Professional Documents
Culture Documents
B Ridges W Ith M Ultiple C Able-Stayed Spans
B Ridges W Ith M Ultiple C Able-Stayed Spans
M ichelV irlogeux,CivilEng.
Consulting Engineerand Designer.Bonnelles.France
- I j
l
#j t
.
Q). , - t
#
. .. p. -
. l. x.
, < j.. .'
*.
- ... . A N *.*.ehw
... . . j. ! -. +z t
. ->*'
' .
. -. .. .x - . .% ..>
.g.
.. . . . .t
r.
>...-... v.. --.o -. .- . . =. w . . .s-.= J..--g.
% 6.
.* .o: . z>. .. -.....-w. .v.r.....
/:ïy
. (7
'
..3
-.'.
TI1(.
7(L
'
IIf'
It
r
.(
''
?(l
'
t
.)''
F7'
t
??lft
?-
'
f1)Ftt'
/>
c.''62/,'?/2(3d
-t'#rt.
-!.
%sil'
.t;;
./
'
'
l'he first one. developed with SOF-
RESID and Jean-claudeFoucriat.u' as ''$h
partofa projectto crossthe English :
1k jyt
/r.l' l
h.
C hanndl.between England and France. j
, yyy-
,
D istribution of R igidity
betw een the Structural
M em bers
-1-he best s0Iution-111-
1d the n'
lost ele-
gant.is to distribute rigidity betw'een
the differentstructurall' nenlbers (the
deck.piers.and pylons)inorderto bal-
ance bending effects produced by
asyn-ln-letric 1iN'e loads and tt) linlit
det-
lections.Frolu one extrenle to the
other.severalsolutionslnightbe ctlnn-
pared (Fig..
?-
$):
-
A deck with high enough rigiditl'tt)
resistbending I'noluents induced by
liN'
e Ioads.This solution is tlnly ap-
plicable for cable-stayed bridges
w ith snAallorl'nediulu spans.
- Pl'lons with high bending rigidit).
for exanzple haN' ing the shape t)l'
an inverted ' V longitudinally-with a
transfer 01 * bending forces i11 the
piers belou'to lil-nitthe rotation at
the deck level.LJ11der these condi-
tions it is possible to l'las'
e a N'ery
slenderand flexible deck.
- D istribute rigidity betq'ettn all the
structural n-lennbers-deck and tou' -
$1r:'i!.
A s stated above.the strtlcttlraldesign
n-lust alloNv for length varialiklns pl-tl-
duced in the deck by the installationt)f
continuity prestressing tenklons in the
spansaftertheyhavebeenclosed-con-
cretecreep and shrinkageuvhichdek'el-
op afterclosingthe spans.antlten- lper-
aturevariations.A llprclcticals()ltltions
u'ill therefore be analy'sed t'ne at tt
tirne.
'
The firstsolution is tt)giN'e the deck a
high flexuralinertia.large enklugh tk)
temporarysupportsandjoinedbJ'lon-
gitudinalclosures.cross beam s and a r
t
.
!:
-#2.
-
a.r
I
:1svjyt
l-
n
''
.
cast-in-situ upper slab. Extrem e py-
lons. on the extrem e piers. are sta-
bi1ised by back staysin a classicalw ay.
eN'en though the side spansare slightly
Iongerthan usual.Onlythe centralpy-
lon issubiected to inAportantrotation-
all-
novem entsproduced by asq' lnal-
netri- 4(1n
...ilt)
(z- r..1 .. , ,. . - i
callive loads.w hich are contrclled by 9) ;a..
sii(,
1 ... ? lt) 1
the deck tlexural inertia. Pylens and 3
7
>. I .- 1 .
ù
.
'-
w. r: ! ; .
w.
cable stays are in verticalplanes.one '-
r 4
rx.
I '->
.4 >.
'
-
w i x x
on each side 01
'the structure (lateral . x' I
suspension).
