design of composite bridges
Part 9: 1983: Bridge bearings
Part 10: 1980: Code of practice for fatigue
BS 5628 Code of practice for use of masonry:
Part 1: 2005: Structural use of unreinforced masonry
Part 2: 2005: Structural use of reinforced and prestressed
masonry
Part 3: 2001: Materials, components, design and workmanship
BS 6799 Highway parapets for bridges and other structures
Part 4: 1999: Specification for parapets of reinforced and
unreinforced masonry construction
BS 7818: Specification for pedestrian restraint systems in metal
1995
BS 8004: Code of practice for foundations
1986
BS 8110 – 1 Structural use of concrete.
Part 1: 1985Code of practice for design and construction
BS 8300: Code of Practice - Design of buildings and their approaches to meet
2001 the needs of disabled people
BS EN 1317- Road restraint systems
2 Part 2: 1998: Performance classes, impact test acceptance
criteria and test methods for safety barriers
BS EN 1990: Eurocode – Basis of structures design,
2002 Annex A2: Application for bridges
Annex A2

Page 4 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

BS EN 1991- Eurocode 1: Actions on structures

1-7 Part 1-7: 2006: General actions – Accidental actions
BS EN 1991- Eurocode 1: Actions on structures
2 Part 2: 2003: Traffic loads on bridges
BS EN 50122 Railway Applications – Fixed Installations:
Part 1: 1998: Protective provisions relating to electrical safety
and earthing
Part 2: 1999: Protective provisions against the effects of stray
currents caused by d.c. traction systems
BS EN ISO Paints and varnishes
12944-3 Part 3: 1998: Design considerations.
N.A.D. for UK National Application Document for ENV 1991-3: 1995 Eurocode 1
ENV 1991-3: – Basis of design and actions on structures – Part 3: Traffic loads on
1995 bridges

Highways Agency standards

BA 9/81 The Use of BS 5400: Part 10: 1980 Code of practice for fatigue
BD 9/81 Implementation of BS 5400: Part 10: 1980 Code of practice for fatigue
BD 20/92 Bridge Bearings. Use of BS5400: Part 9: 1983
BD 21/01 The Assessment of Highway Bridges and Structures
BD 29/04 Design Criteria for Footbridges
BD 30/87 Backfilled Retaining Walls and Bridge Abutments
BD 42/00 Design of Embedded Retaining Walls and Bridge Abutments
BD 60/04 The Design of Highway Bridges for Vehicle Collision Loads
BD 65/97 Design Criteria for Collision Protection Beams
BD 74/00 Foundations
TD 19/06 Requirement for Road Restraint Systems

Her Majesty’s Railway Inspectorate

Railway Safety Section A: Guidance on the Infrastructure
Principles and Section B: Guidance on Stations
Guidance: Part 2
Section C: Guidance on Electric Traction Systems

Department for Transport

Managing the accidental obstruction of the railway by road vehicles

Strategic Rail Authority

Code of Practice: Train and Station Services for Disabled Passengers

International Union of Railways

Page 5 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

UIC Leaflet 719-R Earthworks and track bed construction for railways
UIC Leaflet 774-3R Track-bridge interaction. Recommendations for calculations
UIC Leaflet 776-3R ( 1st Edition 1989): Deformation of bridges

American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO)

Load and resistance factor design (LRFD) – Bridge Design Specifications

Institution of Civil Engineers

Burland and Kalra: Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre: geotechnical aspects,
Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs, Part 1, 1986, 80, Dec., 1479-1503.

Disclaimer
In issuing this document for its stated purpose, Network Rail makes no
warranties, express or implied, that compliance with all or any documents it
issues is sufficient on its own to ensure safe systems of work or operation.
Users are reminded of their own duties under health and safety legislation.

Supply
Copies of documents are available electronically, within Network Rail’s
organisation. Hard copies of this document will be available to Network Rail
employees on request to the Document Controller and to other organisations
from IHS (Technical Indexes Ltd) (01344 404409).

Comments
The applicability and content of this standard will be reviewed on a regular
basis. Written comments on the accuracy and utility of this standard will be
taken into account when assessing the need for a new issue of the standard;
such comments should be sent to the Standards and Assurance Engineer
(Civil Engineering) at 40 Melton Street, London NW1 2EE.

Page 6 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Contents

1 Purpose 12

2 Scope 12

3 Roles, responsibilities and competencies 15

4 Definitions 15

5 Principles 17

6 General Design requirements 18

6.1 Structural adequacy, general location and dimensions 18

6.2 Purpose, intended use and Remit 19

6.3 Operational safety 20

6.4 Construction, maintenance and decommissioning 20

6.5 Compatibility with other infrastructure 22

6.6 Health and safety, and environmental considerations 22

6.7 Legal obligation and commercial liability issues 23

6.8 Bridges not owned or controlled by Network Rail 23

6.9 Interface with the railway 23

6.9.1 Railway tracks 23
6.9.2 Structure gauge and clearances to the railway 24
6.9.3 Railway equipment 25
6.9.4 Electrical protection, earthing and bonding 26
6.9.5 Protection from stray currents 27
6.9.6 Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) 28
6.10 General requirements for interfacing with external authorities,
Outside Parties and third parties 28

6.11 Interface with Planning Authorities 29

6.12 Interface with services, Statutory Undertakers and public utilities 29

6.13 Interface with highways 30

6.13.1 Highway Authority acceptance of the Design 30
6.13.2 Clearances to highways and other roads 30
6.13.3 Highway widths and construction 32

Page 7 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

6.13.4 Highway sight lines 32

6.13.5 Highway lighting and road traffic signs 32
6.13.6 Road traffic signs for restricted headroom Bridges 32
6.13.7 Prevention of vehicle incursion 32
6.14 Interface with waterways 33
6.14.1 Clearances over waterways 33
6.14.2 Lighting and signs over waterways 33
6.15 Interface with mineral extraction and landfill 33

7 Particular Design requirements 33

7.1 Technical Approval 33

7.2 Design life 33

7.2.1 New Bridges and reconstructed superstructures 33
7.2.2 Strengthening, alterations, repairs and temporary Bridges 34
7.3 Durability and corrosion protection 34

7.4 Water management and drainage 34

7.5 Waterproofing 35

7.6 Structural form and articulation 36

7.7 Protection against derailment 36

7.8 Security, fencing and protection from vandalism 37

7.9 Parapets, safety barriers, walkways, handrailing, etc. 37

7.9.1 Vehicle parapets and safety barriers for Overline Bridges 38
7.9.2 Spans over electrified railways 40
7.9.3 Prevention of accidental vehicle incursion 41
7.9.4 Replacement of parapets or safety barriers 41
7.9.5 Walkways, positions of safety and handrailing for Underline
Bridges 42
7.9.6 Protection on wing walls, abutments and Culvert head walls 44
7.9.7 Trackside walkways and personal safety beneath Overline
Bridges 44
7.9.8 Parapets for a Bridge remote from the railway 45
7.10 Footbridges 45
7.10.1 Particular requirements for footbridges 45
7.10.2 Pedestrian hand-rails for stairs, ramps and spans 46
7.11 Pedestrian subways 47

7.12 Pipe Bridges 47

Page 8 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

7.13 Bearings 47

7.14 Fasteners 48

7.15 Hydraulic Design for Culverts 49

7.16 Temporary Bridges 49

8 Deformation and fatigue for Underline Bridges 49

8.1 General requirements 49

8.2 Natural frequency check for applicability of dynamic factors 51

8.3 Deformations due to railway loading 51

8.3.1 Vertical deformation of the deck 51
8.3.2 Track twist (for traffic safety) 51
8.3.3 Uplift at bearings 52
8.4 Combined response of structure and track 52
8.4.1 Track-Bridge interaction 52
8.4.2 Longitudinal displacement of the end of the deck 53
8.4.3 Stresses in rails 53
8.4.4 Uplift at the end of the deck 54
8.4.5 Rotations and uplift forces on directly fastened rails 54
8.5 Transverse deformation and vibration of the deck 54

8.6 Vertical deflection at midspan (for passenger comfort) 54

8.7 Fatigue requirements for Underline Bridges 55

9 Loading 55

9.1 General requirements for loading 55

9.2 Loading for new and replacement Underline Bridges 55

9.2.1 Railway loads for Underline Bridges 55
9.2.2 Dynamic effects for Underline Bridges 57
9.2.3 Fatigue loads for Underline Bridges 57
9.2.4 Additional loads for direct fastening and embedded rails 57
9.2.5 Additional loading for continuous beams in Underline Bridges 58
9.2.6 Walkway loading for Underline Bridges 58
9.2.7 Parapet and handrailing loads for Underline Bridges 59
9.2.8 Accidental (derailment) loads for Underline Bridges 59
9.2.9 Accidental loads for Underline Bridges over highways 59
9.2.10 Accidental loads for Underline Bridges over waterways 59
9.3 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Underline
Bridges 60

Page 9 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

9.4 Loading for new and replacement Overline Bridges and

footbridges 61
9.4.1 Highway vehicle loads for new and replacement Overline
Bridges 61
9.4.2 Pedestrian, cycle and equestrian loads 62
9.4.3 Parapets, safety barriers and handrailing for Overline Bridges 63
9.4.4 Accidental (derailment) loading on Overline Bridge supports 63
9.5 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Overline
Bridges 63

9.6 Other loads and effects for Underline, Overline and other
Bridges 64
9.6.1 Loads to be considered 64
9.6.2 Aerodynamic effects 66
9.6.3 Bridges over watercourses 67
9.7 Loading for substructures 67

10 Design standards 68

10.1 General 68

10.2 Steel, concrete, composite and masonry Bridges 69

10.3 Timber Bridges 70

10.4 Bridges constructed from other materials 70

10.5 Foundations for new Bridges 71

10.6 Earth retaining elements 72

10.7 Existing substructures affected by new construction 72

10.8 Site investigation and geotechnical Design 73

10.9 Specifications for materials and workmanship 73

10.10 Strengthening, alterations and repairs 74

11 Identification of Bridges 75

12 Records 76

Appendix A: Application of Structure Category to individual structures 77

Appendix B: Amendments to BS5400: Steel, concrete and composite

Bridges 80

Page 10 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix C: Railway loads, application, dynamic factors, and amendments to

BS 5400-2: 2006 82

Appendix D: Collision loads from railway traffic 89

Appendix E: Additional requirements for lineside handrailing on Underline

Bridges 92

Appendix F: Existing substructures affected by new construction 93

Appendix G: High Speed TSI requirements 96

Appendix H: Modification to Appendix 1 of GC/RT5212 101

Appendix I: Railway infrastructure / other issues interfaces 103

Appendix J: External authority, Outside Party etc. interfaces 104

Appendix K: Information to be included in the AIP Submission 106

Appendix L: Non-mandatory recommendations 108

Page 11 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

1 Purpose

This Network Rail standard defines the requirements for the Design of Bridges
and Culverts, and other structures within the scope of this standard.

This standard contains requirements supplementary to Network Rail standard

NR/L1/CIV/044: Managing Structures Works. Compliance with this standard
and with the standards referenced herein will, in respect of the Design of
structures within the scope of this standard, ensure compliance with
NR/L1/CIV/044 and Railway Group Standard GC/RT/5112 (Issue 1: Loading
requirements for the design of bridges. At the time of drafting this standard,
GC/RT/5112 was being revised for Issue 2. This standard complies with Draft
3b dated May 2008 of Issue 2 of GC/RT/5112.

2 Scope

This standard applies to the Design of the following types of structure, to

those involved with the Design, and to those appointed by Network Rail to be
responsible for the management of such structures:
• Bridges,
• Culverts,
• avalanche shelters (loads for Design shall be agreed with Network
Rail),
• cut and cover structures,
• pipe bridges (except as identified below in this Clause),
• structures that support buildings over operational railway lines (but
not the buildings),
• subways,
• elevated vehicle forecourts and ramps,
• any other structure required by Network Rail to be designed as a
Bridge or a Culvert.

Examples of structures that are within the scope of this standard are included
in Structure Category A as shown in Appendix A. The scope includes all
Bridge substructures, and earth retaining or wing walls that are integral with
the Bridge substructure, and other earth retaining walls adjacent to the Bridge.

Intersection Bridges, which carry a railway over a railway, shall be designed

for the applicable requirements of both an Underline and Overline Bridge.

Bridges which neither carry the railway nor span over the railway, shall be
designed for the most onerous applicable effects according to what the Bridge
carries and what the Bridge spans over.

Page 12 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

For the purposes of this standard, the use of the terms Bridge or structure
shall be deemed to include Culverts and any other structure within the scope
of this standard where applicable.

This standard applies to the Design of:

• all Bridges that are, or will be, owned or managed by Network Rail,
• all Bridges that are Shared with Outside Parties,
• so far as is reasonably practicable, all Bridges that are owned by
Outside Parties, where failure of the structure has a potential to
affect the safety of train operations.

This standard also applies to:

• all stages where permanent works are Taken Into Use in stages
before final completion,
• all temporary works, as defined in NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical
Approval of design, construction and maintenance of civil
engineering infrastructure, that are provided for the execution of such
Bridges.

The scope of this document covers the Design of the following categories of
work:
• repairs,
• strengthening,
• replacement of parts,
• renewal / replacement of superstructures or substructures;
• new Bridges,
• temporary Bridges.

Where existing Bridges are to have parts repaired, strengthened or replaced

(including the renewal / replacement of superstructures or substructures), the
requirements of this standard shall apply to the Design of such parts and the
consequential effects on other retained existing parts.

Retained existing parts do not need to comply with the requirements of this
standard providing (a) the loads and effects on such parts will not be made
more onerous by the alterations or the addition of other parts, (b) the retained
parts are not showing any signs of distress, and (c) the load-bearing capability
of the retained parts meets Network Rail’s requirements. However,
consideration shall be given to bringing retained existing parts into compliance
with this standard where it is reasonably practicable and economic to achieve
compliance. Where structural works are to be carried out, 10.10 identifies
requirements to strengthen or replace weak existing parts.
Page 13 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

This standard is applicable to Designs for conventional railway traffic at

associated conventional speeds including:
• passenger rail traffic with maximum permitted speed not exceeding
125 mph (200 km/h),
• freight traffic with maximum axle weight of 25 tonnes and maximum
permitted speed not exceeding 60 mph ( 100 km/h),
• freight traffic with maximum axle weight of 22.5 tonnes and
maximum permitted speed not exceeding 75 mph (120 km/h).

For rail vehicles travelling in excess of the above speeds, guidance shall be
obtained from Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures.

This standard does not apply to the Design of the following:

• longitudinal timbers, which shall be designed in accordance with
NR/SP/TRK/038: Longitudinal Timbers – Design, Installation and
Maintenance,
• gantries for signals or overhead line electrification (OLE),
• cable bridges,
• pipe bridges for which the Design basis stated in the AIP Submission
is NR/L2/CIV/067: Design of Equipment Support Structures,
• Outside Party pipelines and other undertrack crossings,
• buildings or other structures that are supported by a Bridge.

Earthworks associated with a Bridge shall be designed in accordance with

NR/L2/CIV/071: Design of earthworks, earthwork remediations and
geotechnical aspects of foundations for structures.

Equipment support structures that are attached to a Bridge shall be designed

in accordance with the requirements of NR/L2/CIV/067: Design of Equipment
Support Structures as applicable.

This standard covers structural aspects of Design and those aspects of

Design relating to the safe movement of users (including clearances) and the
provision of adequate protection to users. However, it does not cover other
health and safety aspects of Design, such as choice of materials (e.g.
exclusion of lead based paints), ventilation, means of escape, access
platforms and ladders.

This standard incorporates those parts of Railway Approved Code of Practice

GC/RC5510: Recommendations for the Design of Bridges which Network Rail
requires to be mandatory. The requirements of this standard shall take
priority over GC/RC5510, which at the time of drafting this standard was due
to be withdrawn. However, the additional information and guidance for the
Design of Bridges available in GC/RC5510 should be used where not in
conflict with this standard.
Page 14 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

In order to address potential effects of climate change regarding

temperatures, an additional 10oC has been added to effective Bridge
temperatures – see Appendix B.

The principal standards for managing structures works are shown in

NR/L1/CIV/044: Managing structures works.

3 Roles, responsibilities and competencies

Those appointing persons to positions with responsibilities to deliver the

requirements of this standard shall ensure that appointees are competent and
that they understand their responsibilities. Appointments, responsibilities and
duties shall be documented.

The skill, expertise, training and experience of those employed on a Design

shall be appropriate to the nature and complexity of the structure being
designed. This competency shall be assessed by the person making the
appointment.

The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 set out

requirements for those managing construction / Design work with respect to
competency.

Roles, responsibilities and competencies of those involved in the production

and checking of a Design, and its construction, shall be in accordance with
NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical Approval of design, construction and maintenance
of civil engineering infrastructure.

The responsibilities of Network Rail’s Infrastructure Liability Manager as

regards this standard are identified in 6.7 and 9.4.1.

4 Definitions

Accommodation Bridge
A Bridge provided to maintain access to lands that were severed by the
construction of the railway and which can only legally be used by the
successor to the original landowner whose land was severed; however,
subsequent public footpath and bridle rights may have been acquired by other
users.

AIP Submission
The submission for approval in principle as required by NR/L2/CIV/003:
Technical Approval of design, construction and maintenance of civil
engineering infrastructure.

Authorised Walking Route

A designated route providing pedestrian access to and egress from places of
work (including booking-on points and stabling points) and which is suitable
for use by persons not certificated in Personal Track Safety.

Page 15 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Bridge
A structure of one or more spans greater than or equal to 1800 mm, whose
primary purpose is usually to carry traffic or services over an obstruction or
gap, but excluding Culverts.

Cess Walkway
A designated walkway along the cess where persons certificated as
competent in Personal Track Safety may walk safely while trains pass. (Note:
a Cess Walkway does not constitute a Position of Safety unless it can be
accessed from the side of the track.)

Containment Level
The capacity of parapets and vehicle safety barriers to restrain road vehicles.
(See Highways Agency standard TD 19/06: Requirements for Road Restraint
Systems).

Culvert
A structure with a span or diameter greater than 450mm but less than
1800mm whose primary purpose is usually to permit water or services to pass
under or adjacent to a railway, road or other Network Rail infrastructure. The
term excludes Outside Party pipelines.

Design
Information in the form of drawings, diagrams, calculations and/or
specifications (performance, materials and workmanship) which together
describe in detail what is to be constructed and, where applicable, how it is to
be constructed. The term is also used to describe the process by which such
information is produced, including the undertaking of structural calculations
where necessary.

Designer
The person responsible for the Design who is authorised to sign the Approval
in Principle Submission and/or the Design certificate on behalf of the Design
organisation.

Interworking
The ability of the structure to carry current and foreseeable rail traffic including
at the published capability of the route, traffic permitted in excess of the
capability of the route, traffic diverted from other routes, the cascade of rail
vehicles from one route to another and interoperability requirements.

Occupation Bridge
A Bridge carrying a private road which generally pre-existed the railway and
which can only be used by authorised users - typically the successors of the
original users of the road and their invitees, although subsequent public
footpath and bridleway rights may have been acquired by other users.

Page 16 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Overline Bridge
A Bridge which passes over the railway and includes public highway,
Accommodation, Occupation and bridleway Bridges, and footbridges.

Outside Party
A person or organisation, other than Network Rail, that is an infrastructure
owner or developer, or is a user or occupier of Network Rail’s infrastructure.
The term includes Highway Authorities, Roads Authorities, Passenger
Transport Executives, public or private developers, and Train Operating
Companies.

Real Trains
The axle loads and axle spacings for particular trains and/or railway vehicles,
and the combinations of such trains/vehicles, defined by Network Rail.

Remit
The formal document issued by Network Rail describing the purpose, scope
and objectives for a project, an outline of the service required, key
responsibilities, and outputs to be delivered at completion of the project
phases.

Shared Bridge
A Bridge of which the ownership and/or management is shared between
Network Rail and an Outside Party.

Structure Category
The category (A, B, C, D, E, F or G) to which a structure is assigned, in
accordance with NR/L1/CIV/044: Managing Structures Works, that defines the
processes to be used to manage the structure works.

Taken Into Use

The state of new, altered or renewed civil engineering infrastructure provided
under a scheme or maintenance works or temporary works, whether complete
or not, when fit for the safe passage of trains, occupying by users, use of or
passage by members of the public, or installation of plant or equipment as
applicable.

Underline Bridge
A Bridge carrying one or more operational railway tracks.

5 Principles

This document supports the philosophy of the HMRI Safety Principles by

requiring that Bridges and associated earthworks are designed so that:
• they permit the safe operation of, and protection to, the railway,
• they are capable of carrying and transferring loads and forces
applied to them,

Page 17 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• there are adequate clearances between trains on adjacent tracks

and between trains and Bridges,
• they provide for the free and safe movement of people,
• they can be executed, examined, maintained and decommissioned
safely,
• reasonably foreseeable future developments are considered.

In addition, structures are to be identifiable on site.

6 General Design requirements

6.1 Structural adequacy, general location and dimensions

Bridges shall be designed with reasonable professional care such that,

for the duration of their intended life, and assuming appropriate
standards of construction and maintenance:
• they provide adequate resistance to the intended applied loads
(including self weight),
• they provide adequate resistance to the likely effects of
external influences,
• they have sufficient robustness not to suffer damage, due to
accidental events (e.g. train derailment) or vandalism, to an
extent that would be disproportionate to the severity of the
cause,
• their deformation under load is satisfactory,
• they are safe for people on or in the vicinity of the structure,
• they can be maintained economically.

Consideration shall be given to incorporating structural redundancy

within the Design, so that alternative load paths are available in the
event of unforeseen failure of part of the structure. Generally, the mode
of failure shall not be catastrophic, the structure shall be designed so
that the critical failure modes are those that give advanced warning of
failure (e.g. bending rather than shear), and the structural form shall
incorporate adequate ductility and/or redundancy. A summary of the
approach adopted shall be identified and recorded in the AIP
Submission, in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical Approval of
design, construction and maintenance of civil engineering infrastructure.

