File No.

WR-HQ0ENGG(WBCC)/2/2019-O/o DY CE/BR/CCG/HQ/WR

Headquarter Office,
Churchgate, Mumbai-20
cbewrly@gmail.com

No. W 65/1 (Const.) E-374 Date: 15.05.2023

CAO (C)
Western Railway,
HQ office, Churchgate,
Mumbai 20

Sub : Regarding provision of approach transition system on bridges

spanning more than12.2 m

Ref : GR - 50(Revision- 1) issued by RDSO / Lucknow in July 2021

______

With reference to above, RDSO has issued guidelines for providing

transition system on approaches of bridges. In these guidelines, two systems
have been deliberated and the same are to be provided for smooth running of
trains for High Speed.

As Construction Organization is executing large number of new line,

Gauge Conversion and doubling Projects, it is imperative that approach transition
systems are compulsorily provided on all major and important bridges. Based on
the feedback received from field officials, it is observed that bridge approaches
are constructed without any of the two systems providing in GR.- 50(Revision- 1).

It is requested that necessary instructions are passed down below for

strict implementation of RDSO’s GR-50(Revision- 1).

Action taken report may be sent to this office for appraisal of PCE.

(Amit Gupta)
Chief Bridge Engineer
Encl : GER-50

C/- PCE : for kind information.

 For official use only

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

TRANSITION SYSTEM
ON
APPROACHES OF BRIDGES

Report No. GE: R-50

(Revision-1)

July- 2021

GEO-TECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIRECTORATE

RESEARCH DESIGNS AND STANDARDS ORGANISATION
LUCKNOW-226011
 FOREWORD

Indian Railways has planned to carry higher axle loads and higher speeds for increasing through put.
For this, it is imperative to have tracks which require minimum maintenance. Problem of track
settlement and maintenance is observed often at approaches of bridges on Indian Railways. This is
attributed mainly due to sudden change in track stiffness at junction of bridge approach and bridge
abutment. A properly designed transition system is required at bridge approach for gradual change in
stiffness which will keep settlement within tolerable limit and avoid abrupt change in dynamic
response.

Indian Railways is grappling with this issue since last 15 years but we have not made any concrete
progress so far in this field and the old system of 600mm boulder backing with 1H:1V backfill material
is still being used which prima facie is not adequate for higher speeds/axle loads. Therefore, the
need was felt to develop an appropriate transition system at bridge approach for Indian Railways.
With this objective in mind, Railway Board instructed RDSO to develop a comprehensive bridge
transition system for implementation in field. It is a matter of great pleasure to see that a new &
improved design of transition system for bridge approach has been developed by revising the earlier
Report no. GE: R-50, August 2005 for use in Indian Railways for new lines keeping in view its
expected requirements and also the ease of construction/executability in field.

Western Railway recently in March 2021 has carried out a trial for strengthening of existing bridge
approach for running of 160 kmph in Surat –Virar section using geocells. The result of the trial is
good. The revised Guidelines also include the above scheme for provision of a bridge transition
system on existing bridge approaches.

Zonal Railways are requested to make extensive use of bridge transition system on existing and new
bridge approaches particularly where bank height is more and subsoil/subgrade is poor. The
experience gained during this exercise will be very useful for further development in this field and we
shall be able to issue necessary Correction Slip in IR Bridge Manual & Bridge Substructure &
Foundation Code which is already delayed badly.

i
 PREFACE

In Embankment on Bridge approaches, there may be a differential settlement in backfill vis-à-vis

abutments which rests on comparatively stiffer base. This may lead to more frequent track attention
at Bridge approaches. A properly designed transition system at such locations will ensure a gradual
change in stiffness and reduce settlement.

Earlier report on “Transition system on approaches of Bridges”, GE: R-50, issued by GE directorate in
August 2005 was a step in this direction. However these provisions of GE: R-50, 2005 were not
implemented in field as the necessary modifications in IR Bridge Manual & Bridge Substructure and
Foundation Code (BSFC) was not made.