The second example is the Colindres 1
Bridge-Spain.com pleted in l993.lt '
y
beam sin the deck above the stlpports
and theirreinforcem enthaN'eto be de-
signed accordingly.ln addition-though
thisisoflil- nited practicalim portance.
itis inzpossible to predictthe relative
luox'em ents of the deck on t1e stlp-
ports:because they arecontrolled only
by friction k?n the sliding bearingsthey
'
This lastfamily of solutions leads di- inspirationNvastakenfrom thisproject A san approxim ation-and w ith an un-
rectlyto a new conceptoftotalsuspen- for the developm entofthe design of known hyperstatic effectgiven by the
sion.This concept w as developed by the Rion-A ntirion Bridge. value of the norm alforce in the m id-
Fritz Leonhardt for classical cable- span cross-section. the compressive
stayed bridgeswith the erection ofthe force in thedeck duetothisload varies
Pasco-Kennewick Bridge in the USA Sim plilled Evaluation ofForces from zero.in the m id-span cross sec-
in 1978-and reproduced in 1986 b)'Pe- tion.to qLll 'bàl'
l near to the pylon or
ter Taylorfor the A lex Frazer Bridge At a meeting in Tokyo.Jean Schm itt tow er.
nearVancouver-Canada.' T'
he concept gave usa very simple way to evaluate
adaptsperfectly to cable-stayed bridges som e forces in bridges with m ultiple W hen analysing the effect ofperma-
with multiple spans in that it permits spans.Considering thatthe deck isso nent loads in a cable-stayed bridge
completefreelongitudinalmovements flexible.we can neglect bending mo- with m ultiple spans.due to sym m etry.
ofthe deck - lim ited onlyby thestress m ents in itw hen analysing the global pylonsortowersareonlysubiected to
variations in cable stays produced by equilibrium ofloads.NVe could extend com pressive forces.'T' he norm alforce
them ovements-withoutany directin- hisapproach.supposingthatlongitudi- in pylons or towers due to the deck
terference with the rigidity of towers. na1deformationsin the deck are very Nveightis equalto PL w here p is the
Length variationsdue to tem perature. sm all. when com pared to horizontal deck linear wei ght (including equip-
concrete creep and shrinkage are thus dellections produced by bending m o- mentl:horizontalforces due to the
com pletely free (Fig.-$W). m entsin pylonsortow ers.even ifthey w eightofcantileverson both sidesof
are very rigid. each pylon or tower are balanced.
Thisefficientsolution wasproposed by N orm alforces in the deck vary in a
the contractorBouyguesfortheR é1s- For simplicity- we suppose that the firstapproxim ation from zero atm id-
land Bridge competition in 1986. deck ishorizontal.butitwould be easy spansto /pf.V8/?at the pylons or tow -
Pierre Richard had theideaofforming to introduce a correction w hen ithas ers:only construction effects (includ-
the bridge.about2.8 km long,from a some inclination. ingprestressingforcesifany).temper-
series of cable-stayed spans 210 m ature variations. concrete creep and
A uniform load on a cantileverarm is shrinkage can alterthisdistribution of
long.The deck w as continuous from directly balanced by the verticalcom - com pressive forces.depending on the
one end to theother.totallysuspended
from the towersthrough which itpass- pon entofcabletensionsqFig.404.con-
sidering the global load on the can-
type ofconnectionsbetween deck and
es (Fig.J9).Unfortunately.just after tilever arm .itis balanced by the ten- pylonsortowers.
thesuccessfulerection ofthe Bubiyan sion in the w'average'-cable-stay with: The situation is com pletely different
Bridge in Kuwaitand when the erec- for live loads.The case of a uniform
tion of the Syllans and Glacières T = qL load on a com plete span. on a deck
Viaductswas beginning in the French 2sina which is totally suspended from the
A lps.Pierre Richard designed a three- w here L is the span length and c the towers.orrestingon a1ltow ersthrough
dim ensionaltruss forthe deck in pre- inclination ofthe''average-'cable-stay. neoprene orsliding bearings is show n
stressed concrete. the high cost of The pylon or tow er thus receives a on Fig.41.Towerson b0th sidesofthe
which killed thesolution. horizontalforcegiven by: loaded span receive a horizontalforce
Bending forcesproduced by asymmet- ql- equaltoqLï;/8h.
.sincenoother(impor-
ricalliveloadsw erebalanced easilyby F = F coscz= tant)force can come from the deck
the high flexuralinertia ofthe deck so lttqa due to the type of connection.these
that the towers were rather slender. towersreceiveabendingm om entw hich
M ore rigid towers. not very m uch varieslinearly and isequalto:
m ore expensive.could have allow ed . 2
ik
(jL (H + /?)
for a slenderdeck w ith a m uch low er l(t'
?)= 8/ .
costthan the proposed one.the total ?
suspension m aking the length varia- atthetosverbasis.where H isthe tow -
tionscom pletely free.A sshown below. erheightbelow the deck.
structtlralEngineering International 1.