The locations and dimensions of the Bridge (including any intended

equipment that it is designed to support) shall provide, where
appropriate:
• for the safe movement of vehicles, persons (including those
whose mobility is impaired) and / or equipment,
Page 18 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• adequate protection from, and or deterrence to, unauthorised

access (e.g. trespass or vandalism),
• adequate protection to vehicles or persons using or affected by
the Bridge.

6.2 Purpose, intended use and Remit

Bridges shall be designed in accordance with the appropriate principles

and requirements identified in this standard so that, as far as is
reasonably practicable, they are suitable for the purpose for which they
are intended and do not have an unacceptable influence on the safe
operation of the railway, Outside Parties and third parties.

Network Rail, or other relevant Authority as agreed with Network Rail,

shall specify the purpose and intended use of the Bridge, outline the
operational and safety requirements for the intended and future use of
the Bridge, and provide relevant Design information, in the Remit or
other documentation. Relevant existing information shall be made
available to the Designer.

The Remit shall specify the following project specific requirements, as

applicable and where not as specified in this standard:
• legal and commercial liability issues (6.7),
• positions of tracks to be supported (6.9.1),
• gauge and clearance requirements (6.9.2),
• whether the Bridge is on a High Speed TSI route, and particular
requirements for assessment of conformity and
verification(6.9.6 and Appendix G),
• particular clearance requirements (6.9, 6.13),
• Design life for strengthening, alteration, repairs of temporary
Bridges (7.2.2),
• Requirements for parapets on a Bridge that is remote from the
railway (7.9.8),
• whether the Bridge in on a primary route, and any particular
requirements for passenger comfort (8.6),
• loads to be supported, including traffic (railway or highway),
equipment and services (including Statutory Undertaker’s), and
numbers of persons (where relevant), with consideration given
to the likely or reasonably foreseeable future loading or other
requirements (9, Appendices C and D),
• accidental loading requirements (9, Appendices C and D),
• speed, tonnage and traffic mix for fatigue (9.2.3),

Page 19 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• loading for an Accommodation or Occupation Bridge, where is

excess of HA and 30 units of HB (9.4.1),
• planned abnormal use,
• particular security requirements,
• other project specific requirements.

To ensure that any specified restrictions on loads or limitations on use

are observed, methods of control shall be identified and recorded in the
AIP Submission, and provisions shall be incorporated into the Design
(e.g. requirements for the erection of notices, weight restriction plates or
physical barriers, etc).

6.3 Operational safety

Influences or requirements which may affect the safety of railway

operations, the general public, or persons whose duties take them on or
near the line, shall be taken into account, including:
• safety of train operations of other railway infrastructure owners
that are likely to be affected by the structure,
• sighting of train control equipment or other lineside signs,
• safety of staff and the general public on platforms,
• provisions for staff on or about the track, including positions of
safety and walkways (on or under Bridges), and sighting
distances to trains,
• aerodynamic effects of passing trains,
• potential arcing of electric power equipment,
• induced voltages,
• ground water, where this has the potential to affect train control
or other safety critical equipment, or the track,
• seasonal fluctuations in ground water levels,
• avoidance of any projections or sharp edges that have potential
to cause harm to staff or the general public,
• protection against falls from heights in excess of 2 metres,
• protection from or deterrence to unauthorised access e.g.
trespass or vandalism.

Appendix I contains a non-exhaustive list of railway infrastructure

interfaces.

6.4 Construction, maintenance and decommissioning

The Bridge shall be designed so that:

Page 20 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• there is at least one safe and feasible method by which it can

be constructed, and subsequently demolished or removed
(decommissioned), taking into consideration the safety of the
operational railway;
• examination in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/017: Examination of
Bridges and Culverts may be carried out safely,
• examination in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/017: Examination of
Bridges and Culverts will be sufficient for the future
management of the structure,
• foreseeable maintenance requirements, including the
replacement of limited-life components such as bearings and
the reapplication of protective coatings, can be carried out
safely so that the Bridge can achieve its Design life,
• the Bridge meets the requirements of Network Rail, and those
of Outside Parties as agreed by Network Rail.

The Design shall consider the construction methodology and shall

minimise the impact on the operational railway.

The method of construction, and any principal construction stages

envisaged by the Designer that need to be taken into account in the
Design, shall be stated in the AIP Submission and the Design
documents. In applicable cases a detailed description, drawings, etc.
shall be included.

The envisaged method of decommissioning the Bridge, and any hazards

associated with demolition that would not be apparent from an
examination of the Bridge or from its anticipated Design or construction
records, shall be stated in the AIP Submission.

Consideration shall be given to provisions for examining and maintaining

hidden elements, those with difficult access, hollow sections, buried
parts and connections to foundations.

Hidden details shall be avoided where reasonably practicable to do so.

Where hidden details are unavoidable, they shall be described in the AIP
Submission with recommendations for future examination.

Consideration shall be given in the Design process to the interfaces

between the Bridge and the object that is crossed, e.g. railway, road or
river, and the effects and operations of each on the other during the
construction, maintenance and future de-commissioning. The Design
and envisaged construction shall avoid unnecessary disruption to
interfacing operations.

In order to avoid delays or rejection of the AIP Submission, materials,

components or construction methods that have not previously been

Page 21 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

generally accepted by Network Rail, or new methods of using the same,

shall be referred to Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures prior
to submission of the AIP.

6.5 Compatibility with other infrastructure

The Bridge shall be designed so that:

• the Bridge itself and any equipment it supports will not
adversely affect the safe functioning of adjacent, existing or
proposed structures or equipment,
• adjacent existing or proposed structures or equipment will not
adversely affect the safe functioning of the structure or the
equipment it supports,
• existing or foreseeable requirements for services or plant can
be accommodated on or within the structure.

6.6 Health and safety, and environmental considerations

The Design shall as applicable take into account the following, without
limitation, as regards their effect on health and safety, and the
environment:
• use by disabled persons,
• safe means of access and egress, including in emergencies,
• fire safety,
• suitable materials and standards of workmanship for the
construction and planned maintenance/ examination,
• use of new materials, components or methods,
• environmental issues, including the impact on sensitive
species,
• management and discharge of track drainage and surface
water,
• contaminated run-off and the need for separators;,
• discharge into rivers and watercourses.

Where appropriate for a particular Bridge, its location or its potential

impact on the environment, the relevant environmental agency (e.g.
Environment Agency, Environment Agency Wales, Scottish
Environmental Protection Agency) shall be consulted before submission
of the AIP, subject to the restrictions and requirements of 6.10 and 6.11.
Where applicable, the agency’s agreement to the Design and/or the
specifications for work and materials, shall be obtained and documented.
Other authorities and Outside Parties that may need to be consulted are
identified in Appendix J.

Page 22 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

6.7 Legal obligation and commercial liability issues

The Design shall take into account Network Rail’s liabilities applicable to
the Bridge as established by Network Rail’s Infrastructure Liability
Manager (ILM) and included in the Remit or as otherwise notified to the
Designer.

All legal obligation and commercial liability issues and queries, including
the following, shall be addressed by Network Rail’s ILM or equivalent
authority (unless responsibility has been delegated to the Designer):
• liabilities,
• easements, and wayleaves,
• load carrying obligations (both statutory and safety
requirements),
• establishing requirements for headroom and carriageway
widths (see 6.13.2), navigation envelopes (see 6.14.1), etc,
• confirming existing agreements regarding repairs,
replacements and renewals of infrastructure and affected
services.

The Designer shall notify the ILM at an early stage in the Design about
any such issues that are relevant and which were not identified in the
Remit, and shall ascertain Network Rail’s requirements.

6.8 Bridges not owned or controlled by Network Rail

Where a Bridge is within the scope of this standard but is not owned or
controlled by Network Rail, Network Rail shall use its best endeavours to
ensure that the Bridge is designed to comply with the requirements of
this standard. Where this is not the case, the relevant details shall be
recorded and the appropriate authorities notified.

Where the safety of train operations or Interworking is likely to be

affected, the matter shall be brought to the attention of the Network
Rail’s Professional Head of Structures.

6.9 Interface with the railway

6.9.1 Railway tracks

The positions and number of tracks to be carried or crossed by the

Bridge shall be specified in the Remit, or other Design
documentation.

Maintenance tolerances on the designed position of the track are

identified in NR/SP/TRK/102: Track construction standards.

Page 23 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

For an Underline Bridge, a minimum of 200 mm of ballast shall be

provided, or such greater depth as required by NR/SP/TRK/102.

A transition zone shall be provided between the end of a new

Underline Bridge and the approach embankment to minimise track
maintenance requirements arising from a sudden change in track
deflection under train loads. The provision of a transition zone shall
also be considered where a Bridge is reconstructed. Examples of
good practice are given in UIC 719-R: Earthworks and track bed
construction for railway lines.

Prior to submission of the AIP for an Underline Bridge, the

requirements for track (including space for point motors etc.), track
support, the transition on/off the Bridge and track drainage shall be
agreed with the relevant Network Rail Track Engineer.

Provisions shall be made to retain ballast on the approaches to an

Underline Bridge, to provide adequate lateral support and to prevent
ballast being washed away during floods.

The form of the Bridge and its ability to carry the intended loads
shall not be unreasonably sensitive to the precise position of the
tracks. Where reasonably practicable, the Bridge shall be designed
to allow tolerance in the permitted positions of the tracks. The
allowable number and tolerable positions of the tracks relative to the
Bridge structure shall be identified in the AIP Submission. Where
the use or replacement of rail-bearers is not reasonably avoidable,
the tolerance in the position of the track shall be identified relative to
each rail-bearer.

The positions and numbers of tracks on an Underline Bridge shall

not be moved or increased respectively, unless both the Bridge
superstructure and substructure have been designed (or
subsequently assessed) for the change in load effects, and any
necessary strengthening or modification has been implemented.

For an Overline Bridge, any change to the position of tracks shall

not compromise the required clearances.

6.9.2 Structure gauge and clearances to the railway

The structure gauge and clearances shall either be established by

the appropriate Network Rail Gauging Engineer or equivalent
authority and identified in the Remit, or shall be agreed with the
Gauging Engineer during the Design process.

The structure gauge and clearances shall comply with the

requirements for the route and, where applicable, shall also allow
for Network Rail’s intentions regarding changes to the railway traffic

Page 24 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

permitted on the route as identified in the Remit. Additional

requirements regarding Technical Specifications for Interoperability
are referenced in 6.9.6 and Appendix G.

Clearances shall comply with HMRI Railway Safety Principles and

Guidance Part 2 Section A: Guidance on the Infrastructure, Chapter
6, and Part 2 Section C: Guidance on Electric Traction Systems,
Chapter 3.

Clearance requirements for the safe movement of rail vehicles shall

comply with Railway Group Standard GC/RT5212: Requirements
for Defining and Maintaining Clearances, subject to a modification
to the diagram in Appendix 1 of GC/RT5212 (Issue 1) as identified
in Appendix H of this standard.

The clearances provided shall take into account relevant

operational safety aspects identified in 6.3 and electrical clearance
requirements in accordance with GE/RT8025: Electrical Protective
Provisions for Electrified Lines where applicable.

Requirements for the safety of railway personnel and access shall

be in accordance with GC/RT5203: Infrastructure Requirements for
Personal Safety in Respect of Clearances and Access and
NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside facilities for personal safety.

In determining clearances, allowance shall be made for the track

cant and the permitted tolerance in track position, and also any
anticipated track lifting, slewing or realignment schemes.

Once the most onerous position(s) of the track has been

established in relation to each critical aspect of clearance for an
Overline Bridge, the Design shall allow for a further 50mm of
unplanned future track uplift, unless otherwise agreed with Network
Rail.

In complying with clearance requirements, the Design shall take into

account the deflection or movement of the structure and its
foundations under permanent, imposed and transient loads, and
tolerances in the construction of the Bridge.

If a proposal to reconstruct a Bridge would result in clearances less

than those required above, the clearances shall be justified and
recorded in the AIP Submission.

6.9.3 Railway equipment

Where required by Network Rail, a Bridge shall be designed to

accommodate service cables and ducts, signals, location cabinets,
point motors, rail lubricators, overhead line electrification, and other

Page 25 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

equipment or equipment support structures. The loads applied by

such items shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

6.9.4 Electrical protection, earthing and bonding

A Bridge carrying or passing over electrified lines shall comply with

the electrical protection and bonding requirements of Railway Group
Standard GE/RT8025: Electrical Protective Provisions for Electrified
Lines.

Earthing and bonding systems for a Bridge, its metal parts and
supported metal services shall comply with NR/SP/ELP/21085:
Design of Earthing and Bonding Systems for 25kV A.C. Electrified
Lines. As required by NR/SP/ELP/21085, the Design of such
systems shall be in accordance with BS EN 50122-1: Railway
Applications – Fixed Installations – Part 1: Protective Provisions
Relating to Electrical Safety and Earthing and with all other relevant
standards.

The electrical protection of the Bridge shall take into account the
structure itself, any supported/attached equipment, any dual
purpose issues, the surroundings and adjacent buildings or
structures.

Where electrical protection is achieved by physical separation or

isolation, the Design of any earthing or bonding systems shall not
compromise this protection.

Bonding/earthing studs shall be fitted to the Bridge as required by

Network Rail.

Bonding that is required exclusively for signalling purposes is

outside the scope of this standard.

Consideration shall be given to maximising the use of metalwork or

reinforcement in substructures for earthing, taking into account
requirements for low resistance and low impedence.

Where required, remote earth test-points shall be provided for in the

Design.

Where metal fences are attached to a Bridge, the electrical

protection of the Bridge and fences, including gates, shall be
considered as a whole. Consideration shall be given to using non-
conducting fencing.

Trays or ladders which support electrical cables and are attached to

a Bridge shall be earthed to the Bridge.

Page 26 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

In D.C. electrified areas, Bridges shall not be bonded to the

negative return rail unless otherwise agreed with Network Rail.

Where a Bridge carries or passes over an overhead line electrified

railway, consideration shall be given to providing effective electrical
bonding as follows:

• uniformly spread over a width of 2.6 m as above bonding a

metal Underline or Overline Bridge to the traction return rail
or earth wire,
• connecting the components of a metal Bridge by welding or
by substantial, clean metal-to-metal bolted or riveted joints,
• connecting together and bonding as above any exposed
metal parts of an Underline or Overline Bridge (e.g.
parapets, handrails and bearings of a concrete Bridge),
• bonding as above concrete reinforcement (including
prestressing anchorages) if it is accessible or if it is
electrically connected to accessible metalwork,
• attaching a bonded metal plate to the underside of a
concrete, timber and masonry Overline Bridge, in certain
cases where required by Network Rail,
• using non-metallic embedded service ducts in the Bridge.

Where a railway signal structure or any other railway equipment or

equipment support structure that is required to be bonded to the
traction return rail are attached to a Bridge, the interface between
the Bridge and the attached equipment or support structure shall be
designed so that all metal parts form a continuous electrical whole.

Where a Bridge crosses over an overhead electrified railway,

consideration shall be given to waterproofing the Bridge and to
managing any run-off to avoid potential damage through dripping
water causing flash over.

The electrical protection Design shall be subject to acceptance by

Network Rail.

6.9.5 Protection from stray currents

Where third rail D.C. electrification, or dual overhead A.C and third-
rail D.C. electrification is present, consideration shall be given to the
risk of stray current corrosion arising due to high current flows
through the earth.

Railway Group Standard GL/RT1253: Mitigation of DC Stray

Current effects identifies the process requirements concerning stray
currents. Where applicable, details shall be agreed with Network

Page 27 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Rail as to which requirements of GL/RT1253 are to be included in

the Design of the Bridge.

Consideration shall be given to special protection, or measures to

mitigate the rate of corrosion, such as electrical isolation of
substructure reinforcement cages, electrical screening, sacrificial
zinc electrodes, or cathodic/anodic protection. Where applicable,
protective provisions shall be in accordance with BS EN 50122-2:
Railway Applications – Fixed Installations – Part 2: Protective
provisions against the effects of stray currents caused by D.C.
traction systems.

6.9.6 Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI)

An introduction to the requirements for complying with the Technical

Specification for Interoperability relating to the Infrastructure
Subsystem for Bridges that carry or cross high speed rail lines
(‘High Speed TSI’) of the trans-European network (TENS lines) is
given in Appendix G.

The TSI for Conventional Rail traffic is under development at the

time of drafting this standard and is currently anticipated to come
into force in 2010. Bridges on or over lines subject to the
‘Conventional Rail TSI’ will have to comply with the requirements of
the TSI once in force.

The applicability of TSIs and the particular requirements for each

Bridge must be established by reference to the High Speed and
Conventional TSIs and the applicable Regulations.

The AIP Submission shall identify in a specific appendix the TSI

requirements which apply to the Design and demonstrate how the
Design complies with these requirements.

6.10 General requirements for interfacing with external authorities,

Outside Parties and third parties

Potential Design interfaces with external authorities, Outside Parties and

third parties are listed in Appendix J.

Before making any initial consultations, the arrangements for liaising with
all external authorities, Outside Parties and other potentially affected
third parties during the Design process, and for subsequently agreeing
any requirements, shall be agreed with Network Rail.

Liaison with HMRI, TSI authorities (see Appendix G), Notified Bodies,
train/freight/station operating companies, and other leaseholders/tenants
(of Network rail) shall be carried out by Network Rail, unless specifically
delegated to the Designer or others.

Page 28 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Provision of access to Network Rail property shall be co-ordinated

through the Operational Property Service of Network Rail’s Property
Estates division, or equivalent authority.

In order to ensure that the Design is compatible, so far as is reasonably

practicable, with the requirements of authorities and other interested
parties external to Network Rail, liaison with external authorities, Outside
Parties and third parties shall commence prior to the start of the Design,
and shall continue throughout the Design process, as applicable.

6.11 Interface with Planning Authorities

Contact with the relevant Planning Authority shall be co-ordinated

through Network Rail, and in appropriate cases Network Rail will
undertake the consultations directly. No communication is to be made
outside Network Rail concerning permitted development status, planning
approval, or listed building status, without the prior approval of Network
Rail, and the Town Planning Team of the Network Rail’s Property
Estates division (or equivalent authority).

Consultation with the Planning Authority shall commence as early in the

overall Design process as practicable, to avoid abortive Design effort.
The following planning aspects shall be considered in the Design, where
applicable and without limitation:
• permitted development status,
• planning permission, including listed building status,
• materials and finishes,
• aesthetics and external colour schemes,
• landscaping,
• effects of the intended methods of construction.

6.12 Interface with services, Statutory Undertakers and public

utilities

Requirements for carrying services, Statutory Undertaker’s or public

utilities’ equipment, and for alterations to services affected by the Bridge,
shall be agreed by Network Rail in consultation with the relevant
authorities, unless delegated to the Designer. The Design shall make
due allowance for any such services or equipment that are to be
supported by the Bridge, and the provisions, loads and alterations shall
be identified in the AIP Submission.

Where reasonably practicable, equipment for different types of services

shall be segregated. Appropriate facilities shall be provided for the
maintenance of the services and equipment. Consideration shall also be

Page 29 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

given to the means of future replacement, renewal and upgrading of

services and equipment.

Consideration shall be given to providing space or incorporating ducts for

future service requirements, and facilitating access in the future with
minimal disruption to the railway and other operations.

The risk to the Bridge superstructure, substructure and associated

earthworks, arising from the consequential effects of the failure of pipes
or services carried by or passing under the Bridge, shall be considered in
the Design.

6.13 Interface with highways

6.13.1 Highway Authority acceptance of the Design

Where a Design will affect existing or proposed highways, the

acceptance of the relevant parts of the Design shall be sought
(subject to the restrictions and requirements of 6.10) from the
Highway Authority, including any mitigation of effects that may be
required. Relevant details and references to acceptance by the
Highways Authority shall be included in the AIP Submission.

6.13.2 Clearances to highways and other roads

Lateral and vertical clearances to highways and other non-public

roads shall be determined by Network Rail (see 6.7) in consultation
with the Highway Authority, private owner or user as applicable, and
shall take into account Network Rail’s existing legal obligations or
agreements.

For a new Bridge over a public highway, the headroom from the
soffit shall not be less than 5.3 m, and shall be at least 5.7 m where
this can be achieved with reasonable economy. The Bridge shall
comply with HMRI Railway Safety Principles and Guidance Part 2:
Section A, Chapter 4.

Where it is not reasonably practicable to provide a headroom of 5.7

m, details shall be justified and recorded in the AIP Submission.
Where the headroom is less than 5.7 m, the superstructure shall be
designed for vehicle collision loads in accordance with Highways
Agency Standard BD 60/04: The Design of Highway Bridges for
Vehicle Collision Loads or suitable protection shall be provided in
accordance with BD 65/97: Design Criteria for Collision Protection
Beams” as applicable. References in BD 60/04 to the “Overseeing
Organisation” shall be deemed to refer to Network Rail. Protection
beams shall not be used to carry critical functions, such as
signalling cables.

Page 30 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Columns which support a Bridge that spans over a highway,

whether within or further than 4.5 m from the edge of the
carriageway, shall be designed and where applicable have
mitigation measures provided, in accordance with BD 60/04.

The Design of a Bridge over a highway shall prevent collapse as

required by BD 60/04. Associated railway loading for an Underline
Bridge is given in 9.2.9.

Consideration shall be given to the following mitigation in relation to

potential impact from highway vehicles, as applicable:

• provide restraint to prevent the Bridge being moved

sideways or upwards,
• add mass to the structure,
• provide a flat soffit or ensure the deck can adequately carry
the loads if one member is removed,
• provide stocky flanges,
• stiffen girder webs,
• provide additional main girder flange thickness to
compensate for damage and facilitate repair options (e.g.
dressing of gouges in the steel).

