Integral Bridges

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance
Discuss me ...
PUBLICATION NUMBER P163
Integral Steel Bridges:

Created on 06 February 2007
This material is copyright - all rights reserved. Use of this document is subject to the terms and conditions of the Steelbiz Licence Agreement
Design Guidance
A R BIDDLE BSc, CEng, MICE

D C ILES MSc, ACGI, DIC, CEng, MICE
E YANDZIO BSc, MEng, CEng, MIMarE
Published by:
The Steel Construction Institute
Silwood Park
Ascot
Berkshire SL5 7QN
Telephone:
Fax:
01344 623345
01344 622944

Discuss me ...
1997 The Steel Construction Institute

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study or criticism or review, as
permitted under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act, 1988, this publication may not be
reproduced, stored, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in
writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction only in accordance with the
terms of the licences issued by the UK Copyright Licensing Agency, or in accordance with the terms
of licences issued by the appropriate Reproduction Rights Organisation outside the UK.
Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the terms stated here
The Steel Construction Institute, at the address given on the title page.
should
be
sent
to
Although care has been taken to ensure, to the best of our knowledge, that all data and information
contained herein are accurate to the extent that they relate to either matters of fact or accepted
practice or matters of opinion at the time of publication, The Steel Construction Institute, the authors
and the reviewers assume no responsibility for any errors in or misinterpretations of such data and/or
information or any loss or damage arising from or related to their use.
Publication Number: P163
ISBN 1 85942 053 2
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
P:\CMP\Cmp657\pubs\P163\P163-Final.wpd
ii
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
FOREWORD
Integral bridge construction eliminates the provision of movement joints between
superstructure and substructure and thus avoids details that have given rise to many
durability problems in the past.
A number of studies have been carried out by The Steel Construction Institute on the
behaviour of integral bridge structures and this has led to the conclusion that the use of steel
elements in the bridge substructure (sheet piling, High Modulus Piles and steel bearing piles)
offers alternative construction sequences and methods which may well be cheaper and more
fit-for-purpose than the traditional reinforced concrete form of construction.

The purpose of this publication is to provide advice and guidance in the design of integral
bridges that use steel in a composite deck, in the substructure, and in both. It is also
intended to promote innovative thought by designers on alternative means of providing
bridge supports in integral bridges to those used traditionally in non-integral bridges. In
presenting new forms of substructure, the guide draws on technology that has been
developed over the past three decades in the Offshore oil and gas construction industry.
Use of steel in the substructure to bridges saves in dead load, provides material ductility and
permits speedier construction, all of which are significant advantages on many bridge
schemes. The use of prefabricated steel deck beams and steel piling saves site occupancy
time and minimises the traffic interruption for replacement bridge projects. It is hoped that
this Guide will encourage designers and constructors to consider a steel substructure option
more frequently during the conceptual and preliminary design phases of projects and thereby
to take advantage of the available potential to build more efficiently.
During the preparation of the publication, comment was received from the following people,
and their advice is gratefully acknowledged:
Mr
Mr
Mr
Mr
S G Griffiths
B Simpson
J L Vincett
R E Craig
Buckinghamshire County Council

Ove Arup & Partners
Tony Gee & Partners
WS Atkins
Funding for the initial studies and for part of the cost of preparing the text of this publication
was provided by British Steel, Sections, Plates & Commercial Steels and by British Steel
Tubes & Pipes. The assistance of Mr W Ramsay, Mr J Wilson and Mr E F Hole of British
Steel is also gratefully acknowledged.
iii
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
iv
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
CONTENTS
Page No.

SUMMARY
viii
INTRODUCTION
WHAT IS AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

2.1
Definition and terminology
2.2
Frame abutment integral bridges
2.3
Pinned integral bridges
2.4
Bankseat integral bridges
2.5
Jointless deck bridges
2.6
Additional considerations when choosing integral construction
2
2
2
3
4
5
6
WHY
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
4.1
Integral bridges in Europe and the USA
4.2
Examples of integral bridges in the United Kingdom
4.3
Offshore experience with tubular hollow sections
15
15
17
19
SUBSTRUCTURES FOR INTEGRAL BRIDGES

5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
Jointless deck configuration
5.5
Intermediate supports
5.6
Bearings
5.7
Skew bridges
21
21
25
26
28
29
31
33
STEEL SECTIONS FOR INTEGRAL BRIDGE PIERS AND ABUTMENTS

6.1
Continuous wall steel pile sections
6.2
Box piles
6.3
Tubular piles
6.4
H-Piles
6.5
Installation tolerances
35
35
37
38
39
40
CHOOSE AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

Experience with non-integral construction
Highways Agency requirements
Advantages of integral bridges
Practical aspects of the site that influence choice
Whole life costing
The use of steel piles in integral bridges
9
9
10
10
11
12
12
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...

6.6
6.7
6.8
Environmental factors associated with driven piles

Driveability
Corrosion allowances
41
41
42
DESIGN BASIS
7.1
General principles
7.2
Design standards
7.3
Limit state design
7.4
Loading effects on foundations
7.5
Observational Method for foundation design
7.6
Design report
7.7
Design for fatigue
46
46
46
50
51
51
52
53
DESIGN METHODOLOGY
8.1
Design sequence
8.2
Preliminary stages
8.3
Design of embedded retaining wall abutments
8.4
Design of column-pile abutments and piers
8.5
Design of bankseat integral bridges
8.6
Deck design
54
54
56
57
63
65
66
SITE INVESTIGATION AND SOIL DATA FOR DESIGN

9.1
Soil data required for design
9.2
Site investigation
9.3
Selection and evaluation of soil parameters
9.4
Soil parameters for design of integral bridges
67
67
67
68
68
10
ABUTMENT WALLS - EMBEDDED WALL STABILITY

10.1 Cantilever and propped walls
10.2 Methods of analysis for stability against overturning
70
70
71
11
ABUTMENT WALLS - SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION

11.1 Soil-structure interaction approach
11.2 Mobilisation of earth pressure and soil-structure interaction
11.3 Soil-structure interaction analysis methods
11.4 Global analysis of integral bridges
11.5 Available soil-structure interaction analysis software
11.6 Boundary conditions at the deck to abutment connection
76
76
76
77
79
79
81
12
ABUTMENT WALLS - RESPONSE TO THERMAL DECK MOVEMENTS

12.1 Bridge temperatures
12.2 Soil behaviour under cyclic loading
12.3 Earth pressures due to wall displacement
84
84
85
86
vi
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...

12.4
12.5
Requirements of BA 42/96
Comparison of Kp values in BA 42/96 with BS 8002
88
90
13
STEEL PILES - AXIAL LOAD RESISTANCE

13.1 Ultimate axial capacity and load transfer
13.2 Vertical settlement and serviceability
13.3 Ultimate capacity in cohesive soils
13.4 Ultimate capacity in cohesionless soils
13.5 Ultimate capacity in rock
13.6 Mobilisation of wall friction on a retaining wall
13.7 Determination of friction surface area
13.8 Determination of end bearing area
13.9 Buckling aspects of fully and partially embedded piles
14
STEEL COLUMN-PILES - LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE

14.1 Lateral loads from soil
14.2 Lateral forces at pile head
14.3 Analysis of pile groups
14.4 Behaviour of a spill-through column-pile abutment
14.5 Integral bridges and crash resistance
101
101
101
103
107
109
15
COMPOSITE DECK DESIGN

15.1 Axial Loading
15.2 Moments due to frame action
110
110
111
16
REFERENCES
112
vii
93
93
94
95
96
96
97
98
99
99
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
SUMMARY
Integral bridge construction is now being actively pursued as a means to avoid
durability problems associated with the movement joints used in traditional
beam-type bridges.
This publication explains what is meant by an integral bridge and illustrates the
various structural configurations that may be used. A key aspect of the
performance of an integral bridge is that the bridge supports, and the soil that they
retain, are displaced by the cyclic thermal strains experienced by the bridge deck.
Bridge designers will need to learn how to deal with the response of the soil and
support structures to such displacements and to develop expertise in this new
concept.
Guidance is provided on the design basis for integral bridges and the design
methodology that will need to be followed, both for bridges with retaining wall
abutments and for bridges on bankseats or individual pile supports.

The use of steel piling in the bridge supports offers a compliant structural element
that is well suited to integral bridge construction. The behaviour of the steel
supports under the loads from the deck and pressure from the soil is explained.
The requirements of the Highways Agency are discussed and compared with other
standards and design rules relating to soil behaviour. The interaction between the
stiffnesses of the deck, the supports and the soil is explored and the requirements
for the connection between the two are examined.
Reference is made to the companion publications Steel integral bridges: Design of
a single-span bridge - Worked example and Steel integral bridges: Design of a
multi-span bridge - Worked example, which illustrate many of the aspects covered
in this publication.
Pont en acier de type intgral: guide de dimensionnement
Rsum
La construction de ponts de type intgral est actuellement en plein essor car elle
permet dviter les problmes de durabilit lis aux appuis mobiles des ponts
poutres traditionnels.
La publication explique le concept de pont intgral et illustre les diffrentes
configurations structurales qui peuvent tre utilises. Un point trs important qui
conditionne le bon comportement de ce type douvrage est celui des dplacements
provoqus, dans les appuis et le sol quils retiennent, par les mouvements du
tablier du pont dus aux variations thermiques. Il est indispensable que lingnieur
projeteur soit bien au courant de ce problme et puisse le prendre en compte de
manre correcte.
Le guide couvre les points principaux du dimensionnement des ponts de type
intgral et expose la mthodologie suivre tant pour le dimensionnement du pont,
pour les murs supports situs aux extrmits du pont et pour les piles de ponts.
viii
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Lutilisation de piles en acier comme appuis du pont convient particulirement bien

pour ce type de constructions. Le comportement de ces supports en acier est
expliqu tant sous les charges provenant du tablier du pont que sous la pousse des
terres.
Les exxigences des autorits responsables des routes sont discutes et compares
dautres codes et rgles de dimensionnement relatifs au comportement des sols.
Linteraction entre les rigidits du tablier, des appuis et du sol est analyse et des
recommendations sont formules pour atteindre un bon comportement densemble.
Le guide fait rfrence deux publications consacres au mme sujet et intitules
Ponts en acier de type intgral: dimensionnement dun pont simple porte exemple dapplication et Ponts en acier de type intgral: dimensionnement dun
pont portes multiples - exemple dapplication qui illustrent de nombreux
aspects couverts dans cette publication.
Rahmenbrcken aus Stahl: Anleitung zur Berechnung

Zusammenfassung
Der Bau von Rahmenbrcken wird aktiv verfolgt als ein Mittel, Probleme der
Dauerhaftigkeit zu vermeiden, die sich bei gewhnlichen Balkenbrcken infolge von
beweglichen Auflagern ergeben.
Diese Verffentlichung erklrt den Begriff Rahmenbrcke und zeigt die
verschiedenen statischen Systeme. Ein entscheidender Gesichtspunkt des Verhaltens
einer Rahmenbrkke ist die Verformung im Bereich der Auflager und des gesttzten
Bodens infolge zyklischer, thermischer Dehnungen des Brckenbalkens.
Brckenplaner mssen lernen, mit der Antwort des Bodens und der Auflager auf die
Verformungen umzugehen und Erfahrung mit diesem neuen Konzept zu sammeln.
Grundlagen zur Berechnung von Rahmenbrcken und die anzuwendende
Berechnungsmethodik werden vermittelt, sowohl fr Brcken mit Widerlagerwnden
als auch fr Brcken mit Auflagerbnken oder Auflagem aus Pfhlen.
Stahlpfhle fr die Brckenauflager sind ein gnstiges bauliches Element, das gut
zum Bau von Rahmenbrcken pat. Ihr Verhalten unter der Belastung aus dem
Brckenbalken und dem Erddruck wird erklrt.
Die Anforderungen der Straenbaubehrde werden besprochen und mit anderen
Vorschriften und Berechnungsregeln hinsichtlich des Bodenverhaltens verglichen.
Die Interaktion zwischen der Steifigkeit des Brckenbalkens, der Auflager und des
Bodens sowie die Anforderungen fr die Verbindung zwischen den beiden, werden
untersucht.
Auf die begleitenden Publikationen Rahmenbrcken aus Stahl: Berechnung einer
einfeldrigen Brcke - Berechnungsbeispiel und Rahmenbrcken aus Stahl:
Berechnung einer mehrfeldrigen Brcke - Berechnungsbeispiel wird Bezug
genommen; sie illustrieren viele der Aspekte, die in dieser Verffentlichung
behandelt werden.
ix
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Ponte integrali in acciaio: guida progettuale

Sommario
Il notevole interesse recentemente manifestato per il sistema costruttivo dei ponti
integrali risulta motivato dalla possibilit di evitare, con riferimento ai tradizionali
sistemi di ponte a travata, i problemi di durabilit imputabili agli spostamenti dei
giunti.
Questa pubblicazione introduce il significato di ponte integrale e presenta le
varie tipologie strutturali che possono essere utilizzate. Un aspetto peculiare del
comportamento di ponti integrali rappresentato dal fatto che gli appoggi da
ponte, unitamente al suolo che li sostiene, non sono soggetti agli effetti provocati
dalle escursioni termiche dellimpalcato del ponte. I progettisti di ponti dovranno
di conseguenza essere in grado di trattare la risposta del terreno e degli appoggi
della struttura in relazione a tali spostamenti, sviluppando quindi esperienza in
questo nuovo settore.

Viene presentata una guida per la progettazione di base di ponti integrali, con
riferimento alla metodologia di calcolo da utilizzare, sia per ponti con spalle a
parete sia quelli che poggiano su argini o su singole pile.
Luso di pile in acciaio per lappoggio della travata rappresenta una soluzione
estremamente conveniente, bene integrabile con il sistema costruttivo in esame. E
analizzato il comportamento degli appoggi da ponte in presenza dei carichi
trasmessi dallimpalcato e delle azioni esercitate dal terreno.
I requisiti di queste strutture imposti dagli enti preposti alla viabilit sono discussi
e paragonati con altri criteri generali e con regole di dimensionamento legate al
comportamento del terreno. Linterazione tra la rigidezza di impalcato, appoggi
e terreno analizzata e sono esaminati i requisiti dei collegamenti.
Viene fatto riferimento alle pubblicazione sulla stessa tematica Ponti integrali in
acciaio: progettazione di un sistema a campata singola - esempio applicativo e
Ponti integrali in acciaio: progettazione di un sistema a pi campate - esempio
applicativo, le quali trattano molti degli aspetti affrontati in questa guida
progettuale.
Puentes de acero integrales: Gua de Proyecto
Resumen
Actualmente la construccin de puentes integrales se ve favorecida con un intento
de evitar los problemas de durabilidad asociados al movimiento de las juntas
tradicionalmente utilizadas en los puentes de vigas.
Esta publicacin explica lo que se entiende por puente integral e indica las
tipologas estructurales utilizadas. Un aspecto clave en el funcionamiento de un
puente integral es el desplazamiento impuesto por las deformaciones trmicas
cclicas del tablero a los apoyos y al suelo retenido por aquellos. Los proyectistas
de puentes debern familiarizarse y hacerse expertos en el tratamiento de la
respuesta del suelo y las estructuras de soporte ante aquellos desplazamientos.
En la obra se dan indicaciones sobre las bases de proyecto de puentes integrales
as como sobre la metodologa que debe seguirse tanto para puentes con estribos
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
de contencin como para puentes con soportes tipo durmiente o con pilares
individuales.
El uso de pilas de acero en los apoyos permite disponer de un elemento flexible
muy adecuado para la construccin integral. Su comportamiento bajo las cargas
del tablero y de la presin del suelo se explica cuidadosamente.
Tambin se analizan los requisitos establecidos por la Highway Agency,
comparados con otras Normas y Reglas de buena prctica relativas al
comportamiento del suelo.
Se estudia la interaccin entre las rigideces del tablero, soportes y suelo, as como
los requisitos de unin entre aqullos.
A lo largo del trabajo se hace referencia a la publicacines gemelas tituladas
Puentes integrales de acero: ejemplo desarrollado para un puente de un vano e
Puentes integrales de acero: ejemplo desarrollado para un puente de varios
vanos que en una serie de hojas de clculo ponen de manifiesto muchos de los
temas contenidos en esta obra.

ndskrmsbroar i stl: Dimensioneringsvgledning

Sammanfattning
ndskrmsbroar har brjat anvndas i allt hgre utstrckning fr att undvika de
underhllsproblem som r frknippade med rrelsefogarna i traditionella
stlbalksbroarna.
Denna publikation frklarar verkningssttet och olika konstruktionslsningar fr
ndskrmsbroar. En frga som tas upp r vad som hnder nr bron utvidgar och
drar ihop sig i lngsled, p g a temperaturndringar. Brokonstruktren fr hr lra
sig att hantera jordtryck och stdkonstruktioner samt allmnt bygga upp kunskapen
om denna konstruktionstyp fr stlbroar.
Det ges vgledning i dimensioneringsfrutsttningar och dimensioneringsgng fr
ndskrmsbroar med olika typer av upplag.
Anvndandet av stlplar som broupplag erbjuder en konstruktionslsning som r
vl lmpat fr ndskrmsbroar. Det redogrs fr hur stlfundamentet pverkas av
laster frn brodck och jordtryck.
Brittiska Vgverkets krav behandlas och jmfrs med andra standarder och
dimensioneringsregler rrande jordtryck. Interaktionen mellan frstyvningarna av
brodcket, brostden och marken r utforskad och kraven p samverkan mellan
dem r utredda.
Hnvisningar grs ven till publikationerna Steel integral bridges: Design of a
single-span bridge - worked example och Steel integral bridges: Design of a
multi-span bridge - worked example, som illustrerar mnga av de aspekter som
omfattas av denna publikation.
xi
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
xii
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
1 INTRODUCTION
A modern beam-type bridge comprises two essential structural components - a deck
to span the gap and the supports. The deck has roadway surfacing, and that
surface must match against the surfaces of the approach roads at either end. Since
these bridge structures flex, expand and contract, it has been customary to use
separation joints between the ends of the deck and the approach structures, and to
provide simple bearings on the supporting structures. The object has been not to
constrain the thermal expansion or contraction of deck beams nor to restrain their
rotation at supports.

Multiple span bridges can then be formed from a series of simply-supported beams,
with similar separation joints between the ends of the separate decks - this was
particularly popular in construction in reinforced concrete. However, structural
continuity over intermediate supports has always been easy to achieve with
composite decks, and this has little effect on the support structure, other than a
redistribution of the vertical reactions, but it does afford some economy in the deck
construction.
The consequence of providing simple support details and separation joints is that
the abutting interface between bridge road surface and approach surface sees a
range of movement as the bridge temperature changes. For very small bridges this
can be accommodated by a narrow gap that opens and closes, but for larger bridges
a fabricated movement joint must be provided, so that the gaps are never large
enough to cause a hazard to the road users.
The structural form of a beam-type bridge with movement joints may be contrasted
with that of a traditional masonry arch. The arch will change its shape slightly
under load as it springs load in compression to the abutments, but the roadway
is effectively continuous, laid on approach road base foundations and then on fill
over the arch barrel. Such structural deformations as occur are accommodated
within the fill, road base and surfacing materials. With a masonry arch bridge,
there is no gap, no discrete interface, no relative movement between the bridge
roadway and the approach roadway, because the arch, its abutments and the soil
behind all act together, or integrally.
With beam-type bridges there have been many problems in practice with leaking
joints, both over intermediate supports and at end supports, leading to poor
durability and consequent high maintenance costs. As a result, the Highways
Agency (HA), would like to see greater use of integral construction i.e. without
movement joints, particularly for bridges shorter than 60 m.
This publication is based on findings from studies carried out by the SCI for British
Steel(1); it provides an introduction to the concepts relating to integral bridges and
illustrates ways in which the ordinary composite beam-and-slab deck bridge can be
adapted to become an integral bridge. Also, the opportunity to use steel in place
of reinforced concrete for the supports is explored. Steel piles offer a degree of
flexibility at supports that is particularly suited to the movements that occur in an
integrated structure; guidance is included to facilitate the consideration of steel
piled substructures.
Reference is made throughout to two companion
(2)(3)
that
illustrate
by worked examples many of the design aspects
publications
covered in this publication.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
2 WHAT IS AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

2.1
Definition and terminology
Generally, an integral bridge is one where the bridge deck is made without any
movement joints at the abutments or between spans. The use of the terms integral
bridge, integral abutment and integral construction have not been consistent to
date and the extent of the integrity between the deck and supporting structure
varies. To avoid confusion a more rigorous system of definition is required.
Bridges without movement joints can be conveniently divided into two basic classes,
termed integral, and jointless deck. The difference between the two, and the
principal features of various forms of each, are explained below.
The use of the term integral abutment is avoided in this publication, except when
referring to its use in the USA.

The term endscreen, or endscreen wall, is used in relation to both integral and
jointless deck bridges to describe the stub wall at the end of the deck that retains the
adjacent road construction.
2.1.1 Integral bridges

An integral bridge is one that has structural continuity between the deck and the
structural elements that support it. There is no relative translational movement at
any interface between the deck and the supporting structure.
Three forms of integral bridge are described in this publication - frame abutment,
pinned and bankseat, described in Sections 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 respectively.
2.1.2 Jointless deck bridges

A jointless deck bridge differs from an integral bridge in that movement bearings
are provided between the deck and the substructure that supports it, ensuring that
the supporting elements are not subject to displacement as a result of thermal
expansion/ contraction or of deflection under load.
2.1.3 Supports
Integral bridges can have wall abutments, column piers or bankseat supports or
combinations. The foundations can be either spread footings or piles. Conventional
abutments comprise retaining walls where either concrete types or sheet piles are
used. Other types of abutment include pier abutments that are essentially
fall-through column abutments with endwalls and side slope configurations.
2.2
The frame abutment integral bridge is a fully integral bridge with the abutment walls
working integrally with the soils that surround them (and thus derive some of their
resistance from them to lateral loads in bending). In addition, the supporting
elements carry the axial loads which are the end shear forces from the deck beams.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Sway restraint is provided by the soil between the 'foundation' and the top of the
frame abutment but the degree of restraint is dependent on the soil characteristics
and the geometrical configuration of the supporting element.

To illustrate the effects that must be considered in the design of the fully integral
bridge, a diagrammatic illustration of the deflections due to a temperature increase
and due to live loading on the bridge are given in Figures 2.1 and 2.2. No
particular form of foundation is shown in order that the diagrams can be taken to
represent either a wall on a strip or spread footing, a wall on a pile cap foundation,
or the upper part of piles driven to a greater depth.
Figure 2.1
Integral bridge - displacements due to expansion
Figure 2.2
Integral bridge - displacements due to vertical loading
No intermediate support is shown in these Figures. A configuration with

intermediate supports would behave in a similar manner at the end supports and the
principles illustrated would not be affected. For further comments on the behaviour
at intermediate supports, see Section 2.6.4.
2.3
In a frame abutment integral bridge, displacements due to temperature (thermal

strains) and load on the deck induce reverse curvature at the head of the abutment
wall, as shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2, and adequate moment capacity is required
in the connection. This can involve a complex reinforcement detail in reinforced
concrete endwalls and capping beams to ensure moment and force transfer.
The introduction of a pin at the connection between the deck beams and an
abutment removes these large hogging moments at the bridge end. This can be
efficient where there is judged to be little to be gained from an integral connection.
Such a pin can be achieved with a relatively simple pinned bearing; the detail of
how this may be achieved is discussed in Section 5.3.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The effects of introducing a pin on the deflections of the bridge structure is

illustrated diagrammatically in Figure 2.3.
Figure 2.3
2.4
Pinned integral bridge - retaining wall displacements due to

deck thermal expansion

A bankseat support structure is a common detail for highway bridges. A bankseat

can be made part of an integral bridge by fully connecting it to the deck to make
them structurally continuous. Since a bankseat only sits on the soil, the structure
foundation will move relative to the ground as a result of thermal expansion and
contraction, and can rotate under deck loading.
Such a bridge can be formed by an endscreen wall (across the ends of the deck
beams) that has a footing foundation, thus combining the functions of vertical
support to the deck and lateral support to the abutting road construction.
A diagrammatic illustration of the deflections due to temperature and load effects on
a bankseat integral bridge is given in Figure 2.4 and Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.4
Bankseat integral bridge - displacements due to expansion
Figure 2.5
Bankseat integral bridge - displacements due to vertical

loading
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
A key aspect to note is that the foundation face which bears on the ground can slide
on the soil under certain combinations of loading (that include significant thermal
strain) and may also rock as the deck deflects under live loading. Depending on the
soil type, the soil may be affected by these cyclic movements, and the possibility of
degradation of the bearing strength needs to be taken account of in deciding a
permissible bearing pressure. Long term settlement could result beneath such bridge
ends. Therefore bankseat integral bridges should only be used where the soils have
high strength, and the total length of the bridge is small (short bridges have lesser
end movements and rocking under load).
2.5
Jointless deck bridges
As explained in Section 2.1.2, a jointless deck bridge eliminates movement joints

at the road surface, but the supports are not integral with the deck structure.
However, like a bankseat integral bridge, an endscreen wall is formed across the
ends of the beams, presenting a vertical face to support the abutting road
construction.

An arrangement of a jointless deck bridge on a bankseat support is shown in

Figure 2.6. Vertical loads are carried directly in bearing onto the soil. There is a
movement interface between the deck beams and the support, arranged as a narrow
horizontal gap under the endscreen wall (see Section 5.4 for further details).
Sliding bearing
Figure 2.6
Jointless-deck bridge - bankseat support
An arrangement on a piled support is shown in Figure 2.7. A suitable detail would

need to be provided at the bottom of the end wall, which moves relative to the
ground beneath, so that any drainage water is conducted away from the piles.
Sliding bearing
Figure 2.7
Jointless-deck bridge - piled support
Like conventional non-integral bridges, access must be provided to permit inspection

of the bearings during the life of the bridge and provision made in the construction
to allow for jacking up the deck for bearing replacement. The principal feature is
therefore the absence of deck joints.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
2.6
Additional considerations when choosing

integral construction
2.6.1 The deck-end/road construction interface

The degree of restraint provided by the soil and road construction against an
endscreen face to a deck, to the retaining wall or piles, may reduce but can never
eliminate expansion and contraction movements due to thermal strains in the bridge
deck. Indeed, studies(1) show that a significant proportion of the free thermal
movements still take place in an integral bridge deck. It is therefore futile to try to
completely restrain such thermal movements by attempting rigid abutment design.