/2001
A nd since the deck can receive no
(inlportant)horizontall
brce frolu the
toïs'ers.through the bearings.the nor-
m alforce produced by live loadsatthe
' toNversisequaltt)zero:an hyperstatic
t
1 effectdex' elopsi1
-
1the loaded span.and
'
j l
1 the norlnal force is a tension in the
I lnid-span cross-section of the loaded
span.give1' 1by:
3
?'hh; j!
l- é
f'
t.
!1--
1 / z. d
r' ......'.......s
I
l 1 .2 8/?
1 j' leading to the tlffectiN'e distribution of
.Y.a.-4t-v.
Y sqav.w ! k..:n.x.k ... .. j l
* *.w ... *=.Aa.nF.
N*
...' -5a
s .Qr.
0=''r*1
..
. '.s..;w>Qm-:z*
a N. 1-r
-'. +g+os..Cm..
>,. .
*5#
>
*
w
rv
-'
eu*
.g
ns
'x.
>+
-'a.
.<
Y-
A
.sc
î
s
%s
*
. g)p.J
.t.*
.j.$j.'
- ...ï...,
.-- i-. tl. norm all'
k'-5tzrlxtjj orcesin thedeck produced by
, 1:
'
. 1 !j.
4.
c.-
oa. these liN'
e loads.
lfthe deck isrigidly connected to clas-
sicaltoNvers.or connected to classical
tow ersby fixed bearings.lhe situation
is conApletely different:a fram e effect
developsintheIoaded span and thead-
iacenttowers (Fig.42).Supposing fol'
sil-
nplicity that they have the sanle
height below the deck.the horiztlnlal
displaceluentatthe deck leNveliseqtlal
to zero for sl'nlluetry and due to the
fact that the longitudinalJeforl- natitln
inthedeck isN' tll-y'slnallasconèparedto
the horizontaldisplacenèentsoftowers.
The horizontalforce in thc touqt zr pro-
duced by the load-t/ '.
J-2,
'
8/?.is --balan-
.
. -r
N xx .. .j 1 ..
..Nxwx N$
x . g/ .
y
y /z -.-'''.
-
e- I
.
N ..h N, ,z '$4.. ! .e-'''-
...e-'
Sc.
.x
'N-.x >X ,, .y ,' a
Nxxks. ;,z
. ' ''.I
' .
/x w
, -.
.ee 'I
.
'u=.
' .
j (5)
j wj
.' ..-
' . 1
*
d
' '.
.
. ' !
î
(
,
J 4.l()
(i j
'
The distribution of nornlal forces i1-1
' the loaded span directly derives fron-t
?
/
'
,--/h
!
-----
t
'
-
:
' . !
-.
--
-''
.-
- f
q
i
j
.
i
-
' ''
'.-
..
...
j7
thisresult.
ltisclea1'thatthedistribtltion ofbe1,
1tl-
??---
3
-
/
,
r
,
.
-,
y p
'
;
j
,
y
, ,
ing forcesin the tosversisnluch nlore
favourablethanw ith atotally stlspend-
/
j
.
'
-
; .
,
) t j
; !
,
?,
y
eddeck(ora deckon neop1-e1'
ing bearings)'
1eorsIid-
.at the tower biasis.the
'i
k. .
bending n'
lonnentisgiq'
en by:
xXx'x t,.'v.
'
y Sj ' -
...
..
j .
4, l
j
!:...!.:.kt ,-.I:.!,tkt .
l
I (6)
-
i
-
)-
1
.
-
l j7
'.1 j1j.
But.practically-u'henthe deck isrigid-
1).
'connected to toxverstheirlow'erpart
is organised so asto free length varia-
tionsin the deck.for exam ple by div-
StructuralEngineering International 1/2001
L11--
I ''n l
1 tvj( j
1
1 X '----A ,
.
'
t
r g;
r; ) .
r
l t
.
/y s.
Nx. *.+* =N v t 99, : , vj: j
srq l ! 4 <
&N x. V1 .
'.