Also, previously on the basis of the recommendation of 71st BSC meeting in 1999, provision of
approach slab on Bridge approaches was adopted on Indian Railways. Subsequently this provision of
approach slab was also deleted from BSFC in year 2016, but it still exists in IRBM and GE: R-50.

In this regard, Railway Board also instructed RDSO to develop & finalise a comprehensive transition
system.

In light of the above discussions, it has become imperative to revise the report on “Transition system
for bridges”, GE: R-50, based on the study of latest developments and provisions adopted on different
world railway systems. This has also become further more important in view of increased traffic,
tonnage and higher speed in Indian Railways.

With this objective in mind, this document hopes to present an improved design for transition system,
on the one hand & take care of practical considerations and ease of construction aspects, on the
other.

It is expected that the document will help field officials immensely in providing an effective system of
transition at Bridge approaches which will lead to quality construction in field, with reduced
maintenance efforts and improved riding quality. In the light of future development on the subject and
the experience gained with its implementation in field, design can be further improved as required.

ii
 CONTENTS

S. Description Page No.

No.
1 Introduction 01
1.1 Requirement of a Transition System on Bridge Approaches 01
2 Historical Developments of the transition system and backfill 02
3 Discussion on developments for improvement in transition system on 03
Indian Railways
3.1 Modifications for improvement in transition system 04
4 Providing Transition for Strengthening of Existing Bridge Approaches 06
4.1 Procedure for laying of Geocells in Existing Bridge Approach 07
5 Recommendations 08
5 References 09

iii
1. INTRODUCTION
Bridge approaches are a common source of poor ride quality and often require more frequent
track attention due to track settlement within length about 20m from the bridge end. The
source of problem is mainly due to difference in stiffness between track on the bridge and
bridge approach. It is a well-known fact that track surface deviations cause dynamic loads or
impacts when trains pass over them.

Numerous attempts have been made world over to eliminate the track dip at bridge approach
by reducing the difference in track stiffness or by creating a more gradual stiffness transition.
However, Indian Railways has been very tentative on this subject and yet to adopt a proper
bridge transition system so far.

Photograph showing dip at the bridge

1.1 REQUIREMENT OF TRANSITION SYSTEM ON BRIDGE APPROACHES:

The backfills resting on natural ground may settle in spite of heavy compaction and may cause
differential settlement, vis-a-vis, abutment which rests on comparatively much stiffer base. To
avoid such embarrassing settlements, while on one hand it is essential to compact the backfill
in the properly laid layers of soil especially in the vicinity of abutment/structures on the other,
the backfill should be designed carefully to keep:
i. Settlements within tolerable limits.
ii. The dynamic response or the coefficient of subgrade reaction on the approach of bridge
and on the abutments should not have an abrupt change.

Indian Railways is planning to increase speeds up to 160 kmph for passenger operations and
running of 25T/32.5T axle loads for goods operation. Hence a need is felt to provide a suitable
bridge transition system on bridge approaches for a more gradual transition of track stiffness.
This report is an attempt in that direction i.e. to provide gradual transition of stiffness from the
formation to the bridge proper which will help in eliminating the differential settlement on
bridge approach and this in turn will help in reduction of maintenance inputs and improved
riding quality.

1
2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS ON THE TRANSITION SYSTEM AND BACKFILL
i. Para 7.5 of Bridge Substructure and Foundation Code (BSFC) and Para 605 of Indian
Railways Bridge Manual (IRBM) stipulates the provisions for drainage layer of 600mm
thick well hand packed boulders/cobbles behind the abutment followed by granular
backfill (GW, GP & SW type material) at a slope of 1:1 as shown in figure below:

Fig.-1: Backfill and drainage arrangement behind abutment.

ii. Provision of approach slab as transition system for bridge approaches on Indian railways
was considered first time in 56th BSC in year 1977 meeting and was discussed in
subsequent meetings. Finally, vide ACS 10 to para 604(3) of IRBM and ACS 12 to para
7.5.3 of BSFC was issued based on the recommendation of 71st BSC meeting in 1999
and provision of approach slab was adopted on IR.