Consideration shall be given to the relative gradients of the Bridge

soffit and the highway, and the potential for vehicles/loads to
bounce after striking the structure, which can make internal parts of
the soffit vulnerable to impact, as well as outer girders.

Where an existing Bridge superstructure is to be strengthened or

reconstructed, so far as is reasonably practicable the resulting
structure shall be able to continue to carry rail traffic in the event of
a Bridge strike. Network Rail's headroom and legal obligations shall
be established in accordance with 6.7. The minimum headroom
over a highway shall not generally be reduced where it is already
below 5.7 m without Network Rail’s approval. Where reasonably
practicable the headroom shall be increased to provide the
maximum up to 5.7 m. If clearances less than existing are
proposed, these shall be determined in consultation with the
appropriate authorities and recorded in the AIP Submission.

For a strengthened or reconstructed Bridge for which a headroom of

less than 5.7 m is proposed, a risk assessment for vehicle impact
shall be carried out, and consideration shall be given to designing
the Bridge to resist vehicle collision loads in accordance with BD
60/04 or providing other suitable protection designed in accordance

Page 31 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

with BD65/97. Details shall be justified and recorded in the AIP

Submission.

The requirements of NR/L2/CIV/076: Management of bridge strikes

from road vehicles & waterborne vessels shall be complied with as
applicable. Consideration shall be given to the guidance in
NR/L3/CIV/202: Management of the risk of bridge strikes.

A Bridge over a non-public road shall comply where reasonably

practicable with the requirements for a Bridge over a highway, and
any different criteria shall be identified and justified in the AIP
submission.

6.13.3 Highway widths and construction

Where the Design includes the provision of a highway, the widths,

details and construction of the highway shall comply with the
requirements of the relevant Highway Authority and details shall be
included in the AIP Submission.

6.13.4 Highway sight lines

The Design shall comply where reasonably practicable with the

requirements of the Highway Authority to provide, or maintain, sight
lines on the highway. Where the Design will unavoidably and
unacceptably affect existing sightlines, requirements for appropriate
mitigation measures shall be sought (subject to 6.7) from the
Highway Authority (e.g. imposing a highway speed restriction) and
shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

6.13.5 Highway lighting and road traffic signs

Facilities for providing/attaching lights, lighting columns, road traffic

signs etc., and for the provision of power, shall be considered, and
shall be included in the Design where such provision has been
agreed by Network Rail. The relevant requirements and loading
shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

6.13.6 Road traffic signs for restricted headroom Bridges

Where a new, strengthened or reconstructed Bridge has a

headroom less than 5.03 m (16' 6''), advance warning signs, and
warning chevrons and headroom signs on each face of the Bridge,
shall be provided as identified in NR/L2/CIV/076: Management of
bridge strikes from road vehicles & waterborne vessels.

6.13.7 Prevention of vehicle incursion

Requirements for preventing the accidental incursion of vehicles

onto the railway are given in 7.9.1.

Page 32 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

6.14 Interface with waterways

6.14.1 Clearances over waterways

Lateral and vertical clearances over waterways shall be determined

by Network Rail in consultation with the relevant authorities, private
owner or user, as applicable and shall take into account any
existing legal obligations or agreements. The clearances shall be
recorded in the AIP submission. The risk of ship impact shall be
considered as identified in 9.2.9 and 9.6.

6.14.2 Lighting and signs over waterways

Facilities for providing/attaching lights, signs etc., and for the

provision of power, shall be considered and included in the Design
where such provision has been agreed by Network Rail. The
relevant requirements and loading shall be identified in the AIP
Submission.

6.15 Interface with mineral extraction and landfill

Issues regarding the interaction of a Design with mineral extractions and

landfill shall be managed in accordance with Network Rail Standard
NR/L2/CIV/037: Managing the risk arising from Mineral Extraction and
landfill. Arrangements for liaison shall be agreed with Network Rail
before making any initial consultations.

7 Particular Design requirements

7.1 Technical Approval

Technical Approval for the Design shall be obtained in accordance with

NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical Approval of design, construction and
maintenance of civil engineering infrastructure.

Like for like replacement of components of an existing Bridge may not

require Technical Approval for the components. However, consideration
shall be given to the dismantling and installation process, any temporary
effect on the integrity of the Bridge, any associated temporary works,
and the need to obtain Technical Approval of any of these aspects in
accordance with NR/L2/CIV/003.

7.2 Design life

7.2.1 New Bridges and reconstructed superstructures

The Design life of a new Bridge, or a reconstructed superstructure,

shall be explicitly stated in the Design documentation and recorded
in the AIP Submission. A Design life of 120 years shall normally be
adopted; however, in exceptional circumstances a shorter life may

Page 33 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

be accepted, provided justification for this is recorded in the AIP

Submission.

The design life of the substructure of a new Bridge shall not be less
than that for the superstructure.

Where existing elements are to be retained, their future Design life,

and the Design life of any new elements, shall be taken into
account.

7.2.2 Strengthening, alterations, repairs and temporary

Bridges

The Design life for strengthening, alterations, repairs and temporary

Bridges shall be as specified in the Remit or as otherwise agreed
with Network Rail, and shall be recorded in the AIP Submission.

7.3 Durability and corrosion protection

The durability and corrosion protection of a Bridge shall be

commensurate with the Design life of the Bridge.

Where it cannot be reasonably avoided for components of the structure

to be less durable than the structure as a whole, such as bearings,
expansion joints, waterproofing, etc., which are likely to need replacing
during the Design life of the structure, consideration shall be given in the
Design to the means of replacing such elements, which shall be
recorded with the AIP Submission.

Where durable steel is used, the additional thickness required to provide

a minimum patina shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Paints, sealants and other materials used for the protection of a Bridge
shall comply with the requirements of NR/L2/CIV/039: Specification
RT98 – Protective Treatments for Railtrack Infrastructure.

The recommendations of NR/L3/CIV/002: Application and reapplication

of protective treatments to Railtrack infrastructure shall be considered.

Consideration shall be given to protection below ground level, taking into

account the difficulties of examination and maintenance, and the
possibility of future changes in ground level adjacent to the structure.

7.4 Water management and drainage

The management of water on or under a Bridge, including approaches,

shall prevent ponding on the trafficked surfaces or within infill material,
ballast, etc., where reasonably practicable. Consideration shall be given
to providing falls, pre-camber and drainage facilities. Due account shall
be taken of water on the approaches to a Bridge, particularly where parts

Page 34 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

of the structure or associated works are at a low point relative to the

approaches.

An Overline Bridge which carries a highway or road shall be provided

with carriageway drainage in accordance with the relevant Highways
Agency standards, unless otherwise agreed by Network Rail. Footways
and parapet upstands and joints shall be designed to prevent surface
water flowing over the edge of the Bridge or exiting through gaps onto
the railway, overhead line equipment (OLE), or other infrastructure
below.

Consideration shall be given to providing drainage facilities for an

Underline Bridge. Drainage shall not direct water onto the highway, or
the railway/OLE below an intersection Bridge, or other infrastructure.

Drainage shall be provided behind earth retaining abutments and walls

to prevent the build-up of water pressure in retained fill material. The
suitability of providing weep holes or direct drainage pipework shall be
considered, taking into account the means of dissipating the water in
front of the abutment, into drainage systems or watercourses, and the
need to prevent pollution. Consideration shall be given to the
requirements of Highways Agency standard BD 30/87: Backfilled
retaining walls and bridge abutments.

Drainage systems shall be designed to facilitate maintenance with the

provision of suitable manholes and rodding eyes, etc.

The Design of drainage adjacent to the track shall comply with

NR/SP/TRK/9006: Design, installation and maintenance of lineside
drainage unless otherwise justified in the AIP Submission.

Where abutments or walls are clad with brickwork or stonework, the gap
behind the cladding shall be filled with mortar. For other cladding
material, consideration shall be given to providing drainage to the void
between the wall structure and facing.

7.5 Waterproofing

A Bridge that carries a highway and other road, etc. shall be

waterproofed in accordance with the relevant Highways Agency
standards, unless otherwise agreed by Network Rail.

Other bridges, including Underline Bridges, shall have waterproofing that

complies with the requirements of NR/L2/CIV/041: Waterproofing
systems for underline bridges. Guidance on waterproofing is provided in
NR/L3/CIV/001: Waterproofing for underline bridges.

The design life of the waterproofing system shall be stated in the AIP
Submission.

Page 35 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

7.6 Structural form and articulation

The structural form and articulation of the Bridge shall take into account
relevant factors and interactions, including the following as applicable:
• the safety and ease of construction,
• the effect on the vertical and torsional stiffness of the bridge,
• the effects of rotations at the bearings, including uplift at the
end of the deck behind bearings,
• avoiding uplift at bearings,
• the support provided to the track,
• constraints on construction depth,
• geometrical constraints arising from structure gauge
requirements, etc.,
• longitudinal and transverse movement, or the effects where
such movement is restrained,
• joint details, waterproofing, and the management of track
drainage and surface water,
• implications for the examination and maintenance of the
Bridge,

• limitations identified in Appendix L.

Details that may lead to debris and water becoming trapped, with
consequential risks of corrosion, shall be avoided. Consideration shall
be given in the detailing to facilitate future repainting of metalwork,
including the recommendations of BS EN ISO 12944-3:1998: Paints and
varnishes Part 3: Design considerations.

7.7 Protection against derailment

An Underline Bridge shall be provided with a solid deck and shall have
robust kerbs to contain the wheels of derailed vehicles, or girders which
perform this function, to comply with the requirements of HMRI: Safety
Principles and Guidance Part 2: Section A: Guidance on the
Infrastructure, Chapter 4. Guidance may be obtained from Clause 7.3.3
in Railway Approved Code of Practice GC/RC5510: Recommendations
for the Design of Bridges.

The following shall be considered in the Design, as applicable.

Protect:
• the ends of main structural girders,

Page 36 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• intermediate stiffeners by placing them on the outer side of

main girders (if provided to a centre girder the Bridge should be
adequate without the stiffeners on one side of the girder),
• provide robustness in the main girders,
• provide internal robust kerbs to protect discrete elements such
as truss members above track level.

Mitigate:
• provide robust kerbs to retain the train on the Bridge,
• the Bridge should not overturn or make the consequences of
the derailment disproportionate to the incident,
• avoid placing single bearing stiffeners in the vicinity of the
tracks, so that in the event of one stiffener being damaged then
alternative stiffener(s) are available to provide alternative load
carrying capacity..

Loading requirements are given in 9.2.8 and Appendix C. These

loading requirements generally preclude open mesh infill to grillage
floors.

7.8 Security, fencing and protection from vandalism

The layout of fencing in the vicinity of a Bridge shall be such that the
fences, together with the adjacent structure, form a continuous barrier
against trespass onto the railway. NR/L3/TRK/030: Lineside security
sets out the minimum requirements. Guidance is also given in HMRI:
Railway Safety Principles and Guidance Part 2: Section B, Chapter 5.

Consideration shall be given to protecting the railway from vandalism

and to deterring people from climbing the parapets on an Overline Bridge
(e.g. by increasing the height of parapets, attaching mesh screens,
installing vandalism cages or anti-trespass spikes, etc.) and by
preventing access to the outer faces of an Overline Bridge. The
protection arrangements shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Consideration shall be given to providing access gates in fences and to

providing steps on embankments/cuttings near a Bridge to facilitate
access for examining and maintaining the structure.

7.9 Parapets, safety barriers, walkways, handrailing, etc.

Parapets, safety barriers, walkways and handrailing, etc. shall comply

with the applicable requirements identified in 7.9.1 to 7.9.8.

Parapets shall comply with HMRI: Railway Safety Principles and

Guidance Part 2: Section A, Chapter 4.

Page 37 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

The level of containment and the positions and extent of vehicle or

pedestrian parapets, safety barriers, handrails and walkways shall be
identified in the AIP Submission.

7.9.1 Vehicle parapets and safety barriers for Overline Bridges

Vehicle parapets and vehicle safety barriers shall be provided, as

applicable, on an Overline Bridge that carries a highway (including
Accommodation and Occupation Bridges) and on the approaches to
the Bridge, and shall comply with the principles of Highways Agency
standard TD 19/06: Requirements for Road Restraint Systems,
subject to the requirements of this standard. References in TD
19/06 to the Overseeing Organisation shall be deemed to be
Network Rail.

For an Overline Bridge which carries a public highway over the

railway, the following shall apply:

• A new or fully reconstructed Bridge (i.e. deck and

substructures) shall have Very High Containment Level
(H4a) parapets in accordance with BS EN 1317-2: Road
restraint systems – Performance classes, impact test
acceptance criteria and test methods for safety barriers.
• Where the existing deck is to be replaced (but not the
substructures), Very High Containment Level (H4a)
parapets shall be provided. In exceptional circumstances,
where it is not reasonably practicable to achieve H4a
Containment Level, (for example where it would become
necessary to reconstruct or significantly strengthen the
substructures in order to withstand the containment forces),
a suitable assessment of the risks at the particular Bridge
shall be undertaken and the highest Containment Level
that can reasonably be achieved shall be proposed in the
AIP Submission.
• Where the Bridge is to be strengthened or altered,
including where a footway is strengthened or replaced to
carry accidental wheel loads, the parapet Containment
Level shall be H4a provided that it is reasonably practicable
to achieve this and it does not materially alter the scope of
the works that was intended. Provision of a Containment
Level of less than H4a shall be justified by an assessment
of the risk and practicability, and the highest Containment
Level that can be achieved shall be provided, which shall
not be less than the existing.

For an Overline Bridge that is significantly longer than the width of

the railway crossed, consideration may be given to providing
parapets with a Containment Level less than H4a on parts of the

Page 38 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Bridge that are remote from the railway, where justified in

accordance with the requirements of TD 19/06: Requirements for
Road Restraint Systems, provided that the risk of accidental
penetration of the parapet and obstruction of the railway is
acceptable to Network Rail.

The location of the transition between a Very High Containment

Level (H4a) parapet and a lower Containment Level parapet shall
be set far enough from the tracks and adjacent slopes to protect the
railway from errant vehicles that have penetrated the lower
Containment Level parapet. Consideration shall be given to the
potential trajectory of a vehicle which has penetrated the non-H4a
parapet, the height of the bridge above the railway and to other
relevant factors (see 7.9.3). The locations of the transitions on the
approach to and departure from the H4a parapet shall not be closer
to the railway than permitted by TD 19/06 and the Road Restraint
Risk Assessment Process (RRRAP) which forms part of TD 19/06.
Typically this will mean the transition will not be closer than 25 m in
advance of the ‘point of no recovery’, and 25 m beyond the opposite
point (reduces to 10 m if on a dual carriageway). Parapets are not
required to extend beyond the length of the abutment or retaining
walls.

Consideration, in consultation with Network Rail, shall be given to

the possibilities of a railway line being moved, reinstated or
constructed, including passing under spans not currently over the
railway, in which case parapets of Containment Level H4a shall be
provided on such spans.

When proposing parapets of different Containment Levels,

consideration shall be given to achieving an acceptable transition
between the parapet types and to the overall appearance.

The provision of parapets with less than Very High Containment

Level (H4a) shall be justified by a risk assessment and details shall
be provided in the AIP Submission, including any other measures
that are to be provided to prevent errant vehicles from striking the
parapet or terminating on the railway.

Vehicle safety barriers shall normally be provided on the approach

and departure to all parapets in accordance with TD 19/06,
including the determination of the required Containment Level of the
barrier. Where it is not reasonably practicable to achieve
compliance with TD 19/06 requirements, for example where the
approaches to the Bridge are constrained by existing road junctions,
layouts or adjacent properties, alternative proposals shall be
justified in the AIP Submission. The highest standard of protection
that is reasonably practicable shall be provided.

Page 39 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appropriate transitions and connections shall be provided between

parapets and safety barriers in accordance with TD 19/06.

The Containment Level, and the Impact Severity Level and

maximum Working Width Class as identified in BS EN 1317-2:
Road restraint systems – Performance classes, impact test
acceptance criteria and test methods for safety barriers, for
parapets and vehicle safety barriers shall be agreed with the
highway authority and Network Rail.

Parapets over the railway shall:

• not be less than 1500 mm high (1800 mm where the Bridge

is frequently used by equestrian traffic, or is over an
automatic/driverless railway),
• have an inner face which is smooth and non-perforated
over its full height without hand or footholds,
• be provided with steeple copings or equivalent.

Consideration may be given to incorporating parapet profile details

given in Appendix G of Railway Group Code of Practice
GC/RC/5510: Recommendations for the Design of Bridges.

Where the railway face of a parapet is inset from the edge of a

Bridge, appropriate anti-trespass and anti-climbing measures shall
be incorporated to prevent people gaining access to or along the
area of the Bridge outside the parapet. This is additional to
provisions for preventing access along the railway face of metal
parapets.

An Accommodation or Occupation Overline Bridge shall be

provided with parapets of Normal Containment Level N2 in
accordance with BS EN 1317-2: Road restraint systems –
Performance classes, impact test acceptance criteria and test
methods for safety barriers, provided a risk assessment is
undertaken which justifies not providing a higher Containment
Level, which shall be included in the AIP Submission. Vehicle
safety barriers shall be provided on the approach and departure to
the parapet, subject to the provisions of 7.9.1.

7.9.2 Spans over electrified railways

The following additional requirements shall apply to parapets on a

span over a railway electrified on the 25 kV overhead system and
where pedestrians, animals, pedal cycles and vehicles drawn by
animals are not excluded by Order:

Page 40 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• parapets shall extend at least 3000 mm beyond any un-

insulated overhead equipment, subject to greater lengths
as required by 7.9.1,
• metal parapets shall be bonded to earth to counter
induction currents (see 6.9.4),
• consideration shall be given to providing additional
protective measures on footbridges where vandalism is
known to be a problem in the area, such as providing
enclosures or increasing the parapet height to 1800 mm.

7.9.3 Prevention of accidental vehicle incursion

Where a highway approaches an Overline Bridge (at a location

where the highway is not supported by the Bridge or other
structure), consideration shall be given to the risk of errant vehicles
falling onto the railway and, where appropriate, a vehicle parapet,
vehicle safety barrier, raised earthwork mound, or other protection
shall be provided. This requirement applies to new and
reconstructed Bridges, and where a parapet on an existing Bridge is
being replaced.

Relevant factors at the site shall be taken into account, including the
distance and elevation between the highway and the railway, the
permitted speed of highway and rail traffic, the curvature and angle
of the approach of the highway to the railway.

Guidance may be obtained from the Department for Transport

document Managing the accidental obstruction of the railway by
road vehicles.

Consideration of the risk, and any protection provided, shall comply

with Highways Agency standard TD 19/06: Requirements for Road
Restraint Systems and the Road Restraint Risk Assessment
Process (RRRAP) which forms part of TD 19/06.

The position and provision of protection arrangements shall be as

agreed by Network Rail and the highway authority.

7.9.4 Replacement of parapets or safety barriers

Where existing vehicle or pedestrian parapets or safety barriers on

an Overline Bridge are to be replaced or reconstructed (but the
Bridge is not to be reconstructed or significantly strengthened), the
parapets and safety barriers shall provide the highest Containment
Level (i.e. to meet the requirements for a new Bridge as in 7.9.1)
that can be achieved without unreasonable additional cost or need
for major works to the Bridge. Services in the Bridge, and the effect
on them caused by providing a parapet with increased Containment

Page 41 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Level, shall be investigated and taken into consideration. Local

repairs to parapets or barriers shall generally match the existing
provisions. In all cases, the existing Containment Level shall not be
reduced.

Where parapets on an arch Bridge are to be reconstructed,

consideration may be given to the use of ‘high level of containment’
reinforced masonry parapets in accordance with BS 6799-4: 1999:
Highway parapets for bridges and other structures Part 4:
Specification for parapets of reinforced and unreinforced masonry
construction. The use of such parapets and the level of
containment shall be justified in the AIP Submission.

7.9.5 Walkways, positions of safety and handrailing for

Underline Bridges

Walkways and handrailing shall comply with the requirements of the

Workplace Regulations and with HMRI Railway Safety Principles
and Guidance Part 2: Section A.

Walkways, Positions of Safety, warning signs and other lineside

facilities for personal safety shall be provided in accordance with the
requirements of GC/RT5203: Infrastructure Requirements for
Personal Safety in Respect of Clearances and Access and
NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside facilities for personal safety, subject to
the requirements of 7.9.5 where more onerous.

Where reasonably practicable a Cess Walkway complying with

NR/SP/OHS/069 shall be provided on both sides of a new Underline
Bridge, a reconstructed superstructure, and an altered1 Bridge.
Continuous handrailing or equivalent barriers/parapets shall be
provided on the outer face where the form of the structure does not
provide adequate protection against falling. The walkways shall
generally be formed at cess ballast level, although they may be
raised or otherwise separated from the track (e.g. passing on the
outside of main girders).

Where it is reasonably practical to achieve on a new Underline

Bridge, a reconstructed superstructure, and an altered Bridge, a
Continuous2 Position of Safety with Immediate Access from the
running line (terms as defined in and complying with Railway Group
Standard GC/RT5203: Infrastructure Requirements for Personal
Safety in Respect of Clearances and Access) shall be provided on
both sides of the Bridge. A Cess Walkway may be used as a

1
For example, alterations to an existing walkway or to edge parts of a Bridge, as opposed to
un-associated strengthening/repairs, etc. to other parts of the superstructure or substructure.
2
Where reasonably practicable the Position of Safety shall be continuous and uninterrupted
throughout the length of the Bridge (obstructions not exceeding 2 m are permitted), and shall
not comprise a series of separated Continuous Positions of Safety with or without refuges.

Page 42 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Continuous Position of Safety where is meets the requirements for

a Continuous Position of Safety with Immediate Access. Where a
Continuous Position of Safety cannot reasonably be provided,
prohibition notices shall be erected in accordance with
NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside facilities for personal safety.