.
t q' i
- -- - -- - - >-. .y- -- j
t 1 qj.-
.k b /-/:
-
1 &'?'E f/:. )./)('M
// .
- .- (3 -J..
-2
cn
L 1
Fig.41:I-FT' :Ioadstp/?a t.
-t?F??/?Jt?rt
7spall.It'JJ'
/7a Jt
?c-/k
'colltpleselj'-
çI/.
!'-
/7el1é/(,(1ri)/(?It'
Q,l-
s
'
t t?r/T
-'
t/L-i :
1 w, ' .
. - z.q/? j
; w (* . , ,? i
. I ! t,/--
l
I l ! 9
j: /
? ' k Jt I
' No /? R l t
?/-' , ( ,
j yk t uvj: (
fp..
-i I += = -lR
-.
&?
A== C
IL.. * ' --- ----- @
. -. yi. -
*=.i=-- s;: ('D
l ; y
( s' y j
I I
H I
B t//.S . z : de
zfz
z' /'ze
. z'.' l#)
qL'
(A - ? R
N'( 1k
l/3
a') (.>
(Fè
i<
i2/'2
'
* ==+ S e += $
i k
t ;
k I
1 . 1 y
'
'
i l j h'i .
:
' 1
i I
. !'
'
.;
)
2
- - 1- - - - - -- - - -
1=
- 4-- -- ; --
'
i
'
.
î = 1=
. s '
l '
. î . I
. (j t/ t/ t/
: '
in =
'
1 k Zz'
z /
'z
..
z/ //
/ :/
zzz Zz
(E) /
/ *2 yr2:
j ! i)i. :
'
i m $
l =+ >,/? ..
>; '*.
R ' X i ' !j.r 1Ik
=5# k. .z y..+ ,i..--
tt V
i I//. 11'
i // 'L.L? ' / a
< '
' lï-
ig.46:LJ ''
k'(.
z10(1(1.
b'tJ/2t?t' tg/lr/'/tJ'k't.
p/' tl!'ll2 111
Fig.. .1-.i!
/J. .
'f
?1()(1(1.
%(?/?a ('f//gfilej
..
er/? '
,.F?2.bb:il
'
lï ctlc/?A'ptfll-Iî'J'r/2/?(I(?c.k (-t')/?2/?/tzf(,lj'. $;df.
b'
.I
)(?11(1.
-
(1deck crp/??
p/t,
zftl
z/ï'sltspellded Jtp/ '
6,1$'el'.
b. L
'(IJ'
t.
lt'
()3b'c1.b'
Lake GepdrtsBridge
The Geneva Lake Bridge is nlade ()f decide upon construction. and the H owever-thiswasagainstthe author's
four pylons and three m ain cable-
G eneva poptllatitln opposed in 1997 ideas.asheprefered having no tensile
stayed spans350 m long (Fig.47).The any proiectacrossthe 1ake. force in the m ain m em bersunderper-
alignn-lentisslightlyctlrved to increase m anentand frequentloads.Theauthor
thebridgeeleganceand m ore speciall3, thus preferred to divide the extrem e
to im prove the view thatuserswould slillau Viaduct piersinto twin parallelshafts in order
have of the structure Nvhen passing
along it. Despite this curvature. the Th eNlilIauprojectiseq'en l uoreambi- to produce high rigidity for bending
tious.Itisabklut2.5 kn4long.Nvith ' the m om ents and large flexibility with re-
pylons and cable staq' s ltre axial.The road passing 27()nl abox' e the Riq'er gard to longitudinalm ovem ents.Em -
deck isextrem ely u' ide.33.46 m -w ith Tarn.lt1' 1asses'en pl'lonsand six l '
nain m anuelBouchon increased this longi-
an extrem elj'elegant cross section:a cable-stayed spans 342 n: long.Nvith tudilèaltlexibility by installing oneline
trapezoidalthree-cellbox-girder-alnnost two piersn-lore than .' 23()n-ltall.the py- offixed bearingson top ofeach ofthe
triangular.extended on each side by lonsrising 9()Im above the deck.H on'- tw in shafts.which w asbetterthan pro-
w ideoverhanging slab elen-lents.Rigid- eNvel-.as stated aboN'e.developing the ducing a rigid connection as on the
ity is distributed efficiently between
thepiers.thepl'lons-and the relatiN' ely pl-
roject totlk a ' h,
rel-
l
y long tiJme and othersupports.