Where the bridge deck length is small, thermal movements can be accommodated
at the bridge ends by an asphaltic plug joint in the road surface immediately behind
the end of the bridge. The joint can be expected to perform elastically without
cracking. However, when deck lengths and movements are larger, cracking is likely
to develop in the road surface in the joint area, allowing salt-laden runoff water to
percolate down the back of the structure.
Opinions vary as to the effectiveness of asphaltic plug joints but the prudent bridge
designer should pay attention to detail at the buried end of the deck and make
provision for surface water leakage regardless of the claims about so-called elastic
behaviour of joints. The difference in vertical stiffness between the road and the
end wall will concentrate any movement at the junction. Consequently, the surface
run-off on the road will doubtless find its way through cracks to the back of the
abutment wall. There is a concern for the maintenance authority that any
deterioration that results will be entirely hidden and un-inspectable.
For bridge lengths in excess of about 10 metres it is therefore perceived to be
difficult to produce a totally satisfactory and durable joint at the junction of the
endscreen wall and the road construction.
2.6.2 Approach slabs

The problems described in Section 2.6.1 can be moved away from the end of the
main deck structure and supports by the use of an approach slab and this has been
a standard detail in the USA. However the practice has had mixed success on some
bridges in the USA(4) and in Scotland(5). Failures appear to be mainly due to the
inadequacy of the connection between the slab and the end wall. Clearly, such a
slab must have structural ties to the deck end and be properly keyed to the structure
so that they move together, and will need to be designed with sufficient strength in
bending that it can span over any local settlement due to traffic vibration.
Thermal deck movement can cause longitudinal compression in the approach slab
or associated heave of the underlying fill due to lateral displacement of the endscreen
wall or abutment wall, and this can compound the other problems identified and
explained in the above references(3).
The arrangement of an approach slab is shown diagrammatically in Figure 2.8.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Asphaltic plug joint
Road surface
Road base
Approach slab
Select granular
fill
Integral
bridge
deck
Embankment fill
Steel bearing
piles
Figure 2.8
Typical arrangement of an approach slab as used in the USA

The maintenance problem at the joint is transferred from the bridge structure to the
road construction with an approach slab, but it is possible that two structural
junctions are created at the changes in stiffness between deck/approach slab and
approach slab/road construction. Due to the likelihood of cracking at either
junction, it is considered that provision must be made to collect any surface water
that could percolate through such cracks at both, and to lead it away from the
adjacent bridge structure.
Any leakage at the movement joint can be captured by transverse drains at road
formation level and led away to the normal carriageway drainage system that is
remote from the structure, but careful attention to detail of the bridge end shape is
necessary to make such provision really effective.
Approach slabs have not been favoured by the Highways Agency for use in nonintegral bridges because of a poor track record. Their preference seems to be to
concentrate on the use of controlled backfills to bridge end-walls and attention to
careful compaction to prevent settlement. Whether this proves to be effective for
integral bridges remains to be seen.
2.6.3 Retained and unretained approaches

The clear opening provided by a bridge or by the end span of a multi-span bridge
may either be bounded by a vertical face, or the ground beneath the bridge may be
sloped upward to the underside of the bridge. Both arrangements are shown in the
Figures in this Section and either can be used, regardless of whether the bridge is
approached by embankments or spans across a cutting.
When the opening is to be bounded by a vertical face, the length of deck is
minimised, but a retaining wall is needed to support the road formation and the
underlying fill or the soil face in a cutting. Conventional arrangements are to
provide either a reinforced concrete wall or a steel sheet pile wall and to support the
deck beams on top of the wall capping beam.
When a retained configuration is to be incorporated into an integral bridge, there is
a choice as to whether the supporting and retaining functions are separated or
combined. If they are combined, the head of the retaining wall is subjected to deck
thermal displacements and this complicates the retaining wall design.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Alternatively, if the approaches are not retained and have natural earthworks slopes
or reinforced earth slopes instead, column-pile integral bridges and jointless bridges
can be used with bankseats on footings or on piles as already described.
For motorway or trunk road replacement bridges, individual steel bearing piles or
sheet pile walls can be driven through the existing embankment fill or cutting face
to found on deeper soils before any new earthworks are started.
For new integral bridges on green-field sites, steel column-piles can be driven to
provide an upstanding length of column as an alternative to conventional concrete
construction; this can save site occupancy time.
2.6.4 Intermediate supports

In the preceding definitions and Figures, the bridge is taken to be a single span for
simplicity. Many bridges, however, are of more than one span. Clearly, to be
integral, the deck beams must be continuous over any intermediate supports, but
this arrangement is already quite normal for composite construction. However,
there remains the question of whether the behaviour of intermediate supports has any
effect on the overall integral behaviour.
If the intermediate supports are provided with sliding bearings offering no rotational
restraint, then clearly they will have no effect on the deck behaviour due to
temperature change. If the supports are pinned to the beams (but still with no
rotational restraint) - perhaps in order to offer restraint to the support against
collision loads - then they will be displaced by deck thermal strains unless it is the
central support to a symmetrical bridge configuration. This displacement is shown
in Figure 2.9.
Generally, thermal movements will be proportional to the distance from a null
point in the middle of the bridge, but if the spans are unsymmetrically disposed, or
if the stiffnesses at the ends are unequal, the null point will not be central.
Figure 2.9
Displacement of intermediate supports pinned to deck beams
Intermediate columns that need to be designed to resist vehicle collision loads can
be more effective when they are restrained at the top by the bridge deck, perhaps
through a crossbeam. Unless they are at the null point, the deflections due to
thermal movements will then have to be taken into account in the column design.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
3 WHY CHOOSE AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

3.1
Experience with non-integral construction

Over the past thirty years, engineers have become more aware of the pitfalls
associated with the use of expansion joints and expansion bearings.
C
Joints are expensive to buy, install, maintain and repair; repair costs can be as
high as replacement costs.
Successive carriageway repaving will ultimately require that joints be replaced

or raised.
Even so-called waterproof joints will leak over time, allowing runoff water,
often salt-laden, to penetrate through the joint and thus accelerate corrosion
damage to girder ends, bearings and supporting substructures.
Accumulated dirt, stones and rubbish may fill recesses, which can, for example,
lead to failure of elastomeric bearing glands.
Hardware for joints can be damaged and loosened by snow ploughs and heavy
traffic.
Bearings are expensive to buy and install and costly to replace.
In time certain types of steel bearing may tilt and/or seize up because of loss
of lubrication or build-up of corrosion.
Elastomeric bearings can split and rupture as a result of unanticipated

movements, or ratchet out of position.
Seized expansion joints and malfunctioning expansion bearings can also lead to
damage of the main structural members.
In 1985 in the USA, a survey carried out by the Federal Highway Administration
found(6) that 75% of the bridges built using expansion joints and bearings
experienced movement contrary to their designers intent. The survey report pointed
out that vertical movements were noticeably greater than horizontal movements,
where the magnitudes of these vertical movements in many instances were due to the
inward movement of the abutments.
In the UK, a survey was carried out by Maunsell and Partners for the Department
of Transport in 1989. The report of that survey(7) identified a number of factors
which contributed to the inadequate durability of many bridge structures. The most
serious sources of damage were found to be salt water leaking through joints in the
deck or service ducts and poor or faulty drainage systems. Also, damage occurred
due to splashing or spraying of salt water from de-icing salts on to bridge abutments,
piers, parapet edge beams and deck soffits. Poor workmanship was found to be an
extremely frequent problem. Most critical was the failure to achieve the specified
concrete cover to steel reinforcement. This led to deterioration, particularly when
it occurred in association with joint leakage. Cracking was the other main problem,
particularly that due to early thermal effects.
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
3.2
Highways Agency requirements
Based partly on the findings of the Maunsell report, the Highways Agency published
their Standard, BD 57/95 Design for Durability and the accompanying Advice Note
BA 57/95(8). BD 57 specifies that bridges with lengths not exceeding 60 m and
skews not exceeding 30E shall ... be designed as integral bridges ... without
movement joints for expansion or contraction.
That Standard is concerned mainly with the Agencys principles of design; details
of the Agencys advice on the design of integral bridges are given in their Advice
Note BA 42/96 Design of Integral Bridges(9) that was published in November 1996.
See Sections 7 and 12 for further discussion on BA 42/96.
3.3
Advantages of integral bridges

Clearly, the first advantage is the elimination of the cost of, and additional work
associated with, the provision of movement joints at the ends of the bridge. This
advantage is confirmed by experience in the USA (see Section 4), where it was
found that the initial capital costs of integral bridges were cheaper than bridges with
expansion joints, even when the extra work associated with ensuring structural
continuity were taken into account (see Burke(10)).
The benefits of reduced maintenance costs and reduced risk of damage arising from
leaky joints is less quantifiable, but is probably the major benefit in most cases.
Apart from these two principal advantages, other benefits can be seen, depending
on particular circumstances and configurations. These include:
Substructure design
The restraint to retaining wall abutment structures provided by the deck (which can
act as both a prop and a rotation restraint) can lead to economies in the wall design.
Resistance to accidental and seismic loadings
The increased longitudinal restraint to the deck, and in frame abutment integral
bridges, the moment restraint, provide extra load paths against the effects of
accidental and seismic events. In particular, where seismic loading is a significant
consideration, considerable savings can be achieved by avoiding the need for
enlarged bearing seat widths and restraining devices.
Torsional restraint of deck at supports
Substantial endscreen or abutment walls ensure that all the deck beams, and the full
width of wall, rotate equally and thus tend to distribute loads more evenly between
the deck beams.
Faster construction
With piled abutments, only vertical piles are needed (no rakers), which both
simplifies and speeds construction. Where permanent bearings are omitted, a timeconsuming operation is eliminated.
10
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Tolerance requirements reduced

The close tolerances required for setting expansion bearings and joints are
eliminated. (Although other tolerance requirements may be introduced, depending
on the connection detail).
Greater end span ratio ranges
It is normal practice for non-integral bridges to limit the ratio of the end-span length
to that of the adjacent span to approximately 0.6, to avoid the occurrence of uplift
conditions under extreme loading; if uplift can occur, expensive hold-down
arrangements will usually be needed. The continuity at the ends of a fully integral
bridge automatically provides uplift restraint; even a compact integral bankseat detail
acts as an additional counterweight.
Other advantages are listed by Burke(10), such as the elimination of the risk of
leakage at the ends, which is of particular benefit with girders of weathering steel.
Such girders in non-integral bridges commonly need to be painted at the ends for
added protection.

3.4
Practical aspects of the site that influence

choice
The main practical factors influencing the choice of an integral configuration are:
C
The overall length of the bridge.
The geometrical arrangement of the end supports (e.g. whether there are side
slopes, cut or fill earthworks).
The type of soil(s) on which the bridge is founded.
The practicality of replacing bearings and access for maintenance.
The retained height of fill.
The construction method to be used.
Where the bridge is a replacement, or is built over an existing road, speed and ease
of construction will also have an important influence on the choice. This is
particularly so where lane rental charges apply and traffic disruption cost has to be
considered. Advances in steel bridge design and construction are providing bridge
engineers with deck structures that can be fabricated to a large extent off-site and
therefore require less time for erection. It is therefore logical to develop any
applications of steel for the support elements of the integral bridge that can also
minimise site occupation time.
When electing for an intermediate support to the bridge, the need to make use of the
deck to provide restraint to the top of the support to assist in resisting collision loads
is an important factor in detailing the structural framing and the connections. The
suitability of concrete, steel or composite construction at the connection will be an
important consideration at all supports. In addition, a more economic substructure
may be possible by considering compliant steel piled supports.
11
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
3.5
Whole life costing
In BD 36/92(11), the Highways Agency requires that, in comparing alternative

designs for bridges, the whole life cost is considered, i.e. the capital cost plus the
direct and indirect costs of maintenance throughout the life of the structure. Since
this Standard predates both BD 57/95(8) and BA 42/96(9), there is no mention of
integral construction in it, but it would seem sensible that the choice between
integral and non-integral construction should be considered in the same way.

The savings in whole life cost by choosing an integral bridge concept can be:
C
Reduced construction cost.
Elimination of the cost of maintenance and replacement of movement joints.
Elimination of the cost of maintenance and replacement of bearings (where they

are omitted, or a reduced cost where simpler bearings are used).
Reduced allowance for the maintenance cost for the deck slab (because the
worst potential source for deck reinforcement corrosion is eliminated).
Note that it is not entirely necessary to eliminate bearings to reduce maintenance

costs. For example, simple steel rocker or knuckle bearings provide an effective
pinned connection, but do not need anything more than an occasional clean and
repaint as there are no moving parts that can seize up. Further information is
given in Section 5.6.
3.6
The use of steel piles in integral bridges
Steel piling can be used for elements in substructures and foundations for integral
bridges, such as:
C
Bridge abutments.
Intermediate piers.
Wing walls.
Retaining walls.
Steel pile sections have been used successfully in non-integral bridges in the UK and
elsewhere in the world and provide a prefabricated, high quality foundation of
known structural integrity that fulfils the requirement for minimum construction
time. Not only can piles be driven rapidly in the vast majority of soil types but they
are capable of being loaded immediately, which is a distinct advantage in fast-track
construction projects.
The advantages of steel piling are described in the Steel bearing piles guide(12) and
may be summarised as the follows:
C
Construction is significantly quicker when compared to in situ reinforced

concrete foundations.
There is no requirement to excavate for foundations.
There is no disturbance of the existing ground during piling.
The steel components are shop quality not site quality.
Piles can easily be made aesthetically pleasing.
12
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Piles can be placed in advance of other works.
Piles have immediate load carrying capacity.
Sheet pile walls provide a curtain walling to contain the working site.
3.6.1 Structural advantages of piling in integral bridges

For integral bridges, steel piling provides a sufficiently stiff but flexible structural
element in the substructure for integral bridges. It offers a compliant foundation that
will not crack in bending and that can reduce retaining wall bending moments,
relative to a rigid reinforced concrete alternative.
Compliant is a term that neatly summarises the characteristics of steel substructures
that are beneficial to integral bridge behaviour.
3.6.2 Types of bridge with steel piling

Different types of frame abutment, pinned and bankseat integral bridge are
illustrated in Figure 3.1.

Frame
Pinned
Carriageway
Carriageway
Retaining wall
Retaining wall
Tubular column-pile pier
Figure 3.1
Bankseat
Piled bankseat
Types of integral bridge with steel piles
Some types of jointless bridge with steel substructures are illustrated in Figure 3.2.
13
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Cantilever/Propped
Bankseat
Sliding
support
Flexible seal
H piles
Carriageway
Retaining wall

Figure 3.2
Types of jointless bridge with steel piles
3.6.3 Appearance of piled substructure of integral bridges

Steel piles for bridges can be very dominant features on the urban and rural
landscape. Careful design can make a considerable improvement to their appearance
without leading to a significant increase in cost.
Apart from having to satisfy the functional requirements, steel piling can be made
to blend in with its surrounding environment as far as possible and to be
aesthetically pleasing. The aspects that are important are:
C
Height of abutment/pier and inclination of its front face.
Anchorages in the face.
Wing wall angle of return affecting the elevation of the wall.
Gradient and surface treatment of the adjacent ground.
Surface textures and paint colour of the facing walls, and the expression and
position of vertical and horizontal construction joints.
Concrete footing walls.
The coping/capping beam of the abutment.
The appearance of a pile can be improved by providing features in the finished face
or by decorative facings or claddings.
14
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
4 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
4.1
Integral bridges in Europe and the USA
Bridges where joints within the deck of the bridge are omitted are not new concepts
in design. In some countries it has been usual practice to build bridges without
joints, and bridge spans longer than 100 m have been built. There are now
examples of modern integral construction in many countries including Australia and
Sweden, but the country with the greatest experience to date is the USA. Only a
few integral bridges have been built in the UK.
In Sweden, bridges are built without expansion joints and even without
transition/approach slabs. Various integral bridge types are in use without special
abutments in the embankments. Single-span slab-frame integral bridges have been
used for over 50 years and the longest continuous slab-frame bridge was one built
in 1968 which had five spans and a total length of 120 m. Sweden has the
advantage of rock foundations that permit the generation of stiff reactions to restrict
bridge movements.

4.1.1 Examples of integral bridges in the USA

In the USA, the move towards integral and jointless construction has led to a
much greater use of continuous construction for multiple spans (it is now favoured
by over 85% of state transportation departments) and to the design of integral
abutments (fully integral and semi-integral bridges in our terminology). Experience
on the performance of integral bridges constructed in the USA is reviewed in a
paper by Burke(4).
The terminology used to describe the types of integral bridge in the USA, however,
differs from the definitions proposed in Section 2 of this publication. Although
similar concepts have been used, the lack of rigour in definition of bridge type can
lead to some confusion.
Generally, the US design of integral abutments appears to have been somewhat
empirical, based on what is judged to have worked satisfactorily before, rather than
by rigorous analysis. The latter would demand more understanding of the behaviour
of such structures so that it can be incorporated into a design procedure.
Most of the integral abutment details described in journals and other published
papers involve the use of piles (normally steel H piles) to carry the vertical reaction.
A typical configuration is that used in Tennessee(13), as shown in Figure 4.1. Steel
bearing piles are cast into the abutment and provide flexibility under lateral
displacement.
15
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Reinforcement
Prestressed
concrete beams
Selected
granular fill
Bearing
Drainage
aggregate
H piles
Figure 4.1
Tennessee integral abutment detail

The introduction of rotational continuity can generate high bending stresses in the
abutment detail, and this is either accepted or Freysinnet hinge details were
introduced into the reinforced concrete wall. Examples of severe cracking and
splitting have been documented at Freysinnet hinges and the long term durability
of the integral abutment details used is not known.
The use of coated reinforcement bars appears to be normal procedure for such
abutments in USA now because they are concerned about the durability aspects of
spalled concrete cover. However, the design life for bridges in the USA is only 50
years(14). Consequently, care should be exercised before adopting any reinforcement
details or connection details from US practice.
Figure 4.2
Freysinnet concrete hinge detail (ref. Ohio detail(15))
A region of potential weakness in a variety of integral abutment details is the keying

of the abutment to the deck slab or to the approach slab. Failures of inadequate
details have been reported in the USA(16). The evidence suggests that the design of
the connection must include very careful design and detail of the tying
reinforcement. To do this effectively requires a better fundamental understanding
16
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
of how connections work and of the stress distributions involved than is presently
available in the USA.
Many lessons can be learnt from the US experience. Burke(4) has identified a list of
design recommendations to assist an engineer considering an integral bridge design.
These have been considered in Section 3 of this Guide.
Skew integral bridges
A nationwide survey in the USA has shown that skewed and curved integral bridges
where the deck is rigidly connected to the supporting wall structure are common,
and Greiman et al(17) summarized the findings of a survey of the Highway
Departments of all 50 States to obtain information on the design and performance
of skewed bridges with integral abutments. It was found that there was a lack of
theoretical and experimental research in this area(18)(19), with the result that most
states designed integral abutments on skewed bridges on the basis of empirical
experience without adequate theoretical analysis.

4.2
Examples of integral bridges in the United

Kingdom
Portal bridges with monolithic abutments have been built in Britain - perhaps the
best known are the twin span concrete overbridges on the original section of the M1
motorway, designed by Sir Owen Williams & Partners in the early 1960s. This
type of construction is particularly massive and was not adopted on later motorways.
Recent examples of integral bridges include the Stockley Park Canal bridge near
Heathrow Airport; the A41 Stone Bridge, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire; the Chad
Brook Bridge in Suffolk; the Bridgend-By-Pass overbridge; that all used steel piled
supports. Several others are currently being constructed.
The above named bridges all have reinforced concrete decks, but their features
nevertheless illustrate general principles that are applicable to both concrete and
composite deck bridges. The principle features are described below.
Stockley Park Canal Bridge
The Stockley Park canal bridge (Figure 4.3) has a clear span of 19 m and was
designed as an integral bridge such that the mid-span bending moment was a
minimum, in order to provide adequate canal traffic head clearance without raising
the road elevation. The deck is monolithic with the reinforced concrete abutment
walls, and live loads are carried by transferring moments into the abutments. The
abutments are founded on a single line of 600 m diameter steel tubular piles that are
embedded in the abutment retaining end wall. This has been designed by including
the rotational stiffness of the abutment fill in the overall stiffness of the bridge
structure. The design concept assumed that the abutment fill not only acted as a
load on the abutment but also provided an additional component of restraint in the
bridge structure. This example of an integral bridge demonstrates an elegant form
with construction economies. Further information is given in a paper by Low(20).
17
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
C
L
19m
CL Canal
600 tubular bearing

piles @ 1700 centres
Figure 4.3
Stockley Park canal bridge

A41 Stone Bridge, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire

The replacement to the A41 Stone Bridge just north of Aylesbury (Figure 4.4) has
a single span of 18 m over the River Thame. The new bridge was designed as an
integral bridge. The integral bridge arrangement permitted increased freeboard to
the river when in flood, whilst maintaining the existing vertical alignment of the
road over a low floodplain. This avoided the further expense of associated
roadworks. To provide the required freeboard, it was necessary to minimise the
deck beam construction depth to just 600 mm. This was achieved by mobilising
abutment fixed-end-moments to reduce the bending moments at mid-span. The
deck was propped at mid-span during its construction and then connected to
moment-carrying in situ concrete capping beams on sheet piled abutments.
Permanent High Modulus steel sheet piling was chosen to provide a compliant
retaining wall foundation of adequate stiffness and to enable a practical construction
procedure that permitted construction in the dry with minimal excavation in the soft
alluvial soils. A paper by S. Griffiths of Buckinghamshire County Council
describing design and construction aspects of the replacement bridge is to be
published in The Structural Engineer in 1997.
21490
In-situ reinforced concrete deck slab
Precast deck beams

Concrete pile cap
High modulus pile web

formed from 914x305 UB
welded to sheet pile facing wall
17900
Figure 4.4
A41 Stone Bridge, Aylesbury
A134 Chad Brook Bridge, Suffolk

Another example of a replacement integral bridge is that constructed over Chad
Brook in Suffolk (Figure 4.5). In this case the bridge span is approximately 11 m.
The configuration of the bridge is similar to the A41 bridge in Aylesbury in which
steel sheet piled abutments are provided and where the pile head is integral with the
bridge deck end capping beams. However, on this site steel box beams were
provided for deck beam support. The sheet piling permitted construction in the dry
18
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
and the span to be reduced to a minimum. Further information pertaining to this

bridge can be found in a paper(21) by McShane.
10.90m square span
Road level
Reinforced concrete deck
Grass block paving

to stream banks
Extent of sheet pile
wing wall
Extent of
bank facing
2
Box piles
forming portal
Figure 4.5
A134 Chad Brook Bridge, Suffolk

Bridgend-By-Pass
The Bridgend-By-Pass railway bridge is a twin 25 m span replacement frame
abutment integral bridge on steel sheet pile abutments and with an H-piled central
reservation pier built for Railtrack plc. The abutments are constructed in Larssen 6
sheet piles of approximate length 22 m. A reinforced concrete capping beam
provides the connection between the sheet piles and the reinforced concrete bridge
deck.
4.3
Offshore experience with tubular hollow

sections
Structural steel circular hollow sections have been used extensively in the UK
offshore oil and gas industry over the last 25 years. During that time, a technology
has been developed which, through experimental research and testing, has produced
industry accepted practice and enabled codes, standards and guidance to be written
and comprehensive design procedures to be developed. The leading codes of
practice have been the American Petroleum Institute codes of practice (API) which
are being updated constantly to embody technical developments in the Oil and Gas
Industry. The code of practice relevant to steel structures is API RP2A(22) which
covers all aspects of design and construction, thereby enabling international design
consultants, fabricators and installation contractors to work to a common standard.
Extensive information is available on circular hollow sections because they are
chosen for the major structural components of offshore platforms including the main
support columns and legs, bracing and piling. Multi-million pound research
programmes have enabled comprehensive tests to be performed to study and simulate
the behaviour of tubular frames. This has included tests to analyse material
strength, welding, durability and fatigue aspects specific to the environmental
conditions that are present during their in-service life.
Over the past three decades, the offshore industry has invested heavily in R & D in
tubular steel piling technology. This has included:C
Instrumented pile load tests in both granular and cohesive soils.
Improved soil investigation methods and tools, e.g. Dutch cone CPTs.
19
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Analysis of pile behaviour and calibration of design prediction methods.
International pooling of knowledge and best practice.

This has resulted in consensus amongst practising experts in the profession as to the
best geotechnical design methods to use for tubular steel piles. The methods have
a sound theoretical basis but the limitations of theory are recognised by including
empirical adjustment factors. These methods have been validated by the SCI and
are presented in the Steel bearing piles guide(12).
20
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
5 SUBSTRUCTURES FOR INTEGRAL

BRIDGES
Traditional non-integral bridges have generally used reinforced concrete for the
supports of both composite steel/concrete and reinforced/prestressed concrete deck
construction. Where piles are needed, both steel and concrete have been used
beneath abutment walls, bankseats and for intermediate supports.
For integral and jointless deck bridges, both types of deck construction will need
different support configurations to respond to the need to accommodate
displacements due to thermal strain and the bending of the deck.
This Section presents a variety of configurations for supports to each of the types
of integral and jointless deck construction, with particular emphasis on the use of
steel in the substructure, since that offers a versatile and compliant form that is well
suited to efficient integral construction. Outline details of supports and connection
zones are illustrated.

5.1
As explained in Section 2.2 this type of bridge is essentially a simple portal frame,
and this means that the end supports will be subject not only to bending due to
pressure of retained soil and axial load as a result of supporting the deck, but also
to additional bending as a result of increased soil pressure when the deck expands
and contracts thermally, and to moments and longitudinal forces transmitted to the
top of the wall from the deck.
Initial considerations by the SCI indicated that it would appear difficult to adapt the
traditional reinforced concrete wall-type abutment to accommodate significant
thermal displacements and the reverse curvature imposed on a stiff wall. For frame
abutment integral bridges the substructure elements need to be compliant in
accommodating displacements due to thermal strain, and steel construction is well
suited to act in this manner. Consequently, much of this publication concentrates
on the use of steel supports, primarily for frame abutment and pinned integral
bridges, but also for other types of support, e.g. steel column-piles.
5.1.1 Steel pile retaining walls

Steel sheet piling is commonly used for retaining wall construction in bridges, and
is competent to carry the vertical and lateral loading. Where the wall is subject to
significant bending, High Modulus Piles (UB sections welded to Frodingham sheet
piling - see Section 6) can provide increased stiffness and strength. For both types
of wall the vertical loads and moments are introduced at the top of the wall via a
suitable connection detail.
For frame abutment bridges, where significant pile head bending moments will be
introduced by a pile capping beam, High Modulus Piles may be needed for all but
the shortest of bridges.
21
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Apart from the design of the wall section to carry the forces, the most important
aspect of the substructure to this type of bridge is the analysis and design of the
moment connection between the deck and the pile wall abutment. Further
information is given in the companion publications Steel integral bridges: Design of
a single-span bridge - Worked example(2) and Steel integral bridges: Design of a
multi-span bridge - Worked example(3).
Concrete capping beam connection
The most versatile method of connecting the deck to a pile wall is a reinforced
concrete pile capping beam. This is effectively an adaptation of a traditional r.c.
capping beam used with sheet pile walls in order to enable moments to be
transmitted. The in situ form of construction accommodates the practical tolerances
that have to be allowed for in the positioning and alignment of the pile wall
installation and for placement of the deck beams. Capping beam connections can
be used with both composite steel/concrete and in situ/precast concrete beam deck
construction.
A moment connection for a High Modulus Pile wall is shown in Figure 5.1.
Asphaltic
plug joint

Concrete deck
Deck
beam
Reinforced
concrete pile
capping beam/wall
Construction
joint
Note:
Similar arrangement
for reinforced
concrete deck beam
High Modulus
Pile
Sheet
pile
Figure 5.1
UB
A built-in connection for a High Modulus Pile retaining wall
Effective transfer of moment from deck beams is possible, provided that the concrete
capping beam has sufficient moment and torsional capacity to distribute the loading
over the full width of the sheet pile wall. Shear studs, hoops or brackets need to be
welded to the sheet pile and to steel plate girder deck beams in order to ensure
effective transfer of forces (see the Steel bearing piles guide(12).)
22
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The connection is formed by using a construction joint within the pile capping beam.
This enables the lower part to be cast around the High Modulus Piles and provides
a level surface on which to land the deck beams. The reinforcement cage in the
capping beam can then be completed and the concrete upper part cast.

The benefits of using a concrete pile cap beam may be summarised as:
C
Effective load distribution from individual deck beams to a group of piles.
Accommodation of a deck girder or beam spacing that is different to the

spacing of the UB sections of the High Modulus Piles.
Permitting the deck structure interface detail (e.g. holding-down bolts for a
steel superstructure or starter bars for a reinforced concrete superstructure) to
be attached to the heads of the piles.
Accommodation of differences between nominal and as-built geometry of both

the piles and the superstructure. The most serious of these is generally believed
to be the position of the piles, but in practice this is not always so - errors in
girder geometry and alignment do sometimes occur.
Acceptance of a relatively large range of level in pile heads, that can be

expected after trimming to length following driving.
Construction is unaffected by local damage to pile heads during driving.
As mentioned above, steel pile walls can be used with precast concrete beam decks an arrangement that has been used is shown in Figure 5.2.
In-situ reinforced concrete deck slab
Precast deck beams

Concrete pile
capping beam
High Modulus
Piles
Figure 5.2
Concrete beam supported on High Modulus Piles
Steel-to-steel connections
Where the bridge arrangements are such that spacing of deck beam and High
Modulus Pile UBs are similar, then individual steel connection details may be
considered. However, due to positional tolerances, potential fatigue problems, and
the on-site fit-up required, steel-to-steel connections of this type are considered
impractical at the present time.
5.1.2 Steel column-piles

As mentioned in Section 2, frame abutment bridges can also be built using individual
bearing piles, supporting each deck beam, rather than a retaining wall. These
column-pile supports are subject to much less resistance from the soil than walls,
and they are also more flexible to the lateral displacement due to thermal and
braking loads. Consequently, they attract less induced moment from the deck.
23
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Steel bearing piles, in the form of box piles or tubular piles, are ideally suited to use
in this situation. As part of a frame abutment they will be subject to some induced
moment from the deck and the detail of this connection will be a very significant
aspect of the design. Moment is transmitted from deck girders to the column-piles
mainly in the plane of the girders, but transverse moments are also present. Careful
modelling of the column-pile stiffness is needed to prevent overdesign. It is very
easy to attract load to columns unnecessarily.
As for retaining wall abutments, a reinforced concrete pile cap is considered to be
the most practical means of achieving this connection, and a cross beam may be
needed to cope with the transverse moments. An elevational section of such a
connection is shown in Figure 5.3.