Where the Bridge is required to carry an Authorised Walking Route,

one such walkway complying with NR/SP/OHS/069 shall be
provided on at least one side of the Bridge, and on both sides
where required by Network Rail.

The height of handrailing on an Underline Bridge shall be at least

1250 mm above the adjacent walkway or cess.

Handrailing shall also be infilled, and designed for loads as

identified in Appendix E.

Where an Underline Bridge crosses a railway (i.e. it is an

intersection Bridge) which has 25 kV overhead line electrification
(OLE), the handrailing shall be increased to 1.5 m height and shall
be solid infilled for at least 3 m either side of the OLE, and shall
comply with the requirements of 7.9.2.

Where handrailing abuts the railway boundary fencing, the layout

and interface shall comply with the requirements identified in 7.8.

Walkways shall be provided with a non-slip surface and shall be

free from tripping hazards.

An Authorised Walking Route (which by definition may be used by

persons not certificated in Personal Track Safety) which is attached
to or is integral with an Underline Bridge, shall be separated from
the railway by a barrier to segregate users from the railway in
accordance with NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside facilities for personal
safety, with a minimum height of 1500 mm. Where the barrier is
attached to the top of a bridge girder which does not provide
footholds for climbing, the barrier height may include the depth of
the girder above the walkway.

A walkway that is attached to or integral with an Underline Bridge,

and which intended for use by the public, shall also comply with the
applicable requirements for a footbridge (see 7.10).

Small gaps between adjacent Bridges, where the tops of outer

girders are close to track level, shall be covered to prevent
accidents to personnel, or small items or ballast falling through. For
Bridges with higher adjacent edges, consideration shall be given to
covering the gap. Handrailing shall be provided where there are

Page 43 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

larger uncovered and unprotected openings between adjacent

underline Bridge decks.

Where an Underline Bridge is located near to a station or near

‘Stop’ signals on the approach to a station, where passengers might
inadvertantly alight from a train onto a girder, handrail or parapet,
consideration shall be given to providing additional protection,
unless the structure itself affords adequate protection. Such
protection shall be achieved by providing a fence on top of the
parapet (provided the parapet is at least 1250 mm high), providing a
raised parapet, or providing a high main structural member on the
edge of the Bridge, all of which shall be to a height of 1500 mm
above platform height (which shall be taken as 915 mm above the
plane of the rails).

Where appropriate, the Design shall incorporate signs to warn

passengers not to alight from the train at such locations.

7.9.6 Protection on wing walls, abutments and Culvert head

walls

Suitable fences, handrails or barriers shall be provided along the

tops of wingwalls, abutments, and head walls of Culverts, as
applicable, to give reasonable protection against falling, where such
protection is not provided by the structure or lineside security
fencing as required by 7.8.

Consideration may be given to the details contained in Highways

Agency standard TD 19/06: Requirements for Road Restraint
Systems. Provisions for protection shall not compromise the
lineside security requirements of 7.8.

Where there are openings between adjacent Underline Bridge

decks, protection against falling shall be provided along the tops of
the abutments between the decks (see Appendices E and L).

7.9.7 Trackside walkways and personal safety beneath

Overline Bridges

Trackside walkways and facilities for personal safety shall be

provided beneath an Overline Bridge. For a new Bridge, and
where reasonably practicable for a reconstructed Bridge (i.e. where
the abutments are also reconstructed), a Continuous3 Position of
Safety with Immediate Access from the running line (terms as
defined in and complying with Railway Group Standard
GC/RT5203: Infrastructure Requirements for Personal Safety in

3
Note that the GC/RT5203 requirements for a Position of Safety to be Continuous are more
onerous than those in NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside facilities for personal safety. Obstructions
shall not exceed 2m in length.

Page 44 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Respect of Clearances and Access) shall be provided on both sides

of the track under the Bridge. Where this is not practicable for a
reconstructed Bridge, the walkways and safety facilities shall
comply with the requirements of NR/SP/OHS/069: Lineside
Facilities for Personal Safety.

7.9.8 Parapets for a Bridge remote from the railway

A Bridge which does not cross a railway, is not adjacent to a railway

and does not carry a railway, shall be provided with vehicle
parapets, safety barriers and pedestrian parapets as applicable in
accordance with Highways Agency standard TD 19/06:
Requirements for Road Restraint Systems, or as otherwise
specified by Network Rail in the Remit.

7.10 Footbridges

7.10.1 Particular requirements for footbridges

A footbridge at a station or that gives access to a station shall as a

minimum comply requirements given in HMRI: Railway Safety
Principles and Guidance Part 2: Section B, Chapter 5.
Consideration shall also be given to the requirements of the
Strategic Rail Authority Code of Practice: Train Station Services for
Disabled Passengers, in which references to the Overseeing
Organisation shall be deemed to be Network Rail.

Subject to the overriding requirements of 7.10 and elsewhere in this

standard, consideration shall be given to the applicable
requirements of Highways Agency standard BD 29/04: Design
Criteria for Footbridges. Details that do not comply with BD29/04
(subject to this standard) shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

The width of footbridge walkways shall be suitable for current and

anticipated pedestrian flows. The width of a footbridge at a station
shall be determined following consultation with the Head of Station
Design and Head of Fire Safety Policy. The minimum width of the
footway shall be 1.4 m, with a minimum of 1.2 m between hand-
rails. When reconstructing a footbridge on a public footpath the
width shall not be reduced where the existing width is less than
1.8m.

For an enclosed footbridge not located at a station and not giving

access to a station, internal headroom dimensions shall be in
accordance with BS 5395: Stairs, Ladders and Walkways.

Consideration shall be given to providing lighting within an enclosed

footbridge

Page 45 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

The agreed walkway dimensions shall be identified in the AIP

Submission.

Subject to the requirements of 7.9, pedestrian parapets shall be

provided in accordance with Highways Agency standard TD 19/06:
Requirements for Road Restraint Systems, except for spans where
cladding or enclosure provides equivalent protection.

A footbridge which is attached to or is integral with an Underline

Bridge shall be separated from the railway by a barrier which shall
prevent trespass onto the railway and shall comply with
NR/L3/TRK/030: Lineside security.

7.10.2 Pedestrian hand-rails for stairs, ramps and spans

In addition to requirements to provide pedestrian parapets on a

footbridge, pedestrian hand-rails shall be provided on both sides of
stairs, ramps and approaches to ramps.

Hand-rails shall either be fixed to the parapet, barrier or structural

members, or shall be self-supporting. Hand-rails shall only be
attached to cladding or glazing where the cladding/glazing has been
designed to accommodate the attachment and applied loads.

Hand-rails shall be designed in accordance with BS 8300 Code of

Practice: Design of buildings and their approaches to meet the
needs of disabled people, and shall comply with the requirements
identified in the Strategic Rail Authority Code of Practice: Train
Station Services for Disabled Passengers.

The height of the hand-rail shall be not less than 900mm or more
than 1000mm measured vertically above the surface of the ramp or
nosing of the stairs.

Consideration shall be given to providing an additional lower hand-

rail at 450 to 550 mm above the stair nosing or ramp surface, to
facilitate disabled people and children.

An additional central hand-rail need only be provided where the

width of stairs or ramps exceeds 3m.

Hand-rails and fixings shall be designed to resist the more severe

effects of a loading of 700N/m applied separately in the horizontal
and vertical directions. This loading is not additional to the loading
on parapets.

Hand-rails are not normally required along parapets on spans

across the railway, and may only be provided where the Bridge is
enclosed or the parapet height is increased to maintain the required
minimum parapet height above the hand-rail. Where the walkway
Page 46 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

has adequate width, a barrier with hand-rails may be provided along

the middle of the walkway.

7.11 Pedestrian subways

A pedestrian subway passing under the railway shall comply with the
applicable requirements for an Underline Bridge, and those for the stairs
and ramps of a footbridge.

7.12 Pipe Bridges

Self-supporting pipes, i.e. free-standing pipes, shall not normally be

permitted to span over railway tracks. Agreement to free-standing self
supporting pipes that carry low pressure water or non-hazardous
materials will only be considered where there is no practicable
alternative.

Pipelines that carry liquids or gases over the railway, where the pipes
are not supported by or incorporated in a Bridge structure that was
primarily designed for other purposes, shall be supported on a purpose-
designed beam or pipe Bridge. Unless not reasonably practicable, such
beams or pipe Bridges shall span over the railway without intermediate
supports. Supports, including intermediate supports where these are not
reasonably avoidable, shall comply with either the clearance or impact
requirements of 9.4.4.

Consideration shall be given to providing:

• side enclosures to facilitate maintenance of the pipe,
• solid flooring with edge panels to direct leaks/spillages away
from the railway.

Adequate measures shall be provided to contain and limit the extent of

any spillage of hazardous substances from pipe Bridges, such as shut
off valves outside the railway boundary, and to direct spillages away
from the railway.

7.13 Bearings

Standards for the Design of bearings are identified in 10.2, which shall
be applied subject to the following requirements. Provisions applicable
to the particular Bridge shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Limitations on the effects at bearings and from Bridge/track interaction,

including those arising from rotations or movements at bearings, are
identified in 8.

Provision shall be made to prevent the effect of rotation at the end of the
deck from being transmitted into the top of abutments.

Page 47 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

For Bridges up to 15m thermal expansion length, bearings may be

designed as fixed for horizontal movement at both ends, unless in
particular cases there are reasons why it is inappropriate to do so.

For Bridges up to 20m thermal expansion length, bearing sliding

surfaces may be plain steel-on-steel, unless in particular cases there are
reasons why these would be inappropriate, e.g. slender piers.

Bearings at halving joints warrant particular consideration. Such joints

shall only be used in exceptional circumstances and only where
adequate access is provided for inspection and maintenance.

As required by 8.3.3, unrestrained uplift at bearings shall not be

permitted. Where bearings are permitted to resist uplift forces, their
design shall take into account the effects of repeated load cycles.

Where the headroom beneath an Underline Bridge is less than 5.7m, the
bearings shall be designed for impact forces as identified in 6.13.2.
Knife edge bearings shall not be used (this is to prevent the Bridge deck
dropping off its bearings). ‘Long-stop’ lateral restraints shall also be
provided, including where the Design allows for lateral expansion
movement.

For a superstructure reconstruction where the ability of the existing

abutments to withstand horizontal pressures cannot reasonably be
demonstrated, restraints (e.g. bearing keep-strips) shall be provided to
allow sufficient movement of the superstructure due to temperature
change but so that, should movement of the abutment top occur in the
future, such movement is limited. In such cases the superstructures
shall be designed to resist any anticipated propping forces.
Requirements for existing substructures affected by new construction are
given in Appendix F.

Where steel roller bearings are proposed, consideration shall be given to

the effects of fatigue and the need for any Design checks additional to
the requirements prescribed in the standards in 10.2.

In all cases, provision shall be made for jacking the structure to replace
discrete bearings.

7.14 Fasteners

Where fasteners are used, at least one end of each fastener shall remain
accessible after assembly. Where it is not reasonably practicable to
permit access to both ends, consideration shall be given to the detailing
at the hidden end, to permit the fastener to be removed, examined and
reinstated.

Page 48 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

7.15 Hydraulic Design for Culverts

Consideration shall be given to the hydraulic Design of a Culvert through

which a watercourse or floodwater flows, for determining the internal
dimensions, gradient, entry and exit details, aprons and wing walls, etc.
as applicable. Particular requirements for hydraulic Design are outside
the scope of this standard. Hydraulic Design criteria shall be agreed with
Network Rail and the Environment Agency or other relevant authority,
and shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

7.16 Temporary Bridges

A temporary Bridge shall be designed in accordance with the

requirements of this standard, i.e. as for a permanent Bridge, subject to
the following.

A Bridge that forms temporary works and will be in place for less than 6
months may be subject to a different approval process as identified in
NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical approval of design, construction and
maintenance of civil engineering infrastructure.

Where safety and Interworking are not adversely affected, some

relaxation in aspects of the Design requirements may be permitted. In
all such cases, the traffic that will be permitted to use the temporary
Bridge, the Design life of the temporary Bridge, any site specific hazards
and any control measures required to prevent overloading of the
temporary Bridge shall be taken into account. For any temporary Bridge,
whether intended for less than 6 months use or longer, justification for
the adoption of such relaxations shall be recorded using the AIP
Submission and shall be subject to acceptance by Network Rail’s
Professional Head of Structures.

8 Deformation and fatigue for Underline Bridges

8.1 General requirements

The deformation of an Underline Bridge shall be determined using the

loading specified in BS 5400 Part 2: 2006: Specification for loads as
modified by Appendix C.

The deformation of an Underline Bridge shall comply with the

requirements in:

• BS EN 1990: 2002: Eurocode – Basis of structural design Annex

A2: Application for bridges, and
• BS EN 1991-2: 2003: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures Part 2
Traffic loads on bridges.

as modified by 8.1 to 8.8.

Page 49 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

All deformations due to permanent loading shall be calculated allowing

for all permanent loads; deformations due to live loads shall be
calculated for the specified loading for the Design, including dynamic
effects. Deformations shall be calculated using partial load factors for all
loads of 1.0.

The permanent load shall include an allowance for future increase in

ballast depth. This allowance shall normally not be less than 100mm;
confirmation shall be sought from Network Rail whether a greater
allowance may be applicable in particular local circumstances.

All horizontal deformations (lateral and longitudinal) shall be calculated

including wind loading, lateral and centrifugal forces, the effects of global
temperature range, and temperature differentials (including those
between the two sides of the Bridge), using partial load factors for all
loads of 1.0.

Unless otherwise stated, the limiting values for deformation are for the
total deformation of the Bridge calculated along each track. For vertical
deformation, this comprises deformations of the main girders, bearings,
cross-girders, rail bearers or deck slabs. For horizontal (longitudinal and
transverse) deformations, this comprises deformation of the Bridge and
the substructure.

All Bridges shall be designed so that the deformations under load do not
encroach on the required vertical and horizontal clearances, and do not
compromise the safety of the Bridge or railway. Clearance checks shall
include, for example, the situation where an Underline Bridge is adjacent
to an independently supported platform.

Requirements for the application of railway loads are given in Appendix

C.

The numbers of tracks to be loaded for the calculation of deformations

and vibration, and the reduction in loading where more than two tracks
are loaded, are identified in Table 1 in Appendix C.

Bridge spans greater than 12 m shall preferably be cambered to improve

their appearance. Camber shall generally be equal to the dead load
deflection plus half the serviceability live load deflection.

For a multi-span or skew Bridge with constant-depth main girders, the

levels of the bearings shall generally be such that all parts of the main
girder soffits lie in a continuous circular curve when viewed in elevation,
square to the girders.

Page 50 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

8.2 Natural frequency check for applicability of dynamic factors

The natural frequency of the Bridge under dead and superimposed dead
loads shall be checked to ensure it is within limits for which the dynamic
factors given in BS 5400-2: 2006 are valid.

The frequency limits shall be as identified in Appendix C item (vii); the

Appendix also identifies requirements for carrying out a dynamic analysis
and additional fatigue checks in cases where the frequency is permitted
by Network Rail to be outside these limits.

8.3 Deformations due to railway loading

The live loading to be taken into account for calculating deformations

shall include vertical loading enhanced by dynamic factors, centrifugal
loads, nosing loads, and longitudinal loads due to traction and braking.
For ballasted decks, effects such as creep and settlement of foundations
may be assumed to be addressed by track maintenance.

8.3.1 Vertical deformation of the deck

For all Bridges, the maximum midspan deflection due to railway

loading shall not exceed span/600.

Additional vertical deformation requirements for passenger comfort

are given in 8.6.

8.3.2 Track twist (for traffic safety)

The twist of the Bridge shall be calculated taking into account RU

loading, and SW/0 where applicable, multiplied by the dynamic
factor, including centrifugal effects.

Track twist shall be checked on the approach to, across, and on the
departure from the Bridge.

Limits on track twist shall be as identified in BS EN 1990: 2002

Eurocode – Basis of structural design Annex A2: Application for
bridges Clauses A2.4.4.2.2 (3) for track twist due to permanent
loads and track geometry, plus the twist due to live loads, where the
value of tT shall be 7.5 mm over 3 m. The requirements of
A2.4.4.2.2 (2) shall not apply.

In cases of Bridge superstructure reconstruction, where it is not

reasonably practicable to comply with the twist criteria identified
above, Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures shall be
advised early during the Design process, and subsequently any
non-compliance shall be identified and justified in the AIP
Submission.

Page 51 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

In all cases, the twist (cant gradient) along a 3 m length of the track
due to the loading on the Bridge in conjunction with the designed
track geometry including any intended rate of change of cant, shall
not exceed 1 in 400 (i.e. 7.5 mm) under the intended and
foreseeable Real Train vehicles that will cross the Bridge, which
shall be represented by the equivalent number of British Standard
Units (BSUs) and enhanced by the dynamic factors for Real Trains
(1+ φI+ φII) identified in NR/L3/CIV/025: The structural Assessment
of underbridges.

8.3.3 Uplift at bearings

Unrestrained uplift at bearings shall not be permitted.

Restraints to prevent uplift at bearings will only be permitted in

exceptional circumstances and shall require advance approval from
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures prior to AIP
Submission, and the Design of the bearings and restraint shall be
subject to Category III checking.

Additional requirements for bearings are given in 7.13.

Limits on the rotational uplift at the ends of decks (beyond the line
of the bearings) are given in 8.4.4.

8.4 Combined response of structure and track

8.4.1 Track-Bridge interaction

The Design shall take into account the interaction effects of the
Bridge on the track, and vice versa, in response to variable loads
including vertical loading from trains, and traction, braking and
temperature effects.

Consideration shall be given to the effects on the Bridge caused by

longitudinal forces arising from train traction and braking, and from
temperature variations, taking into account deformations of the
Bridge superstructure, bearings and substructure.

Consideration shall be given to the effects of Bridge deformation

and temperature, traction and braking effects, on the track (whether
approaching, on, or departing from the Bridge) including track
welds, switch blades and expansion switch blades.

Subject to satisfying the requirements of 8.4.4 and 8.4.5, in the

following cases other track-Bridge interaction effects may be
deemed to be covered by the loading specified in 9:

• Bridge with a total length up to 75 m, but subject to single

span lengths not exceeding 50 m, and carrying ballasted or

Page 52 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

non-ballasted continuous welded rail (CWR) track with

adjustment switches provided where required by
NR/SP/TRK/102: Track construction standards,
• Bridge comprising a single simply supported span up to 30
m expansion length, carrying ballasted CWR track without
adjustment switches,
• two-span simply-supported or continuous Bridge with each
span up to 30 m expansion length, carrying ballasted CWR
track without adjustment switches, provided that the fixed
point for expansion is at the intermediate support,
• single-span Bridge up to 15 m expansion length, carrying
non-ballasted CWR track without expansion switches,
• two-span simply-supported or continuous Bridge with each
span up to 15 m expansion length, carrying non-ballasted
CWR track without adjustment switches, provided that the
fixed point for expansion is at the intermediate support,
• all Bridges carrying jointed track; however, the rail joints
shall be kept clear of the Bridge as set out in
NR/SP/TRK/102.

In other cases, track-Bridge interaction effects shall be checked in

accordance with BS EN 1991-2: 2003: Eurocode 1: Actions on
structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges Clause 6.5.4, wherein
the limiting values and requirements in Clauses 6.5.4.5.1(1), (2) and
(3) shall apply subject to the requirements of 8.4.2 and 8.4.3.
References to alternatives and to the National Annex shall require
the agreement of Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures.

8.4.2 Longitudinal displacement of the end of the deck

Where required by 8.4.1 the effects of the longitudinal displacement

of the end of the deck on the track shall be checked.

The longitudinal relative displacement at the end of a deck due to

traction and braking (δB) shall not exceed the values given in BS
EN1991-2 Clause 6.5.4.5.2 (1).

The longitudinal relative displacement at the end of a deck due to

deformation of the deck (δH) shall not exceed the values given in
BS EN1991-2 Clause 6.5.4.5.2 (2).

8.4.3 Stresses in rails

Where required to be checked by 8.4.1, the stresses in the rails on

the Bridge and abutment due to track-Bridge interaction shall
comply with the requirements of BS EN 1991-2: 2003: Eurocode 1:
Actions on structures Part 2 Traffic loads on bridges Clauses
Page 53 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

6.5.4.5.1 (1) and (2), within which the relevant authority or specifier
for individual projects shall be deemed to be Network Rail’s
Professional Head of Structures.

8.4.4 Uplift at the end of the deck

The vertical relative displacement (δV) of the upper surface at the

end of a deck beyond the bearings, caused by deflection in the
span due to variable actions, relative to the adjacent construction
(i.e. abutment or another deck), shall not exceed the values given in
BS EN1991-2 Clause 6.5.4.5.2 (3) subject to the value not
exceeding 2mm for any line speed.

8.4.5 Rotations and uplift forces on directly fastened rails

For directly fastened rails, the stresses in rails, supports and

fastening systems due to rotations and uplift forces at the ends of
the deck (under vertical traffic loads) shall be checked against the
relevant limit state (including fatigue) performance characteristics of
the rails, supports and fastening systems.

8.5 Transverse deformation and vibration of the deck

Transverse deformation and vibration of the deck shall comply with the
requirements identified in BS EN 1990: 2002 Eurocode – Basis of
structural design Annex A2: Application for bridges Clause A2.4.4.2.4
and the following, unless other requirements are specified by Network
Rail for the individual project. The recommended values given in the
Notes to A2.4.4.2.4 (2) and (3) shall apply.