nanyproblelushad tobesolved.
slenderdeck. Not conA'inced by this proiect and
The prel il
ninary pr oj
e c
t wa s estab- seeking som e com petition betn'een
Longitudinal deforn- 1ations produced
by concretecreep and shrinkage.sol- ne I ished by SETRZ A.n'ith an- laiorcon- differentideas.the Road D irector tl1'-
cern about longitudinaldeform ations ganised two com petitions. The first
Prestressing effects. and tenxperature (Fig../*).711e idea ofan interm ediate one took place in 1993-1994 to select
variations are lim ited b)'the relatively expansion
shortdistance betw een thecentralsec- ing the r.ecom iointwaselim inated follow- new ideasand concepts.D esign offices
m endations of R ené and architects were consulted sepa-
tion oflhe bridge and the extrt an'le p)'- Xvalther.who was m em ber ofa panel rately. but very few neNN' soltltions
lons(475 n' l).'
Theq'are allowed for bq'
1e relatiN'eI3,high flexibility ()1-piers of
t1-
.
expertsinchargeoftheprojecteval- em erged.A second com petition u'as
uation.as he had been for the N or- organised in 1995-1996 betueen fiN'e
svith regard to longitudinaln- loN'el-nents m andie Bridge. René Nvalther would team sofclesign offices and architects.
and by the foundation conditions in haN'e accepted som e cracksin the ex- each team being in charge ofdeN'elop-
the RhonealluN' ialdeposits. trem e piers.resulting from length 5,' :1- ing a proi:
ectcorresponding to one of
U nfortunatelyforthe bridge engineer- riations. which u'ould l' 1aN'
e relaxed the t' iN'
e taluilies of solutions selected
ingcom m unity.avotewasnecessaryto bending forcds in these m em bers. afterthefirstconsultation.Thecolupe-
StructuralEngineering International 1/2001
tition u'asthusmorebetwzen proiects ofSogelerg-Europe EtudesGecti.Serf îectbctB'
een 1996and l998-initiallyto
than between teams. The iury in and the architect Sir N'orman Foster prepare a callfor bids betu'een con-
charge of'the choice in Jtlly l996 se- (Fig.- 4#).vl-his team which the author tractors.HoNveNver.itNvas recently'de-
lected thesoltltion '
with mtlltiple cable- i
oined afterleaN' ing SE-
I'RA wasthen cided to award a concessitln for the
staqr
ed spansdevelopedbl. 'aleam made in charge ofdeveloping adetailed pro- erection of the section of the nlotor-
B'
ay'ofB'hich theviaductisthcn'
lajor
part.the shapesofthe prepared pro-
iectbeingmandatorl'
.
''
'(llE)l 12.-' 'q -è Jk t7
' 13,' 17',4 t;l 1(. 1 '1 Two alternatives had been developed:
one in prestressed concrete.the other
7 -''F ll1j
- ';-5jp -.
:n() 7-i1J ')-!() 7-!4) ')'n() )qt
-) 2j.
';4.
$.'
( with an orthotropic box-girder deck
I (Fig.504.Both solutions have almost
I . thesameshapes.adapted to thespecif-
ic conditions of cable-stayed bridges
Nvith nnultiple spans and to the N' ery
strong winds 1()()or l5()n' laboN' e the
plateau.The shapes that have to be
respected were developed in close c0-
operation wit1 -
1 the architect to effi-
' cientlq'distribtlte rigiditq'buttu'een thtt
:kt)(1
dit-
ferentstructuraln' len-
lbers.butwith
' 7
I the greatest care for the bridge ele-
7
1
l
1!
1
,
1y()(j lI gance and for the aesthetic coherence
ij' ll,.
'
Ft)t) . ofthe differentelenRents.seeking ap-
!
j
i '
j
' parent simplicitl'and expressing the
.h j
A
. A
* ez
reallow offorces.
!
1 I
l I Tlne deck hasa trapezoidalshape.be-
1
j ing alluost triangular with a nal -l'
ow
!
; j lower slab.' The triangular shape that
i had been contenAplated was elim inat-
l 2
1 edbecatlseofitspooraerodq'nalnicbe-
$ l haN'iour.Conlpared ïvith the prelin- li-
l
l j e'
=I .
' nary design.the deck ism ore slender.