iii. Subsequently, GE Directorate RDSO prepared and issued a report No. GE: R-50 in
August’ 2005 for ‘Transition System on Approaches of Bridges’ and recommended
transition system with approach slab for non-ballasted deck and with Provision of Dry
Lean Concrete (DLC) for ballasted deck bridges considering span of 12.2 m and above.
The transition systems recommended in GE: R-50 are as under:

Fig.-2
2
 Fig.-3

iv. The issue of approach slab was again discussed from 81st BSC to 83rd BSC (2015) and it
was decided to delete the provision of approach slab as a part of bridge transition system.
Accordingly, ACS-2 dated 20.10.2016 was issued and finally approach slab was deleted
from BSFC but corresponding modification in IRBM and GE: R-50 were not made and
provision of approach slab as a part of bridge transition system is still existing in them.

v. Recently, Northern Railway vide letter dated 15.01.2021 has pointed out the discrepancy
in Para 604(3) of IRBM and Para 7.5.3 of BSFC regarding provision of approach slab to
B&S Directorate. In this regard, Railway Board instructed that a comprehensive transition
system should be developed/finalized by RDSO. Subsequently, B&S Directorate
requested GE Directorate for suggesting modifications in existing clause of IRBM & BSFC
and to carry out necessary revision in GE: R-50 report.

In view of above historical developments, revision of GE: R-50 (Aug.’2005) is necessary to

delete the provision of approach slab and develop an improved transition system after
literature study and practice over world railways.

3. DISCUSSION ON DEVELOPMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN TRANSITION SYSTEM ON

INDIAN RAILWAYS

Revision of GE: R-50 (Aug.’2005) report has been taken up in view of increase of speed and
axle loads on Indian railways and deletion of approach slab from BSFC.
GE directorate examined the practice of bridge transition systems available world over in 08
railways such as German, Italian, Hungarian, Swiss federal, French, Belgium, Spain &
Slovakia Railways including provisions available in UIC 719R-2008 have been studied in detail
for their application in Indian Railway

These are discussed as under:

3
 i. Cement stabilised granular layer has been provided in slope 1H:1V along the abutment upto
depth of 3 to 4 meter or upto abutment depth of varying thickness from 1 to 1.5m and 3m in
one case. Provision of DLC along the abutment and behind drainage layer in slope of 1H: 1V
upto abutment depth is considered for IR having 2.0m thickness on safer side.
ii. Additional bituminous or foundation stiffness layer below blanket layer of varying length 10m
to 20m (in 2 cases more than 20m) are provided. Accordingly, DLC layer below blanket of
0.5m thickness and in 20m length is considered for IR.
iii. Drainage layer is provided behind abutment. Drainage layer of 600mm thick well hand packed
boulders/cobbles with Geocomposite Drain Vertical (GCD (V)) ‘OR’ 1200mm thick well hand
packed boulder/cobbles has been considered for IR.
iv. Granular backfill is provided behind DLC in slope 1.5H: 1V to 4H: 1V but in most cases as 2H:
1V. Granular backfill material (GW, GP & SW) is considered in slope 2H: 1V in place of
existing stipulation of 1H: 1V for IR.
v. Thickness of blanket layer over DLC layer has been kept same as over the formation adjacent
to transition zone for ease of construction.
vi. Type of bridge, length of span has not been indicated in these practices mentioned
above. The same has also been considered for IR.

In view of above discussion, an improved transition system has been developed by adopting
better practices of transition systems in above mentioned world railways with the following
considerations:

a. It is kept simple without any complexities.

b. Ease of construction, easily implementable with available materials
c. Having uniformity i.e., same for ballasted deck bridge & non-ballasted bridges irrespective of
type of span as per practice over world railways given in UIC report.
d. Adequate drainage arrangement with boulder backing/Geo composite drain (vertical) and
drainage pad of graded gravel. (This para has been Revised is as per corrigendum1 at page
10)
e. Gradual increase of stiffness from approach embankment to bridge abutment has been taken
care first by horizontal DLC layer then by granular backfill of increasing thickness and finally
by sloping DLC & boulder drainage layer along abutment.