8.6 Vertical deflection at midspan (for passenger comfort)

Subject to the span/600 limit identified for all Bridges in 8.3.1, vertical
deflections due to railway loading shall comply with the requirements of
BS EN 1990: 2002 Clauses A2.4.4.3.1 and A2.4.4.3.2; and with
A2.4.4.3.3 where applicable. The required levels of comfort, and
associated vertical accelerations, given in Table A2.9 of BS EN 1990:
2002 shall be as follows, unless other requirements are specified by
Network Rail for the individual project:

• “Very good” shall be applied to Bridges on a primary route or

with a line speed of 90mph (145 kph) or more,

• “Good” shall be applied to all other Bridges.

For a temporary Bridge, the above requirements may be relaxed to

“Good” and “Acceptable” respectively.

Where a vehicle/Bridge dynamic interaction analysis is required for

checking passenger comfort in accordance with A2.4.4.3.3, proposals for
Page 54 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

taking track roughness into account shall be submitted to Network Rail’s

Professional Head of Structures for acceptance.

8.7 Fatigue requirements for Underline Bridges

The Design for fatigue shall comply with the standards identified in 10.2.

Loading requirements for fatigue are identified in 9.2.3.

9 Loading

9.1 General requirements for loading

Adequate provision for all likely and reasonably foreseeable permanent,

transient and accidental loads and load effects shall be taken into
account in the Design of a Bridge. The Design shall also consider the
partial or complete removal of loads that are not permanent, where this
produces a more severe effect; for example the removal of tracks and
their ballast on a multi-track structure.

Unless otherwise stated, the loads identified in this standard are the
characteristic or nominal loads. For both the ultimate and serviceability
limit states these loads shall be factored (for beneficial or adverse
effects) using the load factors and load combinations referred to in the
relevant Design standards in 10, with the most severe effect on each
element of the structure being considered.

In all cases, the loads used in the Design shall be identified in the AIP
Submission, and justified where the relevant values are not prescribed
by this standard or referenced standards. Where partial load factors and
relevant load combinations are not prescribed in the Design standards,
details shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Where a Bridge is to be brought into use in stages, relevant loads shall

be considered as applicable at each stage. Loads that arise during
intermediate stages, but which do not necessarily apply to the finally
completed structure, shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

9.2 Loading for new and replacement Underline Bridges

9.2.1 Railway loads for Underline Bridges

Bridges carrying railway traffic of standard gauge shall be designed

for full Type RU Loading in accordance with BS 5400: Steel,
concrete and composite bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for
Loads, as added to and amended by the requirements of this
standard, and by Appendix C which identifies additional
requirements including those for the application of loading.

Page 55 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Continuous beams shall also be checked for Type SW/0 Loading as

identified in 9.2.5.

In exceptional cases, provided that safety and Interworking are not

adversely affected, a loading lighter than full Type RU may be
permitted, which shall be defined by multiplying the Type RU
Loading by a load classification factor α. The load classification
factor α to be applied to the full Type RU Loading shall not be less
than 0.81. In such cases, the loading shall take into account the
traffic that will be permitted to use the Bridge, any foreseeable
changes in the permitted loading (e.g. prospective different types of
trains), any site specific hazards and any control measures required
to prevent overloading of the Bridge. The loading adopted must
satisfy Network Rail’s statutory and contractual obligations and not
preclude future interworking.

The provision also exists for adopting a heavier loading than full
Type RU on particular sections of the railway, which shall be
identified by Network Rail in the Remit, by applying a load
classification factor α greater than 1.0.

Justification for the use of a load classification factor α which is less

than 1.0, for loading other than full Type RU Loading, shall be
subject to approval from Network Rail’s Professional Head of
Structures at an early stage and shall be recorded in the AIP
Submission.

Where a load classification factor α is applied to RU loading, the

same value of α shall be applied to the following (also see
Appendix C):

• SW/0 loading,
• concentrated loads on deck plates and similar elements
(except α shall not less than 1.0),
• centrifugal loads,
• nosing forces,
• longitudinal loads (traction and braking) and derailment
loads.

Where 3 or more tracks on a Bridge are loaded, the loads from

trains shall be multiplied by 0.75. Note that this is not the load
classification factor α.

The Design shall be able to accommodate the loading from the

latest generation of railway mounted cranes, as identified in
Appendix C.

Page 56 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Where the Bridge is to carry a single line track, the Designer shall
consult with Network Rail on the requirements for accommodating
track renewal plant (e.g. single line track relaying gantries).

Requirements for complying with the Trans European Technical

Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) relating to infrastructure
(High Speed and Conventional Rail), where applicable, are given in
6.9.6 and Appendix G.

It is anticipated that the future Trans European Conventional Rail

Technical Specification for Interoperability (CR TSI) for
infrastructure will specify minimum requirements for applying a load
classification factor α and these shall be applied when the CR TSI
has been published.

Other loads are identified in sub-clauses of 9.2 and in 9.3 to 9.7.

9.2.2 Dynamic effects for Underline Bridges

Appropriate dynamic factors shall be applied to the equivalent static

loading to allow for impact, oscillation and other dynamic effects
including those caused by track and wheel irregularities.
Requirements, and modifications for the application of dynamic
effects from BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges Part 2:
2006: Specification for Loads, are identified in Appendix C.

9.2.3 Fatigue loads for Underline Bridges

Loads for fatigue shall be as required by the relevant standards

identified in 10.2. The fatigue life shall be 120 years unless
otherwise approved via the AIP Submission.

In all cases an appropriate traffic mix for fatigue shall be established

taking account of the design life of the structure, the proposed rail
traffic, and any reasonably foreseeable changes to the rail traffic
using the structure. The design speed, total annual tonnage per
track and design traffic mix shall be as specified by Network Rail in
the Remit for the particular Bridge.

9.2.4 Additional loads for direct fastening and embedded rails

The following additional requirements shall apply to unballasted

decks where the rails are directly fastened or embedded, other than
rails attached to longitudinal timbers. A single static vertical Design
load of 600 kN shall be applied directly to the parts of the structure
that support the rail. This load shall be considered at the Ultimate
Limit State only. The load includes the partial load factor γfL,
dynamic and lurching effects, and is not to be considered in fatigue
checks.

Page 57 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

The single 600 kN load shall be applied as follows.

• To members to which the rail is directly fastened or

embedded. Welds inside troughs which are covered by the
embedding material shall be ignored at the ultimate limit
state and the outer welds shall be designed to carry the
600 kN load.
• To members which directly support the trough, e.g. rail
bearers, slab, etc.

In all cases, stresses in the rail shall not exceed the limits
referenced in 8.4.3.

The 600 kN load shall not be applied to other parts of the Bridge.

As an alternative to the above loading, a special dynamic analysis

may be undertaken, in accordance with the requirements of
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures, to investigate the
particular wheel / rail / bridge dynamic interaction effects and
establish a Bridge specific design load. The dynamic analysis and
Bridge specific design load shall be subject to acceptance by
Network Rail.

9.2.5 Additional loading for continuous beams in Underline

Bridges

Continuous beams in Underline Bridges shall be designed for Type

RU Loading and shall also be checked for Type SW/0 Loading
defined in BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges Part 2:
2006: Specification for Loads. SW/0 loading shall be applied in
accordance with Appendix C and this Clause.

Type SW/0 Loading need only be applied to continuous members,

and shall not be applied in conjunction with Type RU Loading on the
same track. Type SW/0 or RU Loading shall also be applied to
other tracks where this produces a worse effect.

The SW/0 Loading does not have to be considered in any fatigue

check.

Deformation limits are identified in 8.

9.2.6 Walkway loading for Underline Bridges

Where an Underline Bridge supports a footway and / or cycle track

open to the public, the footway/cycle track loading shall be in
accordance with BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads.

Page 58 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Where an Underline Bridge supports a service walkway which is not

open to the public, the walkway loading shall be 5 kN/m2. For local
elements a concentrated load of 2 kN acting alone shall be taken
into account and applied on a square with a 200 mm side (not the
100 mm diameter circle from Clause 20 of GC/RC5510:
Recommendations for the Design of Bridges), or a point load of 100
kN if more onerous.

9.2.7 Parapet and handrailing loads for Underline Bridges

Loads from parapets and handrailing shall be in accordance with

the applicable standards and requirements identified in 7.9.5 and
Appendix E.

9.2.8 Accidental (derailment) loads for Underline Bridges

An Underline Bridge shall be designed for derailment loads in

accordance with BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads, to be modified and applied as
identified in Appendix C item (iii), so that it does not suffer
excessive damage, or become unstable in the event of derailment.

Robust kerbs provided in accordance with 7.7 to contain derailed

vehicles, or girders which perform this function, shall be designed
for horizontal derailment loads, which shall be identified in the AIP
Submission. Guidance may be obtained from Clause 19.1 in
Railway Approved Code of Practice GC/RC5510:
Recommendations for the Design of Bridges.

9.2.9 Accidental loads for Underline Bridges over highways

Supports to a Bridge over a highway (whether less or greater than

4.5 m clearance from the edge of the carriageway), and a Bridge
with a headroom clearance of less than 5.7 m, shall be designed
and protected for the effects of impact from road traffic in
accordance with Highways Agency Standard BD 60/04: The Design
of Highway Bridges for Vehicle Collision Loads, and as identified in
6.13.2.

9.2.10 Accidental loads for Underline Bridges over waterways

Consideration shall be given to the risk of a waterborne vessel

impacting on the spans or supports of a Bridge spanning over
navigable water. The Bridge shall be designed for appropriate
effects. This may require a specialist study. Consideration may be
given to guidance in BS EN 1991-1-7: Eurocode 1: Actions on
structures - Part 1-7: 2006: General actions – Accidental actions
and in the AASHTO: Bridge Design Specifications.

Page 59 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

The provision of fenders or other protection shall be considered.

The risks of a ship using spans other than designated navigation
spans, together with any physical protection that is to be provided,
shall be taken into account.

Impact loads shall be determined as appropriate to the navigation

under the particular Bridge, and shall be related to the clearance
and justified in the AIP Submission.

9.3 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Underline

Bridges

Loading for the strengthening, alteration or repair of an Underline Bridge

shall be in accordance with 9.1, 9.2 (excluding 9.2.1, 9.2.2 and 9.2.5),
9.3, 9.6 and 9.7 as applicable in conjunction with the following
modifications.

Where safety and Interworking are not adversely affected, strengthening,

alteration or repairs may be designed to carry a lesser loading than that
identified in 9.2.1 and 9.2.5. In such cases the load capacity of the
Bridge shall meet the published RA at the linespeed for the Bridge and
the RA of traffic permitted to use the bridge. In such cases, the loading
shall take into account the traffic that will be permitted to use the Bridge,
any foreseeable changes in the permitted loading (e.g. prospective
different types of trains including RA7 for loco hauled traffic), any site
specific hazards and any control measures required to prevent
overloading of the Bridge. The loading adopted must satisfy Network
Rail’s statutory and contractual obligations. The intended loading shall
be justified in the AIP Submission.

Generally the strengthening shall also be designed to meet RA 10 at

60mph (or at linespeed where the linespeed is less than 60mph) Any
lesser loading shall be subject to the approval of Network Rail’s
Professional Head of Structures.

The loading may be derived from Network Rail Code of Practice

NR/L3/CIV/025: The Structural Assessment of Underbridges. The
loading shall not be less than the number of British Standard Units
(BSUs) equivalent to the published Route Availability (RA) number,
increased by 10% and at the permissible speed at the Bridge, subject to
20 BSU (equivalent to RA 10) being limited to 60 mph maximum. For
example, the loading shall be the more onerous of 1.1 x (18 BSU at
90mph) or 1.1 x (20 BSU at 60mph), as applicable to the Bridge.

Allowance for dynamic effects shall be in accordance with

NR/L3/CIV/025.

The design fatigue life of strengthened parts shall be 30 years.

Page 60 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

In cases where it is not reasonably practicable to achieve the 10%

increase identified above on the loading from NR/L3/CIV/025,
justification for not providing the 10% increase shall be included in the
AIP Submission.

Where NR/L3/CIV/025 would otherwise permit a 75% factor to be

applied to the loading on the second and subsequent tracks as identified
in Clause 4.3.8, no such reduction shall be permitted in the Design and
this shall clearly be stated in the AIP Submission.

Where NR/L3/CIV/025 would otherwise permit γfL load factors to be

reduced no such reduction shall be permitted in the Design; where a
range of values is provided for any γfL load factor the maximum value
shall be used; and γf3 shall not be reduced.

Justification for the use of NR/L3/CIV/025, and relevant details of the

loading and associated γfL load factors, shall be recorded in the AIP
Submission.

Consideration shall be given to using a greater loading for the Design to

comply with any planned enhancement of the route to meet the route
strategy.

9.4 Loading for new and replacement Overline Bridges and

footbridges

9.4.1 Highway vehicle loads for new and replacement Overline

Bridges

A Bridge that carries highway traffic shall be designed for full HA

type loading in accordance with BS 5400: Steel, concrete and
composite bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads. In
addition, for a public highway Bridge, the number of units of HB
loading required to be carried and any requirements for abnormal
indivisible loads shall be determined in conjunction with the
appropriate Highway Authority. Fatigue checks shall comply with
BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges – Part 10: Code of
practice for fatigue, as implemented by 10.2.

An Occupation or Accommodation Bridge shall normally be

designed for not less than HA and 30 Units of HB loading in
accordance with BS 5400-2:2006. Network Rail shall identify
requirements in the Remit where more than HA and 30 Units of HB
is required. Where the capacity of a new or replacement Bridge
exceeds Network Rail’s legal obligation, the Designer shall check
with Network Rail’s Infrastructure Liability Manager whether load
restriction plates are to be provided on the Bridge.

Page 61 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

In exceptional cases, a lesser load than that specified in BS 5400-

2:2006 may be permitted by Network Rail for an Occupation or
Accommodation Bridge as long as safety is not adversely affected
and all other legal obligations are met. In such cases, the loading
shall take into account the traffic that will be permitted to use the
Bridge, any site specific hazards and any control measures required
to prevent overloading of the Bridge. The loading for Design shall
be as great as reasonably practicable, but not less than 7.5 tonne
Gross Vehicle Weight, and shall correspond to one of the levels of
loading given in Chapter 5 of Highways Agency Standard BD 21/01:
The Assessment of Highway Bridges and Structures.

Any loading for Design less than full HA loading shall be justified in
the AIP Submission and shall be subject to approval of Network
Rail’s Professional Head of Structures. The justification shall take
into account the following:

• the implications of providing for full HA loading (such as, for

example, if a Bridge superstructure is to be reconstructed
but to provide for full HA loading would also require the
substructure to be renewed),
• the likelihood of the Bridge being used by heavy vehicles
during its service life (taking into account both existing and
anticipated future traffic).

Any consequential requirements (arising from adopting loading less

than HA) that are to be incorporated into the Design shall be
identified in the AIP Submission, e.g. the requirement for the
erection of weight restriction plates or barriers, etc.

Other loads are identified in 9.4.2 to 9.4.4 and 9.6.

9.4.2 Pedestrian, cycle and equestrian loads

For footbridges and other Bridges that support a footway and/or a

cycle track open to the public, the loading shall be in accordance
with the requirements of BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite
bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads.

For a Bridge subject to equestrian use, local elements shall be

subject to a vertical live load of 20 kN, acting alone without other
uniformly distributed live loading, applied on a square of 200 mm
side. This loading includes dynamic factors.

For loaded lengths in excess of 36 m where crowd loading is likely

to occur, e.g. on Bridges near major public venues, the pedestrian
loading given in BS 5400-2:2006 shall be increased to a value to be
agreed with Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures and
shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Page 62 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Where a Bridge is designed to carry pedestrian or cycle traffic only,

suitable physical means shall be provided to prevent the Bridge
being used by vehicular traffic which could affect the safety of the
Bridge or the railway, e.g. the installation of bollards, barriers, etc.,
which shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

9.4.3 Parapets, safety barriers and handrailing for Overline

Bridges

Loads on, and the effects from, parapets, safety barriers and
handrailing shall be in accordance with the requirements in 7.9 and
7.9.1, Highways Agency standard TD 19/06: Requirements for
Road Restraint Systems, BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite
bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads, and the following, as
applicable.

Metal pedestrian parapets shall not be less than Class 3 in

accordance with BS 7818: Specification for pedestrian restraint
systems in metal. In situations where more severe loading may be
applicable, requirements shall be agreed with Network Rail’s
Professional Head of Structures. The Class of the parapet, and the
loading if more severe than Class 3, shall be identified in the AIP
Submission.

For a Bridge subject to equestrian use, parapets shall also be

subject to a load of 10 kN applied over a 300 mm length at the top
of the parapet, in addition to other live load effects.

9.4.4 Accidental (derailment) loading on Overline Bridge

supports

Supports to an Overline Bridge shall be positioned at least 4.5m

from the nearest running rail. Where this is not reasonably
practicable, the supports shall be designed so that:

• they can withstand the effects of light impacts from derailed

coaches or freight wagons, without sustaining irreparable
damage,
• a progressive collapse of the superstructure will not occur
as a result of a loss of a single support.

Recommendations for dealing with collision loads from railway

traffic are given in Appendix D.

9.5 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Overline

Bridges

Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of an Overline Bridge shall

be in accordance with 9.1, 9.4 and 9.6, as applicable.

Page 63 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

However, in exceptional cases subject to the approval of Network Rail’s

Professional Head of Structures and where safety is not adversely
affected, strengthening, alteration or repairs may be designed to carry a
lesser loading than that identified in the preceding paragraph, provided
that the existing load capacity of the Bridge is not reduced. In such
cases, the loading shall take into account the traffic that will be permitted
to use the Bridge, any site specific hazards and any control measures
required to prevent overloading of the Bridge.

Justification for the use of a lesser loading shall be recorded in the AIP
Submission and shall be subject to approval from Network Rail’s
Professional Head of Structures.

9.6 Other loads and effects for Underline, Overline and other
Bridges

9.6.1 Loads to be considered

Except where modified by this standard, a Bridge shall generally be

designed for all other applicable loads and load effects in
accordance with BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads and this standard, or as
otherwise specified by Network Rail, including superimposed dead
load, wind, temperature, differential settlement, earth pressure,
erection, and secondary live loads. The loads and load effects of
the following shall also be considered:

• dynamic effects (9.2.2),

• effects of repeated loading (fatigue, 9.2.3, 9.4.1 and 10.2),
• concentrated loading on deck plates and local elements
(Appendix C),
• application of loading to multi-track Bridges (Appendix C),
• traction and braking forces,
• lurching forces (deemed in BS 5400-2: 2006 to be taken
into account by the specified dynamic factors),
• nosing forces (Appendix C),
• centrifugal forces (Appendix C),
• skidding forces (road traffic only),
• deformations, including track twist (8),
• aerodynamic and slipstream effects from passing trains
(9.6.2),
• effects of track / Bridge interaction (8),
• deck acceleration and resonance effects (8),

Page 64 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• hydrodynamic effects (9.6.3),

• load effects from overhead line electrification equipment
attached to the Bridge, including accidental loads arising
from breakage of catenaries, and load effects from other
railway infrastructure and equipment,
• load effects from noise barriers which are attached to the
Bridge.

In addition to the self weight and permanent loads, consideration

shall be given to superimposed dead loads, equipment loads,
variations in ballast depth where appropriate), and the effects of
internal forces (e.g. pre-stressing and creep).

Other site specific loads shall be considered, including:

• live load surcharge and soil pressures (9.7),

• settlement, including the effects of mining subsidence and
differential settlement (10.5),
• water pressures, including those from exceptional flows,
storm and flooding,
• scour, and waterborne debris (10.5),
• erection, construction and maintenance activities,
• environmental influences (e.g. wind, temperature variations
and temperature gradients),
• bearing friction,
• effects due to inclined decks or inclined bearing surfaces,
• longitudinal anchorage forces from stressing or destressing
rails, which shall be taken as 600 kN nominal load per rail,
applied to one track only (i.e. 2 rails, 1200 kN total) and at
minimum Bridge temperature,
• longitudinal forces due to breakage of rails, which shall be
taken as 600 kN nominal load applied to one rail only.

Accidental loads and load effects shall be considered, including:

• impact from train derailments, both on and beneath a

Bridge (9.2.8 and 9.4.4),
• impact from errant road vehicles, both on and beneath a
Bridge (9.2.9),
• impact from vessels beneath a Bridge over a navigable
waterway (9.2.10),

Page 65 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• other accidental loads and load effects, such as those due

to soil settlement (10.5), may need to be considered at
particular sites.

Where a Bridge is required to carry types of road, vehicular traffic or

other traffic loads other than as identified in this standard, the
loading shall be agreed with the relevant authority and Network
Rail, and shall meet the Principles of this standard (5), and shall be
justified in the AIP Submission.

The Design shall take into account the effects of temperature

variations, and shall ensure that the possibility of brittle fractures is
avoided. Due allowance shall be made for the forces generated by,
or movements required for, thermal expansion, thermal contraction,
and differential temperatures, in individual elements and the
structure as a whole, including the substructure.

The Bridge shall be able to withstand the required wind loading,

including the effects on bearings and substructures. The Design of
structures that are susceptible to wind induced vibration shall take
into account the consequential effects including fatigue in
accordance with BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 10: Code of practice for fatigue as identified in 10.2.

The Design of an Underline Bridge shall assume that unrestricted

rail traffic may be present during any high wind conditions. This
requirement shall also override any less onerous requirements for
wind loading in combinations of live load and wind that may be
provided for in Eurocodes or any other Design standards.

9.6.2 Aerodynamic effects

Aerodynamic effects due to passing rail traffic shall be considered

where this is likely to have a significant effect on a Bridge or its
secondary components, such as:

• a footbridge,
• a Bridge supporting a station canopy or similar structure,
• parapets of an Underline Bridge,
• cladding panels attached to the Bridge,
• noise barriers attached to the Bridge.