' l :.$
about4.50 n- 1conzpared vvith 5.5()nz.
1 j - ...' w
--
=-
-'!1
w- wt
wc x.I
1r.r
The pylons are 90 m high and art?in
'
j I ;
l
I u r'..r the bridge axisforelegance and struc-
i l .
'
,
p 1
I ttlralptlrity.-l-
heyhaN' e theshape ofan
l
i
; i
I 1 inverted N'longitudinalll'to produce
I I the necessarq'rigidity and to appear
p
!j
!
,9.
1
:),:j' lightand transparentatthesalne tim e.
14.531 Thedesign ofpiersbelon' 'had to adapt
to contradictoo' requirenaents: the
tallest ones haN' e to resist verl'high
Nvind forces-w hereasthe extren' le ones
have to be flexible wit1 -
1regard to lon-
gitudinal forces. For project h()mtl-
geneity the architectpreferred to give
a1l the piers the sam e shape-wit11 a
. :. ' . > B'ide box section in the lowe1'partof
+'
> >y, the high piers and a division into tu'
îl)
. ..
*N *>vM-..
.< XAW'A'
. .. 'd
'N' -
%,w.
X
Q'Nx
wx .
.
- . shaftsinthehighiarpart-about9f)m higll.
e.. ,t W <Y.Y- >
w *
x x
x . .
The candidates for the concessitln
u'ereselected in200()and arepresently
.'. .k.
..a.
. preparing theiroft-ers.lfthis bridge is
N NN ''. erected-asexpected.itu' illhavea nna-
. ..
. V '-. >
.
jorimpactontheproft
assion dueto its
W
.. . .' technicalinterestand itsarchitectural
z..#a/
.; ' # o' v. '
' I
. .
Z ' '
&.
,
.
$
perfection.
.
- u111
..
1
X
,
:
'
u
.1
!
:.'
.'''.
c
l
h
i
'
.
' .. ...
' .
.'
1 4
<l
W
.
.. .
..
.
.tr..r .. .. ' .. :;
. -.
sy'..
''
StructuralEngineeringInternatillnal 1-/2001
'
t) 1 O 3 7 6 ? (7
am ending the shape of the offshore
î !
a46 ).f)f) 1 l
( structures that constitute the founda-
u(
)-1.d)() 3-;*
--.()() 3-T7()() 3-:7()1
') 7-to4-8() 3:1.-D..(:J Jl-)n
-..(J() -.()-).()t)'
% , tion caissonsand the piersin orderto
f r
I f redtlce the m assofwater accompany-
I 1 k ë j
' 30254
?7, l I 1 1
' 1 l ing the caissons during earthquakes.
H e entrusted the authorwith an audit
1j
. .
$
r.
t !!
l;
:j!
l;
yt I
t! j of the proîect.asking for proposals
i
hl. i to improve it. Retkrring to Pierre
E
'
j ,
Richard-s project for the Ré lsland
Bridge. the author recom m ended a
continuous deck totally suspended
from thefourpylons.rigidlyconnected
tothepiersbelow'(Fig.51).'Fhissolu-
tion wasadopted im mediately.theside
spans being shortened slightly so that
the last cable stays almost reach the
end supports.
ln comparison with theinitialproiect.
thissolution hasm any advantages.Py-
lonsare connected directly and rigidly
to the piers below. and the relative
m ovem ents betw een piers and can-
tilevers.which appeared so question-
Rw
.
<w able.are thus eliminated.The deck is
è
;m
' xw>''
'
u
X
.'
777
.
y
'.x.
x
x'''
t.wx
''''' h
.h
continuous with no expansion joint.
,-.'',- qf.ï
: -.. '. '. ..
.
:t
:ty . x.
.
....
..
''' ,', .-:.9'.
-
-
.' 'l
'..
.. 's''
l' shh
. .'''
's
' xs.
ss q. producing greater comfort.Safety no
.,',,..,
,,. ..'....s ....
. ..
longer relies on dam pers.buton the
ducti'
-ity of the structural m em bers.
tX
'!
$.
'
1
IC
1
c
'
>
&
F
m
2
,
;
j
I
-
+
)
r
ë
i
m ainly the pylon legs.on which itis
i
.i easierto be confident.Some dampers
t( are used only to lim ittransverse seis-
m ic m ovem ents. Since the drop-in
spans have been elim inated. cable
stayscanbeuniform ly distributed.and
bending momentsdrastically reduced.
and no m ore '-pancake effect-'has to
be feared.