Road construction
Deck beam
Construction joint
Concrete cross head beam

/endscreen wall
Select
granular fill
Tubular pile
Embankment fill
Figure 5.3
Built-in connection for tubular column-pile
As for a frame abutment, a cross beam or capping beam would extend across the
width of the bridge deck. This therefore provides torsional restraint to the main
girders and transverse moment restraint to the columns when subject to lateral loads.
It can also act as an endscreen to retain the pavement formation. A recent example
is given in Figure 4.3, the Stockley Park canal bridge.
The design and construction of such a capping beam will be similar to that for a
frame abutment, but since the forces and moments will be less, the beam should be
less substantial.
24
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
5.2
In a non-integral bridge, a bankseat abutment is normally essentially a simple

L-shaped in situ reinforced concrete construction. The forces that it carries are the
vertical reactions from the deck and the modest pressure from the retained pavement
formation. If the soil strength is inadequate, bankseats may be founded on piles; the
pile group can include raker piles to resist the longitudinal loads from the deck
(when there are fixed bearings). Only vertical piles are required otherwise.
In an integral bridge, the wall must be cast around the ends of the deck beams and
the whole bankseat is then constrained to displace and rotate with the end of the
deck.
5.2.1 Bankseat with spread footing

An integral bankseat detail that is supported only by the soil is shown in Figure 5.4.
The steel beam ends are concreted directly into the bankseat endscreen wall.
Because the resistance to expansion provided by the soil behind an endscreen wall
is very low (due to its small depth) and an even more limited resistance to
contraction is provided by friction beneath a bankseat foundation footing, the
bankseat will therefore slide to and fro when the deck experiences significant
thermal strain. The bankseat will also rock as the ends of the beams rotate (about
a transverse axis) under live loading. In the design of such a bankseat the bearing
stress on the soil should therefore be kept at a lower level than for a static footing,
to allow for cyclic load degradation. Consequently the foundation width will be
larger; an inverted T-shape as shown will probably be preferable to an L-shape, for
stability.
Deck beam
Select
granular fill
Movement by sliding
and rocking
Figure 5.4
Integral bankseat - spread footing
The deck beams will have to be supported at a construction joint in the endwall and
torsionally restrained during construction until they are cast into the end wall.
5.2.2 Bankseat with piled support

A piled bankseat support can be used where a spread footing has inadequate bearing
strength. Normal detailing of a pile cap will result in the piles of an integral
bankseat bridge being subject to the displacement and rotation that occurs at the ends
of the bridge. To avoid introducing additional restraint, and thus additional forces
in the piles, only a single row of vertical piles should be used, as shown in
Figure 5.5. This is the arrangement commonly found in the USA, where a single
row of steel H-piles is used. Experience shows that the lateral resistance developed
by such bearing piles under bridge deck thermal movements is negligible.
25
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The pile cap must be sufficiently deep to permit a practical transfer of vertical load
from the pile.
Deck beam
Select
granular fill
Reinforced concrete
bankseat capping beam
/endscreen wall
H pile
Figure 5.5
Integral bankseat, single row piled foundation

Piled bankseats can be used in combination with normal earthworks slopes in front
of the piles or with a retained face, such as provided by sheet pile wall or a
reinforced earth slope.
5.3
The provision of full moment continuity in frame abutment bridges necessitates the
construction of a complex connection between deck and supports, and requires
careful analysis of the bending interaction between the two structural elements. In
contrast, a more simple pinned integral design offers the benefits of integral
construction without the complexities of a moment connection.
The challenge in designing a pinned integral bridge will be to devise a pin that is
cheap to construct and durable over the full 120 year life of the bridge. The pin
bearing will need to accommodate relative rotation between deck and supporting
structure and transmit vertical and horizontal forces without relative displacement.
5.3.1 Pinned integral sheet pile retaining wall

In the majority of design situations it is envisaged that it will be difficult to justify
fully moment continuous connections between decks and substructures. Nonmoment inducing (pinned) connections at the supports will be the most attractive
solution because they avoid complex design, are cheap to fabricate and aid practical
and trouble-free fit up during installation. Provided that attention is given in design
to durable details, it is possible that pin or knuckle bearings can be made sufficiently
robust that they need never be removed over the full 120 years design life and hence
provision for replacement can be avoided. This will permit economies to be made
in design, construction and maintenance.
For short bridges, the loads on the retaining wall will be quite modest and a simple
sheet pile wall will suffice. A capping beam will be needed to spread the load from
deck beams over the piles and to accommodate construction tolerances, but it can
be relatively modest in size. In such a situation an effective pin can be created by
26
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
steel dowels (shear pins) in bearing plates between the capping beam and an
endscreen wall across the ends of the main beams. Such a detail is shown in
Figure 5.6.
Reinforced concrete
end screen wall
Deck
beam
Holding down bolts

set in grouted pockets
Studs for load transfer

Reinforced concrete
capping beam
Sheet pile or
High Modulus Pile
Figure 5.6
Pinned-integral bridge, sheet pile retaining wall with bearings
5.3.2 Pinned integral High Modulus Pile retaining wall

For larger spans, a retaining wall will need to use High Modulus Piles. In that case
a more substantial pinned bearing is needed. A typical configuration is similar to
that shown in Figure 5.6.
During construction, the bearing lower support plate (or at least its holding down
bolts) can be positioned to suit before the concrete of the capping beam is cast.
Further description of these simple bearings is given in Section 5.6.
5.3.3 Pinned integral on tubular column-piles

Provision of a pinned bearing on top of a tubular column-pile can be achieved in
numerous ways. Placing the bearing directly onto the top of the tubular pile-column
is the simplest way. Figure 5.7 shows a section through a possible connection.
A level surface at the desired elevation is best achieved by an in situ concrete filling
to the column-pile. If the steel tubular column-pile is to be filled with concrete in
any case for crash resistance, then this connection method will be the most efficient
and suitable. This will provide a similar flexibility in positioning for the holding
down bolts for bearings as that used traditionally for deck beams landed on r.c.
abutments.
Load transfer to the pile can be achieved using internal welded shear studs or weld
bead fabricated and tested in the shop before delivery to site.
27
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Figure 5.7 also shows an endscreen wall and the whole abutment is then a fallthrough arrangement similar to that used on the M25/A3 interchange at Wisley in
Surrey, only that was constructed in concrete.
Alternatively, a reinforced earth embankment face can be formed that will reduce
the total bridge span.
Reinforced concrete
end screen wall
Deck
beam
Waterproof
membrane
Holding down bolts
set in grouted pockets
Studs for load transfer

Embankment side slope

Steel tubular column
Figure 5.7
5.4
Section through bearing connection detail for a tubular

column-pile
Jointless deck configuration
A jointless deck type is created when a sliding or rocker bearing is inserted between
the bridge beams and the bankseat footing or pile cap as shown in Figures 5.8 and
5.9. Replacement of such a bearing is a little more difficult than in a conventional
bridge, because any jacking would raise the end wall as well and this will disturb
the adjacent road construction and surfacing. Cutting back and reconstruction of
that interface will therefore be required.
Granular fill
Sliding
bearing
Figure 5.8
Flexible seal
Jointless deck bridge, spread footing bankseat
28
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
As explained in Section 2.4, there is a horizontal movement interface between the

underside of the endwall and the bankseat. This gap may either be open or filled
with a non-structural filler. A flexible seal will be required across the end of this
gap to prevent ingress of soil particles and surface water leakage. Such a seal is
likely to be durable for a long period, since it is not directly exposed to the weather
nor the rigours of the road environment and does not sustain any local loading.
Granular fill
Sliding
bearing
Flexible seal

H piles
Figure 5.9
5.5
Jointless deck bridge, steel piled bankseat
Intermediate supports
5.5.1 Tubular column-piles for intermediate piers

Compliant intermediate supports for multi-span beams can be effectively achieved
by the use of steel column-piles. When they are concrete filled they offer superior
vehicle collision resistance to that of concrete columns. Various arrangements for
intermediate column-piles can be used and two and four column configurations are
shown in Figures 5.10 and 5.11. A crosshead beam could be a practical structural
arrangement which permits correction of any out-of-level or lack of verticality in the
piling after driving and joins individual pile columns to produce one effective
intermediate support structure.
29
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Transverse
r.c. crosshead
beam
Tubular steel
column-piles
eg. 965 x 40 m

Figure 5.10 Two column-pile intermediate pier with r.c. crosshead beam
Either a cast in situ reinforced concrete transverse beam can be used (Figure 5.12)
or a pre-fabricated steel crosshead beam assembly (Figure 5.13). Steel crosshead
beams would be prefabricated, but a practical connection detail will have to be
developed for the connection to the pile. The detail shown has overlarge sleeves
that fit over the pile heads and once levelled either a welded connection is made or
the annulus can be epoxy grouted for load transfer.
Steel
crosshead
box beam
4 No. 762mm
x 40 mm w.t. steel
column-piles
Figure 5.11 Four column-pile intermediate pier with steel crosshead beam
30
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Where there are four column-piles, it may be possible to place an individual deck
beam directly onto its corresponding column-pile without a crosshead beam as
shown on Figure 5.11, but provision must be made for the tolerances that are
associated with driven piling (see Section 6.5). If no crosshead beam is provided
it will also be necessary to show that each individual column-pile can survive a
collision load case, where this is required, without losing its integrity. Where a
crosshead beam is provided, the collision load resistance is shared by the columnpile group.
Deck beam
Pinned bearing

Cross head beam
Tubular pile
Figure 5.12 Tubular column-pile pier with pile capping beam and pinned
bearing
Moment connections between deck beams and intermediate supports should be
avoided as they offer little benefit but complicate construction and create potential
fatigue-prone details. Bearings should be used instead to transfer only horizontal
forces from the deck to the column-pile pier and to anchor the top of the column in
the event of vehicle collision resistance being required. A pinned bearing detail is
shown in Figure 5.12.
5.6
Bearings
Non-moment inducing (pinned) connections at the supports avoid complex design,

are cheap to fabricate and aid practical and trouble-free fit up during installation.
Provided that attention is given in design to durable details, it is possible that such
bearings can be made sufficiently robust that they need never be removed over the
full 120 years design life and hence provision for replacement can be avoided. This
will permit economies to be made in design, construction and maintenance of
pinned-integral bridges.
Rocker and knuckle bearings are less common today than they used to be, having
been replaced by proprietary elastomeric bearings (either steel/elastomer sandwich
or elastomeric pot bearing). Nevertheless, they provide simple pinned connections
that are easy to design. They are easily fabricated from thick steel plate to suit the
particular load requirement, which gives a very durable detail and cuts out the cost
of expensive high specification bearings. Little maintenance is required, other than
31
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
occasional inspection, and even if a knuckle were to seize as a result of neglect,

negligible moment is transmitted as a consequence. Such seizing is only likely on
shorter bridges since on longer bridges where the deck thermal movements are
significant, the joint will be forced to work regularly.
5.6.1 Studies using pinned bearings

Studies by the SCI(1) have examined the feasibility of using pinned bearings for
tubular column-piles, and representative cases have been analysed for intermediate
and end supports for a symmetrical two-span bridge with each span of 40 m.

At the intermediate support of such a two-span overbridge carrying a typical minor

road, the maximum vertical reaction at Ultimate Limit State will be of the order of
3 MN. Lateral forces from wind loads and skidding forces are fairly small (300 kN
nominal skidding load for example). The greatest horizontal load will be that arising
from collision loading on the substructure (in accordance with BD 60/94(23)), in
which a column-pile will behave as a propped cantilever between an effective fixed
position below ground and the bridge deck connection.
Longitudinal displacements at the intermediate support of such a two-span bridge
were found to be very small, with rotations (in the plane of the girder) of less than
0.01 rad. In a transverse plane the bridge girders were effectively braced and
there was little tendency to rotate about the longitudinal axis. The use of linear
bearings (which effectively provide a torsional restraint to each girder) is therefore
quite suitable.
At the ends of such a bridge, the maximum vertical load is smaller, but the same
lateral braking load must be catered for. If the columns are not protected and are
within 4.5 m of the nearside lane edge, collision loads must also be allowed for
according to BD 60/94. Rotational displacements in the girder plane will be less
than at intermediate supports. Maximum thermal longitudinal displacements of
about 20 mm can be experienced, but since the steel column-piles are quite flexible,
this will only give rise to small forces.
Typical configurations of rocker and knuckle bearings are shown in Figure 5.13.
Rocker bearing
Knuckle bearing
Figure 5.13 Simple pinned rocker and knuckle bearings
5.6.2 Rocker bearing

To resist the magnitude of reaction at an intermediate support (around 3 MN or
less), a simple fabricated linear rocker approximately 600 mm long, comprising a
cylindrical upper plate and a flat lower plate, is adequate. A suggested
configuration is shown on top of a thick capping plate to a pile-column in
Figure 5.14. The key features of this bearing are described below.
32
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...

Figure 5.14 A simple pinned rocker bearing

The bearing can be fabricated from ordinary structural steel, grade S355, although
there may be advantages in using higher grades for the rocker plates. A cylindrical
surface of radius about 250 mm, or greater, can be machined on the upper rocker
plate. Upper and lower rocker plates are about 600 mm long and about 100 to
120 mm wide. Friction cannot be relied upon to resist horizontal forces, so shear
keys or dowels must be used. In view of the relatively high shear force arising from
collision loads, several shear dowels will be required. These carry all the shear
force and it would help in minimising their size if higher strength steel is used, but
this is not essential. Dowels of about 35 to 40 mm diameter are suitable. Since
there are no moving parts, such bearings are durable and easily maintained.
Connection of the rocker bearing to the underside of the deck beam and to the top
of a column-pile is via support plates which are welded to the rocker plates (only the
lower support plate is shown in Figure 5.14). The rocker bearing support plates
can either be bolted or welded to the deck beam and set in concrete with anchor
bolts at the top of columns or abutment walls.
5.6.3 Knuckle bearings

In view of the combination of large horizontal force with, possibly, only a small
vertical force, knuckle bearings can be used for pinned connections. Such bearings
have been used on older and heavier bridges, and as bearings for arches. The loads
considered here (3 MN) are fairly modest for a knuckle bearing, and could easily
be accommodated by a pin of less than 100 mm diameter. No special measures are
needed to cater for horizontal forces.
However, the type of knuckle bearing shown in Figure 5.13 is more complex to
fabricate, and thus more expensive, than a rocker bearing, and it does act by sliding
(around the cylindrical surface), which would require more frequent inspection and
attention during maintenance than the pinned rocker.
5.7
Skew bridges
Previous discussion and illustrations of the behaviour of integral bridges have

considered the bridge in elevation, or in the plane of one of the main beams.
However, very many bridges are skew in plan, some with a very large skew angle.
33
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Where an integral bridge is supported on continuous walls, the behaviour of the end
walls is affected by this skew.
Consider a skew integral bridge on retaining walls (see Figure 5.15). The retaining
wall is able to flex only normal to its plane and, as a consequence, the bridge deck
will rotate in plan as it expands, as shown in the Figure (transverse expansion is not
shown - it does not affect the pattern of movement). The effect of high skew is to
magnify the displacement at the acute corner of a wide bridge, although this
magnification is only significant if the bridge is both highly skew and short in
relation to its width.

Figure 5.15 Rotation of a skew deck on wall-type abutments

In BD 57/95(8), the Highways Agency has recognised the problems involved in
predicting the complex behaviour of skew bridges and (in principle) only requires
bridges of skew up to 30E to be designed as integral.
However, if an integral bridge is supported on pile-columns, the rotational effect is
eliminated. Similarly, skew bankseat integral bridges will not rotate significantly
though they may slide parallel to the face of the endscreen wall. Jointless deck
bridges can also be constructed with skew. The Highways Agency limitation
therefore should be regarded as a warning, rather than an absolute limitation.
34
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
6 STEEL SECTIONS FOR INTEGRAL

BRIDGE PIERS AND ABUTMENTS
This section reviews the various steel profiles and sections that can be used in the
sub-structures of integral and jointless deck bridges. Sections for continuous walls
and for individual supports are discussed.
6.1
Continuous wall steel pile sections

The type of continuous pile profile that is most appropriate for a retaining wall
abutment depends on the size and configuration of the bridge structure and the
magnitude of the acting axial and lateral loads.
For lightly loaded bridges of small span and/or retained height, where a pinned
connection is chosen for the deck to sub-structure connection, adequate abutments
may be formed from sheet piles. In the UK, two profiles, designated as Z and U,
are available; Z profiles are referred to as Frodingham sections, and U profiles as
Larssen sections. Although there are no real preferences for the use of Larssen
or Frodingham sections, each type of section does have its own characteristics,
which in certain situations can influence its choice.
For the larger bridge sizes and configurations where the structural capacity of U and
Z profiles is inadequate to accommodate the higher load magnitudes and/or retained
height, High Modulus Piles or interconnected Box Piles can be used.
6.1.1 Frodingham sections (Z profiles)

Frodingham sheet piles are proprietary products that are manufactured by British
Steel. Each pile interlocks with the adjacent pile during driving to create a
continuous sheet pile wall structure. For Frodingham sections (Z profiles), the
interlocks are between adjacent piles at their outer faces. A typical cross-section
detail is shown in Figure 6.1.
Figure 6.1
A Frodingham sheet pile
Frodingham sheet piles have advantages in a marine environment as the interlocks

are generally more watertight than Larssen piles. Also Frodingham sections tend
to be preferred for cantilever walls, as horizontal deflections towards the excavation
tend to be lower.
The section modulus for the Frodingham profiles ranges from 688 cm3/m for the
1BXN section to 3168 cm3/m for the No. 5 section. The complete range of
Frodingham sections and their properties are listed in British Steels Piling
Handbook(24) which can be obtained from British Steel Sections, Plates and
Commercial Steels, Scunthorpe.
35
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
6.1.2 Larssen sections (U profiles)

Larssen sections are also proprietary products manufactured by British Steel. For
Larssen profiles the interlocks are positioned on the centre line of the wall (see
Figure 6.2). The piles depend upon friction at the interlocks, to develop the full
modulus of the combined section. As the interlocks are close fitting, this form of
construction causes a considerable amount of friction to be developed. In most
cases, the friction at the interlocks is achieved by shear being generated by surface
irregularities, rusting, lack of initial straightness and soil particle migration into the
interlocks during driving. This interlocking enables the full structural capacity of
the combined section to be developed on most walls (see British Steels Piling
Handbook(24), pages 1/7 and 5/15). If there is concern about achieving full structural
capacity for a very high wall where it could be critical then the interlocks can be
welded. Crimped or welded pairs can be delivered to site. Further advice will be
available in Eurocode 3: Part 5(25), when it is published.

Figure 6.2
A Larssen sheet pile
Larssen sections are stiffer and less prone to deviation from the intended placement
line than Frodingham sections. This is particularly the case when driving is carried
out through dense or difficult soil.
The range of Larssen steel sheet pile sections has also recently been increased to
include wider sections. These are named LX sections and have been introduced to
provide a superior strength-to-weight ratio pile that has comparable driving
capabilities.
The range of section modulus for LX profiles varies from 830 cm3/m for the LX8
section to 3201 cm3/m for the LX32 section, and for the Larssen profiles from
610 cm3/m for the 6W section to 5066 cm3/m for the 6 section. The complete range
of sections and their properties are listed in British Steels Piling Handbook.
Larssen 6 piles were used in the retaining walls for the frame abutment integral
bridge at the Bridgend-By-Pass, see Section 4.2.
6.1.3 High Modulus Piles

A High Modulus Pile is a proprietary product manufactured by British Steel Piling
which comprises Frodingham sheet piles welded to the outer surface of the flange
of a Universal Beam. A typical section is shown in Figure 6.3. Each pile is driven
clutched to an adjacent pile to form an interlocking sheet pile wall acting
compositely with the Universal Beams. The resulting profile provides a wall of
identical repeating units. High modulus piles are produced in a range of sizes such
that the calculated structural capacity can be very closely matched, thus providing
maximum economy.
36
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Intermittant weld at interlock

75mm weld at 600mm crs with
300mm closure weld at ends
966mm for 3N & 4N
850mm for 5
Width of one combined pile
283mm for 3N
330mm for 4N
311mm for 5
11.7mm for 3N
10.4mm for 4N
11.9mm for 5
Frodingham section
steel sheet piling
x
11.7mm for 3N
14.0mm for 4N
17.0mm for 5
Continuous fillet weld

x
Universal beam
Figure 6.3
High Modulus Piles

Currently British Steel offers High Modulus Piles formed from several profiles of
Frodingham section combined with a variety of Universal Beams, which are spaced
at 850 mm or 966 mm centres, depending on the section selected. Two Frodingham
sections (4N and 5) combined with eleven weights of Universal Beam are available
(see British Steels Piling Handbook).
High Modulus Piles are ideally suited to forming integral bridge abutments as they
have a suitable structural stiffness, and are practical to install. The universal beam
significantly increases the structural capacity of the section, and is capable of
supporting both lateral and axial loads. This type of section is most appropriate for
medium to large size bridges where the magnitude of loading and/or the retained
height rule out Larssen or Frodingham sheet piles. The spacings of the universal
beams (850 mm and 966 mm) are ideal for the construction of shallow bridge decks
formed of beams at close centres, but are sufficiently far apart to permit easy
inspection and maintenance.
High Modulus Piles were used in the A41 Stone Bridge replacement frame abutment
integral bridge at Aylesbury, see Section 4.2.
6.2
Box piles
Box piles are formed by welding two or more sheet pile sections together. Both
Larssen and Frodingham sheet piles can be used. They can be introduced into a line
of sheet piling at any point where local heavy loads are to be applied, for instance
beneath bridge beams (as in the Chad Brook Bridge, see Section 4.2), or used
separately. They are clutched together with adjacent sheet piles and can be
positioned in a sheet pile abutment so that its appearance is unaffected.
Frodingham plated box piles are formed by continuously welding a plate to a pair
of interlocked and intermittently welded sheet piles. Larssen box piles are formed
by welding together two sheet pile sections with continuous welds (see Figure 6.4).
37
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Weld
Weld
Weld
Figure 6.4
Types of box piles
Special box piles can be formed using certain combinations of sheet piles. Further
information can be obtained from British Steel Piling Technical Services.
6.3
Tubular piles

Tubular piles have been used as foundations for offshore steel frame structures for
over 60 years, ever since oil platforms were first required in the oil fields of Lake
Maracaibo in Venezuela in the 1920s. Initially, spare oilpipe was used for
convenience but, as the supporting structures became more sophisticated, the cold
rolling of piles in structural plate to project-specific diameters and wall thicknesses
has become more common.
Purpose rolled tubular piles are expensive but high quality steel linepipe that is
perfectly suitable for piling is available throughout the EU at reasonable cost.
British Steel manufacture such pipe at their new Hartlepool linepipe mill and can
fabricate project-specific sizes at their Stockton-on-Tees mill. See Section 7.2.4 for
linepipe material specifications.
Linepipe is manufactured to a different product specification to structural steel, but
its properties are suitable for most structural applications as well. The cold-rolling
process produces consistently higher yield strengths than those for hot-rolled steel
products and this can have significant benefits for highly loaded bearing pile and
structural column-pile applications, and can permit harder driving. Selection criteria
are often based on the accommodation of high driving stresses during installation
and the resistance to lateral loading shear forces in service without inducing plastic
deformation in the section.
An example of a project where tubular bearing piles were used is the Stockley Park
canal bridge, see Section 4.2.
The range of linepipe sizes produced by British Steel in 1996 is shown in
Figure 6.5.
38
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Wall thickness
(mm) (ins)
50
2.0
45
1.8
40
1.6
35
1.4
30
1.2
25
1.0
20
0.8
15
0.6
10
0.4
0.2
API 5L X52
API 5L X65
API 5L X70
API 5L X80
16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42
Outside pipe diameter (ins)

Figure 6.5
6.4
British Steel available range of linepipe
H-Piles
Steel H-piles have been used extensively in bearing pile supports for bridges in the
USA and the UK. A recent example is their use on the A47 Walpole to Tilney End
By-Pass bridges in Norfolk, designed by Stirling Maynard & Partners.
Steel H-piles (see Figure 6.6) are very efficient in surface area provision for shaft
friction piling. For example a 305 mm 305 mm x 110 kg/m H-pile section has
an external surface equivalent to a concrete pile of diameter 601 mm and a
displacement volume only 5% of that of the concrete pile, which enables it to be
driven with less energy and into more dense soils. The displacement volumes of
British Steels range of 305 mm 305 mm piles cover a range of 3% to 8% of that
of equivalent concrete piles. In any given foundation plan area therefore, a greater
number of steel piles can be provided in a group with a standard spacing of 3B (or
3Dia.) than concrete piles and the load supported can either be greater, or if soil
conditions permit, the driven steel piles can be shorter to support a given structural
load. Further information is given in the Steel bearing piles guide(12).
y
Figure 6.6
A typical H-Pile section
39
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
H-piles are also used very effectively to transfer bearing loads down to a buried
rockhead that may underlie the site and to get round buried obstructions. It is often
advisable to use special pile shoes to strengthen the tip and prevent damage or
buckling under hard driving conditions. Further information is given in the Steel
bearing piles guide(12).
6.5
Installation tolerances

The accuracy of pile installation is of the utmost importance to minimise on site

connection preparatory work at the bridge deck to pile head interface. However,
tolerances must be allowed in the positioning of driven steel piles, and it will be
necessary to consider lack of fit forces and local moments in the design of the
connection details. Information on tolerances that are achievable using commonly
available pile driving equipment and methods are quoted in the ICE publication
Specification for piling(26) and specifications issued by the Federation of Piling
Specialists(27), the Eurocode TC 288 WG4(28) Execution of sheet pile wall structures
and the TESPA Installation of steel sheet piles booklet (29), and the SCI publication
Design guide for steel sheet piled bridge abutments(30).
However, only the least onerous levels of tolerance are given in those publications.
Following discussions with members of the Federation of Piling Specialists (FPS),
a summary of the most accurate or best alignments that can be expected using
specialist equipment, skilled personnel and careful planning of procedures in respect
of site conditions was drawn up and this is presented in Table 6.1.
Table 6.1
Tolerances that can be met in driving steel piles
Type of pile and method of driving

Deviation normal to the wall centre
line at pile head
For pitch and drive

method or over water
For panel drive

method
25 to 75 mm
Dependant on equipment used.
Finished level deviation from a

specified level
of pile head, after trim
2 mm
of pile toe
120 mm
Deviation from specified inclination

measured over the top 1 m of wall
Normal to line of piles
Along line of piles
1.5%
1%
1%
0.5%
Installation planning is essential to allow for any inhomogeneity in the soils.

Accuracy of alignment will also be affected by pile stiffness, the driving equipment
and the competence of the workforce. Conventional pile guide frames (formed of
stiff universal beams with the webs horizontal) ensure good alignment for sheet piles
in panel driving methods. It is also important that piles be finished to level with
minimal tolerances and that any damage to the top of the pile is cut off. Experience
of steel sheet pile driving shows that over length piles should be supplied to allow
for on-site changes in soil conditions between boreholes. This overdrive allowance
is normally +10%, with spare piles being provided to replace any that are severely
40
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
damaged during installation. Where dramatic changes in toe level are anticipated,
e.g. a geologically eroded buried rock surface, steel piling is particularly appropriate
but the advice of specialist piling contractors should be sought during conceptual
design of the bridge foundation. The Federation of Piling Specialists should be
consulted on such a matter. Sometimes, driving causes previously driven piles to
rise but this can be compensated by redriving these piles.
It is inconceivable that an acceptable level can be achieved at the top of the pile to
avoid any need for on-site cutting. However, precision mechanical, burning and
hydraulic grit blast cutters are available to achieve a level cut within 1 to 2 mm
accuracy.
6.6
Environmental factors associated with driven

piles

Increasing attention has been directed to the environmental effects of pile driving in
recent years. Although the duration of the piling contract may be short in
comparison with the whole contract period, noise and vibration may be perceived
more acute during the piling phase. This is exacerbated because pile driving is often
the first construction activity on site. Forewarning of the public is therefore always
a worthwhile precaution before starting pile driving operations.
In the UK, the Control of Pollution Act (1974)(31) provides a legislative framework
for, amongst other things, the control of construction site noise. The Act defines
noise as including vibration and it provides for the publication and approval of
Codes of Practice, the approved code being BS 5228(32). A section of the Code (Part
4) deals specifically with piling noise. This Code was revised in 1992 to include
guidance on vibration. Detailed information is given in the Design guide for steel
sheet piled bridge abutments(30).
The study and codification of noise and vibration as a necessary part of construction
work has helped with its formal acceptance and treatment. The construction industry
has developed new driving equipment and methods to reduce the levels of noise and
vibration during pile driving which help to keep them within acceptable limits.
Driven piles are hence acceptable from the environmental aspect on many more sites
than they used to be.
6.7
Driveability
The designer needs to ensure that the steel piles that he has chosen for his concept
can be installed to the desired penetration.
Several simple driving formulae have been used by piling specialists over many
decades and reliable empirical rules derived from this experience to use in those
formulae. Two of the most reliable formulae are those of Hiley and Janbu and these
are explained in detail in Cornfield(33) and in the Steel bearing piles guide(12).
Experienced judgement is required on hammer efficiency and on driving resistance
in order to obtain sensible results. A nomogram is included in the SCI publication
to assist the user. If the designer has little experience of assessing driveability,
assistance can be sought from a specialist piling company recommended by the FPS.
41
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The driving resistances of sheet piles and individual bearing piles differs
fundamentally because of the interclutch friction with sheet piles. In fact, this has
been found to be the most significant resistance with sheet piles and explains why
single bearing piles can be driven to much greater depths than sheet piles. The FPS
and British Steel have published Tables of maximum driveable depths for sheet piles
in different types of soil for the guidance of designers. These are reproduced in the
Steel bearing piles guide(12) and Design guide for steel sheet piled abutments(30).
A more sophisticated method of assessing pile driveability for bearing piles is to use
a computer version of the wave equation. The WEAP program is the most highly
developed and the most extensively used in design offices. It contains a complete
hammer data library and guidance on soil resistance and reliable default values for
all the parameters involved that have been derived from the back analysis of
instrumented pile driving.