3.1 MODIFICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN TRNSITION SYSTEM:

Based the above discussion, modifications for the improved transition vis-à-vis existing
provisions of transition system for ballasted deck bridges and non-ballasted bridges have
been summarized as under:
S Item Existing provision Revised provision
no (Figure 4 & 5)
IRBM/BSFC GE: R-50, 2005
1 Drainage layer. 600mm thick 1200mm thick well 600mm thick boulders/cobbles
boulder/cobbles hand packed with geo composite drain
boulder/cobbles (vertical) or 1200mm thick
boulder/cobbles as drainage
layer.

4
 2 Dry lean concrete -- -- 2000mm DLC behind drainage
(DLC) along layer in slope 1H:1V,
abutment behind confirming to IRC: SP-49.
drainage layer 1998.
3 Granular Backfill 1H:1V 2H:1V 2H : 1V
slope
4 Horizontal dry lean Approach slab DLC and well 20m length and 0.5m thick
concrete (DLC) as stipulated in graded gravel of DLC layer below blanket layer
layer and Approach IRBM but varying thickness and over subgrade and backfill
slab deleted from having total length up to boulder backing,
BSFC 16m. confirming to IRC: SP-49.
1998.
Note: - (i) Any one of the two systems in Fig. 4 & 5 can be used based on availability of material.
These recommended transition systems are to be adopted for both ballasted and non-ballasted
deck bridges irrespective of span except for pipe culverts.
(ii) Where bank height is less and subsoil & subgrade is of good quality and long term differential
settlement of foundation/backfil soil and of the structure is expected not to exceed allowable limits,
the provision of dry lean concrete can be dispensed with by the GAD approving authority.

G.E. Directorate, R.D.S.O.

Transition System of
Bridge Approach for
Ballasted & Non-Ballasted
Bridge with Hand Packed
Boulders/Cobbles Drain &
Geocomposite Drain

Fig-4 (Revised)
Revised fig-4 is as per corrigendum1 at page no. 10

5
 G.E. Directorate, R.D.S.O.

Transition System of
Bridge Approach for
Ballasted & Non-Ballasted
Bridge with Hand Packed
Boulders/Cobbles Drain

Fig-5 (Revised)
Revised fig-5 is as per corrigendum1 at page no. 10

4. PROVIDING TRANSITION FOR STRENGTHENING OF EXISTING BRIDGE APPROACHES

Chief Bridge Engineer/Western Railway in consultation with IIT/Madras and RDSO had
developed a system of providing bridge transition system on existing lines. This has been
provided on a Major Bridge No. 417 on Sachin – NRL block section in Virar - Surat section on
Delhi – Mumbai route to strengthen the existing bridge approach to increase of speed to 160
kmph. In this scheme, Geocell has been laid in March 2021 in the multiple layers of varying
length and infilled with granular material in top portion of formation in a traffic block of 4 hours
& 50 minutes. The result of the trial is good.

Therefore, the above scheme is being recommended for provision of a bridge transition
system on existing routes as per the requirement for increase of speed or where maintenance
issues are being found on bridge approaches due to differential settlement.

The schematic sketch of the Trial is given in Fig.6 below:

6
 Fig-6

4.1 PROCEDURE FOR LAYING OF GEOCELLS IN EXISTING BRIDGE APPROACH:

i) Dismantling of track and removal of rails, sleepers and fittings for length of 20m.
ii) Removal of ballast.
iii) Excavation of formation to 1400mm below rail level so as to get 700mm depth of formation for
20 M length and of 5M width.
iv) Placing layer of geotextile in the stretch of size 20M x 5M.
v) Providing 150mm thick blanketing material on top of geotextile watering and compaction of the
same.
vi) Placing 10mX5m Bottom layer of geocells and filling it with blanketing material and
compaction with rammers after watering. Geocell is of size 356mm and 150mm depth
conforming to IS: 17483 (Part 1) – 2020.
vii) Placing 15mX5m Middle layer of geocells and filling it with blanketing material and
compaction with rammers after watering.
viii) Placing 20mX5m Top layer of geocells and filling it with blanketing material and compaction
with rammers after watering.
ix) Providing 100mm thick blanket layer over the Top layer and compacting the same.
x) Preparing ballast bed.
7
 xi) Laying of sleepers and linking of rails.
xii) Spacing of sleepers and boxing.
xiii) Through tamping with Tamping Express Machine.