The finalprojecthasbeen developed
on these bases by GTNI and Ingerop.
The bridgehasfive spans.286.3 )' t560
and 286 m long. 7-he four supports
keep the aspectofthe offshore struc-
tures.with a directfoundation on the
sea bed extended by a pierhaving the
shape of a large circular caisson.The
piercrown widensthiscaisson to leave
passage for the deck and to allow the
Rion-xntirlon Bridge The idea thatcantileversw ould m ove installation ofthe fourlegsthatconsti-
by at least 1.00 m during extrem e tuteapylon.joiningatthepyl ontopto
A lastproiectdeservesattention.espe- earthquakes was not very com forting have (he shape ofan inverted V longi-
cially asitisthe singleone undercon- w ith the drop-in spansbetween them . tudinally and transNrersally.The deck is
struction today.nam ely the Rion-A n- The concentration of several cable a com posite structure with two steel1-
tirion Bridge thatwillcrossthe Patras stays at the cantilever ends.in order girdersasedgebeamsjoinedbymulti-
Bay.The initialdesign presented pre- to balance the weight of the drop-in ple floorbeam sand a reinforced con-
viously in this article raised m any spans.produced undesirable bending crete slab.This solution was selected
questions. m om ents.m uch higherthanin classical forits low ercost.despite the aerodp
A tfirst it was questionable.as struc- cable-stayed bridges.Further artificial nam icbehaviourofthistypeofprofile.
turalsafety relies com pletely on a se- problems are produced when cable which isnotthebest.
riesofhuge dam pers.w hich do notyet stays are anchored at close intervals.
exist: the possible tectonic displace- Finally. vertical effects of extrem e
mentsreach 2.00 m and seism ic forces earthquakes would shake the drop-in C onclusions
arevery high.Furtherspace necessary spanslikepancakesin theirpans.
to house al1this equipm entappeared This extensive review presents a new
lacking-despite the large dim ensions W Then Jacques Com baulttook charge
field of application of cable-stayed
given to the pierheads. oftheprojectsupervision.hebeganby bridges.The erection ofthe Rion-A'n-
StructuralEngineering International 1/2001 Reports 81
TN'IT-FFOHT.H .I''illlll;)llt/tpp'.b';)tl1lIîI$'t:jJ(t Be-
El?5c
. K -'t
hs
'('
7 --'
.'
:A() :1
-($(.1 3%
-'()(.4 -7i>''
- tt
3 -5-1..u84
-
tonN'e1'lag.DiisseldorI'.l97'''
. k .
' 1 .
. 1 I I
PO DO LN 5-.54' ..S(7.ALZI.J.('()/7. $'r77/t'r?'ttlltf?lt/
.î
bt,7 s
x.4t.. ar'it
ass.'p,.t' .k.k
. .s/.
,...
.t , .'.
. p. ' . - .-- k j.
f t tlesizll t?/'t'
fk/i/g-xff?y'
t,t/ 1
)l'
i(lq:L'
.
b.Jt'h1 ïï' i1t
?1'ck
=- R i == L' ' ' ''
Son>-Neu 5-ork.1976.
(..'
iI5ISIN G N.J.Ct//l/f.?. sLq)))()t':ç'(I/?r,'J.vtts.'(-()tl-
t't.
gplfllltiflesigll.John '
iNliltl'qs'tt'Stlns.C-hicllestel'.
l983.
NN'ITTFO i'1T.H.Britlles Betonxkrlug.Dtissel-
dorf.l984.
. k;'
!#xz
;x
yi' ff..z .'4 u.. '- . .a. .p SI.'-..N.L7-H ER.R.etttI.P(t)1I.b/?tJl//7dI/?f7$.Pl'ttssch
z.. :672;:1; ,.'' .>' .
vqr .
wox.
wx
u-- -v
>'
'r 'r5r?'.?..'s..t L.t'.%..XM.'xNwuxx-n.x.hhxhx'wx>-.
y
)/z
i.
/jvs
y''
w-x
>-N.
.
x
-..
-- '
, .
,.'
,
m
''
K,
Az<).'z
Z r
z: ...'