A further computer program derivative of the wave equation is CAPWAP which

permits the analysis of recorded stress waves in steel piles during driving. Such a
PDA (Pile Driving Analysis) enables the interpretation of soil resistance by curve
fitting techniques. The force-time recording from strain gauges on the pile is
compared to the force-time curve produced by integration of the simultaneous
acceleration-time recording. The latter is adjusted by varying the soil resistance
model on the pile shaft and base, thereby gaining an understanding of both its
magnitude and distribution down the pile.
By comparison with static pile load tests on the same pile, an extensive database has
now been assembled by many practitioners throughout the world (see the
Proceedings of the International Conferences on the Application of Stress Wave
Theory on Piles (1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996)(34). As a result, the static load
resistance of piles can be predicted to an accuracy of +/- 10% in granular soils and
rocks. Care must be exercised with the use of the method in clays however because
of the time delay in shaft friction recovery after driving.
6.8
Corrosion allowances
The means for countering the effect of corrosion of steel piles are well developed.
Guidance is presented in British Steels Piling Handbook and in the Highways
Agencys BD 42 Design of embedded retaining walls and bridge abutments(35).
BS 8002(36) and BS 6349(37) both consider that the end of effective life of a steel sheet
piles occurs when any part of the pile reaches its maximum permissible stress as a
result of the reduction in section due to corrosion. A pile section chosen for the
in-service condition should therefore also be adequate at the end-of-design-life (i.e.
after 120 years, when designed to BS 5400), at which time the effective pile section
will have been reduced by corrosion, but also the forces in the pile may have been
modified by the change in stiffness of the pile. It is not immediately obvious
whether the start of in-service life condition or the end-of-design-life condition will
be critical for the structural design of the abutment, it depends on the actual
situation.
As the corrosion loss allowance varies along the pile according to the corrosion
environment, the designer needs to be aware that the maximum corrosion may not
occur at the same level as the maximum forces and moments, and to allow for this
accordingly.
42
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The design procedure for use of sheet piled walls in integral bridges is illustrated in
the Integral steel bridges: Design of a single-span bridge - Worked example(5). In
that example it is found that the redistribution of earth pressure that occurs as a
result of the increased flexure of a corroded section is significant, and that the endof-life condition is a critical design load case in the selection of pile section.
6.8.1 Corrosion and protection of steel piles

According to BD 42(35), steel piles are to be designed with sacrificial thicknesses
applied to each surface, depending on the exposure conditions, to provide a design
life of 120 years. Table 6.2 summarises the required sacrificial thicknesses for
each surface for different exposure conditions, which are based on the advice given
in BS 8002(36) Clause 4.4.4.4.3.
The reduced (corroded) section properties can either be obtained by calculation or
can be obtained from British Steels Piling Handbook.
Table 6.2
Sacrificial thicknesses for piling according to BD 42

Exposure zone
Sacrificial thickness
(for one side of the pile only)
(mm)
Atmospheric
Continuous immersion in water or effluent
In contact with natural soil
Splash and alternating wet/dry conditions
The procedure to determine corrosion allowances for a particular situation in

accordance with BD 42 can be presented in the form of a flowchart - see Figure 6.7.
It should be noted that the corrosion allowances in BD 42 all apply to unprotected
steel piles. Although it is generally cost effective to provide the sacrificial steel
thickness, consideration can be given to the following alternative corrosion
protection options:
C
Protective coatings, particularly in the exposed section of the pile.
The use of copper-bearing steel (effective against atmospheric corrosion).
The use of a higher strength steel than required if no corrosion were assumed
(i.e. use steel grade S355GP, to BS EN 10248(38), in a wall designed for steel
grade S270GP). This permits a greater loss of metal before stresses become
critical.
Cathodic protection in soil below the water table or in a for marine

environment
Concrete encasement of steel piles above the water line. However, the inherent
impact absorbing properties of the pile are lost by this method.
Details of these options are given in British Steels Piling Handbook.
However, where the exposed face of a retaining wall is potentially exposed to salty
road spray (i.e. a splash zone) it will probably be more effective and aesthetically
pleasing to use a non-structural cladding or a protective coating, rather than a large
43
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
sacrificial thickness. No guidance on the use of cladding or coating to reduce the

corrosion allowance is available in BD 42, although it is understood that this is
currently being reviewed for a future revision of that standard.
British Steel has undertaken significant research and development into corrosion of
steel and corrosion protection and further advice can be obtained by reference to The
corrosion and protection of steel piling in temperate climates(39) and The prevention
of corrosion on structural steelwork(40).
6.8.2 Corrosion in fill or industrial soils

Bridges are sometimes constructed in areas of recent fill or industrial soils.
Corrosion protection of the steel in contact with the fill material may be required.
and this can be assessed by testing the material for pH and resistivity.

The nature of in situ fill soils can be variable and a full soil analysis will be required
to assess the likely corrosion performance of steel in the environment. Soil tests to
determine the pH of the soil should be in accordance with BS 1377: Part 3(41) and
as directed by the Contract to determine resistivity. Other tests may be relevant,
and most of these are reviewed in CIRIAs series of reports on contaminated land
(contact CIRIA for further details).
In a controlled fill (i.e. selected granular fill, as referred to in Clause 3.8 of
BD 42), no special measures are required and the same corrosion rates as in natural
undisturbed soils can be assumed.
Further advice on corrosion assessment and protection can be obtained from British
Steel, Swinden Technology Centre, or from SCI.
44
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Exposed to
atmosphere ?
Yes
No
Completely and
continuously
immersed in water?
Yes
Aggressive
atmosphere /
water / effluent ?
No
No
Sacrificial thickness 4 mm
Yes
Seek specialist advice
Splash
zone ?
Yes
Cladding ?

No
No
Yes
Natural Undisturbed
soil ?
Yes
No
Classify soil from Tables 1, 2
and 3 of BD 42/94
Non-aggressive soil ?
Yes
No
Very
aggressive soil ?
No
Yes
Seek specialist advice
Figure 6.7
Determination of corrosion allowance
45
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
7 DESIGN BASIS
7.1
General principles
Limit state design should be adopted as far as possible for integral and jointless deck
bridges. Where only rules on an allowable stress basis are available, they must be
applied in a way that is consistent with the limit state design used elsewhere.
Compatibility must be maintained between the displacements and deformations of
the deck structure, the foundations and the connections between them. An overall
analysis is required that takes account of the interaction between structural and
geotechnical elements (such an analysis is not yet covered in any design code).
7.2
Design standards
7.2.1 National and European standards

For bridges the applicable National Standard is BS 5400(42). This covers the design
of steel, concrete and composite structural elements of bridges. Composite bridge
deck design is normally in accordance with Parts 3, 4 and 5 of BS 5400(42).
For the design of earth retaining structures and foundations, reference may be
made to BS 8002(36) and BS 8004(43) .
BS 8002
BS 8002 is primarily applicable to small and medium sized earth-retaining structures
with a retained height of up to approximately 8 m, although it is stated that many
of the recommendations are more generally applicable. BS 8002 is a code of
practice based on the use of a simplistic and traditional limit equilibrium method for
retaining wall design that has been used to ensure stability of walls. This method
is based on the use of theoretical limiting earth pressures without practical proof that
they can co-exist at the point of wall overturning. This method has not been related
to wall movement nor have trial walls demonstrated these earth pressure profiles for
all types of wall, and therefore the method cannot be used reliably for analysis of
retaining walls subject to displacement.
As BS 8002 is based on this simplistic approach, it cannot uniquely define the limit
states that are to be used for design. This is seen in its definition for limit state
design in that the safety and stability of the retaining wall may be achieved,
whether by overall factors of safety, or partial factors of safety, or by other
measures. Owing to this lack of precision in definition, BS 8002 refers both to
partial factor based limit state codes of practices such as BS 8110, BS 5400 and
BS 5950; and to BS 449: Part 2(44), which is a working stress code of practice
based on the use of a lumped factor approach.
BS 8002 uses an approach based on worst credible soil and ground parameters to
develop an adequate margin of safety(45). A mobilised soil strength is advocated
for use in design at the serviceability limit state only (to limit retaining wall
movements), because BS 8002 states that the most severe earth pressures that can
credibly occur on a retaining wall, occur at that limit state. The mobilised soil
46
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
strength is obtained from the representative strength/1.2, where 1.2 is the

mobilisation factor.
No analysis at the ultimate limit state is then required by BS 8002 because it
assumes that the forces acting on the retaining wall at the serviceability limit state
are greater than those at the ultimate limit state.
According to the research by Potts and Fourie(46), which is quoted in the ISE
publication Soil-Structure interaction - the real behaviour of structures(47), the earth
pressures generated are related to wall movement, and much more precision is
required in the definition of serviceability limit state before the ultimate limit state
can be dismissed as in BS 8002.

Owing to their more complex behaviour, integral bridges require more precise
analysis methods to be used than the limit equilibrium wall stability methods.
BS 8002(36) is limited in its application to wall stability type analysis; it does not
cover the soil-structure interaction that is required in order to determine bending
moments, forces and stresses on integral bridge retaining walls. For highway
structures, HA Departmental Standard BA 42/96(9) advises that BS 8002 should be
used, but only for particular aspects of design. It does require, however, that steel
embedded retaining walls for integral bridges are designed in accordance with
BS 5400 Parts 3, 4 and 5 using the limit state partial factor approach and not the
working stress approach.
BS 8004
BS 8004 is applicable to the design and construction of foundations in general,
which can be piled or shallow bearing foundations. BS 8004 is based on a working
stress approach using lumped factors of safety and uses a design approach for
foundations based on moderately conservative soil parameters, loads and geometry,
and on generous factors of safety.
Eurocodes
Recently two CEN documents have become available. Eurocode 7 Geotechnical
Design(48), issued by BSI as DD-ENV 1997-1, and the draft prestandard Eurocode 3:
Part 5 Design of Steel Structures - Piling(25) has been circulated in industry as
prENV 1993-5(25). These are fundamentally more rigorous documents which apply
limit state principles and use a partial factor approach.
Use of Eurocode 7(48) can be of some help in the design of integral bridges since it
uses limit state design with partial factors that are compatible with the design
approach of BS 5400. The use of Eurocode 7 is endorsed by the Highways Agency
in BA 42/96.
In Eurocode 7, the partial factors which are applied to the characteristic value of the
soil parameter are presented in Clause 2.4.2, Table 2.1(48) and that Table is
reproduced below for information. Annex B of DD ENV 1997-1 provides additional
recommendations relating to these partial factors.
47
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Table 7.1
Partial factors to be applied to actions and ground properties,

according to DD ENV 1997-1
Actions
Permanent
Case
Factor on Ground Properties

Variable
tan N
cu
qu
1.50
1.1
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.00
1.50
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.00
1.30
1.25
1.6
1.4
1.4
Un-favourable
Favourable
Un-favourable
Case A
1.00
0.95
Case B
1.35
Case C
1.00
Notes:
Case A
Case B
Case C
N
cu
Loss of static equilibrium; strength of structural material or ground insignificant

Failure of structure or structural elements, including those of the footing, piles,
basement walls etc., governed by strength of structural material
Failure in the ground
Angle of shearing resistance
Undrained shear strength

7.2.2 Highway Agency Standards

The Highways Agency sets out its requirements and advice for the design and
construction of structures in Standards (BDs) and Advice Notes (BAs). The BD
documents contain mandatory requirements that are effectively the building
regulations for bridges in the UK. Some of the BD documents are used to invoke
BSI codes of practice as mandatory design rules, subject to a few amendments to suit
the HAs particular requirements. The BA documents give background information,
guidance on the application of the related BD and generally recognised rules that
satisfy the requirements of the BD. The BAs are not intended to be mandatory.
As explained in Section 3.2, the requirement that integral bridge construction be
considered is given in BD 57/95. No Standard has yet been issued relating to the
design of such bridges, but guidance is given in BA 42/96. However, it must be
noted that it does not provide comprehensive design rules. It only sets out advice
relating to design and construction with a view to achieving greater consistency in
approach between designers. The Highways Agency has confirmed in a Seminar on
Integral Bridges, held at the Institution of Structural Engineers, London, on
23 January 1996 that BA 42/96 is not mandatory.
Where piled abutments and/or piers are specified, BD 32 Piled Foundations(49) sets
out the design and construction requirements, with BA 25(50) providing guidance on
its use and interpretation.
It may be noted that determination of design load effects are specified in BD 37(51),
which introduced a modified version of BS 5400: Part 2. This includes the
specification of partial load factors on earth pressures and on the restraint of thermal
movement. Such factors may not be appropriate to integral bridge construction; see
further comment in Section 12.4. Where bridge supports are located within 4.5 m
of the edge of a carriageway, they are required to be designed to withstand vehicle
collision loads. The magnitude and application of this loading is given in BD 60/94.
48
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
7.2.3 Other standards

The design of tubular piles is not covered by a UK or CEN Standard, but is
comprehensively covered by API RP2A(22). This is an American Code of Practice
which is used by the worldwide oil and gas industry to design fixed offshore
installations. Using the API RP2A document as a basis, ISO 13819-2(52) is under
development for international use. These documents are based on a limit state
philosophy using partial factors.

7.2.4 Material properties for steel piles

Steel sheet piling, including sections for box piles, are produced in accordance with
BS EN 10248(38); grades S270GP and S355GP are commonly used. Universal beams
(for High Modulus Piles) and other plates and sections are produced in accordance
with BS EN 10025(53); grades S275 and S355 are commonly used. Whilst the S355
strength designations are the same, the difference between S270 and S275 should be
noted. Traditionally, impact toughness has not been considered a requirement for
piling in the ground and so the grades S270GP and S355GP have no toughness
testing requirement (although the Standard provides an Option to require toughness
testing). But, for steelwork designed to BS 5400: Part 3, notch toughness is
required, although the service temperature for steel in contact with the ground may
not be as low as the minimum effective temperature of the bridge deck. In the
absence of specific guidance from the Highways Agency, it would seem not
unreasonable to specify a toughness requirement equivalent to J0 quality (27J at
0EC) for the sheet piling and grade S275J0 or S355J0 for the UBs; as mentioned,
the sheet piling material can be tested on request, and it is likely to meet the
requirements of J0 quality without any special measures.
Tubular steel piles are produced in accordance with API 5L(54) rather than a BSI or
CEN Standard. The specified minimum yield, according to that Standard, may be
used for design. Values of specified minimum yield for steel grades to API 5L are
given in Table 7.2. There is a toughness requirement set at a Charpy value of 35
for plate thicknesses of between 20 to 100 mm at !40E C for the weldability of these
steels in offshore conditions; this is in excess of that required for onshore piling.
Other useful information on the specification and use of structural steel tubulars is
contained in Appendix 21 of the Offshore Installations: Guidance on the design,
construction and certification published by the HSE(55).
Table 7.2
API Grade
Yield stress for cold formed line pipe

Specified minimum
yield stress
MPa
X46
317
X52
358
X56
386
X60
413
X65
448
X70
482
X80
551
49
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
7.3
Limit state design
Limit state design considers two principal limit states:

C
Ultimate limit state
at which collapse or other form of failure

occurs
Serviceability limit state
the states prior to collapse beyond which

specified serviceability criteria are no longer
met.
Limit state design, as set out in BS 5400, requires that the design resistance R* is at
least equal to the design load effects S*. The partial factors to be used are (fL on
loads, (m on material strengths and (f3 to take account of inaccurate assessment, etc.
The partial factors are applied in two different ways, depending on the Part of
BS 5400 concerned. In Part 3 the design values are expressed as:
R* =
function(characteristic strength)
f3 m
*
and S = ( effects of
fL
design loads)

Whereas in Part 4 they are expressed as:
R* =
function(characteristic strength)
and
S* =
f3
( effects of
fL
design loads )
Consequently, care has to be exercised in the application of the partial factor (f3
when dealing with a mixture of steel and concrete elements. This situation also
arises in the design of steel retaining structures, since BD 42 also requires that (f3
is applied to the load effects; when that is the case, the factor should be omitted
from the calculation of design resistance, even for steel elements.
Design resistances are determined in accordance with BS 5400: Parts 3, 4 and 5, for
the steel, concrete and composite elements respectively. The integral bridge deck
and High Modulus Piles are designed to BS 5400: Parts 3 and 5. The capping beam
is designed to BS 5400: Parts 4 and 5.
Design of sheet piling to date has used the elastic section properties of the wall, but
there is a move towards using plastic section properties for the ultimate limit state
design of sheet pile walls. This is detailed in the new Eurocode 3: Part 5(25).
Development of fully plastic structural capacity of U-section sheet piles (Larssens)
is only obtained if pairs of sections are crimped or welded at the interlocks.
Z profiles such as Frodingham sections do not suffer from this problem. Guidance
to determine the appropriate capacity of U sections is given in British Steels Piling
Handbook(24).
In drivability assessments, the calculated dynamic stresses are compared with 0.9 fy
for the steel grade being used.
50
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
7.4
Loading effects on foundations
Design load effects on the foundations of an integral bridge arise from a variety of
sources:
C
Soil pressures.
Ground water and free water pressures.
Seepage forces.
Embankment surcharge loads.
Ground movements.
Bridge structure self weight.
Traffic loads.
Braking loads.
Temperature changes in the deck.

Movements at the ends of the bridge deck due to change of the effective
temperatures of the bridge are partially restrained by the resistance provided by the
adjacent soil, leading to forces and moments in the bridge deck and foundations.
Reference should be made to BA 42(9) for the specification of thermal strains and the
determination of movements and restraint forces in the bridge deck and foundations.
7.5
Observational Method for foundation design
The Observational Method involves making the best estimate of a geotechnical

behaviour, in conjunction with formulation of contingency plans for additional
measures to be taken if the actual behaviour exceeds predictions by an unacceptable
margin. In the construction industry, increasing emphasis is being placed on the
value of the Observational Method (see Peck(56)) whereby immediate feedback from
instrumentation monitoring of retaining wall behaviour is used to modify the design
and construction procedures according to a pre-determined plan.
In geotechnical engineering the current state of the art is such that predictions of
wall and pile displacements are subject to a considerable degree of uncertainty.
Among the reasons for this is the difficulty in predicting the soil response to
structural loading from a limited number of tests on soil samples, and the general
lack of monitoring of real highway structures for correlation.
Where a Serviceability Limit State deflection is judged by the designer to be really
necessary and is specified for a retaining wall, say where protecting an adjacent
building from the effects of the bridge works, then the Observational Method may
be the only reliable method to permit control of the works.
The Observational Method is recommended in the ENV-1997-1 Eurocode 7(48). It
states that if this method is to be used it is imperative that before start of
construction the following requirements are met:
C
Acceptable limits of behaviour are established.
The actual behaviour lie within the acceptable limits.
51
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
A monitoring plan is set up which shows that the actual behaviour lies within
the acceptable limits.
A contingency plan is available if the actual behaviour is outside the acceptable

limits.
For small and medium sized structures, the wall displacements will be small and the
inherent uncertainties are normally catered for in design by adopting conservative
values of soil properties (see Section 10). For larger and more complex structures,
however, any over-conservatism may lead to unacceptably high costs.

The Highways Agency is considering the implications of the use of the

Observational Method for steel and concrete piled retaining structures and is funding
research in this area. The TRL have started this process for concrete retaining
walls(57) but not yet for sheet pile walls. Various studies on the use of the
Observational Method for highway structures have been or are in the process of
being published by the Transport Research Laboratory(58) and others(59). Numerous
highway structures have been built using this method, for example the A406
underpass at Neasden and the Limehouse Link Tunnel. Operational experience of
the use of instrumentation data to verify temporary works design has been
documented on the Aldershot Road Underpass, Guildford(60).
Monitoring the behaviour of structures as part of the observational method provides
a reliable means of evaluating the validity of current design methods, from
comparisons of the measured to predicted behaviour.
In the design of an integral bridge, which requires an appreciation of the behaviour
of soils in situations not previously encountered, the Observation Method may prove
a valuable design tool.
7.6
Design report
Although not a requirement of the Highways Agency (but a requirement of ENV

1997-1 Eurocode 7(48)) the assumptions, data, calculations and results of the
verification of safety and serviceability of bridge substructures should be collated
and presented clearly in a design report. The report should include, but not be
limited to, the following:
C
An examination and description of the site.
Interpretation of the results of ground investigation.
Analysis of the results of site monitoring of ground water conditions.
A list of the geotechnical design assumptions.
Any anticipated geotechnical problems and statements on the contingency

actions to be taken.
Statements on geotechnical requirements for the design and construction of the

sheet pile retaining wall including testing, inspection and maintenance
requirements.
Stability analyses of the site and calculations for the structural design of the
steel sheet pile wall.
52
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
7.7
Design for fatigue
Cyclic loads that can cause fatigue damage to integral bridges are those due to
vehicular movement of traffic along the bridge deck and those due to expansion and
contractions of the bridge deck due to temperature fluctuations. For both welded
and bolted steel structures, fatigue life is normally governed by the behaviour of the
connections, which include main and secondary connections. The optimal fatigue
behaviour is obtained by ensuring that the structure is so detailed and constructed
that stress concentrations are kept to a minimum and where possible the elements are
able to deform in their intended ways without introducing secondary deformations
and stresses due to local restraints.
In framed integral bridges, the moment connections at the ends will need to be
checked for fatigue due to traffic loads. Bolted and welded details, and shear
connectors, will need to be considered.
The question also arises of whether variation in temperature, leading to strains and
movements, might also give rise to fatigue.

To assess the extent of fatigue that could be present, it is necessary that reliable data
pertaining to temperature variation be used. Currently, limited temperature data is
published and four possible sources are those given in BS 5400, BS 7608(61),
TRL 696(62) and TRL 765(63).
However, for a general appreciation, reference can be made to data in a paper by
Hambly and Owens(64) in which the question of fatigue assessment of thermally
restrained bridges has been considered. In this case the bridge considered was a
steel box girder. BS 5400, TRL 696 and TRL 765 were used to provide data and
included three distinct types of temperature cycles:
C
One extreme cycle during the 120 year design life between the extreme
maximum and minimum temperatures (from BS 5400).
120 annual cycles between summer and winter temperatures (estimated from
TRL 696).
365 120 daily cycles between day and night temperatures (estimated from
TRL 696).
which is summarised in Table 7.3.

Table 7.3
Bridge temperature cycling
Time Period
Extreme (120 year)

Annual
Daily
Cycles
Temperature changes
Effective
EC
Difference
EC
70 + 20
90
120
50 + 20
70
44,000
14 + 14
28
Clearly, the number of cycles involved is much lower than that normally considered
for design (BS 5400: Part 10 gives a limiting stress range of over 200 N/mm2 at
105 cycles, the lowest number of cycles normally considered). Fatigue due to
thermal variation is therefore extremely unlikely in structural elements.
53
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
8 DESIGN METHODOLOGY
8.1
Design sequence
For a non-integral bridge, the design of the deck structure and the design of the
foundations are essentially separate exercises. The main interaction is simply a
transfer of support reactions from the deck and the detailing of the bearing areas.

For an integral bridge there is a degree of continuity that creates interaction between
the design of the two elements. The stiffness of the soil reactions and of the
connection will affect the stresses induced and the construction sequence may affect
the loading combinations that will apply. Therefore a decision must be made on the
type of foundation that is to be used at the concept and scheme costing stage.
For a jointless deck type bridge where only the deck is integral, the old design
procedures of independent deck and substructure design may be used, since the
elements are separated by bearings that allow relative movement.
The overall design sequence for an integral bridge is illustrated in Figure 8.1. As
can be seen, the first four activities concern the conceptual design of the bridge, and
within this phase it is necessary to decide the configuration that is the most
economic, taking into account the site constraints, the practicalities of construction
and whole life costing. This must be done before the stage of the global interaction
analysis is reached, because the latter requires realistic structural element sizes and
stiffnesses.
Some experience of soil-structure interaction analysis and familiarity with the effect
of different soil types on wall and pile behaviour will greatly assist in judgements
on the relative merits of different wall constructions, on the effect of different
connections or of the merits of piled versus spread footings in their response to the
deck thermal movements and braking loads.
A well structured methodology for analysis and design is important because it
enables the designer to focus not only on the immediate activity at hand but also on
what is to be achieved in the overall design. Guidance given today tends to be less
prescriptive than in the past because of the need to allow the application of new
knowledge and the development of specialised computer software. This approach
allows the designer to think, rather than just rigidly apply a set of prescribed
instructions, and is particularly valuable in the analysis of integral bridges, for which
formalised rules have not yet been established.
The overall design sequence is expanded into a more detailed methodology for
embedded retaining wall type bridge abutments in Section 8.3, and for piled column
solutions for fall-through abutments and intermediate pier supports in Section 8.4.
These methodologies are based on the currently available Standards identified in
Section 7, supplemented by recently developed practice that employs numerical
analysis software to solve the soil-structure interaction problem (as discussed in
Section 8.3.7). Each aspect of analysis and design is covered, together with a
sequence in which the activities should be undertaken in order to design retaining
wall abutments, and tubular steel column-piles most effectively. In Sections 8.3 and
8.4 the reader is referred to the appropriate sections of this document that explain
the detailed considerations and to other references.
54
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Site investigation
Select initial concept
Design deck
Evaluate benefits of
continuity deck/support
8.2.1
8.2.2
8.2.3
Select soil properties

8.2.4
Select retaining wall,

column-pile or
bankseat configuration

Design abutment or
bankseat structure
Intermediate
supports?
Design for reactions

from deck
Evaluate benefits of
moment continuity
Yes
No
Include continuity in
interaction
Carry out interaction
analysis
(deck + supports)
Check adequacy of
deck and supports
Revise deck and/or

supports
Strengths OK
?
No
Yes
Design details,
including connections
deck/supports
Figure 8.1
Overall design sequence for an integral bridge
55
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
8.2
Preliminary stages
8.2.1 Site investigation

A good knowledge of the site conditions and relevant soil data are essential in
designing a safe and efficient retaining wall bridge abutment. The designer must be
confident of the data; further boreholes may be needed to better delineate the soil
boundaries over the site.
A geotechnical specialist should be involved in specifying the site investigation
techniques to be used. Refer to Section 9.2 for guidance on site investigations and
Section 9.3 for an explanation of the selection and evaluation of soil parameters.
The soil data to be obtained will include bulk densities, effective stress strength
parameters (c, N), deformation and stiffness parameters, and ground water
conditions. BS 8002(36) provides some useful further information on representative
values for different types of soil.

8.2.2 Select initial concept

The conceptual design of an integral bridge structure may be performed using the
guidance given in Sections 5, 6, 7, and 8. Section 5 explains the different forms of
support and connections between bridge deck and the substructure; both moment
resisting and moment-free connections are considered. Section 6 describes steel pile
sections that can be used for bridge substructures. Pile driveability and construction
sequence are very important aspects that need to be considered in conceptual design
because they affect the practicality, loading, and cost of integral bridges.
Decisions will need to be taken at the conceptual design stage on the type and
configuration of integral bridge that is likely to be the most suitable for the site; for
the client requirements; and for the lowest whole life cost before proceeding with
more detailed design.
Where construction cost is the overriding criterion, several alternative types of
bridge may need to be evaluated in more detail in order to arrive at reasonably
detailed design drawings that can be priced more reliably by contractors. The
construction sequence generally affects the load combinations that govern integral
bridge structure design and hence it needs to be decided before commencing detailed
design, particularly where soil-structure interaction will be involved.
The cost of building the structure will only be part of the comparison because steel
substructure bridges offer faster construction than many conventional types and this
can significantly reduce the overall construction cost. The saving in construction
time may be a very useful advantage to the client, especially where lane rental
charges are to be applied and minimum disruption to traffic on bridge replacement
schemes is an important factor.
8.2.3 Initial design of deck

The initial design of a bridge deck (selection of girder size, flange dimensions,
spacing, etc.) will be the same as for a non-integral bridge except that there are
particular regions that require more attention; these include the bottom flanges in the
region of intermediate supports and at the abutments of frame abutment integral
bridges. At these locations, hogging moments will be present and the bottom
flanges will be in compression; longitudinal compression due to restraint of thermal
56
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
expansion will add to these stresses. If the bottom flanges are not adequately
restrained laterally by the cross bracing, the effects of buckling in hogging regions
near the end supports may need to be analysed.
For an analysis of a frame integral bridge, in the first instance it should be assumed
that fully fixed conditions apply at the bridge deck supports. Design load effects
(moments and shears) in the deck can then be determined. An initial estimate of
axial load should be made to allow determination of axial stresses. Flange and web
sizes can then be verified before proceeding to detailed design. Moments and shears
should also be determined assuming pinned supports, so that any benefits of moment
continuity may be evaluated.
For a bridge that is presumed from the outset to be a pinned integral bridge, a
similar exercise should be carried out, except that the fixed supports condition is not
considered.
No detailed advice is given in this publication on bridge deck design; guidance is
available from other SCI publications(65).