Structures susceptible to the aerodynamic effects of passing trains

shall be designed to resist the resultant aerodynamic forces.
Structures that are particularly sensitive to transient pressure
fluctuations may required a special study to consider their dynamic

Page 66 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

performance when subject to the aerodynamic effects of passing

trains.

Guidance may be obtained from BS EN 1991-2: 2003: Eurocode 1:

Actions on structures – Part 2: Traffic loads on bridges (which
replaced ENV 1991-3: 1995), and pending publication of the
National Annex to BS EN 1991-2: 2003 further guidance may be
obtained from the UK National Application Document for ENV 1991-
3: 1995. It is anticipated that the National Annex to BS EN 1991-2
will permit the loading to be determined for the individual project
and in this case the requirements of UK National Application
Document for ENV 1991-3: 1995 shall apply.

9.6.3 Bridges over watercourses

For a Bridge over a watercourse, hydrodynamic effects and the

effects of water scour shall be considered where the structure may
be affected.

Where scour may occur, the foundations shall be designed to resist

the scour or shall be adequately protected.

The Design shall be based on a 1 in 200 year return period. The

sensitivity of the Bridge shall be checked for a 20% increase in the
flow to allow for climate change; the structure shall not suffer
catastrophic damage or total loss, but local damage is acceptable.

Consideration shall be given to the effects from waterborne debris

striking the Bridge.

For a Bridge over a navigable waterway, also see 9.2.10.

9.7 Loading for substructures

The Design shall take into account all static and transient loads that will
be applied, including any long-term increases in lateral earth pressures
which are imposed on the substructure.

The minimum traffic surcharge loading to be applied to a substructure

shall be as follows.

• For highway traffic, surcharge loads taken in accordance with

BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges Part 2: 2006:
Specification for Loads.

• For railway traffic, a surcharge loading for each track taken as

a nominal uniformly distributed load of 50 kN/m2, uniformly
spread over a width of 2.6 m applied symmetrically about the
track centreline acting at the level of the underside of the
sleepers (subject to particular increases identified below). This
Page 67 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

may be deemed to include for dynamic effects and for

centrifugal and other secondary loading effects.

For the design of a ballast wall at the top of an abutment, the above
railway traffic surcharge loading shall be increased to 60 kN/m2,
uniformly spread over a width of 2.6 m as above. The resulting strength
requirements shall be provided across the full width of the ballast wall so
as not to restrict future re-positioning of the tracks.

For the upper part of a side wall where the face parallel to the track is
within 0.5 m from the ends of sleepers and within 1.0 m below the
underside of the sleepers, the above railway traffic surcharge loading
shall be increased to 60 kN/m2 uniformly spread over a width of 2.6 m as
above.

Where applicable, allowance shall be made for likely future

developments such as significant track lift, significant track realignment
or the laying of additional tracks.

For the Design of a local element close to the track (e.g. ballast wall),
account shall be taken of the maximum vertical, longitudinal and
transverse loading due to rail traffic.

A nominal 10 kN/m2 surcharge loading (to be regarded as a

superimposed dead load) shall be applied to part or all of the plan
projected area of a substructure, other than plan areas occupied by
railway or highway surcharge loading specified above. This shall be
applied to give the most unfavourable effect to the element under
consideration, and shall not be applied where its absence is more
onerous.

If, in exceptional cases, it is considered that values for the design traffic /
surcharge loading lower than those given above are applicable, the
proposed values shall be identified and justified in the AIP Submission.

For piers, columns and similar substructure elements, the dynamic factor
for railway loading may be taken as 1.0 where the slenderness ratio “L/r”
of the element is less than or equal to 30 (where L is the element’s
effective length and r is its radius of gyration). The full dynamic factor
shall be applied to crossheads and similar structural forms.

10 Design standards

10.1 General

A Bridge shall be designed in accordance with statutory requirements,

Railway Group Standards, Network Rail Standards, European and
British Standards, relevant industry standards and industry good
practice.

Page 68 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Where a Design standard is mandated in this standard, that Design

standard shall be used and shall take precedence over others, unless
otherwise justified in the AIP Submission and subject to the approval of
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures.

Eurocodes may be used in place of British Standards mandated in this

standard, providing the Design requirements are equivalent to the
mandated standards and the use of the substitute Eurocodes is justified
in the AIP Submission.

Designs shall be undertaken using limit state principles, unless there are
no applicable standards using these principles, in which case alternative
standards and Design principles shall be identified and justified in the
AIP Submission.

So far as is reasonably practicable, a set of consistent and compatible

standards shall be used, covering loading, Design, execution
(construction) and material / workmanship specifications. Where it is
unavoidable to use standards which are not necessarily compatible,
such as a mix of British Standards and European Standards (other than
as required by this standard), any incompatibilities arising between the
standards shall be identified in the AIP Submission, with proposals for
resolving the incompatibilities.

Where European Standards are used, EN versions shall only be used in

conjunction with the UK National Annexes, unless otherwise specified in
this standard, or otherwise justified in the AIP Submission.

Standards to be used for the Design shall be identified in the AIP

Submission.

10.2 Steel, concrete, composite and masonry Bridges

Steel, concrete, and steel / concrete composite Bridges (and parts of

Bridges) shall be designed in accordance with the applicable parts of BS
5400: – Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges, unless indicated to the
contrary by this standard. The following modifications shall be adopted:

• Part 1: 1988: General statement (without modification).

• Part 2: 2006: Specification for loads. This shall be subject to
the requirements of 8, 9 and amended by Appendix C of this
standard.
• Part 3: 2000: Code of practice for design of steel bridges
(without modification).
• Part 4: 1990: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges.
This shall be as amended by Appendix B of this standard.

Page 69 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• Part 5: 2005: Code of practice for design of composite bridges.

This shall be as amended by Appendix B of this standard.
• Part 9: 1983: Bridge bearings. This shall be as implemented by
Highways Agency Standard BD 20/92: Bridge Bearings, use of
BS 5400: Part 9: 1983, subject to the requirements and
provisions of 7.13.
• Part 10: 1980: Code of practice for fatigue. This shall be as
implemented by Highways Agency Standard BD 9/81:
Implementation of BS 5400: Part 10: 1980 Code of practice for
fatigue, subject to the following requirements.

Highways Agency Standard BD 9/81 refers to advice on the use of BS

5400 Part 10 given in the complementary Highways Agency Advice Note
BA 9/81: The Use of BS 5400: Part 10: 1980 – Code of Practice for
Fatigue. The reduction in fatigue life recommended in Clause 4.2 of BA
9/81 shall not apply to the Design of a Bridge which is not subject to
acceptance by the Highways Agency or highway authority.

A masonry Bridge (or part of a Bridge), shall be designed in accordance

with BS 5628: Code of practice for use of masonry.

10.3 Timber Bridges

A timber Bridge (or part of a Bridge) shall be designed in accordance

with the applicable Parts of BS 5268: Structural Use of Timber.
Provision shall be made for the following, which shall be recorded in the
AIP Submission:

• the methods for using loads, that are based on limit state
terms, in design methods that are based on permissible stress,
• the effects of repeated application of live loading,
• the weather exposure conditions of the Bridge and the
anticipated examination and assessment regimes.

10.4 Bridges constructed from other materials

A Bridge (or part of a Bridge), constructed from a material other than

those listed in 10.2 and 10.3, shall be designed in accordance with
recognised national, industry or other standards, which shall be identified
in the AIP Submission. Where no such standards currently exist, the
Design methodology shall be justified and recorded in the AIP
Submission.

The use of such other materials in the Design of Bridges shall be subject
to the approval of Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures prior to
submission of the AIP (see 6.4).

Page 70 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

10.5 Foundations for new Bridges

Foundations for a new Bridge shall be designed in accordance with BS

8004: Code of practice for foundations, and the applicable requirements
of NR/L2/CIV/071: Design of earthworks, earthwork remediations and
geotechnical aspects of foundations for structures.

Global factors of safety, for use with Moderately Conservative soil

parameters as identified in NR/L2/CIV/071, shall not be less than the
following unless otherwise justified in the AIP Submission:

Bearing capacity: > 3

Sliding: > 2 (ignoring passive pressure in front of walls)

Overturning: > 2 (ignoring passive pressure in front of walls)

Overall stability: as identified in Clause 14.5.2 in NR/L2/CIV/071.

The factors of safety to be used in the Design, and the allowable ground
bearing pressures and associated factors of safety used to determine the
pressures, shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Additional guidance may be obtained from Highways Agency Standard

BD 74/00: Foundations.

Restrictions on the use of certain types of foundations or structural forms

are given in Appendix L.

Consideration shall be given to the effects on the Bridge and the track
due to settlement or other movement of the foundations, including
differential settlement between supports and along a support or
foundation tilt, and the effects of subsidence arising from mineral
extraction (see 10.8). The effects on the track adjacent to the ends of
the Bridge shall also be considered.

Movement of the foundations or deflection of the structure shall not

cause any part of the Bridge to encroach on the required clearances or
compromise safety or performance of the Bridge, railway or supported
equipment.

Consideration shall be given to the risk of flooding and scour, and their
consequences on substructures, foundations and earthworks associated
with the Bridge, including where the Bridge is located in the flood plain of
a watercourse. Additional requirements for Bridges over watercourses
are given in 9.6.3.

Page 71 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

10.6 Earth retaining elements

Earth retaining abutments, retaining or wing walls that are integral with
the abutment, and retaining walls adjacent to the Bridge, shall be
designed in accordance with this standard and BS 8002: Code of
practice for earth retaining structures.

Additional guidance may be obtained from Highways Agency Standard

BD 30/87: Backfilled Retaining Walls and Bridge Abutments.

For the Design of embedded retaining walls and Bridge abutments,

additional guidance may be obtained from Highways Agency Standard
BD 42/00: Design of Embedded Retaining Walls and Bridge Abutments.

The basis of Design for earth retaining elements including whether global
or partial factors of safety are to be used, and their values, shall be
identified in the AIP Submission. Where global factors of safety are used
these shall comply with 10.5. Where partial factors are used, any other
associated partial factors (e.g. for loading) shall be identified in the AIP
Submission.

Where applicable, the standards adopted for the design of the Bridge
shall be used for the Design of earth retaining elements that are integral
with the Bridge4.

10.7 Existing substructures affected by new construction

Where only the superstructure of an existing Bridge is to be

reconstructed, or in other cases where new construction is associated
with the total or partial retention of an existing substructure, the following
shall apply:

• the remaining part of an existing substructure need not be

deemed unacceptable for continuing service solely because it
does not comply with the criteria applicable to a new structure,
• the soil supporting an existing substructure need not be
deemed unacceptably loaded solely because the Design
loading will be higher than the loading considered acceptable
for the same soil supporting a new structure.

Further guidance on the treatment of existing substructures affected by

new construction is given in Appendix F. In all cases, due consideration
shall be given to the condition and anticipated future deterioration of any
existing substructure before it is considered acceptable to be retained.

4
For example, concrete elements shall be designed using BS 5400 Part 4, and not BS 8110
Part 1.

Page 72 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

10.8 Site investigation and geotechnical Design

The Design shall take into account the ground conditions in the locality of
the Bridge and its foundations, and shall comply with the applicable
requirements of BS 8004: Code of practice for foundations.

Where there is insufficient existing site investigation or geotechnical data

information available to carry out the geotechnical Design, a site
investigation appropriate to the size, depth, structural configuration and
loading of foundations, geotechnical complexity, likely level of soil and
ground water contamination and location of the Bridge shall be carried
out.

The Design shall take into account the requirements of NR/L2/CIV/071:

Design of earthworks, earthwork remediations and geotechnical aspects
of foundations for structures applicable to the Bridge, including:
• site investigation,
• contaminated land investigation,
• derivation of geotechnical parameters,
• interaction of the Bridge and adjacent ground,
• slope stability.

Where the Bridge may be affected by mineral extraction or landfill,

Network Rail’s Mining Engineer shall be consulted in accordance with
NR/L2/CIV/037: Managing the risk arising from mineral extraction and
Landfill.

10.9 Specifications for materials and workmanship

Specifications for materials and workmanship shall be considered to be

part of the Design and shall be prepared in accordance with the
requirements of NR/L2/CIV/140: Control and use of model clauses.

Requirements for materials and workmanship are given in

NR/L3/CIV/008: Model clauses for specifying civil engineering work.

The specifications for materials and workmanship shall be compatible

with the Design assumptions adopted and shall be in accordance with
the applicable Design standards.

The specifications shall be suitable for the local environment of the

Bridge, and shall comply with environmental, Health and Safety
requirements.

Page 73 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

10.10 Strengthening, alterations and repairs

Where structural works are to be carried out, as a minimum all existing

parts that have been assessed as worse than Assessed Category A2 in
accordance with NR/L2/CIV/035: Assessment of structures shall be
strengthened or replaced to comply with the requirements of this
standard. Where there is a justification for not complying with this
requirement the justification shall be subject to the approval of the
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures and provided in the AIP
Submission for the works.

New elements shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of

this standard as for a new Bridge.

Where it is not reasonably practicable for strengthening, alteration or

repairs on a Underline Bridge to comply with the requirements for a new
Bridge, and where safety and Interworking are not adversely affected,
the strengthening, alteration or repairs may, subject to the approval of
Network Rail be designed to satisfy the requirements of NR/L3/CIV/025:
The structural assessment of underbridges, subject to the loading
requirements identified in 9.3. The approach to be adopted shall be
described in the AIP Submission. (Note: it is not acceptable to use
NR/L3/CIV/015 for the design of strengthening. The design of
strengthening to a bridge previously assessed to NR/L3/CIV/015 shall
include the provision of an assessment to NR/L3/CIV/025 for the
remainder of the structure).

Consideration shall be given to the interface between the new and

existing parts. The Design shall ensure that there are no detrimental
effects on the existing parts resulting from the installation of the new
parts, particularly with regard to compatibility of the different stiffness the
of parts, and the distribution of load effects. The acceptability of
changing the patterns of load, as well as the magnitude of loads, shall
also be checked.

Consideration shall be given to improving retained existing parts to

comply with the requirements of this standard, where it is reasonably
economic and practicable to do so. Any retained existing parts that do
not comply with this standard shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Repairs that are not like for like replacements shall be considered as
alterations and shall be subject to Technical Approval in accordance with
NR/L2/CIV/003:Technical approval of design, construction and
maintenance of civil engineering infrastructure.

The Design of alterations to existing metal Bridges shall avoid the

introduction of poor fatigue details, including those shown in
NR/L3/CIV/025: The structural assessment of underbridges.

Page 74 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

11 Identification of Bridges

Each Bridge shall be identifiable on site in such a way that there is no

ambiguity between Network Rail’s records of the structure and its location on
site.

Identification plates shall be installed on the following types of new Bridge,

and on existing Bridges when works (other than those of a disproportionately
minor nature) are undertaken:

• Underline Bridge with a headroom over the road of 5.7m or less with
allowances for sag curve compensation,
• Underline Bridge supported on columns,
• Bridge over a navigable waterway,
• Overline Bridge,
• Bridges where required by NR/L2/CIV/076: Management of Bridge
Strikes from road vehicles & waterborne vessels.

Identification plates shall include the following information:

• The unique identity of the Bridge, for example its name or number,
location, road name, mileage,
• the emergency phone number of the relevant Operations Control
office.

New Bridges, other than those identified above, shall have identification
plates, but which shall only show the emergency phone number where
specifically required by Network Rail.

For complex structures, consideration shall be given to identification marking

of individual elements of the structure in accordance with NR/GN/CIV/041
Structures Condition Marking Index Handbook for Bridges. Guidance on the
identification of infrastructure is given in HMRI Railway Safety Principles and
Guidance Part 2, Section A, Chapter 8.

For new and modified existing Bridges as identified above, Bridge

identification signs or plates shall be provided at the track side or attached to
the Bridge. The signs or plates shall, so far as is reasonably practicable, be
visible to train drivers.

Further guidance on the form, size and positioning, etc., of identification plates
and trackside identification signs/plates is given in NR/L3/CIV/202:
Management of the risk of Bridge strikes.

Page 75 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

12 Records

The Design information shall be fully documented in order that as much

information about the Bridge as is reasonably practicable remains available.

Health and Safety files shall be provided as required by the CDM Regulations.

Records of new and altered Bridges shall be created and retained as

described in NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical approval of design, construction and
maintenance of civil engineering infrastructure.

The records shall clearly identify the Design load capacity for the Bridge and
any limits on use.

Records shall include:

• calculations,
• Technical Approval design certification,
• as-built drawings,
• material certificates,
• records of Network Rail’s and others’ services at the site,
• information on any changes made to the structure, or particular
difficulties encountered, during the construction which may affect the
performance or maintenance of the Bridge,
• details of any proprietary products incorporated in the construction,
• information on items that are anticipated to require maintenance or
replacement during the Design Life of the Bridge, the type of
maintenance and when it is anticipated, and any unusual access or
methods required.

Where a Bridge has been strengthened, or altered to an extent which affects

the assessed capacity of elements of a Bridge, the Designer shall on
completion of the Design provide an update of the existing assessed capacity
of the Bridge (e.g. relevant Design calculations or a back-analysis of the
existing assessment) which shall identify the changes in the assessed
capacity of affected elements and the Bridge as a whole. In addition to
providing a Form B for the Design in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/003:
Technical approval of design, construction and maintenance of civil
engineering infrastructure, the designer shall also provide a signed Form BA
in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/035: Assessment of structures.

Page 76 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix A: Application of Structure Category to individual

structures
The list of structures in the following Table is not exhaustive. The Table identifies examples
of structures that are within the scope of this standard.

Structure Category
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G)
Structure

Coastal, Estuarine &

Ancillary Structures
Buildings & Station
Bridges & Culverts
The structures listed below shall be managed in
accordance with the standards applicable to the

Retaining Walls

River Defences
appropriate Structure Category (see note at end of

Earthworks

Structures
table).

Tunnels
Advertising hoardings •
Avalanche shelters •
Bridges •
Buildings, including their basements and •
undercrofts
Boundary or free standing walls •
Cable Bridges carrying signal or power cables •
Canopies and supporting elements, other than •
Canopies on footbridges
Close circuit television camera or screen supports •
(CCTV)
Coastal, Estuarine or River Defences •
Concourses at stations •
Culverts •
Customer information screen (CIS) supports •
including suspension hangers
Cut and cover structures, unless required to be •
designed as a Tunnel
Cut and cover structures required to be designed •
as a Tunnel
Driver only operation (DOO) equipment supports •
Earthworks •
Electrical control rooms (Building) •
Electrification structures (OLE), including straight •
masts, solid or lattice web cantilevers or portals
Electrification structures – raft type substations •
Elevated or suspended platforms within stations •
Elevated vehicle forecourts or ramps • *
Elevated trackside water tank support structures •
Equipment box support structures •
Equipment Support Structures (ESS), other than •
those more particularly identified in this Table
Feeder station support structures •
Footbridges, including Canopies •

Page 77 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Structure Category
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G)
Structure

Coastal, Estuarine &

Ancillary Structures
Buildings & Station
Bridges & Culverts
The structures listed below shall be managed in
accordance with the standards applicable to the

Retaining Walls

River Defences
appropriate Structure Category (see note at end of

Earthworks

Structures
table).

Tunnels
Gate boxes / houses (Building) •
Hoist or drive support structures •
Inspection pits set into the track •
Integrated electrical control centres (IECCs) •
(Building)
Lighting support structures, including single tube •
masts or columns, cantilevers or portals, other
than metallic lattice towers
Location box support structures •
Metallic lattice tower Equipment Support •
Structures
Minor Retaining Walls •
Multi-storey car parks •
Operational control rooms (Building) •
Platforms at stations or depots, including front and •
rear walls, cross walls, suspended spans and
supporting structures
Platforms for uncoupling trains at stations and •
depots
Platforms constructed on embankments or in •
cuttings to support location cases or other
equipment
Pipe Bridges and pipelines that form self •
supporting Bridges
Radio telecommunications masts (not metallic •
lattice)
Raised walkways, including train access in •
berthing sidings
Relay rooms (Building) •
Relocatable equipment buildings (REBs) •
Retaining Walls (other than Minor Retaining Walls) •
Sand towers •
Signal gantries, cantilevers, portals and other •
signal structures, that span or cantilever over
operational railway lines
Signal structures (other than those identified •
above) including straight posts and signal
equipment platforms
Signal boxes (Building) •
Signal boxes: support beams to locking frames in •
mechanical signal boxes
Shafts •
Station accommodation and facility Buildings •

Page 78 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Structure Category
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G)
Structure

Coastal, Estuarine &

Ancillary Structures
Buildings & Station
Bridges & Culverts
The structures listed below shall be managed in
accordance with the standards applicable to the

Retaining Walls

River Defences
appropriate Structure Category (see note at end of

Earthworks

Structures
table).

Tunnels
Structures supporting Buildings over operational •
lines
Substations (Building) •
Subways •
Supports to raised track in inspection areas •
Telecommunication equipment supports (other •
than metallic lattice towers)
Timber signal posts, doll and guy posts, telegraph •
poles
Train Sheds and structural elements of adjacent •
Buildings which provide support
Trolley wire supports (OLE) •
Tunnels, including adits, portals, inverts and •
drainage within or attached to Tunnel structure,
but excluding Shafts
Undertrack Crossings •
Water retaining structures •
Wheel lathe pits •

* Note – some structures may need to satisfy requirements of more than one Structure
Category; for example an elevated vehicle forecourt or ramp which is primarily a Bridge but is
also part of a Building. In such cases appropriate additional Design requirements from the
other applicable Structure Category shall be identified in the AIP Submission.

Page 79 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix B: Amendments to BS5400: Steel, concrete and

composite Bridges

Applicable parts of BS 5400 shall be used as identified in 10.2 and subject to

the following amendments and additional requirements. Clause numbers in
the headings below refer to those in BS 5400 except where stated.

PART 2: 2006: Specification for Loads

Particular amendments and additional information are included in

Appendices C and D (in this standard).