.
j'
s
.t.q x
h
kM x't.'x-
x7xzwN'
h'w:: -
%
xt-
L
r
-
w
rx
w-?s'N'>N.-'''''NX'.X. .
-
xM
Jzz'
x'
-
w-'
. ..e'
z,j.='v
.
VA...''Zz
--
.-
,'z
'..<.z'''.,.sz,,.;
.
'n.
-----
'N<---x
/, .' !h, .k xNx .
ovow-
A..''A'
.' .
.-'
z.,.'
,,z'.
..'.
J,/;
/ :
; ht
N. L
'
'à
.
.x
'xl
: xL
N
... .' !.,'.%'x'xy.xx lx
èx x xvr
-.
. X x
Pol.l!cchniquesRom êtlldu-s.l-ausannt).l9S6.
.
' -
.l -- - . - - - .- - ..-- .- . 1 . . LEO NH .ARDT.F.P()?In'.Pltellrcx.Prutssk!sPoly-
@ =
lcchniquesRonnandes.Ltttlsal)Ile.ltpst).
TRO ITSKY.51.S.C7?/?/t?-..'JtIï't't/I,l'i(lqk,.b.2ndedi-
tion.BSP Professio1' 1alBooks.()xford.1tl8:.
5IO ItAND I.R.blllLJb'Ll.zi(,
tI.
lL,.T@,t'/!/st?/fl,zitl./h'()g-
tte?J't?.G angenRi.Rol'
na.J9t)l.
FR ES'SS1NET.lhtblc-3r/dl.'t,tïbl.l'tific.%.X.'tkli)r).'-N'i1-
lacoubIaj',1994.
Tlle ??t?It' .b1a('(lll-'
/1//'/'tf B''i(lzçt.' J/2(, t''l'k.'llLi.%lll'il
.
/l/'/t-/tttl.Pol'talld BridgcOffice.s'lacau.l994.
'
HO LG .A.TE.xA. '.T'
/!(,6î'()tk t?/'./t'j/-t.
r.%L'/?/t!/'t'/?iltlfl
&xt
/1is rt/tlp?1.-.' ':tNlendes.S!-uttgLtrtttntlLtlndon.
1t.
)97.
h.-IRLOG Et.;X N'1.l%)llI.àtàFlt/pfAflll.b éè J,'t?!'(;(?.s'
'
tJltlliiple-
b.Progre-s dans ICt conception tlu's ou-
N'rages d'arten béton.Jtlurndes d'dtudqls SlA. '
G PC elll'lponl'leurdu 65'''ktllniycrsllil't.
tdu Pr()-
fesseurRtc11audFavre.S1. A D()1(''t).Zurich. 1999.
SCH 1-.-AICl-1.J.(-'(???('t,/?J//tl/Dtz.
sf/kz/?t?/'Sr/f/kztu.'
î./t)lrg tk'
lri(,l'j'.'Bridj'
tttEngineering C-tlntk-rklncu'.
Sha1-11-1ElSheik11.2()t)().
tirion Bridge.and hopefully'ofthe(
''
N1il- R eferences SCH LAlCH .J.î'tll'iLAlb'i1lJ-l/'jt/jxcDc5jk,/!.TrtlIluls
lau '
Viaduct.willshow the considerable 1I
A Bridge Design ((l't'nfel' encd.).Nlctd1' 1d.- n()()
t).
inlerestin this tlrpe ofsolutioll.espe- Tllç
, /p,.
J
'
(tve
- xpilllllitlg /-(?/v.c sltllzlctlillo /?3
cially 1n larger proiects like the Fern- 1.'
i
f
'lle-lleltl.Bauïerlclg-Beriin.l963. . Y'IRLOG E'L-X.N1.Bt'itlgtA.b
;IT'/J/?.h.lttltilll(..s (,
(1-
beltBridge between GernAany and the BoaxsA.c).:Boxl.G.z7?t,(.r???(.?.(,f(,t?r(./;j?(,(.- /?/(
a-5'
. fffb'
ctl5>t???y.Trk?1
)dsi:
1BridgeDesigl'
l(Ckln-
Copenhagen lsland. ?!/?.t
-()fRiL.L'a/xl().%Jt/ré?,7f//'.Alttc'Tiranti. lk ren ce ).N'
1C
ldr ik
.l.
-76)
(1
().
.