8.2.4 Select soil properties

Soil properties relevant to the type of foundation should be extracted from the site
investigation report. Discussions may need to be held with geotechnical specialists
to achieve this (see Section 9).
8.3
Design of embedded retaining wall abutments
Figure 8.2 below shows a design sequence for the design of retaining wall
abutments. Both frame abutment and pinned integral bridges are covered. The
activities in the preliminary stage outline above are common to both types.
The following Sections deal with each of the activities shown in Figure 8.2.
The design methodology concentrates primarily on the use of numerical analysis
methods for solving soil-structure interaction.
8.3.1 Wall stability and depth of embedment

An analysis is required to check the overall stability of the embedded retaining wall
against overturning, and to calculate the required depth of embedment. The most
appropriate analysis is one based on a limit equilibrium method; this is explained in
Section 10. In that section the Factor on Strength method is recommended and the
results checked using the Burland-Potts method. The recommended partial and/or
lumped factors of safety to be used are given in Section 10.
Factored highway loadings are applied at the relevant points and at the appropriate
levels, in combination with unfactored permanent loads and any other loads. Partial
load factors are not applied to earth pressure because an overall lumped factor of
safety approach is used in this part of the design, applying the factor to the load
effects at the end of the analysis for design of the wall. Live load surcharges are
only applied to the retained side of the wall. See Section 7.4 for a summary of
loads to be considered.
57
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Perform wall stability analysis to

determine depth of embedment &
initial design moment for wall
section
Select a pile section
8.3.2
Determine depth of embedment to

resist vertical loads
Perform pile driveability analysis

8.3.1
8.3.3
8.3.4
Choose frame or pinned abutment
Frame abutment
Pinned abutment
Determine retaining wall boundary

conditions due to axial stiffness &
rotational stiffness of deck
Determine effective prop stiffness

due to deck
8.3.6
Carry out retaining wall analysis

(FREW, WALLAP, etc)
Determine bending moments and
forces
8.3.7
Carry out propped cantilever wall

analysis (FREW, WALLAP,
REWARD, BA42 method)
Determine bending moments and
forces
Check wall & deck for moments and

forces at ULS and SLS
Figure 8.2
Design sequence for embedded retaining wall abutments
58
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
8.3.2 Selection of sheet pile section size

A preliminary pile section for the abutment retaining wall should be chosen from the
types of continuous steel sheet pile sections that are commercially available. These
include sheet piles (Frodingham and Larssen Profiles), High Modulus Piles and box
pile combinations.
In the selection of section size the following requirements should be considered:
Structural capacity
The initial selection of pile size should be made on the basis of moment resistance
to sustain the (factored) maximum moment determined by the wall stability analysis.
For advice on the basics for calculation of steel section resistance, see Section 7.3.
Corrosion
The maximum appropriate corrosion allowance for the exposure conditions as
specified in BD 42/94 should be deducted before determining the structural capacity
and selecting a section at this stage of design (see advice given in Section 6.8).

8.3.3 Vertical resistance of sheet pile walls

The length of the pile section chosen for its bending resistance must also be checked
for its adequacy to carry axial loads and then the depth of embedment increased
where necessary. A method of predicting the load resistance of driven steel piles
is given in Section 13. If the depth of embedment is inadequate to resist the vertical
loads from the bridge deck, then an alternative is to use a larger pile section size.
8.3.4 Pile driveability and dynamic analysis

The designer should check that the chosen steel pile can be driven to the required
penetration. This can be done either by using pile driving formulae or by using
wave equation analysis. See Section 6.7 for guidance.
The objectives of the pile driveability analysis for the selected pile section size are:
To check that the pile can be driven to the required penetration.
To check that the pile will not be overstressed during driving.
8.3.5 Choice of frame or pinned abutment

A choice needs to be made between either a pinned or framed abutment
configuration at this stage because the type of deck/substructure connection affects
the type of analysis required. The benefits of selecting a frame abutment
configuration should have been evaluated in the preliminary stages and a clear plan
should have emerged to enable the selection at this juncture.
8.3.6 Boundary conditions

Software is not yet available that will model accurately the soil behaviour in an
integral bridge at the same time as the structural behaviour of the deck as a whole.
Consequently, separate analysis must be made and the interaction between then
evaluated.
59
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
To model the soil/structure interaction between the deck, substructure and the
adjacent soil, compatible boundary conditions at the connection need to be
established. The modelling of the interaction is dependent on the types of computer
program that are used to analyse (separately) the deck structure and the substructure.
Modelling is discussed in Section 11.
Frame abutment
A frame abutment has both rotational and displacement continuity between deck and
supports.
Typically, a rotational spring will need to be applied to the top of the wall to
represent the effect of deck stiffness on the pile capping beam, and another spring
will need to be applied to the deck model supports to represent the restraint of the
wall.

The spring representing the deck can be calculated from the deck analysis model
with an end moment applied, because the M/N relationship is linear elastic. When
assessing the M/N relationship, care should be taken to ensure that the deck response
corresponds to the loadcase under consideration ( e.g. longitudinal load produces
a sway response).
Similarly, the axial stiffness of the deck may be easily calculated. The wall analysis
model may include this as a spring, although the propping effect of most decks can
be modelled as an infinitely stiff prop.
The soil-response is potentially non-linear, therefore the M/N characteristics of the
head of the abutment wall should be evaluated over a range of moment values up to
the full fixed end moment from the deck structure.
Pinned-integral
When using numerical analysis models the same aspects apply as for the frame
abutment situation but without the moment continuity, so the rotational spring is not
required.
8.3.7 Bending moments and forces acting on the abutment

Frame abutment
For a framed abutment, a soil-structure interaction analysis will be required to solve
the strain related earth pressure problems. Suitable numerical analysis programs are
FREW and WALLAP; both are widely available in the design industry. See
Section 11.
Load cases will be run for all the situations during construction and in service.
The effect of thermal expansion of the deck can be modelled directly using
numerical analysis programs because they are based on the compatibility of stress
and strain. The detailed modelling technique will vary between programs, but the
principle is to induce the thermal displacement into the soil model at the deck level.
For braking load cases, the frame abutment is analysed as a sway frame, and
account should be taken of the sway response of the deck that creates an asymmetry
in abutment load. The most critical load combination is again difficult to prejudge
60
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
because the designer must consider long and short term deck stiffness(due to
concrete creep effects) together with uncorroded or corroded (end of life) steel pile
wall thickness.
Pinned-integral
Numerical analysis programs like FREW and WALLAP can be used to determine
the bending moment and force diagrams for pinned integral bridges as well, but a
more simple limit equilibrium based propped cantilever analysis like ReWaRD is
also generally sufficient for low to medium height walls (less than about 8 m in
height).

For low to medium height walls it has been found that limit equilibrium analysis can
give comparable bending moments in the sheet pile wall to those given by FREW
and WALLAP, provided that the wall section is relatively stiff and most of the
bending induced is due to rotation of the wall. In high walls with greater
slenderness, the ability of steel sheet pile walls to deflect, and thereby to redistribute
earth pressure, can only be satisfactorily analysed using the more sophisticated
numerical analysis programs like FREW and WALLAP.
In view of the lack of reality in limit equilibrium calculations, it is prudent to
determine the maximum bending moment using several methods, as recommended
in CIRIA 104(66) and BD 42(35), and to weigh the effects of small increases in depth
of embedment; variations in soil parameters; and of possible loading conditions
before selecting the design value.
The application of the deck thermal expansion and contraction movements will give
a problem when using limit equilibrium methods, since the models are based on
applied earth pressure forces, not strains. It is not advised to use limit equilibrium
methods for bridge decks longer than 10 m, where displacements become
appreciable and can be expected to affect earth pressures significantly.
Corrosion effects
The effects of corrosion need to be considered when obtaining the total bending
moments and forces acting on the substructure:
The pile section properties and stiffness reduce with decreasing wall thickness due to
corrosion, and therefore bending moment and force magnitudes acting on the wall will
change over the service life time of the bridge. Separate analyses are required to
cover this, one for the uncorroded state and the other for the fully corroded state.
Bending moments due to construction tolerances and deformations

Additional bending moments are caused by out-of-vertical and positional tolerances
in construction and when lateral load displacement occurs, and these need to be
included in the total effects. Typical misalignments due to tolerance in construction
are given in Table 6.1 and horizontal displacements are obtained from the soilstructure interaction analysis.
8.3.8 Structural adequacy of the abutment

The bridge abutment has to resist all combinations of loads at both ULS and SLS
(see Section 7). Steel pile sections are to be checked for adequacy in strength both
for static loads and dynamic pile driving forces (see Sections 6 and 7). Where
61
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
appropriate, adequacy of section is to be considered for uncorroded and corroded

cases (see Section 6.8).
For static loading, adequacy of section has to satisfy the requirements of bending,
axial and shear including the interaction between bending plus shear force and
bending plus axial force interaction. BS 5400(42) does not provide a check for
bending, shear force and axial force interaction, therefore it is necessary for the
engineer to apply a rational interaction check which will give the most conservative
outcome (see comment in Section 7.3 on checking the resistance of the deck).
Adequacy of structural strength of the abutment at SLS is made by checking the wall
displacement output from the soil-interaction analysis (see Section 7.3). If the data
indicates that structures or services may be affected, it will be necessary to perform
a deformation analysis to determine ground movements. Wall displacements for
both the construction and in-service stages are determined either by finite element
methods (see Section 11) or by use of the Observational Method (see Section 7.5).
8.3.9 Detail design - connections and fatigue analysis

The design of the reinforced concrete capping beam involves considering the force
and moment transfer between the cap and the embedded pile tops; the cap and the
end of the embedded deck beam; and the transverse load and moment transfer across
the wall.
Reinforcement has to be provided to effect all these three load transfer mechanisms
for frame integral abutments. This is illustrated in Steel integral bridges: Design of
a single-span bridge - Worked example(5). A section through that detail is shown in
Figure 8.3.
T32 at 150 crs
8 rows of 3 No. 25mm dia.

studs at 150 mm crs
8 No. T25 at 150 crs.
7 No. T40 at 200

6 No. Hoops
Construction Joints
T40 at 150 crs
500 x 600 x 100 deep

landing plinth
Neutral Axis of
High Modulus Pile
Figure 8.3
Section through pile cap showing reinforcement details
62
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Reinforcement detailing for a typical pile capping beam for a pinned-integral bridge
is covered in Steel integral bridges: Design of a multi-span bridge - Worked
example(3).
A construction joint will need to be provided at a convenient level in the capping
beam that is above the head of the embedded pile on which to land the deck beams.
A strip of elastomeric material can be used as a soffit to take up irregularities in the
concrete surface or steel wedges or packing plates used to level the beams as
necessary.
An illustration of load transfer shear studs in the top of a tubular column-pile is
given in Figure 5.7 and Figure 5.12.
8.4
Design of column-pile abutments and piers
Figure 8.4 below shows a design sequence for the activities that are specific to a
steel tubular column-pile design for intermediate piers and fall-through abutments.
Reference to specific design guidance, both in this document and in other
publications on the design of column-pile abutments and intermediate supports, is
given in the same manner as the preceding Section 8.3 does for embedded walls.

8.4.1 Axial load resistance

The axial load resistance of a tubular or box section bearing pile that is driven open
ended is covered in the Steel bearing piles guide(12). Some of the advice is repeated
here in Section 13.
Pile driveability and dynamic analysis
See Section 8.3.4.
8.4.2 Laterally loaded pile analysis

For the pile size and configuration determined from axial load capacity
requirements, the tubular pile abutment/pier has to be checked to confirm that it has
adequate strength to resist the bending moments and forces that act on the steel piles
due to lateral loads acting at the deck to pile connection. A check has also to be
made on the earth pressures that may act due to adjacent embankment loading.
Guidance on performing the analysis of laterally loaded bearing piles is given in
Section 14. For further details on the types of analysis programs, refer to the
CIRIA Report Design of laterally loaded bearing piles(67) and Steel bearing piles
guide(12).
63
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Select a pile section for axial

resistance and check driveability
8.4.1
Carry out lateral analysis of

individual pile (thermal, braking
and collision loads)
8.4.2
Check pile for combined stresses

Adjust wall thickness and
diameter
Frame abutment integral
Pinned integral

Impose deck rotations on pile

calculate BMs in pile and
connection
Check pile for combined stresses
Check pile length for toe fixity
Design pinned connection and

bearings
8.4.3
8.4.3
8.4.3
Design pile cap moment

connection
Check deck
Figure 8.4
Design sequence for column-pile abutments and piers
8.4.3 Pile/structure interaction

Frame integral bridge
The imposition of a moment connection at the head of the pile where it is embedded
into the pile cap requires a moment/rotation diagram to be developed for the pile
head. This can be obtained using lateral load pile analysis programs like ALP in the
Ove Arup OASYS suite(68).
64
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
This first requires output from the deck analysis that gives the order of rotation at
the soffit of the pile capping beam, assuming different restraints from the pile.
Since there may be only 4 to 6 tubular steel piles across a typical overbridge
endscreen wall, the first assumption should be no rotational restraint, only lateral
restraint i.e a pinned-support case for the deck.
This rotation is then applied to a fixed head pile model, like ALP, and the lateral
analysis is run to derive the moment and shear force at pile head versus pile rotation
relationship and the combined stress in the pile section. The pile length may need
to be extended to achieve toe fixity in this analysis.
If the induced reaction force from the pile at the head is significant, an appropriate
force per unit length is then applied to the capping beam to produce a beam moment
diagram, to permit design of the connection with the pile and the bending across the
beam to add to that from earth pressure on any endscreen wall. The deck analysis
may need to be re-run to revise the moment diagram if the pile restraint is sufficient
to cause a hogging moment at the deck/capping beam level.
Pinned integral bridge

Unlike abutment walls, there is no complication for wall stability analysis, so the
basic design work for using column-piles in a pinned integral bridge is completed
by checking the combined stresses from the axial and lateral loading analysis.
In respect of end of embankment stability, there may also be a deep-seated slip plane
that passes across the piles at some depth and the shear force from that will have to
be applied to the pile as well.
Pile driving stresses should be checked for the final section.
8.4.4 Design of pile cap

The concrete pile capping beam or pile cap is reinforced to resist all the load effects
for each load case combination, including crash resistance reactions where that is
required.
8.4.5 Crash resistance analysis of tubular piers

Where column-piles are close to the carriageway, BD 60/94(23) requires that they be
designed for resistance to collision loads. The Standard specifies equivalent static
loads, which can be used for overall design, but which are not suitable for local
design of a hollow steel column. Further advice is given in Section 14.5.
8.5
Design of bankseat integral bridges
The steel plate girder beams of a composite bridge deck will have to be cast into the
reinforced concrete endscreen wall of a bankseat substructure in order to create an
integral bridge. The geometry and the degree of moment continuity will dictate the
design of the connection.
Where the foundation soils are good and construction depth is less than about 2 to
3 metres, it will be possible to use a spread foundation, otherwise piled foundations
may be the most economic solution (as used on the A1 North Shotton overbridge).
65
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The design of endscreen walls for lateral earth pressures is covered in the
recommendations of BA 42/96(9) by the Highways Agency which also recommends
a reduction in the allowable bearing pressure beneath spread footings to allow for
the effects of cyclic loading. Otherwise conventional design of the substructure and
foundations to BS 5400(42) and BS 8004(43) is used, as appropriate.
Where bearing piled bankseats are required, the design can be performed in a
similar manner to that described in Section 8.4.
8.6
Deck design

For comment on the effects to be considered in deck design of integral bridges, see
Section 15.
66
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
9 SITE INVESTIGATION AND SOIL DATA

FOR DESIGN
This section provides the designer with an awareness of the soil and ground data that
is required to perform an accurate design of an integral bridge. Accurate data is
required about the site and the soil, therefore a knowledge of the methods and
procedures that are to be performed by a geotechnical engineer to obtain this data
must be understood by the designer. In some cases soil properties may not be
initially available or previously determined values may be insufficient for design.
Supplementary boreholes would then be required that are tailored to the particular
requirements of integral bridge analysis.
9.1
Soil data required for design

The soil data that is required for pile design includes:

C
Saturated and unsaturated bulk densities (unit weight).
Undrained and drained shear strength including angle of shearing resistance.

and cohesivity.
Standard Penetration Test resistance N values for pile end bearing and shaft
resistance.
Cone penetrometer resistance, qc .
Deformation and stiffness soil properties required include but are not limited to:
C
Youngs modulus (E50 and initial tangent modulus).
Poissons ratio.
Coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction.
Coefficient of subgrade reaction.
Consolidation characteristics.
Typical values for appropriate soil properties are presented in the Design guide for
steel sheet piled bridge abutments(30).
9.2
Site investigation
Site investigations should be carried out in accordance with BS 5930(69) and methods
of in situ and laboratory testing to BS 1377(41). Advice is also given by the
Highways Agency in Advice Note HA 34/87(70). A series of informative CIRIA
reports(71)(72)(73) is also available advising on site investigations.
Accurately determined soil properties, both local and adjacent to the construction
site, need to be obtained to enable a bridge abutment or pier to be designed
accurately and confidently. Soil parameters must not be determined in isolation and
need to be presented with information relating to the physical conditions in the
vicinity of the structure. This includes the topography of the site, details of adjacent
foundations and services, and the nature of the ground water conditions.
67
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Before a method of construction is proposed and a design commenced, it is essential

that site explorations are considered, and performed where required. Site
investigations are performed to ascertain the character and variability of the strata
underlying the site of the proposed retaining wall and adjacent to it. In particular,
those properties that could affect the performance of the structure and the choice of
the method of construction should be assessed thoroughly.
Loads on bridge foundations and stability of walls are significantly influenced by
ground water conditions. The ground investigation should therefore include the
installation of standpipes to monitor the ground water table and the geotechnical
report should interpret the seasonal and long term fluctuations that could be
expected.

Although site investigations are important in enabling an accurate design to be

produced, the extent and detail of investigation has to reflect the type of structure
that is to be designed. ENV 1997-1(48) provides classification categories for
geotechnical design requirements, which can be adopted in assessing the extent and
detail that is required for a particular project. These are referred to as Categories
1, 2 and 3 (see Section 2.1 of ENV 1997-1).
For some complex projects, site investigations will need to be performed during
construction (see the Observational Method discussed in Section 7.5). Periodic
ground inspections during construction enable actual conditions prevailing to be
monitored and soil parameters modified as the design is progressed.
9.3
Selection and evaluation of soil parameters
The determination of soil parameters for design needs to be based on the careful
assessment of a range of values of each parameter that might govern the
performance of the structure during its design life, with account taken of the
conditions representative of the ground and the nature of the surrounding
environment.
The assessment of appropriate parameters is often dependent on the mechanism or
mode of deformation being considered. Strain levels and compatibility should
therefore be considered in the assessment of strengths in materials through which a
presumed failure surface can occur. Ranges of values may also be required,
particularly if the soil parameter values are likely to change during the lifetime of
the embedded sheet pile abutment structure. Typically for structures in clays it is
necessary to obtain soil parameters both for short-term and long-term conditions.
This requires that soil parameters for both drained and/or undrained conditions are
obtained from soil tests.
9.4
Soil parameters for design of integral bridges
The uncertainty involved in the selection of soil strength parameters can be catered
for by specifying that soil properties are based on the definitions stated in
BS 8002(36). BS 8002 requires that representative values are obtained, where a
representative value is defined as a conservative estimate of the property of the soil
as it exists in situ. In this case conservative is defined as a value of soil
parameter which is more adverse than the most likely value. It may be less or
68
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
greater than the most likely values and tends towards the limit of the credible range
of values. It is comparable with the definition of the worst credible value referred
to the CIRIA Report Design of retaining walls in stiff clays(66).
Shear stress
100
Moderately conservative
o
(c'=10 kN/m 2 , ' = 21 )
50
Worst credible
o
(c'=0 , ' = 21 )
50
100
150
200
Effective stress (kN/m2 ) '

Figure 9.1
Representation of a representative (worst credible) value
Care must be taken in using quoted values or specifying soil properties to be

measured as various other definitions exist. Characteristic values as defined in ENV
1997-1 are selected as a cautious estimate of the values affecting the occurrence of
the limit state. Usually the extent of the ground governing the behaviour of a pile
abutment or pier at a limit state is much larger than the extent of the zone in a soil
and consequently the governing parameter is often a mean value over a certain
surface or volume of the ground. In this case the characteristic value is a cautious
estimate of this mean value.
The CIRIA Report Design of retaining walls embedded in stiff clays(66) takes into
account the uncertainty in the selection of soil strength parameters for clays by
allowing two different values to be defined. These two values are termed
Moderately Conservative and Worst Credible and are defined below.
A moderately conservative value for a soil parameter is defined as a conservatively
best estimated value. It is the most commonly used in practice by experienced
engineers.
A worst credible value is the worst value that the designer could realistically
believe might occur. In the case of a load or a geometric parameter, it is not the
worst physically possible, but rather a value which is unlikely to be exceeded. For
example, in the case of a soil strength parameter, the worst credible value
appropriate to a retaining wall design would be a pessimistic value which is very
unlikely to be lower.
69
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
10
ABUTMENT WALLS - EMBEDDED

WALL STABILITY
This section presents the method that is used to assess the overall stability of
embedded retaining walls against overturning and determine a depth of embedment
such that horizontal wall displacements are within serviceability requirements.
Other possible modes of failures may occur but they are less likely than that of
overturning. These include stability failure by deep-seated slip planes passing
behind and below the wall, which can be particularly important for waterfront
structures or in sloping ground.

Embedded retaining walls rely on the resistance of the ground below excavation
level and, where present, on the forces provided by anchors for their stability. For
both support conditions, whether for cantilever or propped walls, it is assumed that
there is enough movement of the ground to allow full active and passive pressures
to be generated at limiting conditions.
The classical methods of determining earth pressure for the limit equilibrium wall
stability analysis are the same as those used for non-integral bridges. For further
explanation see the Design guide for steel sheet piled bridge abutments(30). Simple
hand calculations can be used, but computer programs like British Steels ReWaRD
program can save time and permit more rigorous comparison of several methods in
the judgement of embedment depth.
The limit equilibrium approach is simplistic in that it does not satisfy all the
fundamental theoretical requirements to simulate soil-structure behaviour. No
account is taken of the mode of wall displacement on the resultant earth pressure and
no indication of the distribution or magnitude of earth pressure prior to ultimate
failure is given. The estimation of structural forces in the embedded retaining wall
under serviceability conditions is therefore extremely difficult. Although a great
deal of experience has been gained using this approximate method, the above
shortcomings limit its use to initial wall stability analysis and determining the depth
of embedment of retaining walls. Bending moments and forces acting on the wall
can only be determined accurately if soil-structure interaction using numerical
analysis techniques is considered (see Section 11).
10.1 Cantilever and propped walls

As a cantilever wall depends entirely on the support of the penetrated ground for its
stability, it cannot be in equilibrium without the toe being prevented from rotating.
Embedded cantilever retaining walls are therefore designed using the fixed-earth
support method. When retained heights increase or restricting soil movements
becomes important, propped embedded walls are used. In this case the free-earth
support method is adopted for design. For more detailed information see the Design
guide for steel sheet piled bridge abutments(30). These two methods enable the
embedment depth to be determined at the limiting equilibrium (failure) condition,
and the anchor force where present. For design purposes a margin of safety is
introduced.
70
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
10.2 Methods of analysis for stability against

overturning
Various methods of analysis are in current use for assessing overall stability and
determining depth of embedment for embedded retaining walls. They are all
limiting equilibrium methods which are used for cantilever abutment walls, or
abutment walls propped at or near the top.
For design, the moment equation is directly or indirectly used to ensure that
restoring moments exceed overturning moment by a prescribed safety margin. This
is achieved by the introduction of partial factors or by a single factor of safety,
termed a lumped factor.
In the context of a limit equilibrium analysis, the factor of safety has two functions:
To make allowance for uncertainties in the evaluation of the soil parameter.
To ensure that deflections in service are not excessive.

The former can be allowed for either by using an unfactored worst credible
parameter, or by using a factored moderately conservative parameter, or the
representative/1.2 as in BS 8002(36).
Since weaker soils produce larger structural displacements at the point of limit
equilibrium, in-service displacements can be limited by the application of a further
factor. This factor would be applied to either the unfactored worst credible
parameter or to the factored moderately conservative parameter.
In practice both functions are grouped together in one lumped factor. This practice
is at odds with the trend towards discrete partial factors in structural engineering for
three main reasons.
C
Soil parameters are highly variable both within one site and from site to site.
They do not lend themselves to statistical distributions that lie at the heart of the
partial safety factor approach.
Limit equilibrium methods are widely used, hence there is a need for a factor
to limit deflections.
Insufficient test data for calibration from actual walls is available to assess the
accuracy of the deflection predictions of existing numerical-based software (i.e.
FREW, WALLAP).
Until the above circumstances change, there will still be a need to carry out a limit
equilibrium analysis to establish an embedment depth that sufficiently limits
serviceability limit deflections.
As a result of the recent introduction in the United Kingdom of BS 8002 and the
draft for development version of Eurocode 7(48), the Factor on Strength method is
increasingly being used for stability determination. Also the Burland and Potts(74)
method is increasingly being used because it is more consistent than, and free from
the peculiarities contained in, the other lumped factor methods (see Section 10.2.2).
It is therefore recommended to use the Factor on Strength method using partial

factors, and the Burland and Potts method based on a lumped factor of safety as a
check.
71
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
10.2.1
Factor on Strength method
In this approach the soil strength parameters used to derive the earth pressure
coefficients are reduced by dividing by appropriate factors. The divisor can be a
factor which represents the mobilised soil strength acting at the serviceability limit
state (i.e. in accordance with BS 8002) or partial factors applied in an ultimate limit
state (i.e. in accordance with Eurocode 7(48)).
In an effective stress analysis the soil strength parameters include c', the effective
cohesion and N' the effective angle of shearing resistance. To allow for the
uncertainties associated with c' and N, two factors of safety are defined, Fc and FN.
The factored parameters for effective stress analysis are termed mobilised values and
are given by:
c m'=
c'
tan '
and m'= tan 1
Fc
F
where cm' and Nm' are the mobilised values of the respective strength parameters
c' and N'.
To maintain overall consistency
m
cmw ' cw
=
and
=
m ' '
cm '
c'
where *m and cwm are the mobilised values of wall friction * and wall adhesion cw.
For total stress analysis:
cum =
cu
Fc
where cum is the mobilised value of the undrained shear strength cu.
It is common when performing an effective stress analysis to assume that Fc = FN
= Fs, although in Eurocode 7(48) individual factors for c' and N' are given.
The mobilised strengths are used to calculate the earth pressure coefficients and the
distribution of earth pressure on the wall. The factored strength parameters increase
active and reduce passive earth pressures and modify the relative distribution of
these pressures.
The resultant forces on the back and front of the wall are then expressed as a
function of the unknown depth of embedment, d. By equating moments to zero the
embedment depth can be calculated.
The design embedment is that for which the following relationship is satisfied:
M fp = M fa + M w
72
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
where,
Mfp =
Mfa =
Mw =
Moment of factored passive earth pressure

Moment of factored active earth pressure
Moment of net active water pressure
When the forces are expressed as functions of embedment depth do, this equation
reduces to a cubic expression in terms of do.
The factor to be used in the Factor on Strength method is given in Table 10.1.
Table 10.1 Soil strength factor Fs
Reference

Design Conditions
BS 8002(36) *
Serviceability Limit State
CIRIA 104(66)
Worst credible design
Effective
stress
Total
stress
1.2
1.5
Permanent works in stiff clays
1.2
Temporary works in stiff clays
1.0
These are mobilisation factors appropriate for a serviceability limit state and are not strength
factors as such.
Larger than 1.5 for clays which require large strains to mobilise peak strength.
Eurocode 7 provides partial factors for c'; N'; and cu; which are presented in
Table 10.2.
Table 10.2 Eurocode 7 partial factors for soil strength parameters
Case
Ground Properties
tan N'
c'
cu
1.1
1.3
1.2
B1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.25
1.6
1.4
Partial factors are applied on actions only.
Case A
Case B
Case C
10.2.2
is the loss of static equilibrium (strength of

structural material or ground insignificant)
is failure of structure or element (governed by
the strength of the structural material)
is failure in the ground.
Burland and Potts method
In this approach the earth pressure distributions are calculated using the fully
mobilised (unfactored) design soil strengths and the geometry adjusted such that
restoring moments exceed overturning moments by a prescribed margin. This is an
empirical method developed by Burland, Potts and Walsh which has been shown to
behave successfully. It is a consistent method providing satisfactory results using
one lumped factor of safety, Fr, for the practical range of soils and wall geometries.
73
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The resultant earth pressure forces acting on the wall are split into net activating and
net resisting components. The net activating forces are those forces that arise from
the retained height of soil, whilst the net resisting forces are those forces from the
soil below excavation level (see Figure 10.1). These net forces are expressed as a
function of the unknown depth of embedment, do and their calculation involves the
solution of a cubic equation.
Earth
Passive
Net water
Active
Active

Figure 10.1 Earth pressure representation for the Burland & Potts method
The active earth pressure diagram is modified by altering the pressure at any level
below excavation to be equal to the pressure at excavation level. The passive earth
pressure diagram is modified by deducting the difference between the gross and
modified active pressures from the gross passive pressure at any level. The
modified active and passive pressure diagrams are given by the unshaded areas.
The design embedment is that which satisfies the following relationship:
M mp
Fr
Mmp
Ma
Mw
Fr
= Ma + M w
=
=
=
=
moment of modified passive earth pressure

moment of modified active earth pressure
moment of net active water pressure
lumped factor of safety
Care must be exercised in the use of this method where a value of c' is used when
analysing total stress conditions (see paper by Burland, Potts and Walsh(74)).
Recommended factor of safety values for the Burland and Potts method are
presented in Table 10.3.
74
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Table 10.3 Burland & Potts method factors

Reference
Design condition
Fp
Burland, Potts and Walsh
Ultimate Limit State
CIRIA Report 104(66)
Worst credible design, temporary

works in stiff clay
1.0
Worst credible design,

permanent works in stiff clays
1.5
75
1.5 - 2.0
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
11
ABUTMENT WALLS - SOILSTRUCTURE INTERACTION
For integral bridges the analysis of earth pressure requires a strain dependent model
that can only be provided by a numerical analysis computer program.
This Section provides guidance on the determination of bending moments and shear
forces acting on the bridge abutment where the mobilisation of earth pressures and
soil-structure interaction are considered. The soil-structure interaction approach
produces a more realistic representation of the behaviour of a structure by taking
into account in situ soil stresses, temperature effects, forces and bending moments
from the bridge deck and the stiffness of the structure and the soil. As these
analyses cannot be performed by hand calculations, commercially available software
is required.