In addition, the following amendments shall apply:

i) Table 11

In order to address potential effects of climate change, for the Design of a new
Bridge the values of the maximum effective Bridge temperature given in Table
11 shall be increased by 10oC to allow for the effects of future climate change.

ii) 5.8.2

Live load surcharge from railway loading shall be as identified in 9.7 in this
standard.

PART 4: 1990: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges

BS 5400 Part 4: 1990 shall be used with the following amendments:

i) 4.1.1.1 (b)

Prestressed concrete beams shall be designed as Class 2 members but with

no tensile stresses under permanent loads (serviceability limit state).

ii) 4.2.2

In sub-paragraph (a), all live loading shall be ignored.

iii) 4.7

The last paragraph shall be deleted and replaced by the following:

“For unwelded reinforcing bars the limiting stress ranges for fatigue
shall be as follows:

(i) for a Bridge carrying a railway - in accordance with Part 10,

where in Table 8:
2
m = 9, K2 = 0.75 x 1027, σ0 = 160 N/mm for bars < 16mm dia;

Page 80 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

2
m = 9, K2 = 0.07 x 1027, σ0 = 125 N/mm for bars > 16mm dia;

(the simplified procedure given in Clause 9.2 of Part 10 may be used

where the loading is the standard railway bridge loading);

(ii) for a Bridge carrying a highway - in accordance with current

practice of the Highways Agency.”

PART 5: 2005: Code of practice for design of composite bridges

i) 5.3.2.5

For a Bridge subject to railway loading, the value of γm shall be taken as 2.05,
not 1.85 as stated.

ii) 5.3.3.6

Add the following:

“The effect of axial tension on the static or fatigue shear strength of a

connector should be taken into account as follows, unless the reduction in Pu
or the increase in Qmax is less than 10%.

For stud connectors the nominal static ultimate shear strength Pu′ in the
presence of tension Tu may be taken as
Pu′ = Pu – Tu/√3

where Pu is the nominal static ultimate shear strength as defined in 5.3.2.1.”

iii) 6.3.4

For a Bridge subject to railway loading, the value of γm shall be taken as 1.5,
not 1.4 as stated.

iv) Spacing and location of shear connectors

Where deck planks or permanent formwork are used, consideration shall be

given to preventing the planks/formwork from being accidentally dislodged
sideways and falling between the supporting girders. Where shear
connectors on the girder flanges are used to provide such fail-safe restraint,
their edge distances and spacing along the girder shall take into account the
width of the plank/formwork, the overlap provided on the girder flange and
construction tolerances.

Page 81 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix C: Railway loads, application, dynamic factors, and

amendments to BS 5400-2: 2006

This Appendix identifies additional railway loads, requirements for the

application of railway loads, dynamic effects, amendments and supplementary
requirements to BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges Part 2: 2006:
Specification for Loads, and other additional requirements.

Note that RU loading identified in BS 5400-2: 2006 is equivalent to Load

Model 71 in BS EN 1991-2: 2003: Eurocode 1: Actions on structures – Part 2:
2003: Traffic loads on bridges.

Where requirements of BS EN 1991-2: 2003 are applied, the load

classification factor α (for loading heavier or lighter than normal rail traffic)
shall be taken as the value in accordance with 9.2.1 in this standard, or shall
be taken as 1.0 where a load classification factor is not required by 9.2.1.

i) Distribution of axle and wheel loads for RU and SW/0 loading

When designing members for which the local effects of wheel loads is critical,
an allowance shall be made for eccentricity of loading inside vehicles by
distributing axle loads to the wheels in the proportions identified in BS EN
1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.3.5.

Eccentricity of vertical loads may be neglected when considering fatigue.

For the purpose of determining the patch loading under a sleeper, for
ballasted track the wheel load may be distributed over three adjacent sleepers
in the proportions identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.3.6.1 provided
that the ballast depth is at least 200mm below the underside of the sleepers at
the low rail.

Alternatively, for ballasted or unballasted track, the longitudinal distribution of

vertical wheel loads along the rail onto the bridge deck may be determined by
an analysis which takes into account the vertical stiffness of the rails, track
components, ballast and track support.

The patch loading at the underside of the sleeper shall be applied as identified
in BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.3.6.3 (2).

Below the underside of the sleeper, each patch load shall be taken as
distributed through the ballast at an angle of 1 horizontal to 4 vertical, as
identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.3.6.2 (2).

Page 82 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

ii) Application of loading

a) All railway loads

All railway loads shall be applied as identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clauses

6.8.1 (1) and (3).

b) Type RU loading

Type RU loading shall be applied as identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause

6.8.1 (4).

c) Type SW/0 loading

Type SW/0 loading shall be applied as identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003

Clause 6.8.1 (5). Note that Type SW/0 loading shall be curtailed where this
produces a more severe effect on the part being considered.

d) Nosing Loads

The nominal nosing load set out in BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.2.8 may be
distributed over three adjacent sleepers in the proportions:
1 : 1 : 1
4 : 2 : 4

e) Centrifugal Loads

Where a Bridge carries curved track, the centrifugal force shall be taken into
account in the Design, and for determining the proportion of vertical load
carried by each rail. The Design shall take into account:
• the amount of track cant,
• the different speeds of heavy and light trains,
• possible future changes in cant and speed.

Reasonably conservative assumptions shall be made in determining the most

onerous likely effects. Such effects may be significant for types of
construction in which individual elements are predominantly loaded by one rail
(for example rail bearers, and narrow unconnected longitudinal beams or
girders).

Type RU or SW/0 Loading shall be considered as relevant to the part being

considered.

Centrifugal effects shall be determined in accordance with BS 5400-2: 2006

Clause 8.2.9 and the following:

• the centrifugal force shall always be combined with the vertical traffic
effect. The centrifugal force shall not be multiplied by the dynamic

Page 83 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

factor. When considering the vertical effects of centrifugal loading,

the vertical load effects of centrifugal loading less any reduction due
to cant shall be enhanced by the relevant dynamic factor;
• for a Bridge located on a curve, types RU and SW/0 loading shall
also be considered without the centrifugal force;
• where the line speed exceeds 120 km/h (75 mph), an additional
check shall be undertaken using RU (and SW/0 loading where
applicable) with its dynamic factor and nominal centrifugal force Fc
calculated with vt = 120 km/hr, and taking the reduction factor f = 1.0,
according to the following formula:
Fc = P (vt)2 / 127 r
using the notation in BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.2.9.

f) Number of tracks to be loaded for checking deformations and vibration

Limit state and associated acceptance Number of tracks on the Bridge

criteria
1 2 ≥3
Track Safety Checks:
Vertical acceleration of the Bridge (9.2) 1 1 1

Vertical deformation of the Bridge 1 or 2 or

1 1 or 2a
(9.3.1) 3 or moreb

1 or 2 or
Track twist (9.3.2) 1 1 or 2a
3 or moreb
Combined response of the Bridge and
track due to live loads including limits 1 or 2 or
1 1 or 2a
on vertical and longitudinal 3 or moreb
displacement of the deck (9.4)
Transverse deformation of the Bridge 1 or 2 or
1 1 or 2a
(9.5) 3 or moreb
SLS Checks:
Passenger comfort (9.6) 1 1 1
ULS Checks:
1 or 2 or
Uplift at bearings (9.3.3) 1 1 or 2a
3 or moreb
Notes:
a
Whichever produces the more severe effect.
b
Where 3 or more tracks are loaded, the load from trains shall be multiplied by 0.75.

Table 1: Number of tracks to be loaded for checking deformations and

vibration

Page 84 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

iii) Derailment loads (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.5)

For the ultimate limit state check against collapse, but accepting local
damage, the requirements of BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.5.1 (b) shall be
replaced by those of BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.7.1 Design Situation I,
noting that the formula for the loads produces the design loads (i.e. includes
γfL).

For the ultimate limit state check against overturning or instability, but
accepting local damage, the requirements of BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.5.1
(c) shall be replaced by those of BS EN 1991-2: 2003 Clause 6.7.1 Design
Situation II, noting that:
• the formula for the loads produces the design loads (i.e. includes
γfL),
• a maximum of 20 m of the udl of LM 71 loading is to be applied,
• the 250 kN point loads of LM 71 are not applicable.

The Bridge deck shall be designed to resist a nominal vertical point load from
re-railing jacking equipment equal to α x 250 kN (where α is the applicable
load classification factor in accordance with 9.2.1, which in this case shall not
be less than 1.0), applied on a 150 mm x 150 mm area anywhere on the deck
between the robust kerbs, considering only the ultimate limit state and
applying a γfL of 1.4.

The serviceability limit state requirements of BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.5.1 (a)
(1) and (2) shall not apply, since they are less onerous than the preceding
requirements, and need not be checked.

On multi-track bridges, the derailment loading shall be considered on one

track in combination with RU (or LM 71) loading on the other tracks as
applicable, where this produces a more severe effect.

Walkways and similar secondary structural elements which are outside the
robust kerb need not be designed to carry derailment loading. If, however,
such an element is designed to carry derailment loading, the design of the
Bridge as a whole shall be such that it will not overturn when the derailment
loading for overturning and instability is applied along the outer edge of the
element.

iv) Wind Loading (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 5.3.2.5(a))

The limitation on maximum wind speed coexistent with live loading for
highway and foot/cycle Bridges (35 m/s) is not applicable to rail Bridges.

v) Permanent loading for Underline Bridges

a) Design dead load (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 5.1.2.1)

Page 85 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

γfL values for dead loads at ULS of 1.1 for steel and 1.2 for concrete shall
be used in place of the values given in BS 5400-2: 2006 Table 1.

b) Nominal superimposed dead load (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 5.2.1)

Where the actual depth of ballast from the underside of sleepers at the
lowest rail to the top of the bridge deck is less than 300 mm, the depth of
ballast shall be taken as 300 mm for calculating the nominal superimposed
dead load. Where the depth exceeds 300 mm, the actual depth of ballast
shall be used.

Ballast density shall be taken as 21 kN/m3. (This allows for dirty

waterlogged ballast).

c) Design superimposed dead load (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 5.2.2)

For superimposed dead load, γfL shall be taken as 1.75 at ULS and 1.2 at
SLS for track ballast for a depth measured from top of sleeper to 300mm
below the underside of the sleeper; the same values shall be taken for slab
track.

For additional ballast depth or fill γfL shall be taken as 1.20 at ULS and
1.00 at SLS.

For track, γfL shall be taken as 1.20 at ULS and 1.00 at SLS based on the
heaviest likely future track type. This shall generally be assumed to be
UIC 60 rail with full-depth concrete sleepers at 600mm spacing.

d) Removal of superimposed dead load (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 4.5.2)

These requirements do not apply when determining the natural frequency

of a Bridge deck for checking dynamic effects. See (vi) and (vii) in this
Appendix.

Due regard shall be taken of the case where either reballasting or

resurfacing work is being undertaken and for the temporary case during
erection.

Each bridge shall be considered individually and a realistic assessment

made. Particular care is needed when continuous elements are being
considered.

For guidance it may be assumed that:

• where live load is present, the superimposed dead load (ballast) can
be reduced by up to half over the full length of the bridge;
• where live load is not present, the superimposed dead load (ballast
and track) can be removed partially or completely over the full length
or part length of the bridge;

Page 86 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

• whether or not live load is present, for a multi-track bridge the

superimposed dead load (ballast and track) can be removed partially
or completely over the full length or part length of the bridge for one
or more tracks. Where live load is present, full live load shall be
applied to the other tracks so as to produce the most severe effect
on the part of the Bridge being designed.

vi) Dynamic effects (BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.2.3.1 and Table 1)

The reference in BS 5400-2: 2006 Clause 8.2.3.1 to the deflection limits in

UIC Leaflet 776-3R shall be replaced by the natural frequency requirements
identified in 8.2 and item (vii) in this Appendix.

The definitions for dimension (L) in Table 1 in BS 5400-2: 2006 shall be

supplemented by the following:

Structural Element Dimension L (m)

Battle deck type floor with closely
spaced cross girders or ribs and
without longitudinal ribs:
Cross girders or ribs
Deck plate
Concrete slab decks
Twice the cross girder spacing plus
3m
Cross girder spacing plus 3 m
The lesser of:
1. the span of the main girders, or
2. twice the main girder spacing

Note that details given in Table 6.2 of BS EN 1991-2 shall not be applied.

vii) Dynamic factors – checks of natural frequency

The dynamic factors provided in BS 5400-2: 2006 shall be applied subject to

the following.

a) Linespeeds not greater than 90mph (145 km/h):

• The Bridge shall have a natural frequency within the limits given in
Figure 6.10 of BS EN 1991-2: 2003, unless otherwise permitted by
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures.
• For a Bridge with a frequency within the above limits, the dynamic
factors in BS 5400-2: 2006 shall be applied and a Bridge-specific
dynamic analysis is not required;
• Where a Bridge is permitted with a natural frequency outside the
specified limits, a Bridge-specific dynamic analysis shall be
undertaken and additional requirements identified below shall apply.

Page 87 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

b) Linespeeds above 90 mph (145 km/h) but not greater than 125 mph
(200km/h):
• The Bridge shall have a natural frequency within the limits given in
Figure 6.10 of BS EN 1991-2: 2003, unless otherwise permitted by
Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures, and no reduction in
Type RU Loading and Type SW/0 Loading shall be permitted.
• For a Bridge satisfying the above frequency limits and full unreduced
loading requirements (and other than those Bridges identified in the
following bullet point), the dynamic factors in BS 5400-2: 2006 shall
be applied and a Bridge-specific dynamic analysis is not required.
• For through or half-through Bridges with lightweight all-metal floors,
and for any Bridge permitted to be designed outside the specified
frequency limits, but excluding the standard Network Rail “Western
Region” box-girder style decks with inverted-T ribs at not more than
650mm centres, a Bridge-specific dynamic analysis shall be
undertaken, and additional requirements identified below shall apply.

The additional requirements referred to in a) and b) above are:

• The Bridge-specific dynamic analysis shall use Real Trains to be
specified by Network Rail, and load models HSLM-A and HSLM-B as
identified in BS EN 1991-2: 2003;
• Deck accelerations shall be checked against limits to be specified by
Network Rail;
• Load effects from the Bridge-specific dynamic analysis shall be
compared with those from the normal loading for the Design (i.e.
normal Type RU and SW/0 Loading), and the more severe effects
shall be used in the Design;
• Supplementary fatigue checks shall be undertaken.

viiI) Loading for rail mounted crane

The following nominal loading for a KIROW KRC1200UK rail mounted crane
shall be taken into account in the Design:
Loads: 8 number point loads each of 250kN on each of 2 rails
Spacings: 1100 1200 1100 5600 1100 1200 1100 mm
The 16 No point loads (8 axles) shall be applied with a dynamic factor of 1.0
(i.e. there is no increase in the loads for dynamic effects) and the loading is
not to be considered for fatigue checks.

The crane loading shall be applied as an alternative to RU loading on one

track, with normal railway loading (RU, SW/0 etc. as identified in 9.2) applied
on the adjacent track(s). The crane loading shall be applied as part of Load
Combination 1 in Table 1 of BS 5400-2: 2006.

Page 88 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix D: Collision loads from railway traffic

The following requirements are applicable to permissible line speeds up to

125mph (200km/h).

i) General

With reference to Clause 8.6 of BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite

bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads, this Appendix identifies
recommendations for Bridge supports near railway lines and accidental
loading from railway traffic.

These recommendations apply to the supporting structures for new Overline

highway Bridges and similar structures, and to structures carrying hazardous
materials (e.g. gas), constructed over or alongside railway tracks. They do
not apply to lineside railway infrastructure such as overhead line electrification
masts or signal gantries.

The recommendations shall be applied to new and reconstructed footbridges

where reasonably practicable, taking into account the nature of the rail traffic
and the track layout adjacent to the Bridge.

The recommendations take account of:

• the definition of a hazard zone where the risk of impact is greatest,

• the need for columns and piers to withstand the effect of light
impacts that might occur from derailed coaches or freight wagons
without sustaining irreparable damage,
• the prevention of a progressive collapse of the superstructure in the
event of a major accident which results in the loss of a support.

The strategy for the Design should be to help minimise the likelihood an
impact occurring, and to mitigate the consequences if an impact does occur.

Wherever reasonably practicable, the supports of a Bridge that spans over or

alongside railway tracks shall be placed outside the hazard zone (identified in
(ii) below).

ii) Structures within the hazard zone

Where there is no reasonably practicable alternative to placing supports inside

the hazard zone they shall preferably be monolithic piers rather than individual
columns.

The hazard zone shall be assumed to extend for a width of 4.5 m from the
running edge of the nearest rail. All supports located between railway tracks
shall be considered to be inside the hazard zone. Where individual columns
are used within the hazard zone, the Design of the Bridge above them shall

Page 89 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

incorporate a degree of continuity and alternative load paths such that the
removal of any one column will not lead to the collapse of the remainder of the
structure under the permanent loads and primary and secondary live loads in
accordance with Combination 1 in Table 1 of BS 5400: Steel, concrete and
composite bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for Loads. The ultimate limit
state partial factors shall be as specified in Table 1 but limited to 1.0 on live
loads.

To provide robustness against the effect of light impacts, all piers or columns
within the hazard zone shall be designed to withstand without collapse a
single horizontal Design force of 2000 kN acting at a height of 1.2 m above
the adjacent ground level and a single horizontal Design force of 500 kN
acting at a height of 3 m. The two forces may act in any direction but need
not be considered to act simultaneously. These forces are Design ultimate
limit state forces (i.e. include γfL) and shall be combined with the permanent
loads and the applicable primary and secondary live loads as identified in the
paragraph above.

The connections between a column and its base shall be such that the
connection can resist a horizontal Design force of 2000 kN at the ultimate limit
state without being dislocated. Pin jointed connections shall be avoided.

Consideration shall be given to the Design and detailing of the connection

between a column and the structure it supports so that in the event of the
column being struck the load effects generated by the failure of the connection
will not cause failure of the supported structure. A check of the unsupported
girder shall be made using the ultimate capacity of the connection at failure as
a nominal/characteristic load on the supported member in conjunction with the
permanent loads and primary and secondary live loads identified above.

The supports for a footbridge in a country/non-station location should be set

back at least 4.5 m from the running edge of the nearest rail. The position of
the supports for a footbridge in a station may be governed by the width of the
platform. Where supports are unavoidably within the 4.5 m hazard zone the
platform shall be designed to provide protection to the supports (see (iv)
below). Consideration shall be given to avoiding the use of single column
supports within the hazard zone.

iii) Bridge supports in the vicinity of buffer stops

Supports to a Bridge which could be endangered by a rail vehicle running past

a buffer stop shall be avoided wherever reasonably practicable. Where this is
not reasonably practicable, an additional end impact wall shall be provided
which, together with the buffer stop, protects the supported Bridge.

When designing such an end impact wall, suitable allowance may be made for
the restraint provided by the track where this is securely connected to the wall
(e.g. by means of a concrete slab to which the rails are fastened directly).

Page 90 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

For a track serving passenger traffic, the end impact wall shall be designed for
a horizontal ultimate limit state Design force of 5,000 kN at a height of 1.0 m
above the top of the rail, provided that the buffer stop has a minimum braking
capacity of 2500 kNm.

In a shunting and marshalling area, the end impact wall shall be designed for
a horizontal ultimate limit state Design force of 10,000 kN at a height of 1.0 m
above the top of the rail, provided that the buffer stop has a minimum braking
capacity of 2500 kNm.

iv) Plinths and platforms

Where individual columns are used, a solid plinth shall be provided to a height
of 915 mm +0/-25 mm above rail level or 1200 mm minimum above ground
level where lateral clearance permits. The height of the plinth shall be
constant and the ends of the plinth shall be suitably shaped in plan to deflect
derailed vehicles away from the column. A solid platform construction shall be
used to provide similar protection from derailed vehicles for individual columns
within station areas.

The column shall be structurally separated from the protecting plinth or

platform by means of a covered air gap or compressible material around the
column, so that if the plinth or platform is deflected or displaced in an
accidental situation the risk of an impact being transferred to the column is
minimised.

v) Structures in embankments

Columns and piers located within embankments, or at the bottom of

embankments, may require special consideration even if outside the hazard
zone, because of the possibility of derailed vehicles rolling down the
embankment. If it is not reasonably practicable to arrange the Design to avoid
this situation, appropriate measures shall be taken to safeguard such columns
and piers. Consideration shall be given to:

• the use of guard rails,

• providing a retaining structure to widen the top of the embankment,
• the use of massive piers.

Page 91 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix E: Additional requirements for lineside handrailing on

Underline Bridges

Open handrailing adjacent to a walkway not open to the public on an

Underline Bridge, shall have in addition to a continuous top rail and a 150 mm
raised kerb or kicker plate, one of the following:

(a) at least one intermediate rail or wire parallel to the top rail such that the
clear distance between any two rails / wires or between a rail / wire and
the kerb / kicker plate does not exceed 500 mm;

(b) vertical or near-vertical infill bars or wires such that the clear distance
between bars / wires does not exceed 150 mm;

(c) other arrangements (including ornamental arrangements) of rails or bars

or wires or similar elements such that a 600 mm x 200 mm rectangle with
its long sides vertical will not pass through;

(d) mesh infill.

Intermediate or infill elements of handrailing shall be able to withstand, without

permanent deformation, a horizontal loading of 1.0 kN/m2 or a horizontal force
of 0.5 kN applied at any point, whichever has the more severe effect.

Handrailing shall also be designed for horizontal loading of 0.74 kN/m or a

horizontal force of 0.5 kN applied at any point to the top rail, whichever has
the more severe effect.

Page 92 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix F: Existing substructures affected by new construction

Where the superstructure of an existing Bridge is to be reconstructed on

existing abutments, or in other cases where new construction is associated
with total or partial retention of existing substructures, the nature and extent of
the existing substructures to remain shall be subject to the approval of
Network Rail and identified in the AIP Submission.