Photograph showing Geotextile laying Photograph showing Geocell laying

Hand packed boulder layer behind abutment, if available should not to be disturbed while
excavation for laying Geocell.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS
Transition systems shown in Fig 4 & 5 are to be provided in Bridge approaches at new
construction for ballasted and non-ballasted deck bridges except pipe culverts. In addition,
followings care shall also be taken care during execution of the improved Transition system:
1. Placement of backfills by filling with the granular materials of GW, GP & SW i.e., well/poorly
graded gravel and well graded sand type of soil as per IS: 1498-1970 and should be free of
clay. Now, this backfill to be provided in the slope of 2H: 1V. The same backfill material is
stipulated in para 604(3) & 605(3) of IRBM. Backfill material needs to be placed in 150mm or
lesser thickness layers and compacted with vibratory plate compactors. Top layers of backfill
material shall be compacted with heavy duty vibratory rollers, used for compaction of
earthwork in embankment whenever/wherever feasible
2. Provisions of Dry Lean Concrete (DLC) should confirm to IRC: SP-49. 1998.
3. Following should be ensured as per Comprehensive Guidelines and Specification for Railway
Formation vide specification no. RDSO/2020/GE: IRS-0004 September 2020:
a. While placing backfill material during rehabilitation of existing bridge approach, benching
should be made in approach embankment to provide proper bonding between new and
old material.
b. Ground improvement requirement must be checked at the location of bridge approach
and if required necessary ground improvement must be carried out.
c. Geo composite drain (vertical) shall be provided as per specification and other details
given in Appendix-C.

8
 d. The thickness & specification of blanket in transition zone will be same as that provided at
formation adjacent to the transition zone.

4. Existing bridge approach where problem of track settlement is observed can be strengthened
by providing geocell layers in top layer of formation as per procedure in Para 4.

6. REFERENCES:
i) Notes of bridge and Structures Standards Committee held in 56th meeting (1977) to
83rd meeting (2015)
ii) RDSO letter no: CBS/DCS dated 29/30.8.2000.
iii) Addendum and Corrigendum slip no: 12 dated 22.9.2000 of B&S Directorate
iv) Indian Railway Bridge Manual – 1998
v) Bridge Substructure and Foundation Code (BSFC) – 2013 (Incorporating Correction
Slips up to ACS 9 issued on 6.7.2020)
vi) Note no: 11-A circulated vide Board's letter no: 2001/CRB/IN/11-dated: 20.12.2001
vii) Comprehensive guidelines and specification for railway formation” specification No.
RDSO/2020/GE: IRS-0004 Sept-2020

OFFICER AND STAFF ASSOCIATED WITH PREPARATION OF THE REPORT

Under the active guidance of Shri S. K. Jindal, Principal Executive Director/GE, this report has
been prepared by Shri S. K. Awasthi, Joint Director/GE, assisted by following officials:
Shri Ramesh Jain, ARE/GE-II
Shri Rajender Kumar Premi, SSRE/GE
Shri Sourabh Yadav, SSRE/GE
Shri Susheel Kumar, SSE (Design)

********************

9
 Corrigendum No. 1 to RDSO report no. GE: R-50 (Revision-1), July 2021
(Transition System on Approaches of Bridges)

Para 3(vi)(d) and Fig. 4 & Fig. 5 of RDSO report no GE: R-50 (Revision-1) have been
revised as under:

Para/Fig. Existing Clause of Transition Revised Clause

System on Approaches of
Bridges Report No. G-R-50
(Revision-1)
Para Adequate drainage Adequate drainage arrangement with
3(vi)(d) arrangement with boulder boulder backing/Geo composite
backing/Geo composite drain(vertical) and drainage pad of
drain(vertical) graded gravel
Fig-4 & Fig-4 & 5 have been revised to include “drainage pad of graded gravel
Fig.5 (size 20-80mm)” at the bottom of DLC vertical and drainage layer behind
abutment.

(S. K. Awasthi)
Joint Director/GE-1

10