11.1 Soil-structure interaction approach

The introduction of soil pressures into structural design can give rise to some
confusion over whether soil pressures are loads (in the sense that they are applied
to a structural element) or are part of a structural element resistance (in the sense
that they respond to imposed loads or displacements). The distinction is likely to
be important in the understanding and treatment of integral bridges, where strain and
displacements are continually varying, unlike normal static situations. The
distinction is also of significance to Limit State Design, since partial safety factors
will generally be different for loading and for resistance. Design rigour is
needed to eliminate this potential confusion.
11.2 Mobilisation of earth pressure and

soil-structure interaction
The importance of soil structure interaction in design can best be shown by
illustrating the mobilisation of earth lateral pressures as the embedded wall moves
(see Figure 11.1, Ref. Potts and Fourie). Three modes of wall deformation, namely
horizontal translation, rotation about the wall top and rotation about the toe,
provided an analogy to commonly occurring cases. For embedded cantilever walls
the mode of displacement is essentially one of rotation about the toe; for an anchor
or bridge deck beam located near the top of the wall the mode is rotation about the
top.
Rotation about the base requires significantly more displacement to obtain failure
conditions than do the other modes of displacement. For high values of the at-rest
coefficient, Ko; active and passive conditions are mobilised at similar displacements.
However, for low Ko values, active conditions occur before passive conditions.
Clearly, displacements necessary to mobilise active and passive conditions are
dependent on the value of Ko as well as on the mode of deformation. The limiting
values of Ka, active, and Kp, passive, are less sensitive to the mode of displacement
than the Ko value.
76
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Ko
Ka
Kp
K o = 2.0
1
4.0
H/2
1
3
Earth pressure
coefficient K
H
K o = 0.5
3.0
3
2.0
Ka
Active side
Kp
Passive side
1.0
4.0
3.2
2.4
1.6
0.8
0
/H (%)
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.2
4.0

Figure 11.1 Development of earth pressure coefficients with increasing

wall displacement (rough wall)
Deformation of flexible embedded sheet pile walls arising from soil-structure
interaction will result in earth pressure distributions which cannot be predicted by
classical earth pressure theories (see Figure 11.2). However, the study for the rigid
wall case does show clearly actual behaviour rather than the assumed simplistic
behaviour and makes the engineer appreciate the redistribution of earth pressure that
will be created by flexible steel wall structures.
Actual measured
pressure
Pressure profile
from classical theory
Figure 11.2 Actual horizontal earth pressure distribution for a flexible

sheet pile abutment
11.3 Soil-structure interaction analysis methods

The soil-structure interaction approach models the earth pressure distribution which
acts on the design configuration of the wall. The simplest of these soil-structure
interaction methods are the Winkler(75) spring models where the soil is modelled as
a spring. These are followed with increasing complexity by methods where the
77
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
soil is modelled by Boundary element, finite difference and finite element

numerical approximations.
11.3.1
Winkler spring models (beam on elastic

foundations)

The beam or slab on an elastic foundation approach has found application in

numerical analysis of sheet piles. Power series, finite differences, distribution and
discrete element methods are employed for the solution of the governing
differential equations. In each case the elastic foundation is assumed to generate
reactive pressure proportional to the structural displacement (Winklers hypothesis).
The soil response is usually characterised by a spring constant, which is related to
the coefficient of subgrade reaction. Normally the coefficients of horizontal
subgrade reaction recommended by Terzaghi(76) are used.
The 'beam on elastic foundation' or 'subgrade reaction' approach is one commonly
used for soil-structure interaction because of the ease with which it can be applied,
and various methods are available. Commonly, the soil mass is modelled as a
series of horizontal isolated springs, or as springs with some form of
interconnection (see Figure 11.3). In addition, the in situ horizontal soil stresses
are input together with the active and passive earth pressure coefficients to provide
the limiting values of the horizontal effective stress. Where an anchor is to be
simulated, additional springs at the required stiffness and at the appropriate level
are input.
Anchor
Slider
Spring
Figure 11.3 Spring model for analysis of abutment

In most situations, the bending moments and shear forces obtained from the
Winkler method are insensitive to the values of the spring stiffness chosen and used
in the analysis. However, this is not the case for the prediction of deformations
of the wall. Deformations obtained from these analyses can therefore only be
regarded as rough estimates and need to be checked by field measurements.
The analysis can be carried out with the wall being backfilled towards its top or
excavation from the top of the wall downwards. If progressive softening, which
takes place in the long term as a result of the swelling of clays, is to be modelled,
then it is necessary to change the spring stiffnesses.
Limitations of the beam on elastic foundation approach are:
C
Difficulty in determining appropriate spring stiffnesses for analysis.
78
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Method cannot directly simulate unusual initial soil stresses.
Development of wall friction and construction sequence.
Determining surface movements of the retained soil.
11.3.2
Boundary element and finite element methods
More sophisticated techniques are available which model general soil-structure

interaction problems. These methods are more rigorous in the formulation of the
problem and overcome the shortcomings of the beam on elastic foundations. A
commonly used boundary element method is the one proposed by Pappin et al(77).
Boundary Element methods still have shortcomings, therefore if a sophisticated
analysis is required, a finite element analysis should be performed. These methods
have the ability to predict both earth pressures and deformations with a minimum
of simplifying assumptions. Where it is necessary to use finite element analysis
techniques then specialist advice should be sought.

11.4 Global analysis of integral bridges

In a non-integral bridge design the analysis of the bridge structure is performed by
separate analyses of the deck structure and the substructure. For example, as in
most cases the supports are pinned, the bridge deck can be analysed using a
grillage model and the reactions at the supports then treated as loads acting on the
substructure model. The substructure is analysed under the combined loading of
the deck reactions and soil pressure loads.
In an integral bridge, interaction between the deck and the substructure occurs with
the adjacent soil becoming part of the structures resistance to deck loading. An
effective design method that can be applied to integral bridges is one where the
bridge deck and substructure models are separately analysed. Subsequently the
models are modified to include the influence of the bridge deck to substructure
connection and each model is re-analysed. The bridge deck to substructure
connection is taken into account by determining imposed displacements, rotations,
forces and bending moments at the connection which results in a compatible set of
imposed boundary conditions. These boundary conditions which are linear elastic
translation and rotation springs, are applied both to the bridge deck and to the
bridge substructure models.
11.5 Available soil-structure interaction analysis

software
There are a number of commercially available numerical analysis software products
that are commonly in use by design practices. Three of the most well known are
WALLAP, FREW and FLAC.
Results obtained from these programs are very dependent on the relative stiffness
of the chosen components of the model. The application of arbitrary rules for
determining soil stiffnesses can result in large variations. Depth, soil type and over
consolidation ratio can have considerable influence on the stress/strain properties of
soils and these parameters should be obtained from proven experience. Programs
79
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
need to be calibrated against measurements in well-documented case histories in

retaining wall construction and worked examples made available to the user.
11.5.1
WALLAP
WALLAP (Wall Analysis Program) is a widely used commercial package from

Geosolve and described by Borin(78), designed specifically for routine retaining wall
design. Finite elements are used to model the sheet pile wall and an elasto-plastic
finite element model or a Winkler spring model can be chosen to represent the soil.
The springs in the Winkler spring model can either be interconnected or
independent.
WALLAP can be used to model cantilever walls, anchored walls and strutted
excavations. Initial or in situ soil pressures can be defined and the pressures
determined during wall/soil movement are constrained to lie between active and
passive limits. Wall excavation can be modelled together with de-watering, placing
of surcharge and the introduction of struts and anchors. In addition complex water
profiles can be included to model steady seepage, submergence and perched water
tables.

The deliverables from the program include a stability analysis, wall displacement
versus depth profile, bending moment, shear force, earth pressure distributions and
strut loads.
Users need to be aware that the Winkler spring approximations do not yield the
same wall displacements as those given by more sophisticated models. See Brooks
and Spencer 1992(79), who compared the results from WALLAP and FLAC. At that
time they concluded that lower stiffnesses must be used in the Winkler spring
models to obtain similar displacements to those given by finite element models.
11.5.2
FREW
FREW (Flexible REtaining Wall analysis) is part of the OASYS suite from Ove
Arup and Partners, London which is also developed specifically for retaining wall
design. The program uses a modified Winkler spring model approach, see Pappin
et al(80). The analysis is carried out by assembling a stiffness matrix for a line of
nodal points that represents the wall. The soil can be modelled in three different
ways:
C
Winkler springs (subgrade reaction method).
Stiffness matrices obtained from pre-stored finite element analyses.
Mindlin method, where the soil is modelled as an elastic solid (constant

stiffness with depth only).
FREW calculates earth pressure, shear forces, wall bending moments, prop forces
and wall displacements for each construction stage being considered and also allows
soil arching to be modelled. Full details are given by Pappin et al(81).
FREW has the facility to model the effect of moment continuity between wall and
deck by adding deck elements as a continuation of the wall above the soil (that is,
as though the deck is rotated by 90E to make it vertical). The extent of the deck
elements and the restraints at its end are chosen to represent the whole deck. For
a simple span, only half of the deck is modelled; at the centreline restraints are
provided to simulate the affect of the complete deck on a pair of wall supports.
80
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Symmetric and anti-symmetric loading can be modelled. The SCI publication Steel
integral bridges: Design of a single-span bridge - Worked example(5) provides an
example of the use of FREW.
11.5.3
FLAC
FLAC is a program for the solution of general geomechanical problems based on a

finite difference method. The program has been developed by ITASCA Consulting
Group, Minneapolis, USA. Amongst other uses, it is capable of solving a range of
earth retention problems, and any type of non-linear soil stress/strain relationship
can be followed. It is suitable for the solution of retaining wall, tunnel-lining and
rockbolting problems.
11.6 Boundary conditions at the deck to abutment

connection

As yet there are no programs that allow a three dimensional soil-structure model to
be produced easily. Until such a program is developed, it will be necessary to
model the soil and structure separately, and approximate the interaction between the
two by the provision of appropriate boundary conditions. The commonly used
retaining wall analysis programs such as WALLAP or FREW are capable of being
used as part of such an analysis.
One possible analysis method is illustrated in Figure 11.4. The integral bridge is
split into two models, deck grillage and abutment. Boundary conditions are
provided at the connection between the two models. The rotational stiffness of the
combined wall and soil is calculated using the WALLAP model, by applying
moments directly to the top of the wall and measuring the resulting rotation. It is
suggested that the full fixed end moment is applied as an upper bound, in order to
establish that the soil response is linear within the expected range of moments. The
rotational stiffness of the deck can be established in a similar manner. The values
of the respective spring forces are transferred between models.
Spring A
Spring A
Deck Model
(Grillage)
Spring B
Spring B
Elasto
plastic
soil
mass
Soil Model
(WALLAP, FREW)
Figure 11.4 Soil-structure interaction diagram for WALLAP or FREW
81
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
For a beam of constant stiffness, the general stiffness/flexibility equation for in-plane
rotation may be expressed as:
6 EI y
My1 =
L2
d z1 +
4 EI y
L
y1 +
6 EI y
L2
d z2 +
2 EI y
L
y2
(1)
using the sign convention shown in Figure 11.5.

y2
y1
my2
my1
y
x
Figure 11.5 Sign convention

For an excavation loadcase and for symmetric loading on the deck, rotation is
symmetrical therefore:
2y2 = !2y1
and dZ1 = dZ2 = 0

which leads to an effective stiffness of the deck connection given by:
M y1
y1
2 EI
L
Loading on the deck must be split into symmetric and anti-symmetric components.
The stiffness for symmetric components is 2EI/L, as above; the stiffness for
anti-symmetric components is 6EI/L.
11.6.1 Modelling deck expansion

Deck expansion using WALLAP can only be modelled by applying a preload to the
prop at deck level. As prop preloads and stiffnesses are not proportional to member
strain, i.e. g P/AE if a preload is applied, the effective sequence of events
modelled is:
1.
2.
3.
Prop stiffeners set to zero.

Load applied.
Prop stiffness reset to previous value.
The actual deck expansion depends on the point of equilibrium between the soil
reaction and the internal forces in the deck. This is illustrated diagramatically in
Figure 11.6.
82
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Force
Deck behaviour
Soil behaviour
Force
at
equilibrium
Point of
equilibrium
Displacement
at
equilibrium
Displacement
Figure 11.6 Equilibrium condition between deck and soil

In this Figure, the force-displacement line for the deck represents the response of
the deck to an axial load after a thermal strain has occurred. The intercept on the
force axis represents the force if all strain is prevented; the intercept on the
displacement axis represents the displacement at the end of the deck if it is free to
expand.
The force-displacement line for the soil mass can be determined using FREW or
WALLAP. It is suggested that preloads to the strut are applied up to the fully
restrained force in the deck.
The line represents the displacement at the top of the wall when subject to a load
applied at the top of the wall (additional to any preload due to the action of the deck
as a prop).
The intersection of the soil line with the deck line will be the actual force and
displacements for the given temperature increase.
If the two abutments are similar, there will be equal (and opposite) displacements
at each. If they are dissimilar, a more complex interaction must be considered.
11.6.2
Modelling braking loads
The load combinations that involve braking loads need careful consideration of an
appropriate model because of the asymmetry caused. A sway type effect is created
with both frame and pinned abutment bridges.
In a frame integral bridge, this may contribute to producing critical bending
moments at the integral connection. To check whether the affects may be
significant, Kleinlogel graphs (see the Steel Designers Manual(82)) can be used for
a quick initial analysis, by simplifying the structure to a portal frame with a fixed
base - initially 3 m into stiff clay (after McShane(21)). Neither FREW nor WALLAP
are particularly suited to the direct evaluation of the effects of this loading since both
the loading and the structure (including the soil mass) are non-symmetric.
This check is illustrated in Steel integral bridges: Design of a single-span bridge Worked example(5), which calculates the moments at the wall/deck junction acting as
a portal frame without restraint from the soil.
83
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
12
ABUTMENT WALLS - RESPONSE TO

THERMAL DECK MOVEMENTS
This Section provides guidance in analysing the bridge abutment for forces resulting
from the cyclic expansion and contraction of the bridge deck beam due to
temperature effects.
12.1 Bridge temperatures

The movement at the ends of the bridge due to change of temperature in the deck
is a significant factor in the design of an integral bridge, so it is important to have
a good understanding of the temperature changes that the bridge will experience.
The length of a bridge depends on its effective bridge temperature which, in
essence, is the mean temperature throughout the structure, or the temperature at the
neutral axis of the deck beams. The effective bridge temperature depends on
ambient temperature, on the type of construction, on the duration of the weather
conditions and the wind circulation. The determination of effective bridge
temperature has been related to ambient temperatures by Emerson(62). The maximum
and minimum ambient temperature (over the Highways Agency required 120 year
design life) depends on the geographical location of the bridge in the UK.
HA document BD 37(51) defines the requirements for the determination of maximum
and minimum effective bridge temperature. These temperatures are used to
calculate the change in length (of an unrestrained bridge) at the extremes of ambient
temperature variation, and hence the maximum conceivable movements for design
purposes. However, the neutral, or at rest position of an integral bridge can be at
a temperature which is not the mean of these two extremes. A practical judgement
assumes that the bridge is set at a temperature within 10EC above or below the
mean; the maximum movement is therefore that due to half the total range plus
10EC. This appears to be the basis used in BA 42/96(9), where a thermal strain
range is specified for the design of integral bridges.
Data on temperature ranges, nominal thermal strains and characteristic thermal
strain range according to BA 42/96 are presented in Table 12.1.
For integral bridges, BA 42/96 advises that no factor need be applied to the thermal
strain range; at ULS, earth pressures calculated on the basis of these strains are,
however, subject to a factor (fL of 1.5 (Clause 2.8 of BA 42/96). It may be noted
that this contrasts with BD 37, which specifies, separately, that ULS design values
are obtained by applying a factor ((fL) of 1.3 on the nominal range of movement,
or by applying a factor of 1.3 on the forces due to restraint of the nominal range of
movement.
For design purposes, if the thermal strain range is taken according to BA 42/96, i.e.
0.0005 for a composite bridge, without any partial factor, this corresponds to
movements at each end of a 60 m total length bridge of some 15 mm, assuming that
both ends move equally.
In practice, the movements observed at the ends of monitored bridges appear to be
much smaller than the design movements. This discrepancy is due to actual
84
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
temperature variation, on a short-term basis, being much less than the extreme
design ranges. For example, Emerson(62) notes that the daily range in effective
temperature of a concrete bridge is less than 4.5EC for 96% of the days in a year
compared with the nominal design range of 46EC. The observed movements on
supposedly unrestrained bridges may be less than expected due to frictional restraint
in the bearings. Bridges in which bearings become locked up nevertheless
continue to expand and contract, displacing their supports as they do so. In these
cases simply supported bridges may actually be acting integrally.
Table 12.1 Thermal strain design temperatures

Deck Structure
type
Half range + 10oC
Ambient temperatures
Temperature
o
C
Thermal
strain
Thermal
strain range,
in BA 42
Maximum
o
C
Minimum
o
C
Groups 1 & 2:
Steel
47
!28
47.5
0.00057
0.0006
Group 3:
Composite
40
!19
39.5
0.00047
0.0005
Group 4:
Concrete
37
!14
35.5
0.00043
0.0004
Notes:
1) The ambient temperatures are respectively the maximum and minimum anywhere in the UK,
so the range is greater than might be expected for any given location.
2) Structural types are: Group 1 steel box girders; Group 2 steel girders; Group 3 composite;
Group 4 concrete.
12.2 Soil behaviour under cyclic loading

It is widely recognised that soil behaviour under cyclic loading is controlled by:
C
Soil type (cohesive or non-cohesive).
Magnitude of the shear strain, i.e. amplitude of induced movement or soil

displacement.
Frequency and magnitude of loading.
Presence of ground water.
Initial density (for cohesionless soils).
The behaviour of soil under cyclic loading is largely influenced by the rate at which
the change in pore water pressure can dissipate through the soil mass. In low
permeability cohesive soils the rate of dissipation is very slow and the soil usually
responds under undrained conditions to cyclic loading. Under these conditions the
undrained shear strength cu is reduced with increasing shear strain. In contrast, if
partial or full drainage of the soil occurs then consolidation and strengthening of the
soil takes place, together with an increase in stiffness.
Research has been undertaken on the behaviour of soils under cyclic loading
particularly where compaction of soils by mechanical plant occurs. See Section
12.3. However, cyclic loading compaction under surface moving loads will be of
relatively high frequency and in most cases there is little opportunity for soil
drainage and dissipation of pore pressures to occur even in relatively permeable noncohesive sands and silts.
85
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Cyclic loading of soils due to thermal movement of a bridge superstructure occur

at a much lower frequency (1 to 2 cycles per day for daily temperature changes and
1 to 2 cycles per year for seasonal changes). Under these conditions of
comparatively slow cyclic loading the soil is likely to respond under drained or
partially drained conditions with dissipation of pore pressures. It is quite probable
that cohesive soils will behave in this manner. It is therefore anticipated that an
increase in strength and stiffness of soil behind an integral abutment will take place
if cyclic loading occurs.
12.3 Earth pressures due to wall displacement

Limited work has been undertaken and few cases published of the effects of thermal
movement on lateral stresses in integral bridge abutments. Broms and Ingleson(83)
measured lateral earth pressures acting on backfilled abutments of rigid frame
bridges. They found that complex interaction between abutment wall and its backfill
occurred during a small number of cyclic movements. Further work by Broms and
Ingleson(84)(85) indicated a continuing increasing trend in lateral earth pressures with
increasing number of cycles of bridge movement.
Backfilled abutments are generally speaking designed on the basis that the backfill
pressure equates to at-rest conditions, Ko, whilst the earth pressures for embedded
walls would in practice be the in situ, at-rest condition and the design pressures
would generally be assessed on the basis of active lateral pressures Ka. Where the
in situ soil is overconsolidated either naturally or by compaction, higher lateral earth
pressures theoretically up to Kp could exist. More recent work by Ingold on the A3
Wisley bridge over the M25 in Surrey has produced further data on earth pressures
in fill behind endscreen walls (see Section 14.4).
For embedded steel sheet pile retaining walls, the initial earth pressure mobilised in
the soil behind the wall is likely to be the Ko value, which is likely to be greater
than 1.0 in natural overconsolidated clays and probably of the order of 0.5 in sands.
The Ko value dictates the earth pressure for cuttings in natural clay and for the
design of retaining walls for deep urban underpasses it is advisable to measure the
in situ Ko value during the site investigation using such tools as the dilatometer.
Recently research by Springman et al at Cambridge University to study the effect
of slow cyclic temperature induced expansion or contraction on the displacement of
flexible sheet pile retaining walls in sand has been published in the TRL Report
Cyclic loading of sand behind integral bridge abutments(86). Based on the physical
tests and numerical analyses conducted in this research, actual lateral earth pressures
on the wall have been produced which provide a better insight into the actual
behaviour of the soil and the wall. These lateral earth pressures are presented in
Figures 12.1 and 12.2.
SCI studies(1) show that wall movements due to deck expansion for the range of
bridges with deck lengths less than 60 m, are insufficient to generate full passive
pressure and therefore this experimental research is not relevant. The worst case
condition used in the Springman et al research is to extreme to apply in most
integral bridge design and the designer is best advised to use methods explained in
Sections 11.
86
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Depth (m)
Wall
static
cycle 1
2
K=2
4
e
activ
dr
hy
12
200
active
10
os
ta
tic
tic
ta
os
dr
st
h y at re
at re
st
100
K=2
-100
-200
Lateral pressure acting on abutment (kPa)
Depth (m)
Wall
static
cycle 1
2
4
12
200
active
100
tic
ta
os
dr
hy at rest
10
hy
dr
os
ta
tic
at re
st
active

Figure 12.1 Lateral earth pressures - wall displacement towards fill
K=2
-100
-200
Lateral pressure acting on abutment (kPa)
Figure 12.2 Lateral earth pressures - wall displacement away from fill
The results have shown that at serviceability limit state, the effect of cyclic passive
wall rotation on lateral pressures, bending moments and deck loads did not appear
to be significant at these amplitudes of wall rotation. However, at ultimate limit
state under passive wall rotations, abutment bending moment and axial deck load
values are noticeably increased by the stiffening of the soil response due to the
cyclic nature of wall movements. The lateral earth pressures on the abutment wall
are also increased due to ongoing densification of the retained soil.
87
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
12.4 Requirements of BA 42/96

In BA 42/96(9), the Highways Agency advises the limits on passive earth pressures
and the value of Kp that it expects to be used in the calculation of passive earth
pressure resistance for the cyclic loading caused behind bridge abutment walls due
to thermal movement of the deck in an integral bridge.
BA 42/96 states that the values of K* and Kp it gives are based on the findings
obtained from experimental and analytical data, particularly that in the TRL Report
by Springman et al(86), although this research applies specifically to short rigid walls
and sand fill only. No adjustment is given for flexible steel walls, even though it
is well known that earth pressure is considerably less, and of a redistributed form,
behind such walls.
Earth pressure coefficients are to be calculated according to BS 8002(36) but with the
mobilisation and material factors as given in BA 42/96. The Eurocode 7(48)
approach is also invoked.

Specific advice contained in BA 42/96 relating to soil behaviour is summarised

below:
3.2 An increase of stiffness of granular soil occurs due to densification of the fill
under the thermal cyclic movements induced by deck expansion. Even if the fill
is placed in loose condition, representative c'peak and N'peak ... should be used
throughout the design.
3.3 ... the passive earth pressure mobilised by a granular backfill on a [retaining
wall] abutment of an integral bridge moving towards the backfill would act in
an unfavourable manner. For this reason, the approach of Eurocode 7 ...
is adopted in which the factor of M is 1/1.2, i.e a value <1, [and] is applied
... for earth pressure calculations. (BS 8002(36) gives a value of mobilisation
factor, M = 1.2 to calculate active and at-rest earth pressure coefficients.)
3.3 ... Wall friction should be taken as * = design Nr/2
3.4 During displacement towards the backfill, ... Kp ... increases very rapidly at
high angles of friction as follows: (see Table 12.2)
Table 12.2 Values of Kp from BA 42/96(9)
Kp
Inclination of abutment backface
N'
Vertical
20E forwards
20Ebackwards
30E
35E
12
40E
20
45E
15
37
It can be seen that Kp increases very rapidly at high angles of friction and it is
therefore essential to have reliable measured values of N for the select granular fill
materials that are likely to be used immediately behind abutment walls for integral
bridges.
88
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
... the relationship between K*, the retained height (H) and thermal
displacement of the top of the abutment (d) [is]:
3.5.3
K ( ' (d/0.05 H)0.4Kp

... K* should not be taken as less than the at rest earth pressure K0, nor
less than Kp/3
3.5.4
3.6 Live load surcharge on backfill should be ignored when calculating the passive
earth pressure mobilised by thermal expansion of the deck . Earth pressures
under live load surcharge are to be checked at the at-rest earth pressure
conditions with K0 = (1 - sin N').
2.9 Earth pressure coefficients on abutments should be calculated ... using material
factors (m on earth pressure coefficients of:
disadvantageous forces from backfill (m=1.0
The relationship given in 3.5.3 is illustrated graphically in Figure 12.3 for a typical
abutment height of 7 m and an endscreen wall of height 2 m. The lower limit
specified in 3.5.4 is also indicated in the Figure.
0.50
Endscreen wall
H = 2.0 m
0.45
0.40
Lower limit
0.35
K* / K p

advantageous forces from backfill when resisting secondary load effects (e.g.
braking) (m = 0.5
0.30
0.25
Typical abutment
H = 7.0 m
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
10
12
14
16
Displacement, mm
Figure 12.3 Mobilised passive soil pressure coefficient, according to

BA 42/96
Soil-structure interaction
Unfortunately, BA 42 does not discuss the effects of soil-structure interaction, i.e.
making allowance for the elastic strain in the deck when it exerts the force needed
to displace the abutment into the soil. Indeed, the term thermal displacement at the
top of the abutment (d) quoted in 3.5.3 of BA 42/96 is not defined or discussed.
Unfortunately, a problem arises in trying to use BA 42 to determine the force to
displace the wall from its at-rest position. The lower limit of a Kp suggests that
there is no additional force needed to displace the wall until the displacement is
sufficient to give a value of K*/Kp in excess of 0.33, which never happens for a
typical abutment of bridges up to 60 m length. (The design displacements at the
ends of a 60 m long bridge are 15 mm according to BA 42 - see Section 12.1).
89
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
However, if the lower limit of Clause 3.5.4 is ignored, an interaction relationship

of the type discussed in Section 11.6.1 can be considered.
To illustrate this soil-structure interaction in an integral bridge, displacement/force
relationships were calculated for a 60 m long composite deck with a 7 m high
abutment wall, and this is illustrated in Figure 12.4.
8.0
7.0
Force (MN)
6.0
Response of deck (thermal strain 0.005)
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Response of wall
0
10
15
Displacement (mm)

Figure 12.4 Response of deck and retaining wall in a typical bridge

The force to displace the top of the wall is calculated on the basis of the K* value,
the pressure diagram in Figure 3.2 of BA 42, and the assumption that there is no
moment in the wall at the bottom of the retained height. The (FL parameter is
omitted from both the force to displace the wall and from the force to restrain the
wall against expansion. The soil is assumed to be well graded gravel; N is taken as
45E, a value which reflects compaction due to cyclic movement of the wall; the soil
density is taken as 20 kN/m2; the deck area is taken to be 0.07 m2/m width.
From Figure 12.4 it can be seen that there is very little restraint to thermal
movement. The equilibrium position corresponds to a movement of about 90% of
the free movement (although the free movement is half what it would be for a nonintegral bridge fixed at the far end). The force in the deck is about 10% of the fully
restrained force.
12.5 Comparison of Kp values in BA 42/96 with

BS 8002
To clarify the design recommendations given in BA 42/96 on earth pressure, a
comparison exercise was performed with values given by BS 8002. In BS 8002 the
values of passive earth pressure coefficient Kp are obtained from the Rankine
equation. For N'peak, Kp is given in Table 12.3.
90
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Table 12.3 Values of Kp and Ko given by BS 8002 based on Npeak

N'peak
Kp
Ko
30
0.5
35
3.7
0.43
40
4.6
0.36
45
5.8
0.29
In BS 8002 N'design is determined from the definition given in Clause 3.2.5 where the
mobilisation factor M is equal to 1.2. Values of N'design are given in Table 12.4.