The following guidelines may be applied.

(1) IF ALL of the following conditions are satisfied:

(i) an existing substructure is in satisfactory condition and shows no
significant signs of distress or undue settlement,
(ii) the effects of dead loading on the existing substructures or subsoil
will not be significantly increased as a result of the new
construction (having regard to masonry stresses and to maximum
and average soil pressures),
(iii) the effects of live loading on the existing substructures or subsoil
will not be significantly increased following the new construction
(having regard to masonry stresses and to maximum and average
soil pressures),
(iv) the stability of the existing substructures against overturning and
sliding will not be significantly reduced as a result of or following the
new construction,
(v) there are no particular geotechnical considerations which give
cause for concern,
THEN the existing substructures may normally be considered adequate
for retention without modification and without the need for structural or
geotechnical analysis.

In this Appendix, the interpretation of the term ‘significant’ requires

engineering judgement to be used in relation to the particular
circumstances prevailing at the structure. Significance should be
considered in terms of effects on the safety of the structure and the
ability of the structure to carry loads.

(2) IF conditions (i) and (v) above are satisfied, but the effects of dead
and/or live loading on the existing substructures or their tendency to
sliding / overturning will be significantly greater than existing,
THEN the following shall apply:
• Appropriate structural and/or geotechnical analysis should be
carried out.
• Account should be taken of any more or less favourable distribution
of loading as a result of the new construction. For example:

Page 93 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

(a) A freely-supported span may be replaced by a portal

structure which, although heavier, effectively struts the
abutment tops, preventing rotation about their bases.
(b) A superstructure which bears near the front face of an
abutment may be replaced by a new superstructure which
bears further back, thus improving the stability of the abutment
and reducing the maximum soil pressures beneath it.
(c) Beam type construction will generally distribute loads more
evenly throughout the abutment than a half through type
structure.
(d) The effects of a half through type structure can be
improved by providing cill beams with sufficient strength to
distribute loads.
• When considering the acceptability of additional soil loading, due
distinction should be made between soil types which may fail
completely and those whose response is likely to be no more
severe than increased settlement. In some cases, increased
settlement might be acceptable if the safety, clearances and
performance of the Bridge and any supported equipment are not
affected. However, in such cases, the new superstructure should
be designed to accommodate the effects of any likely increased
total or differential settlement.
• Underpinning and/or strengthening should be considered as
applicable.
• Such underpinning does not necessarily have to carry all of the
foundation loading. It may be sufficient to design underpinning to
carry the incremental loading only, or in some other way to share
the load between new and old parts. However, such load sharing
should not be relied upon unless it can be verified that the
underpinning structure / soil system will settle under increased
loading in an essentially ductile manner and will be able to
withstand any tension which may result from the application and
removal of live loading. (Useful information may be found in
Burland and Kalra’s paper “Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre:
geotechnical aspects”, Proc. Instn Civ. Engrs, Part 1, 1986, 80,
Dec., 1479-1503.)

(3) IF conditions (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v) above are satisfied but the existing
substructures are showing significant signs of distress,
THEN the following shall apply:
• The cause of distress should be determined (e.g. earlier existence
of rail joints, high local forces especially at abutment corners,
malfunctioning or no bearings, failure of waterproofing / drainage,
vegetation, increase in ballast depth, settlement, effects of mining,

Page 94 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

reduction in passive pressure due to road lowering, trenching or

scour, etc.).
• Appropriate structural and / or geotechnical analysis should be
carried out.
• Distinction should be made between movement / damage which
has occurred in the past but has since stabilised and movement /
damage which is ongoing. In the case of the former, remedial work
may not be required.
• Remedial work should generally be considered as a first choice
rather than complete replacement of the existing substructures,
allowing where applicable for sharing of load between new and old
parts.

(4) An existing Bridge superstructure may act as a prop to the abutments

(whether designed to or not). Consideration should therefore be given
to the stability of existing abutments when the superstructure is
removed. Where necessary, temporary props should be provided and /
or limitations placed on soil surcharge loading behind the abutment
(e.g. by restricting the use of construction plant or by reducing the
height of fill behind abutments during reconstruction).

(5) When considering ground bearing capacity, consideration should be

given to the fact that the ground beneath existing foundations will be
consolidated and may have a higher bearing capacity that that
determined from ground investigations adjacent to the structure.

Page 95 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix G: High Speed TSI requirements

This Appendix provides an introduction to the requirements of the High Speed

Technical Specification for Interoperability relating to the Infrastructure
Subsystem (the “High Speed TSI”, which is published in the Official Journal)
as implemented by (subject to any subsequent Regulations or amendment):

The Railways (Interoperability) Regulations 2006 (Statutory Instrument

2006 No. 397)
(see http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20060397.htm)

as amended by:
The Railways (Interoperability) (Amendment) Regulations 2007
(Statutory Instrument 2007 No. 3386)
(see http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20073386_en_1)

The 2006 regulations cover both High Speed and Conventional Rail.

This Appendix outlines the applicability of the High Speed TSI (Issue II –
Commission Decision 20 December 2008 - Reference 2008/217/EC ) and the
main aspects that affect Bridge Design. See 6.9.6 regarding the Conventional
Rail TSI.

In addition to the requirements given elsewhere in this standard, it is a

statutory requirement that Bridges which carry or cross routes of the trans-
European high speed rail system (identified in Schedule 11 of the
Interoperability Regulations) shall be designed in accordance with the High
Speed TSI.

Compliance with details identified in this Appendix shall not be taken to

ensure compliance with the High Speed TSI or the Interoperability
Regulations.

The Remit from Network Rail shall normally identify whether TSI applies to the
Design of a Bridge. Where this has not been identified and the Bridge is on a
TSI route, confirmation shall be sought from Network Rail’s Professional Head
of Structures concerning the particular requirements for compliance with the
High Speed TSI and Interoperability Regulations, prior to AIP Submission.

In all cases, liaison with TSI Authorities shall only be carried out by Network
Rail unless specifically delegated to others.

a) Application of TSI requirements

It is essential that the applicability of the TSI is established for the individual
Bridge and works to be undertaken.

Advice is available on the Department for Transport web site

(http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/interoperabilityandstandards/).
Page 96 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Notwithstanding whether or not formal conformity and verification with the

High Speed TSI is required, it is Network Rail’s policy to apply the High Speed
TSI requirements where reasonably practicable to the following structures on
High Speed TSI applicable routes (this list includes the TSI requirements):

• new Underline Bridges, Culverts, Overline Bridges and footbridges

(including Outside Party Bridges),
• Underline Bridge superstructure reconstructions to accept faster
and/or heavier rail traffic than that which is currently accepted,
• where reasonably practicable, Underline Bridge superstructure
reconstructions undertaken because of poor condition and/or
assessment failure of the existing structure,
• significant structural work to improve railway clearances across
Underline Bridges, under Overline Bridges and through tunnels,
• significant structural work to accommodate new and/or lengthened
station platforms.

The High Speed TSI requirements do not apply to minor works (“substitution
in the framework of maintenance”), which may be considered to include
replacement of components, assemblies or sub-assemblies in accordance
with current technology, and also like for like replacement.

As a guide, the High Speed TSI requirements do not generally apply to the
following types of work:

• any work which could reasonably be described as “maintenance”

(including repairs or restoration of capability, and remedial
strengthening of Bridges resulting from assessment failures),
• any work which could reasonably be considered as not “major
upgrade works” (including strengthening of bridges to accommodate
faster or heavier bridges),
• alterations to structures which improve safety and/or accessibility
but which do not provide for any improvement in the speed, weight
or gauge of railway traffic, for example:
• provision of Underline Bridge impact protection beams,
• provision of improved walkways on Underline Bridges,
• provision of new ramped access to existing footbridges,
• improvements to Overline Bridge parapet containment levels.
Where the High Speed TSI requirements are applicable, the Design shall
comply with the more onerous requirements of those identified in this standard
and those in the High Speed TSI.

Page 97 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Additional approval and verification procedures apply to work which is within

the scope of the High Speed TSI, as identified in the TSI and Interoperability
Regulations.
b) Main requirements of High Speed TSI

The Designer shall check the version of the High Speed TSI current at the
time of the Design and shall identify the version in the AIP Submission.

UK1 gauge has been revised for Issue II of the High Speed TSI. Application
rules are given in Railway Group Standard GE/RT8073 Issue 1: Requirements
for the application of standard vehicle gauges, with guidance in GE/GN8573
Issue 2: Guidance on gauging.

Where the application of the High Speed TSI requires a load classification
factor α (for loading heavier or lighter than normal rail traffic) to be applied, the
value of α to be used shall be the greater of the value required by the TSI and
the value required elsewhere by this standard, and details shall be identified in
the AIP Submission.

The Sections of the High Speed TSI (Issue II) likely to be relevant are as
follows, without limitation:

TSI requirements particularly relevant to Bridge Design TSI Section

(Listing is not exhaustive) Number
Minimum infrastructure gauge 4.2.3
Traffic loads on structures 4.2.14
Vertical loads 4.2.14.1
Dynamic analysis 4.2.14.2
Centrifugal forces 4.2.14.3
Nosing forces 4.2.14.4
Actions due to traction and braking (longitudinal loads) 4.2.14.5
Longitudinal forces due to interaction between structures and 4.2.14.6
track
Aerodynamic actions from passing trains on line side 4.2.14.7
structures
Application of the requirements of EN1991-2:2003 4.2.14.8
Lateral space for passengers and onboard staff in the event 4.2.23.1
of detrainment outside of a station – Lateral space alongside
tracks
Register of infrastructure 4.8
Assessment of conformity with TSI and/or verification 6.2

Page 98 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Particular features of the British network 7.3.6

c) Other TSI aspects to be considered

The following TSI (Infrastructure) aspects, relevant to other structure related
issues, shall also be considered in the Design:
TSI aspect (Listing is not exhaustive) TSI Section
Number
Essential (general and specific) requirements, and meeting 3.2 & 3.3
those requirements, including:
Reliability and availability (including monitoring and
maintenance)
Safety
Health (including materials hazardous to health)
Environmental protection
Technical compatibility
Operational noise 3.2.2
Ground vibration 3.2.2
Prevention of unauthorised access 3.3.1

d) Additional factor for deterioration γdet

In addition to the TSI infrastructure requirements, Network Rail also require an

additional partial factor γdet to be used in the Design of all Bridge elements
that form part of the trans-European high-speed rail network. γdet shall provide
an additional 10% allowance on the effects from live loads (at ultimate limit
state) for future (normal) structural deterioration, to enable the various TSI
structure-related requirements to be met in the longer term and to provide
Network Rail with flexibility in asset stewardship in meeting in-service TSI
obligations.

The application of γdet shall be identified in the AIP Submission. γdet shall not
be applied to fatigue checks and shall not be applied to deformation checks.

The additional partial factor γdet shall be applied when determining the Design
loads for live loads only, such that using the notation in BS 5400: Steel,
concrete and composite bridges:
Q* = . γdet . γfL . Qk and is subject to application of γf3
where:
Q* is the design load.
γdet is an additional partial factor for structural deterioration, but
applied to live loads only. γdet shall be taken as:
1.1 for the ultimate limit state,
Page 99 of 109
 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

1.0 for the serviceability limit state.

γfL is the partial factor for loads defined in the BS 5400: Steel,
concrete and composite bridges Part 2: 2006: Specification for
Loads, as modified by this standard.

Qk is the nominal live load.

γf3 is an additional partial factor to be applied to the load effects or

to the capacity/stiffness in accordance with the applicable Part of
BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges.

Page 100 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix H: Modification to Appendix 1 of GC/RT5212

Note that this modification to GC/RT5212 shall not be implemented for a

Bridge that is subject to High Speed TSI requirements (see 6.9.6 and
Appendix G). (Note: on these routes there is a statutory requirement to
comply with GC/RT5212 via the High Speed TSI).

Issue 1 of GC/RT5212: Requirements for Defining and Maintaining

Clearances supersedes all of GE/RT8029: Management of Clearances and
Gauging (except for Section 14), which has been withdrawn.

Appendix B of GE/RT8029 (Issue 1) gave a “Structure gauge for areas close

to the plane of the rail”. This included an area defined as being an “area for
dwarf signals, bridge girders, and other lineside equipment (conductor rail
equipment, such as hook switches, is also permitted to utilise this area)”. The
area extended outwards from a point 240 mm + 318 mm = 558 mm from the
nearest running edge, to a height of 110 mm above the plane of the rails.
In Appendix 1 in Issue 1 of GC/RT5212, the various areas included in the
“Structure gauge for areas close to the plane of the rail” were consolidated
into an area designated as an “Area reserved for items intended to come in
close proximity to trains (for example, conductor rails and AWS magnets)”.
Bridge girders were therefore excluded from the area permitted by
GE/RT8029 (as bridge girders are not “intended to come in close proximity to
trains” in the same way as conductor rails and AWS magnets).
It has been established that it was not the intention to exclude bridge girders
from the area permitted by GE/RT8029 when Issue 1 of GC/RT5212 was
drafted. The exclusion was inadvertent - there are no safety grounds for such
an exclusion.
The Design of Bridges in accordance with NR/L2/CIV/020 shall therefore
permit fixed infrastructure to be located in the “area for dwarf signals, bridge
girders, and other lineside equipment” previously identified in GE/RT8029.
Until GC/RT5212 is revised, where a Bridge Design includes girders within the
area identified above, the girders and the relevant dimensions shall be
identified in the AIP Submission, with a cross reference to this Appendix.
Note: GM/RT2149: “Requirements for Defining and Maintaining the Size of
Railway Vehicles” permits train builders to design a swept envelope that
comes within 50 mm of the area subject to this application, reducing to 25 mm
“under worst case conditions, such as suspension failure”. Section G2 of
GC/RT5212 therefore requires: “When designing new infrastructure,
allowance shall be made for construction tolerances to ensure these
requirements [structures do not intrude inside the structure gauge set out in
Appendix 1] are met once the infrastructure has been built”. “Infrastructure” is
defined as track and structures in combination. Allowance has therefore to be
made for construction tolerances of both the structure and the adjacent track.

Page 101 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Bridge girders occupying the area subject to this modification must continue to
meet this requirement.

Page 102 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix I: Railway infrastructure / other issues interfaces

The following is a list of railway infrastructure and other issues for which
Network Rail is responsible which should be considered as appropriate in the
planning, Design and execution of structures works. The list is not
exhaustive.

• Interoperability
• Permanent way and track
• Drainage
• Signalling
• OHLE and third rail electrical power
• Power supply
• Telecommunications (including radio networks)
• Passenger flow at stations
• Clearance and gauging
• Operational safety
• Fire safety
• Environmental requirements
• Security
• Emergency evacuation
• Anti-terrorist requirements

Page 103 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix J: External authority, Outside Party etc. interfaces

Arrangements for consulting external authorities, Outside Parties, etc., shall

be agreed with Network Rail in accordance with 6.10 before any consultation
takes place.

The following is a list of external authorities, Outside Parties and third parties
which may need to be considered and consulted with in the planning, Design
and execution of structures works. The list is not exhaustive.

• * Her Majesty’s Railway Inspectorate (HMRI)

• * Technical Specification for Interoperability (TSI) Authorities
• * Notified Bodies
• * Train operating companies, freight operating companies and station
operating companies
• * Other Network Rail leaseholders and tenants
• * Government authorities in England, Scotland and Wales established
under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990
• * Bodies responsible for structures of historical importance, such as
English Heritage, Historic Scotland and Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments
Executive Agency
• * Local authority planning bodies and environmental authorities
• * Highway authorities such as the Highways Agency, Scottish Executive,
Transport Directorate of the National Assembly of Wales and local
authorities
• Other railway infrastructure owners such as London Underground and light
rail and metro operators
• * Drainage, river and port authorities
• British Waterways Board and other canal owners
• * Environmental authorities, such as Environment Agency, English Nature,
Scottish Natural Heritage and the Countryside Council for Wales
• * Utility owners and statutory undertakers
• Other infrastructure owners
• Other land owners
• Other neighbours
• Emergency services

Page 104 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

* Liaison with these bodies shall be carried out by Network Rail unless
specifically delegated to others.

Page 105 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix K: Information to be included in the AIP Submission

This Appendix lists the clauses in this standard which require information to
be included in the AIP Submission. These requirements shall be considered
in conjunction with the requirements identified in NR/L2/CIV/003: Technical
approval of design, construction and maintenance of civil engineering
infrastructure.

Clause Title
2 Purpose
6.1 Structural adequacy, general location and dimensions
6.2 Purpose, intended use
6.4 Construction, maintenance and decommission
6.6 Health and safety, and environmental considerations
6.9.1 Railway tracks
6.9.2 Structure gauge and clearances to the railway
6.9.3 Railway equipment
6.9.6 Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI)
6.12 Interface with services, Statutory Undertakers and public
utilities
6.13.1 Highway Authority acceptance of the Design
6.13.2 Clearances to highways
6.13.3 Highway widths and construction
6.13.4 Highway sight lines
6.13.5 Highway lighting and road traffic sign
6.14.1 Clearances over water
6.14.2 Lighting and signs over waterways
7.2.1 New Bridges and reconstructed superstructures
7.2.2 Strengthening, alterations, repairs and temporary Bridges
7.3 Durability and corrosion protection
7.4 Water management and drainage
7.5 Waterproofing
7.8 Security, fencing and protection from vandalism
7.9 Parapets, safety barriers, walkways, handrailing, etc
7.9.1 Vehicle parapets and safety barriers for Overline Bridges
7.9.4 Replacement of parapets or safety barriers
7.10.1 Particular requirements for footbridges
7.13 Bearings
7.15 Hydraulic Design for Culverts
7.16 Temporary Bridges

Page 106 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Clause Title
8.3.2 Track twist
8.3.3 Uplift at bearings
9.1 General requirements for loading
9.2.1 Railway loads for Underline Bridges
9.2.3 Fatigue loads for Underline Bridges
9.2.8 Accidental (derailment) loads for Underline Bridges
9.2.10 Accidental loads for Underline Bridges over waterways
9.3 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Underline
Bridges
9.4.1 Highway vehicle loads for new and replacement Overline
Bridges
9.4.2 Pedestrian, cycle and equestrian loads
9.4.3 Parapets, safety barriers and handrailing for Overline Bridges
9.5 Loading for strengthening, alteration or repair of Overline
Bridges
9.6.1 Loads to be considered
9.7 Loading for substructures
10.1 General
10.3 Timber Bridges
10.4 Bridges constructed from other materials
10.5 Foundations for new Bridges
10.6 Earth retaining elements
10.10 Strengthening, alterations and repairs

Appendices:
A Application of Structure Category to individual structures
(reference in Footnote)
F Existing substructures affected by new construction
G High Speed TSI Requirements
H Modification to Appendix 1 of GC/RT5212
L Non-mandatory recommendations

Page 107 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

Appendix L: Non-mandatory recommendations

This Appendix contains additional non-mandatory good practice

recommendations.

1. Railway Approved Code of Practice GC/RC5510: Recommendations

for the Design of Bridges

At the time of drafting this standard, Railway Approved Code of Practice

GC/RC5510 was due to be withdrawn. However, the Design of a Bridge
should generally comply with the recommendations and guidance in
GC/RC5510 where these do not conflict with the requirements of this
standard.

2. Economy

Structures should be designed with appropriate economy, with costed

alternatives included within the AIP Submission to justify the adopted design.
Consideration should be given to the whole life costs prior to submission of
the AIP.

3. Clearances

Where reasonably practicable, the Design should provide larger clearances

than the minimum requirements specified.

4. Clearance for ballast cleaning machines

Consideration should be given to the clearance requirements for ballast

cleaning machines to pass beside foundations and structural supports.
Where applicable, details should be identified in the AIP Submission.

5. Track maintenance plant

An Underline Bridge should be designed so that it will not be damaged by

track maintenance plant. Where a Bridge deck is ballasted, the Design
should, so far as is reasonably practicable, allow for sufficient depth of
covering fill material and/or ballast over foundations so as to avoid damage to
waterproofing or the structure by the tynes on ballast tampers.

A ballasted deck, and the details at the ends of such a deck, should be
designed to prevent the loss of ballast.

6. Limitations on structural form

The following techniques should not be used in permanent works for

abutments or other substructures of Underline Bridges, without obtaining the

Page 108 of 109

 Ref: NR/L2/CIV/020
Issue: 1 (Draft 12)
Date: 2008

approval of Network Rail’s Professional Head of Structures prior to AIP

Submission:

• reinforced soil abutments,

• anchored earth, including percussion driven mechanical anchors,
• ground anchors,
• steel sheet piles,
• crib walls,
• gabion walls,
• soil nailing.

Helical screwed piles should not be used for Underline or Overline Bridge
foundations without the approval of Network Rail’s Professional Head of
Structures prior to AIP Submission. Where such use is permitted, guidance
on requirements is given in Network Rail Structures Engineers’ Technical
Advice Note SE/TAN/0038: Helical screwed pile foundations for equipment
support structures.

7. Protection on abutments or walls between adjacent Bridge decks

Personnel protection is required along the top of abutment walls or transverse

infill walls located between adjacent separated Bridge decks. Consideration
shall be given to the risk arising from derailed trains striking or dislodging the
protection, and the parts to which it is attached.

Generally the protection should take the form of lightweight handrailing which
complies with the requirements of 7.9 and Appendix E. In addition, the
handrailing should be infilled with 3mm minimum diameter galvanised mesh
with a maximum hole size of 25mm. Solid construction e.g. brickwork,
blockwork or concrete walls, or upstanding extensions of abutment or
transverse infill walls, should not be used.

Where strengthening, alteration or repairs are to be carried out to existing

Bridges which have solid protection walls etc., consideration should be given
to altering such protection to comply with the above.

Page 109 of 109