Table 12.4 Values of Kp and Ko given by BS 8002, based on Ndesign

N'
N'design
Kp
Ko
30
25.7
2.5
0.57
35
30.3
3.0
0.50
40
35.0
3.7
0.43
45
41.8
5.5
0.33
Note:
M = 1.2, as Clause 3.2.5 of BS 8002, and

thus N'design = N'/1.2
It can be seen from Table 12.4 that N'design and Kp are now lower than N'peak and its
corresponding value of Kp. This means that the design presumes a looser soil.
However, for integral bridges, the cyclic movement due to expansion and
contraction of the deck results in the compaction of the soil behind the retaining wall
abutment. BS 8002 does not cater for the compaction condition occurring. BA
42/96 attempts to allow for the compaction of the soil by using a mobilisation factor
of 1/1.2 rather than 1.2. It quotes that a factor of less than 1.0 can be allowed as
it reflects the approach given in Eurocode 7(48). The mobilisation factor of 1/1.2
increases both N'design and Kp which correspondingly reflect a compaction of the soil
behind the retaining wall abutment. The resulting values of N'design and Kp are given
in Table 12.5.
Table 12.5 Values of Kp and Ko given by BS 8002, using M = 1/1.2
(BA 42, Clause 3.3)
N'
N'design
Kp
Ko
30
34.7
3.64
0.43
35
40
4.6
0.36
40
45.2
5.9
0.29
45
50.2
7.6
0.23
Note:
Assume that N' is N'peak as per BA 42/96 Clause 3.2
91
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
However, the values of Kp in Table 12.5 are not the same as those in the Table in
Clause 3.4 of BA 42/96. If the values of that Table are back-analysed, it is found
that the mobilisation factor is not 1/1.2 but is in the range 1/1.81 to 1/1.56
depending on the value of N' (see Table 12.6). Designers should seek clarification
from the Highways Agency before proceeding with their design.
Table 12.6 Mobilisation factor M (from definition in BS 8002 from Table
in BA 42/96 Clause 3.4

Note:
N'
Kp
N'
Mobilisation
factor M
30
42.0
34.7
35
45.6
40
40
53.1
45.2
45
15
61.0
50.2
N' obtained from Rankine and M from definition in BS 8002(36)

Assume that N' is N'peak as per BA 42/96 Clause 3.2
Current practice for flexible walls is to use highly developed numerical analysis
computer programs such as FREW and WALLAP. These programs model the earth
pressure versus wall movement relationships and are accepted because they have
been calibrated by comparison to measured wall behaviour. It is also accepted that
current knowledge does not permit really accurate predictions of wall movement,
and differences of the order of 100% are common between predicted and measured
values or between the results of different programs!
Hence any method that is presented for the analysis of earth pressure should be
treated with caution and the advice of experienced practitioners sought in the process
of design judgement. Care is obviously necessary in design to properly understand
how a particular integral bridge will behave and routine design methods should only
be included where there are adequate checks.
In this light, the limits presented by BA 42/96 should not be taken as definitive,
more as an approach that attempts to be guarded and conservative if possible; the
objective of the Highways Agency is to prevent under-design.
92
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
13
STEEL PILES - AXIAL LOAD

RESISTANCE
This section presents methods for predicting the axial capacity of sheet piles and
bearing piles for bridge abutments or piers which resist vertical loads from the
bridge superstructure. The subject is thoroughly covered in the SCI publication
Steel bearing piles guide(12).
Axial loads acting at the top of the piled steel sub-structure are loads directly from
the bridge deck superstructure. These loads comprise dead loads, traffic loads and
environmental loads, and are transferred from the bridge deck to the abutment either
via bridge bearings or directly from the deck beam via the pile cap to the steel pile.
Finally the axial load in the pile is transferred to and resisted by the surrounding
soil.

13.1 Ultimate axial capacity and load transfer

A piled bridge abutment or pier subjected to a vertical load, parallel to its
longitudinal axis, will support that load partly by shear generated over its length,
due to the soil-pile wall friction or adhesion, and partly by normal stresses generated
at the base or tip of the pile, due to end bearing resistance of the soil (see Figure
13.1.)
P
Skin friction
resistance
End bearing
resistance
Figure 13.1 Wall friction and end bearing resistance against vertical loads
A simplistic relationship is given in BS 8004(43) for the ultimate capacity, R of the
pile. This relationship assumes that the ultimate capacity is equal to the sum of the
wall friction capacity Rsk and base capacity Rbk, i.e.:
Rc = Rs + RD = Asas + Abab
93
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
where:
unit wall friction value 1)
surface area of the pile in contact with the soil 2)
unit end bearing value
steel cross section area at the tip of the pile or plug cross sectional area.
qs
As
qb
Ab
=
=
=
=
1)
The average value of qs over the length of the pile is taken for a soil profile
with more than one soil type.
See Section 13.7 for determination of surface area.
2)

The relative magnitudes of the ultimate wall friction and ultimate end bearing
resistances depend on the geometry of the pile and the soil profile. Where a pile is
embedded in a relatively soft layer of soil, but bears on a firmer stratum, this type
of pile is referred to as an end bearing pile. It derives most of its capacity from
the end bearing capacity, Rb. On the other hand, where no firmer stratum is
available to found the pile on, the pile is known as a friction pile. In cohesive
soils, the wall friction capacity Rs is generally paramount, whilst in non-cohesive
soils, the overall axial capacity is more evenly divided between wall friction and end
bearing capacity.
The equation presented above only considers the ultimate state condition, where the
pile has been allowed to deform sufficiently to allow both the ultimate wall friction
and the ultimate end bearing capacities to be developed. Commonly, load transfer
curves are produced which are plots of load resistance versus axial deformation of
the pile head for displacements ranging from zero to the ultimate limit or to an
achievable maximum value. These plots include mobilised soil-pile shaft friction
(shear) transfer versus local pile deflection and mobilised end bearing resistance
versus axial tip deflection. The Steel bearing piles guide(12) provides more detailed
information.
Numerous computer programs are available commercially to model the vertical
capacity of piles. One is PILE, which is part of the OASYS suite of geotechnical
programs(87).
13.2 Vertical settlement and serviceability

The design ultimate capacity of a steel pile, Rcd, is given by:
Rcd =
where
Rsk
s
Rsk
Rbk
(s
(b
.
=
=
=
=
=
Rsk
b
ultimate wall resistance
ultimate bearing resistance
factor for wall friction resistance
factor for base resistance
factor to take into account uncertainty of soil parameters
determined on site or in the laboratory.
(s, (b and . are partial factors for the resistance side of the limit state equation.
These factors are not provided by BS 8002(36) or BS 8004(43) but are given in
DD-ENV 1997-1 Eurocode 7(48). In Eurocode 7 for driven piles:
94
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
(s
(b
.
=
=
=
1.3
1.3
1.5
Provided that
PDesign
Rcd
where
PDesign is the design magnitude of the axial load including all appropriate
partial factors from BD 37(51), then the design vertical capacity of the sheet
pile - soil interface is adequate.
13.3 Ultimate capacity in cohesive soils

13.3.1
Wall friction
Most piles in clay develop a high proportion of their overall capacity in wall
friction, hence more effort has been devoted to developing reliable data for
estimating values of wall friction in clays than in sands. Previous work in this field
for both clays (and sands) is presented in API RP2A-LRFD(22) and various
background references are given. The unit wall friction qs for clays can be
estimated in terms of the undrained shear strength of the soil and is given in
BS 8004 and API RP2A-LRFD(22) by the relationship
qs = " cu
where
"
cu
=
=
a dimensionless factor
undrained tri-axial shear strength of the soil.
BS 8004 does not offer any specific advice on the value of ". However, SCI
studies(12) show that " can be conservatively taken to be 0.25 for the ultimate skin
friction value. (From pile load tests it has been found that the value of " increases
with time. In the short term (typically when site pile tests are performed) " is
approximately equal to 0.25 but with time (months/year later) " can reach a value
of 0.5.
13.3.2
End bearing
The long term drained end bearing capacity of a pile in clay is significantly greater
than its undrained capacity. However, the settlements required to mobilise the
drained capacity are far too large to be acceptable. Also, the immediate load
carrying capacity of a steel pile must be sufficient to support all loads during
construction. For these reasons it is common to calculate the base capacity of piles
in clay in terms of the undrained shear strength, cu.
The magnitude of the end bearing capacity qb, generated in cohesive soils is given
in BS 8004 as:
qb = 9cu
where
cu is the undrained shear strength.
95
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
As an indication, the undrained shear strength of cohesive soils is generally in the

range between 20 kN/m2 for soft clay to 400 kN/m2 for very stiff or hard clays.
For this range of cu, the end bearing values are in the range 0.2 to 3.6 MPa.
13.4 Ultimate capacity in cohesionless soils

13.4.1
Wall friction
The unit skin friction qs for a granular soil is given by:

qs
where
2N
N
13.4.2
Standard Penetration Test value
End bearing

Methods of estimating values of the end bearing resistance can be based either on
fundamental soil properties or soil properties determined directly from in situ
measurements. For cohesionless soils the most reliable method of predicting end
bearing resistance is to use the static cone penetrometer (Dutch cone) in the site
investigation. The end bearing resistance is calculated from the relationship:
qb
c
q
where:
c
q
is the average cone resistance within the zone influenced by stresses imposed
under the pile wall tip.
Extensive experience with pile predictions based on the cone penetrometer in

Holland has produced a set of design rules which have been summarised by
Meigh(88).
The magnitude of the end bearing capacity qb, generated in cohesionless soils can
also be given by the relationship:
qb
400N
For sands, the end bearing values are an order of magnitude greater than cohesive
soils and range in value up to 40 MPa. Although this value may seem high in
relation to the 10 MPa quoted in BS 8004, it is nevertheless realistic, and even
higher values (up to 70 MPa) have been measured in sands offshore.
13.5 Ultimate capacity in rock

Where piles are driven through clay/sand strata but are terminated at depth into a
relatively incompressible rock stratum, the main component providing resistance is
the end bearing. In these cases low axial movements of the pile will occur, owing
to the compressive strength of the rock, and it may not be possible to generate
appreciable wall friction resistance in the clay/sand layers. In many cases, the
maximum design load for such a pile will be determined by the stresses in the pile
material itself, rather than the permitted end bearing capacity on the rock.
96
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
End bearing capacities for intact rocks are of a magnitude greater than end bearing
capacities for even cohesionless soils and end bearing resistance has been measured
in the range 100 - 400 MPa. In the case of weathered or highly jointed rock, end
bearing values reduce significantly and can be of the order 10 to 100 MPa.
13.6 Mobilisation of wall friction on a retaining wall

For a bridge abutment, adequate resistance must be provided by the steel pile to
accommodate the vertical loads from the bridge deck superstructure. The vertical
loads are applied as axial loads acting at the top of the pile.
W
Active soil
zone moving
downwards

Passive soil
zone moving upwards
Figure 13.2 Generation of wall-soil friction by pile movement

For design to resist the axial load acting at the top of the sheet pile, it is important
that the overall behaviour of the pile abutment is considered. Although the design
of the abutment to resist axial load is undertaken independently from the lateral
loading case, the behaviour of the soil adjacent to the wall needs to be considered
as the wall displaces laterally. The soil on the active or retained side of the wall
moves down relative to the wall in order to mobilise friction in the beneficial
direction and, on the passive side, the displaced soil has to move upward (see Figure
13.2). If the abutment itself displaces in a downward direction under the action of
an axial load at the pile head, the wall friction on the active side will diminish.
For an axially loaded pile, it may conservatively be assumed that wall friction
resistance is mobilised along the wall bounded between excavation level and the pile
tip (see Figure 13.3). Only the side of the wall in contact with the passive soil zone
is then considered.
97
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Excavation level
Assumed length
of wall providing
wall friction
resistance
Pile tip
Figure 13.3 Length of sheet pile contributing to wall friction
13.7 Determination of friction surface area

13.7.1
Retaining wall abutment
The surface area of sheet piles and High Modulus Piles can be obtained from British
Steels Piling Handbook(24) in the section that lists the coating areas for piles. The
surface area per metre length of sheet pile can be taken to be 80% of the coated
area. For one face of the pile, use 40% of the coated area. This area is multiplied
by the length over which wall friction is mobilised.
Where it is found that the depth of embedment based on stability is insufficient to
provide the required vertical resistance capacity, it can be assumed that any extra
length of pile will have friction acting on both faces of the pile.
Similar calculations of surface area can be performed for High Modulus Piles and
box piles.
13.7.2
Tubular and box piles
The surface area of tubular and box piles depends on whether or not a soil plug is
formed at the tip. If no plug is formed at the tip of the pile, the surface area is
given by the summation of outside and inside surface areas. If a plug is formed, the
surface area is based on the outside surface only.
13.7.3
H section piles
As for closed sections, the surface area of a H pile section depends on whether or
not a soil plug is formed at the tip. If no plug is formed at the tip of the pile, the
surface area is given by the total surface area of the H section. If a plug is formed,
the H Pile is assumed to be a closed box section of a size based on the external
dimensions of the H pile.
98
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
13.8 Determination of end bearing area

13.8.1
Retaining wall abutment
The area at the tip of the sheet pile acting in end bearing assumes that no soil
plugging is present. In this case, the area is given by the cross sectional area of the
steel.
For a High Modulus Pile, the composite steel cross sectional area is used, unless the
sheet pile is curtailed above the tip of the High Modulus Pile. In this case, the area
used is the cross sectional area of the universal beam only.
13.8.2
Tubular and box piles
For tubular and box piles, the area to be used in the valuation of end bearing is the
full cross sectional area of the pile base comprising the pile wall and any soil plug.
The calculated ultimate pile end bearing across the whole cross section is compared
with the internal soil plug plus the pile wall tip end bearing and the lesser is taken.

13.8.3
H section piles
For H section piles, the area to be used in end bearing is the full cross sectional area
of the pile base comprising the pile wall and any soil plug. The calculated ultimate
pile end bearing across the whole cross section is compared with the internal soil
plug plus the pile wall tip end bearing and the lesser is taken.
13.9 Buckling aspects of fully and partially

embedded piles
The wall thickness of the pile should be chosen such that diameter to thickness ratio
D/t is sufficiently small to preclude local buckling at stresses up to the yield strength
of the pile material. Guidance relating to local buckling can be found in
API RP2A-LRFD(22).
There are analytical solutions available to determine the buckling behaviour of fully
and partially embedded piles but the methods are quite complex. One method is
provided by Bowles(89). Bowles adopts the method of Wang(90) where the method is
automated using a suitable computer analysis program. Although other methods are
available (Davison and Robinson(91) and Reddy and Valsangkar(92)), the method
proposed by Bowles is much easier to use.
13.9.1
Serviceability limit state
The load resistance versus pile head displacement curves are very useful in
presenting the situation that exists at the ultimate condition and the working
condition. Figure 13.4 shows the mobilisation of resistance with deformation for
a cohesive soil, including wall friction, end bearing and their combination. For
simplicity the resistance profiles are drawn as straight lines rather than curves. It
is seen for this situation that at the ultimate state where the resistance is at a
maximum the pile head deflection is approximately 20 mm. However, to establish
the point of the curve which represents the working condition it is necessary to
review the partial factors that are used in the procedure to design for the ultimate
condition.
99
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
For a limit state design where partial factors for loads and resistance are used the
equation relating load and resistance at the ultimate limit state is given by:
P fl f3 =
where
P
(fL
(f3
Rcd
(
.
Rcd
=
=
=
=
=
=
unfactored axial load at the pile head

partial factor for loads from BD 37(51)
partial factor for innacurate assessment from BD 37(51)
ultimate axial capacity of the soil
resistance partial factors (s and (b
factor to take into account uncertainty of soil parameters
determined on site or in the laboratory.
R sk+ R

Axial resistance
R cd
bk
(Ultimate)
R sk (Ultimate)
0.3 R cd
R bk (Ultimate)
End Bearing
10
20
30
40
50
Axial Displacement (mm)
Figure 13.4 Resistance versus pile head displacement

The partial load factors are taken from BD 37(51) and the partial resistance factors
from the draft version of Eurocode 7, (Table 7.1 and 7.2)(48). The equation above
can be rewritten by inserting the magnitudes of the partial factors, therefore:
1.4 11
. P =
Rcd
1.5 1.3
or
P =
Rcd
0.3 Rcd
3.0
At the serviceability limit state (working condition) the partial factors for load and
resistance are all equal to 1.0, therefore the working condition can be defined
accurately by the intercept of the curve at a resistance value of 0.3Rcd. It is seen
from Figure 13.4 that for an axial load magnitude of 0.3Rcd the pile head
displacement at the working condition, i.e. approximately 4 mm, is significantly
smaller than the pile head displacement at the ultimate condition, i.e. approximately
20 mm. In addition, it is seen that in the case of a cohesive soil the resistance is
predominantly provided by wall friction.
100
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
14
STEEL COLUMN-PILES - LATERAL

LOAD RESISTANCE
Greimann and Wolde-Tinsae(93) provide a simplified design method for analysing

piles in integral bridge abutments based on previous analytical models and
observations of pile behaviour. Two failure modes for a pile were considered; the
slip mechanism, where the pile slips through the soil; and the lateral mechanism,
where the failure of the soil pile system is associated with lateral movement of the
pile. Results predicted by the simplified model were compared to results from a
non-linear finite element program and shown to be conservative.
Where horizontal loading on individual piles is significant, pile analyses are required
to determine the design bending moments. In certain situations, the interaction of
individual piles will need to be considered and pile group analysis performed to
predict the group load resistance and lateral movement.

Steel piles can be subjected to two types of lateral loads - those acting at the pile cap
level and those acting on the pile shafts through the soil mass. Both of these types
of loading need to be taken into account in the design of piles.
14.1 Lateral loads from soil

When an embankment is terminated adjacent to a piled bridge abutment, any
underlying sub-soil stratum undergoing deformation may tend to flow away from
the embankment. Where this effect occurs, this effect results in lateral pressures
which act on the pile shafts in addition to the other loads carried by the foundation.
These types of piles are referred to as spill-through piles.
Where there is a likelihood of any soil-induced lateral loading being developed
during or after the construction of a pile, for example, in river valleys with
overlying soft clays, silts, etc. efforts should be made firstly to identify the extent
of the problem and to determine the most economical solution. This could be either
to take measures at the construction stage to reduce the magnitude of the effects or
to design the piles to withstand the predicted lateral loading. Whatever option or
combination of options are chosen, it is important that an appropriately detailed
ground investigation is undertaken (see Section 9).
For integral bridges, spill-through abutments reduce the soil induced lateral
pressures, however, it is more difficult to obtain good compaction of fill material
for backfilled abutments. Another option is to consider piled or un-piled bankseats.
Where spill-through piled abutments need to be designed for soil-induced lateral
loading, the procedure recommended in BA 25 Section 4.6 can be used.
14.2 Lateral forces at pile head

design of piles for lateral loading is comprehensively covered in the CIRIA Report
Design of laterally loaded bearing piles(67), publications by Poulos and Davies(94),
Tomlinson(95) and the Steel bearing piles guide(12). These documents review the
available methods for the analysis of laterally-loaded single piles and pile groups.
101
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The analytical methods discussed generally include lateral, vertical and moment
loading as separate cases. The limitations imposed by the available methods of
analysis are highlighted and guidance is given on the practical problems of assigning
realistic values to the necessary soil parameters, particularly concentrating on the
value for soil reaction stiffness. Recommendations are made concerning methods
of analysis which may be satisfactorily adopted in most circumstances. Sections
14.2.1 to 14.2.3, and 14.3 provide a summary of the analysis procedure.
14.2.1
Methods of analysis for ultimate or failure

conditions
The ultimate resistance of a laterally loaded pile can be estimated from approximate
solutions proposed by Broms(96)(97). These solutions are based on limiting
equilibrium principles to assess stability only. They are known to be conservative
but are recommended because the ultimate lateral resistance of a pile is not usually
the governing criteria. Solutions are available for piles in clays and sands. The
relevant parameters required for the analysis are related to soil strength (see
Section 9.1).

14.2.2
Serviceability and deformation analysis of piles
The performance of a laterally loaded pile in service can be predicted with

reasonable confidence by using idealisations of soil stiffness. These include soil
stiffness constant with depth, linearly varying with depth or by soil
resistance-deformation curves (P-Y curves). Elastic continuum analysis Finite
Element programs can also be used. These methods are fully explained in a CIRIA
Report(67).
Although numerous idealisation of soil stiffness analysis methods are available, the
lateral deformation of the pile is best modelled using the Winkler Medium approach.
This approach considers the pile to be a linear elastic beam supported by a series of
discrete springs. A P-Y spring Winkler model for horizontal movement is shown
in Figure 14.1.
V
M
H
Figure 14.1 P-Y spring model for lateral pile resistance
In most cases the P-Y curve form of the Winkler soil model is used because it is the
one most extensively validated. P-Y curves originate from instrumented lateral load
tests carried out on 762 mm OD tubular piles in the USA in the 1960s for offshore
design. The models of load resistance were derived from soil resistance
distributions required to match the bending stresses measured in the pile shaft strain
gauge instrumentation, i.e. curve-fitting to match bending moment diagrams. The
P-Y curve method is the only one in which it is possible to allow for significant
102
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
cyclic loading of piles. This is useful for the structural design of the pile section but
does not give accurate displacements because the single piles had no head restraint.
It is explained in detail in the U.S. Offshore Design Code API RP2A(22) and in
computer programs.
Specific P-Y curves can be obtained for soft clays, stiff clays and sands from
References(98)(99)(100). Computer software(101) is also available.
A commercially available program to model a single pile is ALP. It is part of the
OASYS geotechnical suite of programs(68).
14.2.3
Capabilities of available methods of analysis
The capabilities of the various methods of analysis available to the engineer are
summarised in Table 14.1, as given in CIRIA Report 103(67).
Table 14.1 Summary of the output of method of analysis
Model
Limitations

Structural frame Unrealistic model (the

soil is ignored).
Application
Output
End-bearing pile groups, with a

small lateral load component
(say up to 10% of the vertical
load).
Axial load on piles is

the only reasonable
output.
Any laterally-loaded single pile

or widely-spaced pile (s/D>3)
group. The analysis can
provide reasonable predictions
for cyclic loading or account for
the development of plastic
zones if suitable P-Y data are
selected.
Depth, slope,
moment and shear
of the pile at any
depth.
Winkler Medium
or
P-Y analysis
A reasonable model for

single piles. However,
inappropriate for pile
groups with s/D < 8,
because the continuity
of the soil is not
modelled.
Elastic
continuum
A reasonable model for Single piles or pile groups under Output depends on
single piles or pile
working loads.
the particular
groups at working load.
program adopted,
Yield of the soil cannot
but typically
be included exactly.
includes deflection,
The limitations depend
slope, moment,
on the mathematics of
shear and axial load
the particular computer
distribution for each
solution chosen.
pile in the group,
Available programs are
and the overall
limited to constant or
stiffness and/or
linearly increasing soil
flexibility matrix of
modulus with depth.
the pile group.
14.3 Analysis of pile groups

Once a pile layout has been established for the bridge substructure and the initial
estimate of the number of piles required has been determined using the predicted
single pile design capacity from Section 13.2, the possible pile group effects will
need to be considered.
Piles in a group may be subject to the following effects:
C
The load resistance of a group of piles could be less than the sum of the
resistances of all the piles in the group acting independently.
103
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
The pile head deflection of the group, or of its pile cap, may be different to
that of a single pile.
a)
Load resistance
There are some simple spacing rules that have been derived from experiment and
experience and piles will only interact to cause a group effect if they are closer
than a predefined spacing to each other. This is about 3D (where D = pile
diameter) for piles in clay or within about 4D if the piles are in sands. When they
are closer than those limits, the pile group behaves as a single block with shaft
friction around its external periphery and a base resistance over the whole area of
the block because the individual soil resistance envelopes overlap.
Wherever possible the layout, spacing and pile cross section size should comply with
the above criteria in order to ensure that piles act independently. If this is achieved
then no pile group effect will occur and the vertical load resistance of the group is
the sum of the individual piles, and the vertical deflection at the pile head is no more
than that of an individual pile.

Where such adjustment of the spacing and arrangement of the piles in a group still
violates these rules, then a pile group analysis will be required to determine the
interaction effects.
As a first approximation, the piles in the group should be arranged to resist the
applied loading from a structural point of view (i.e. the centre of action of the pile
group should lie near the resultant thrusts of the various load cases). Having
outlined a trial pile group, detailed analysis is carried out to refine the design.
A well detailed procedure for analysis of pile groups is given in the CIRIA Report
Design of laterally loaded piles(67) and is reproduced in Figure 14.2. The report
suggests that three levels of appraisal are adopted:
1.
Consideration of the ultimate failure mechanism of the foundation and

incorporation of an overall reserve of strength for safety.
2.
Computation of the lateral translation and rotation of the foundation at working

loads, and consideration of the effect of this deformation on the whole
structure.
3.
Bending resistance of the piles.
Load factors applicable to the Limit State design of a piled foundation subjected to
substantial lateral load are not well established. Selection of the appropriate factors
depends on the type of loading, the reliability of the ground investigation data, and
the response of the completed structure to the deformation of the foundation.
Inherent uncertainties in assessing the loads and stresses in a laterally-loaded pile
group require that reasonably conservative overall safety factors should be adopted,
combined with limits on permissible displacement. The following tentative
guidelines are suggested for the design of individual piles:
104
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Outline Pile Group

Based on engineering assessment of
- soils data
- structural loading
- construction constraints
- possible pile types
Assess
- reliability of data
- sensitivity of structure
Select Method of Detailed Analysis

Consider
- available SI data
- magnitude of lateral loads
- complexity of pie data
- batter of pipes
Static Analysis
Refine
- pile group
- size of piles
Analyse Data
Select design
parameters
Analysis
Single piles
1. Elastic continuum methods
2. Subgrade reaction methods (p-y analysis)

Pile
1.
2.
3.
Minor Structures
Appraise performance
groups
Poulos analysis
Randolph analysis
Elastic continuum computer models
(e.g. PGROUP, LAWPILE)
Output
Piles
- axial load
- shear forces
- bending moments
Group
- vertical deformation
- horizontal deformation
- rotation
- flexibility matrix of group
Appraise Performance of Foundation

- servicability of structure
- consider limit state criteria
- global effects
Modify design
as neccessary
Final design details
Figure 14.2 Analysis procedure for pile group
105
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
1.
An overall Factor of Safety for lateral load of not less than 3 should be used.
2.
Limits on lateral pile displacement at the ground surface of not greater than 2%
of the pile diameter for sands and stiff clays, and not greater than 5% of the
pile diameter for soft clays, subject to the tolerances imposed by the structure
itself.
These criteria are conservative, and they should restrict the development of plastic
failure zones to a shallow depth.
(b) Pile head deflection

Three conceptual models are currently in use for the design of pile groups:
1.
Structural frame model - In the static and stiffness methods, the piles are
implicitly assumed to be end bearing on a competent layer, and the contribution
of overlying soft material to load capacity is entirely discounted. (Computation
of the forces in the frame is carried out by conventional structural analysis).
Although this is not a realistic model of actual site conditions, the method has
given satisfactory results, and it is still extensively used. The method is now
principally useful for a preliminary appraisal of the layout of a pile group and
for the design of lightly-loaded groups. For an economic design of pile groups
subjected to large lateral loads or moments, other forms of analysis are
preferred.
2.
Spring idealisation - In this method, the soil is modelled by an infinite number

of discrete springs (Winkler Medium). Transfer of shear stresses within the
soil mass is not modelled. The method has been extended (by Matlock and
Reese(102)) to include non-linear springs, and it is generally referred to as the PY or the subgrade reaction method.
The model is well developed, giving satisfactory predictions of the behaviour
of single piles and pile groups. It is felt that the reservations expressed in
CIRIA Report 103(67) in regard to pile groups is no longer valid because P-Y
modifyers or interaction factors which modify the relationship between load
and displacement for each pile are now available. An example of the use of
springs is described by Horsnell(103) where P-Y curves are used to represent the
horizontal springs. Poulos describes the use of the elastic or elastic-plastic
continuum approach which is incorporated in the program DEFPIG(104).
3.
Elastic continuum model - An elastic continuum model is useful for the analysis
of both single piles and pile groups when the soil can reasonably be assumed
to be linearly elastic. In practice, provided an appropriate secant modulus is
selected, the method gives satisfactory results for piles at working load in most
soil types. Complex elastic-plastic soil models for pile group analysis are not
generally available and are not necessary if the limit of 0.02D is used for lateral
displacement at ground level.
Continuum analyses use Mindlins(105) solution (e.g. by Poulos(106)(107)(108)(109)) and
by Bannerjee and Driscoll(110)) to incorporate pile/soil/pile interaction. The
method usually involves the use of a computer, and the designer should be fully
aware of the limitations of the particular program used. While the method is
currently best suited to the final design of the foundation, the publication of
parametric studies(111) makes the method more generally applicable. Several
106
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
programs are already available commercially, and it is anticipated that other

comprehensive programs will be produced, to cater for most common practical
problems. Two programs recommended in BA 25(?) include PGROUP (see
Bannerjee et al(112)) and MPILE(113).
The idealisation of an elastic continuum allows calculations to be performed which
provide an insight into the behaviour of the pile group, and the sensitivity of the
group to changing loading conditions and soil parameters.
The application of these concepts is summarised in Table 14.1, together with the
output of each method. The designer should select the method appropriate to the
problem in hand, bearing in mind the complexity of the problem and the resources
available. For the design of large piled foundations, an analysis based on the elastic
continuum approach is considered to be one of the most satisfactory methods
available at present, provide that the limit on displacement is satisfied.

Analysis of the foundation at unfactored working loads enables the designer to assess
the significance of the computer predicted deflections and to include the stiffness
matrix of the foundation in the overall design of the structure.
14.4 Behaviour of a spill-through column-pile

abutment
Column-pile abutments are recommended as one form of substructure which
provides an attractive compliant support to an integral bridge. Typically, a
column-pile abutment consists of a single line of equally spaced tubular piles which
are capped by a crosshead beam with an end screen wall.
The lack of information for general abutment design (not specific to integral bridges
only) prompted the Transport Research Laboratory to initiate long term monitoring
of a spill-through bridge abutment with the objective in obtaining actual data relating
to lateral soil pressures, response of the piles and the internal forces that were
induced into the structure. This data provides an insight into the behaviour of a
steel column-pile abutment configuration (see Section 5) as it illustrates that
horizontal friction loads were generated in the PTFE sliding bearings.
Columns for two spill-through abutments were monitored in collaboration with the
University of Surrey for a bridge that carries the A3 trunkroad over the M25
motorway at Wisley(114). Each abutment is formed from six reinforced concrete
columns spaced at 4 m centres supported on a continuous base slab. A transverse
reinforced concrete capping beam provides the support for the bridge deck beams
and an endscreen wall is used to provide lateral support to the soil immediately
adjacent to it. A vertical cross-section through a column is shown in Figure 14.3.
The design of the abutments for longitudinal bending was based upon an active soil
pressure on the rear face of the capping beam and the columns, using a pressure
coefficient Ka= 0.27. However, the lateral pressure on the columns was doubled
to allow for the possible effect of side friction and arching of the soil since it was
assumed the fill would push forward between the columns. Lateral pressures on the
front face were ignored and the columns were assumed to bend as vertical
cantilevers from the top of the base slab.
107
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Endscreen
wall
3.5m
P.T.F.E. sliding
bearing
Capping
beam
Column
4.5m
Base
1.0m
6.0m
A comparison of the actual pressure profiles throughout the depth of the abutment
with the original design assumptions is shown in Figure 14.4. The main feature of
the pressure profiles obtained was the sharp reversal in lateral pressure near the top
of the columns. This suggests an instantaneous centre of rotation of the abutment
at a point some 2 to 3 m above the slab base. The resistance of the compacted fill
to deflection imposed by the deck superstructure and to lateral pressures from behind
the capping beam was very effective. Consequently, the pressures generated by
compaction of the fill against the capping beam were far greater than the active
values assumed in the design (approaching a rectangular lateral pressure profile
rather than the traditionally assumed triangular profile). It is recommended that
these compaction pressures would be more realistically estimated using the methods
proposed by Ingold(115).
Height (m)

Figure 14.3 Vertical cross section through column, Wisley bridge
End screen
wall
Transverse
capping
beam
6
Resultant
4
Design
Pile
60
40
20
0
20
Lateral pressure (kPa)
Figure 14.4 Pressure profile throughout depth of abutment, Wisley bridge
108
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
14.5 Integral bridges and crash resistance

Since the advent of the Highways Agencys standard BD 60/94, effective crash
resistance design has become a critical aspect for intermediate pier and abutment
supports to bridges.
Reinforced concrete columns have been known to shatter under vehicle impact (see
photographs contained in BD 60/94). This is due to the dynamic effects of the
impact. No design advice on these effects is given in BD 60/94, which reduces the
accident loading to a pair of static forces. It is considered that the energy absorption
aspect of vehicle impact is an important factor when considering the survivability of
a support and thereby of the overbridge itself, but this is not currently covered in
the Highways Agency advice and Standards.

Since the mass of the bridge support is an important factor in the energy sharing
equation, it can be expected that reinforced concrete walls and barrettes are a
superior solution to reinforced concrete columns, but are, of course, much more
expensive to construct.
Steel piles can offer a superior crash resistant support element that will merely dent
under impact. The extent of denting can now be predicted with reliable accuracy
by energy sharing models that are used in the defence industry to study the effect
of projectiles on composite walls, but these have not been used to date in the bridge
design industry. Relevant research has also been carried out in the offshore industry
in the study of boat impact on offshore oil platform legs (see papers by Amdahl and
Frieze(116)).
Denting of steel tubular column-piles under collision loads can be prevented by
filling the tubular column with mass concrete, and with adequate restraint at the head
of the column will provide an impact-resistant support element. A steel tubular
column-pile is also very easy to install by driving and is thus a practical solution for
bridge supports. They deserve serious consideration in competition to reinforced
concrete walls and barrettes where cost-effectiveness is of interest and the confidence
in performance under collision loads is required.
Alternatively, steel H-piles can be used as the core of concrete columns to assist
crash resistance where the mass of the column or wall is considered adequate to
absorb the impact without shattering.
Further consideration and some guidance on the use of steel column-piles is given
in Integral steel bridges: Design of a multi-span bridge - Worked example(3).
109
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
15
COMPOSITE DECK DESIGN
The design of continuous composite decks for non-integral bridges is well

understood and guidance is available(65). Such design includes:
C
Consideration of the global analysis (usually by use of grillage analysis).
The design of the main girders to carry moments and shears.
The design of the deck slab both in spreading wheel loads to the main beams
and as part of the effective section of the main beams.
Selection of bracing to stabilise compression flanges at midspan (during

construction) and adjacent to intermediate supports (in service).
The design of the shear connection between the steel girders and the deck slab.

In an integral bridge all these design considerations still have to be made, but in
addition the effects of the restraints at the ends, in introducing both axial load and
moment, now need to be evaluated. In previous Sections, the effect of the beam
stiffness on retaining wall behaviour (when there is moment continuity) was
discussed, together with the interaction between wall and deck axial stiffness (when
a temperature rise occurs in the bridge deck).
This Section highlights the aspects of the deck design that are affected by integral
construction.
15.1 Axial Loading

It can be seen from the discussion in Section 12 that the thermal strain experienced
by a bridge deck at ULS (a value of 0.0005 according to BA 42(9)) is very little
affected by the typical abutment wall, even when the retained soil is well compacted
granular fill. Consequently the axial stresses in the deck as a result of the partial
restraint of expansion and contraction are small (of the order of 10 N/mm2 for the
example quoted in Section 12.4). Since temperature loading is a combination 3
loading, it is more likely that a combination 1 loading will govern the deck design.
If the soil is stiff, a larger axial force in the deck may arise due to HA loading.
This is partly due to the restraint of bending of the wall by the soil, and partly due
to the HA surcharge on the soil behind the abutment.
However, if the deck were to act as a prop between two retaining walls, higher axial
loads would result. The extreme case of this situation is when the deck is
constructed before there is any excavation in front of the retaining wall (or
alternatively, before any backfill is placed behind it). The wall then behaves as a
propped cantilever rather than a free cantilever. In the SCI publication Integral steel
bridges: Design of a single-span bridge - Worked example(2) it is shown that a total
axial stress of over 60 N/mm2 results from the combination of forces due to
propping of the wall and restraint of wall bending when HA load is applied.
The only significant axial forces in the deck will thus be compressive. In midspan
regions this will reduce the bottom flange stresses and increase the force in the slab.
As the slab is rarely designed on the basis of axial strength, this additional axial
stress should have little affect. However, at intermediate supports, and at the end
110
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
supports where there is moment continuity (a frame integral bridge), the effect of
axial stresses will be significant. In these regions the bottom flange is usually
braced so that it can work near to its maximum (factored yield) stress. Additional
axial stress would require additional flange area and probably more bracing (i.e.
further into the spans). Clearly, the benefit of the deck acting as a prop to the wall
would have to be balanced against a slight increase in girder size in these regions.

The introduction of a significant level of axial stress into regions of a beam that are
designed to resist a combination of moment and shear raises a query about the
applicability of clauses in BS 5400: Part 3(42). Clause 9.9.3 covers combined
bending and shear; Clause 9.9.4 covers combined bending and axial load; neither
covers a combination of all three types of force. But, since the axial force might
in some cases be a significant proportion of the resistance force, it would appear to
be unsafe to ignore it in Clause 9.9.3.
It is suggested that accounting for the axial force in addition to moment and shear
could be carried out simply by adding the term Pmax/PD to the expressions in 9.9.3.1
(c) and (d). Also, whilst the deck as a whole has a favourable slenderness ratio, the
limitation on PD will be the buckling of the bottom flange. This can be recognised
by treating the flange as the chord of a truss, determining its effective length in
accordance with Clause 12.4.1, and then using the slenderness of the flange to
determine the ultimate compressive stress from Figure 37. (This neglects the small
amount of restraint provided by the continuous web as part of a U-frame with the
deck, but it is conservative to do so.)
15.2 Moments due to frame action

Where there is moment continuity between deck and wall (or column-pile), moments
will be developed due to live loading and thermal displacements. If propped
construction is used, or if moment continuity is created before all the deck load is
added, there will be moments due to dead load as well.
The governing design moments at the ends will be hogging moments, and this will
cause compressive stresses in the bottom flange. This region will then have to be
treated like the hogging moment regions adjacent to intermediate supports, and
bracing will be required to stabilise the bottom flange against buckling. Note that
the axial loads discussed above will also contribute to the level of stress in the
bottom flange and to the need for bracing.
Where the beams are connected to a reinforced concrete capping beam, the moments
transmitted between deck and wall will be transferred via shear connectors attached
to each flange. There is a good case for making use of hooped connectors instead
of the usual shear studs because, although they are more expensive to add during
fabrication, they can transmit greater forces.
Where the only significant moments are those due to live load, the fatigue design of
the shear connection must be considered carefully; the moment due to the fatigue
vehicle may be sufficiently large that fatigue resistance governs.
111
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...

16
REFERENCES
1.
THE STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE

Integral Bridges: Interim Report, Phase 1
Document RT 408, July 1994
Integral Bridges: Interim Report, Phase 2
Document RT 438, November 1995
(unpublished reports to British Steel)
2.
WAY, J.A. and YANDZIO, E.

Steel integral bridges: Design of a single-span bridge - Worked example
The Steel Construction Institute, 1997
3.
Steel integral bridges: Design of a multi-span bridge - Worked example

The Steel Construction Institute (to be published)
4.
BURKE, M.P., Jr.

Transportation Research Record, 1113 pp. 54-65
Bridge approach pavements, integral bridges and cycle-control joints
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington
D.C., 1987 and
National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Synthesis of highway
practice No. 141, Bridge deck joints, September 1989
5.
THORBURN, S.
The interaction between bridges and embankments and the use of run-on
slabs
Henderson colloquium on Integral Bridges: What are they?
University of Surrey, September 1993, and
The use of run-on slabs - a solution or part of the problem?
Seminar on Design of Integral Bridges
International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (British
Group) at The Institution of Structural Engineers, London 23 January
1996
6.
MOULTON, L.K., GANGARAO, H.V.S., and HALVORSEN, G.T.

Tolerable movement criteria for highway bridges, pp. 1-109
Report FHWA/RD- 85/107
FHWA Research Development Technology, McLean, Va, 1985
7.
WALLBANK, E.J.
The performance of concrete in bridges - A survey of 200 highway
bridges
The Stationery Office, 1989
8.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
Design manual for roads and bridges, Volume 1, Section 3
BA/BD 57/95, Design for durability
112
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
9.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BA 42/96 Design of integral bridges
10.
BURKE, M. P., Jr.

Jointless Bridge Experience in the United States
1996
11.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BA 28/92 and BD 36/92, Evaluation of maintenance costs in comparing
alternative designs for highway structures
12.
BIDDLE, A.R.
Steel bearing piles guide
The Steel Construction Institute (to be published)
13.
Correspondence between British Steel Sections, Plates & Commercial

Steels and Edward P. Wasserman, Department of Transportation, State
of Tennessee, Nashville, Tennessee, 1993
14.
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials (AASHTO)
Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 16th Edition
AASHTO, Washington D.C., 1996
15.
HAMBLY, E. C.
Bridge design for durability
Integral bridge abutment details in practice and theory
TRL, 1992
16.
WASSERMAN, E.P.
Jointless bridge decks
AISC Engineering Journal, Vol. 24, No. 3, 93-100, 3rd Quarter, 1987
17.
GREIMANN, L.F., WOLDE-TINSAAE, A.M., and YANG, P.S.

Transportation Research Record 903: Skewed bridges with integral
abutments
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington
D.C., 1983
18.
ROEDER, C.W. and MOORTY, S.

Transportation Research Record 1290: Thermal movements in bridges
Transportation Research Board
National Research Council, Washington D.C., 1991
113
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
19.
MOORTY, S. and ROEDER, C.W.

Temperature-dependent bridge movements
ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 118, No. 4, April 1992
20.
LOW, A.
Integral Bridges - Designers Viewpoint
1996
21.
McSHANE, G.
Steel sheet piling used in the combined role of bearing piles and earth
retaining members
Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Piling and Deep
Foundations, Stresa, Italy, 7-12 April 1991
TESPA (Technical European Sheet Piling Association), 1991
22.
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE

API Recommended Practice 2A-LRFD (RP2A-LRFD) 1st Edition
Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing fixed
offshore platforms - Load and resistance factor design
API, 1993
23.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BD 60/94, Design of highway bridges for vehicle collision loads
24.
BRITISH STEEL SECTIONS, PLATES & COMMERCIAL STEELS

Piling Handbook, Seventh Edition
BS S, P & CS, 1997
25.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDISATION

Draft prENV 1993-5
Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures
Part 5: Piling
CEN, 1996
26.
INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS

Specification for piling and embedded retaining walls
Thomas Telford, 1996
27.
FEDERATION OF PILING SPECIALISTS

Specification for steel sheet piling
FPS, 1991
28.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDISATION (CEN)

Draft prEN 12699
Execution of special geotechnical works - displacement piles
BSI, 1997
114
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
29.
TECHNICAL EUROPEAN SHEET PILING ASSOCIATION

Installation of steel sheet piles
TESPA, 1993
30.
YANDZIO, E.
Design guide for steel sheet piled bridge abutments
31.
United Kingdom Control of Pollution Act 1974

Section 40
HMSO, 1974
32.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION

BS 5228: Noise control on construction and open sites
BSI, 1992
33.
CORNFIELD, G.M.
Steel bearing piles, 4th Edition
34.
Proceedings of the International Conferences on the application of stress

wave theory on piles
Stockholm 1980, 1984; Ottawa, 1988; The Hague, Holland, 1992;
Orlando, Florida, 1996
A.A. Balkema publishers, Rotterdam
35.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BD 42/94 Design of embedded retaining walls and bridge abutments
(unpropped or propped at the top)
36.

BS 8002: 1994 Code of practice for earth retaining structures
BSI, 1994
37.
PADFIELD, C.J. and MAIR, R.J.

Report 104: Design of retaining walls in stiff clays
Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA),
1984
38.

BS EN 10248: Hot rolled sheet piling of non alloy steels
BSI, 1996
39.

The corrosion and protection of steel piling in temperate climates
Publication P115, February 1994
40.

The prevention of corrosion on structural steelwork
Brochure reference SPCS 501 3 5/96, May 1996
115
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
41.

BS 1377: 1990 Methods of tests for soils for civil engineering purposes
BSI, 1990
42.

BS 5400: Steel, concrete and composite bridges
Part 1: 1988: General statement
Part 2: 1978: Specification for loads
Part 3: 1982: Code of practice for design of steel bridges
Part 4: 1990: Code of practice for design of concrete bridges
Part 5: 1979: Code of practice for design of composite bridges
Part 10: 1980: Code of practice for fatigue
BSI
43.

BS 8004 :1984: Code of practice for foundations
BSI, 1984
44.

BS 449: Specification for the use of structural steel in building
Part 2: 1969: Metric units
BSI, 1969
45.
AKROYD, T.N.W.
Earth-retaining structures: Introduction to the Code of Practice BS 8002
The Structural Engineer, Vol. 74, No. 21, 1996
46.
POTTS, D. M. and FOURIE, A. B.

A numerical study of the effects of wall deformation on earth pressures
pp. 383-404 Int. Jnl. Num. and Anal. Meths in Geomech. Vol. 10,
No. 3, 1986
47.
INSTITUTION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS

Soil structure interaction - the real behaviour of structures
ISE, 1989
48.

Draft for Development DD ENV 1997-1: 1995
Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design
Part 1: General rules (Includes the United Kingdom National
Application Document)
BSI, 1995
49.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BD 32/88, Piled foundations
50.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BA 25/88, Piled foundations
116
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
51.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
BD 37/88, Loads for highway bridges
52.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR STANDARDISATION

(ISO)
13819-2: Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries: Offshore structures
Part 2: Fixed Steel Structures
ISO, 1995
53.

BS EN 10 025: Hot rolled products of non-alloy structural steels Technical delivery conditions
BSI, 1993
54.
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE

API Specification 5L
Specification for line pipe, 41st Edition
API, 1995
55.
HEALTH AND SAFETY EXECUTIVE

Offshore installations: Guidance on the design, construction and
certification, Fourth Edition
HSE, 1990
56.
PECK, R.B.
Advantages and limitations of the Observational Method in applied soil
mechanics
Ninth Rankine Lecture
Geotechnique, Vol. 19, pp. 171-187, 1969
57.
CARDER, D.R.
TRL Report 172: Ground movements caused by different embedded
retaining wall construction techniques
Transport Research Laboratory, 1995
58.
CARD, G.B. and CARDER, D.R.

Highways Agency/TRL Report 228
Movement trigger limits when applying the Observational Method to
embedded retaining wall construction on highway schemes
59.
THE INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS

The Observational Method in geotechnical engineering
Thomas Telford, 1996
60.
CARDER, D.R., PRESS, D.J., MORLEY, C.H., and ALDERMAN,

G.H.
TRL Report 239: Behaviour during construction of a propped
diaphragm wall founded in London clay at Aldershot Road Underpass
117
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
61.

BS 7608: Code of practice for fatigue design and assessment of steel
sections
BSI, 1993
62.
EMERSON, M.
TRL Report 696: Bridge temperatures estimated from shade temperature
63.
EMERSON, M.
TRL Report 765: Temperature differences in bridges: basis of design
requirements
64.
HAMBLY, E.C. and OWENS, G.O.

Jointless steel viaducts for railways
Conference on Continuous and Integral Bridges
E & FN Spon, 1994
65.
ILES, D.C.
Design guide for continuous composite bridges: 1 compact sections,
1989, 1993
Design guide for continuous composite bridges: 2 non-compact sections,
1989, 1993
Design guide for simply supported composite bridges, 1991
The Steel Construction Institute
66.
PADFIELD, C.J. and MAIR, R.J.

Report 104: Design of retaining walls in stiff clays
1984
67.
ELSDON, W.K.
Report 103: Design of laterally-loaded piles
1984
68.
OASYS
Geotechnical suite of programs for analysis and design
ALP - Laterally loaded pile analysis
Ove Arup & Partners (London), 1991
69.

BS 5930: 1981 Code of practice for site investigations
BSI, 1981
70.
HIGHWAYS AGENCY
HA 34/87: Ground investigation procedure
118
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
71.
WELTMAN, A.J. & HEAD, J.M.

CIRIA Special Publication 25: Site investigation manual
1983
72.
UFF, J.F. & CLAYTON, C.R.I.

CIRIA Special Publication 73: Role and responsibility in site
investigation
1991
73.
MARTIN, W.S.
CIRIA Special Publication 136: Site guide to foundation construction
1996
74.
BURLAND, J.B., POTTS, D.M. and WALSH, N.M.

The overall stability of free and propped embedded earth retaining walls
pp. 28-38, Ground Engineering,14(5), July 1981
75.
WINKLER, E.
Die Lehre von Elastizitat und Festigkeit
Prague, 1867
76.
TERZAGHI, K.
Evaluation of coefficients of subgrade reaction
Geotechnique, Vol. 5, pp. 297-326, 1955
77.
PAPPIN, J.W., SIMPSON, B., FELTON, P.J. and RAISON, C.

Numerical analysis of flexible retaining walls
Proceedings of the Numerical Methods in Engineering Theory and
Application 85 Conference, Swansea, pp 789-802
78.
BORIN, D.L.
WALLAP anchored and cantilevered retaining wall analysis program:
Users manual (Version 4)
Geosolve (London), 1988
79.
BROOKS, N.J. and SPENCER, J.F.

Design and recorded performance of a secant retaining wall in Croydon
Proc. Int. Conf. Retaining Structures Cambridge, 1992
80.
PAPPIN, J.W., SIMPSON B., FELTON, P.J. and RAISON, C.

Proc. Symp. Computer Applications in Geot. Engng.
Midland Geot. Soc. Birmingham Univ. pp 195-212
1986
81.
PAPPIN, J.W., SIMPSON, B., FELTON, P.J. and RAISON, C.

Symposium on Computer Applications in Geotechnical Engineering
The Midland Geotechnical Society, UK, 1986
119
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
82.
THE STEEL CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE and BLACKWELL

SCIENCE
Steel designers manual - 5th edition
Blackwell Science, 1994
83.
BROMS, B.B. and INGLESON, I.

Earth pressure against the abutments of a rigid frame bridge
pp. 15-28, Geotechnique 21, No.1, 1971
84.
BROMS, B.B. and INGLESON, I.

Lateral earth pressure on a bridge abutment
Vol.1, pp 117-123. Proc. 5th European Committee on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Madrid, 1972
85.
BROMS, B.B. and INGLESON I.

Written discussion - Lateral earth pressure on a bridge abutment;
Lateral earth pressures on walls and measurements under different
temperature conditions
Reprint and Preliminary Reports, No. 52,
Swedish Geotechnical Institute, Stockholm, 1973
86.
SPRINGMAN, S.M., NORRISH, A.R.M. and NG, C.W.W.

TRL Report 146: Cyclic loading of sand behind integral bridge
abutments
87.
OASYS Geotechnical suite of programs

PILE: - Vertical pile capacity
Ove Arup & Partners (London), 1991
88.
MEIGH, A. C.
Cone penetration testing
Construction Industry Research and Information Association and
Butterworths, 1987
89.
BOWLES, J.E.
Foundation analysis and design, 4th Edition
McGraw-Hill, 1988
90.
WANG, C.K.
Stability of rigid frames with non-uniform members
pp. 275-294, JSD, ASCE, Vol. 93, ST 1, Feb. 1967
91.
DAVISON, M.T. and ROBINSON, K.E.

Bending and buckling of partially embedded piles
Vol. 2., pp. 243-246, Proc. 6th International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 1965
92.
REDDY, A.S., and VALSANGKAR A.J.

Buckling of fully and partially embedded piles
pp. 1951-1965, J. Soil Mechs. and Founds Div., ASCE, Vol. 96
(SM6),
November 1970
120
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
93.
GREIMANN, L.F. and WOLDE-TINSAAE, A.M.

Design model for piles in jointless bridges
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 114, No. 15, 1987
94.
POULOS, H.G. and DAVIS, E.H.

Pile foundation analysis and design
John Wiley and Sons, 1980
95.
TOMLINSON, M.J.
Pile design and construction practice, 4th Edition
E & FN Spon, 1994
96.
BROMS, B.B.
Lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soils
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Mar.
1964, 90 (SM2), 27-63
97.
BROMS, B.B.
Lateral resistance of piles in cohesionless soils
Proc. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., May 1964, 90
(SM3), 123-156
98.
MATLOCK, H.
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA
OTC 1204, Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay
May 1970
99.
REESE, L.C. and COX, W.R.

Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA
OTC 2312 Field testing and analysis of laterally loaded piles in stiff
clay
May 1975
100.
ONEILL, M.W. and MURCHINSON, J.M.

An evaluation of P-Y relationships in sands
A report to the American Petroleum Institute, May 1983
101.
REESE, L.C.
Laterally loaded piles: program documentation
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. - J. Geotech. Engng. Div. 103(GT4),
287 to 305, April 1977
102.
MATLOCK, H. and REESE, L.C.

Generalised solutions for laterally-loaded piles
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Oct. 1960,
86(SM5), 63 to 91
103.
HORSNELL, M.R.
Pile design - application of offshore technology to the onshore
environment
Proc. Syp. Computer Applications to geotechnical problems in Highway
Engineering, pp. 268-292, 1980
121
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
104.
POULOS, H.G.
Users guide to program DEFPIG - deformation analysis of pile groups
School of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, 1980
105.
MINDLIN, R.D.
Force at a point in the interior of a semi-infinite solid
Physics 1936 7 195
106.
POULOS, H.G.
Behaviour of laterally-loaded piles: single piles
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., May 1971,
97(SM5), 711 to 731
107.
POULOS, H.G.
Behaviour of laterally-loaded piles: pile groups
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., May 1971,
97(SM5), 733 to 751
108.
POULOS, H.G.
Design of pile foundations
Research Report 271, University of Sydney, School of Engineering,
1975
109.
POULOS, H.G.
Lateral loaded deflection prediction for pile groups
Proc. Am. Soc. Civ. Engrs. - J. Geotech. Engng. Div., Jan. 1975,
101(GT1), 19 to 33
110.
BANNERJEE, P.K. and DRISCOLL, R.M.

Three-dimensional analysis of raked pile groups
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Dec. 1976, 61(2), 635 to 671
111.
BUTTERFIELD, R. and DOUGLAS, R.A.

CIRIA Technical Note 108: Flexibility coefficients for the design of
piles and pile groups
1981
112.
BANNERGEE, P.K., DRISCOLL, R.M and DAVIES, T.

PGROUP - Program for the analysis of pile groups of any geometry
subjected to horizontal and vertical loads and moments
Manual HECB/B/7, Highways Computing Division of the Dept. of
Transport, 1981
113.
RANDOLPH, M.F. and RANPURIA, A.K.

MPILE: - Program for the analysis of pile groups under general three
dimensional loading conditions
Manual HCSL/B/35, Highways Computing Division of Dept. of
Transport, 1984
122
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
114.
LINDSELL, P. and S.H. BUCHNER, S.H.

Long-term monitoring of spill-through bridge abutments
IStructE/BRE Seminar on Structural Assessment - Based on full and
large scale testing, Watford, April 1987
115.
INGOLD, T.S.
Lateral earth pressures on rigid bridge abutments
Journal of Inst. Highway Engineers, Vol. 26, No. 12, London,
(December 1979), pp. 2-7
116.
AMDAHL and FRIEZE

Conference on accidental loadings on marine structures: Risk and
response
Royal Institute of Naval Architects (RINA), London, 1996
123
15 September 2003

Discuss me ...
Typeset and page make-up by The Steel Construction Institute, Ascot, Berkshire, SL5 7QN
Printed and bound by Staples Printers Rochester Limited, Rochester, Kent, ME2 4LT
1600 - 6/97

Integral Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Integral Bridges

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Integral Bridges

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

PUBLICATION NUMBER P163

Integral Steel Bridges:

A R BIDDLE BSc, CEng, MICE

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

1997 The Steel Construction Institute

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

Buckinghamshire County Council

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

WHAT IS AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

SUBSTRUCTURES FOR INTEGRAL BRIDGES

STEEL SECTIONS FOR INTEGRAL BRIDGE PIERS AND ABUTMENTS

CHOOSE AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

Environmental factors associated with driven piles

SITE INVESTIGATION AND SOIL DATA FOR DESIGN

ABUTMENT WALLS - EMBEDDED WALL STABILITY

ABUTMENT WALLS - SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION

ABUTMENT WALLS - RESPONSE TO THERMAL DECK MOVEMENTS

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

STEEL PILES - AXIAL LOAD RESISTANCE

STEEL COLUMN-PILES - LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE

COMPOSITE DECK DESIGN

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Lutilisation de piles en acier comme appuis du pont convient particulirement bien

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Ponte integrali in acciaio: guida progettuale

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

ndskrmsbroar i stl: Dimensioneringsvgledning

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

2 WHAT IS AN INTEGRAL BRIDGE?

Definition and terminology

Created on 06 February 2007

2.1.1 Integral bridges

2.1.2 Jointless deck bridges

Frame abutment integral bridges

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance

Created on 06 February 2007

Integral bridge - displacements due to expansion

Integral bridge - displacements due to vertical loading

No intermediate support is shown in these Figures. A configuration with

Pinned integral bridges

In a frame abutment integral bridge, displacements due to temperature (thermal

P163: Integral Steel Bridges: Design Guidance