Design and Construction of a
Honduran Replacement Bridge
Li Zhenqiang
Senior Engineer
Beijing, People’s Republic of China
and
Chief Engineer, Conhsa-Payhsa Group
San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Rigoberto Ramírez C., P.E.
Structural Engineer
Conhsa-Payhsa Group
San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Juan Carlos Argüello, P.E.
Project Manager
Conhsa-Payhsa Group
San Pedro Sula, Honduras
70 PCI JOURNAL
The Megaplaza Interchange comprises two
131-ft-long (40 m) single-span bridges in an
eastern suburb of San Pedro Sula, Honduras. The
design used precast, prestressed concrete girders
to construct the bridges over the 131 ft (40 m)
span. A new design concept consisting of precast
concrete folded-plate abutments was used. The
precast, prestressed concrete girders required only
a transport truck and two cranes to erect each
68 ton (62 Mg) girder. In this paper, the authors
present the design and construction highlights of
the project.
T
he Megaplaza Interchange project comprises two
131-ft-long (40 m) single-span bridges in an eastern
suburb of San Pedro Sula, Honduras, a major city
near the Caribbean coast of Central America and on the
border of Guatemala. The bridges are part of a north-south,
secondary-circulating, main thoroughfare and were built
to overpass a major roadway, Prime 1A, a west-east route
through San Pedro Sula (Fig. 1). The transportation project
was constructed in eight months, from June 2003 to Febru-
ary 2004, with no significant interruption to daily traffic on
Prime 1A.
Design Background
The original design of the bridge (Design A) was com-
pletely finished in October 2002 and was offered for public
bid (Fig. 2). According to construction documents, the owner
received five competing bids from local
contractors. The project owners dem-
onstrated responsibility to the public
and leadership in contract administra-
tion through their use of a competitive
bid process for this transportation infra-
structure project. The Conhsa-Payhsa
Group submitted the winning bid and
was awarded the contract.
The owner had one stipulation re-
garding construction of the replace-
ment overpass bridges: Interference
with the heavy traffic on the Prime
1A roadway passing under the bridges
must not occur during construction. To
accommodate this mandate, the gird-
ers were delivered to the project site by
truck and erected at night (between the
low-traffic-volume hours of 10:00 p.m.
and 6:00 a.m.) or on Sundays. Even Fig. 1. West view of completed Megaplaza Interchange Bridge in San Pedro Sula,
with this site access restriction, the Honduras.
construction schedule dictated project
completion in only eight months.
The Conhsa-Payhsa Group per-
formed a value engineering analysis,
working with the owner and the con-
struction managers, with the objective
of finding ways to cut construction
time. Some of the joint decisions in-
cluded reducing bridge length from
150 ft to 131 ft (46 m to 40 m) and in-
creasing the main span from 108 ft to
131 ft (33 m to 40 m). Bridge design
improvements required modifying the
profile grade line and increasing the
vertical clearance limits (Fig. 3).
The most challenging aspect of the
bridge design was the 131-ft-long
(40 m) girders. Engineers were cre-
ative in developing a structural design
that incorporated precast, prestressed Fig. 2. Elevation detail of Megaplaza Interchange Bridge Design A.
concrete. As an alternative solution, Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.
a change was proposed to the design
configuration: Use a completely pre-
cast concrete system for the super-
structure design. The new precast
concrete design was proposed to the
construction supervisor who, in turn,
proposed it to the owner. The com-
pletely precast concrete system was
ultimately accepted by the project
partners, and the contractor directed
the municipality of San Pedro Sula
to develop the necessary construction
documents for Design B. Construction
began in June 2003.
The volumes of concrete required
to construct the superstructures of the
bridges are shown in Table 1. Fig. 3. Elevation detail of Megaplaza Interchange Bridge Design B.
Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.
July–August 2006 71
Table 1. Concrete Volume of Superstructure of Design B.
Total Concrete Volume
Designation Element Amount
Precast (m³) Cast-in-Place (m³)
Girder 6 139.22
Diaphragm 72 11.52 5.76
Deck panel 20 42.40
Wearing surface 54.12
Curb 10 6.50
Barrier 10 18.80
Barrier column 10 0.70 2.78
TOTAL 219.14 (78%) 62.66 (22%)
Note: 1.308 m3 = 1 yd3.

General Planning repetition and precast concrete forming Bridge Design

The original interchange was skewed
(about 86 degrees) and composed of
two separate, parallel, and independent
bridges over the roadway, Prime 1A, in
San Pedro Sula (Fig. 4a). The owner
offered a simple plan for the new over-
pass, calling for two parallel bridges,
also skewed 86 degrees, similar to
the original structure. In the owner-
supplied plan, the skewed structural ge-
ometry resulted in a lack of component
standardization and did not lend itself
to the inherent efficiencies offered by
precast concrete manufacturing.
After studying these original plans,
the authors concluded that, with only
minor modifications, the most efficient
and economical structural solution
would be a rectangular plan. Conse-
quently, the owner agreed to the modi-
fied replacement plan design because
it offered advantages in quality and
scheduling (Fig. 4b).
The total length of each bridge is
135 ft (41 m), with a total bridge
width of 42.8 ft (13.1 m) and a clear-
ance (from road surface to soffit of the
bridge) of 18.4 ft (5.6 m). The depth
of the bridge superstructure varies
from 6.7 ft (2.0 m) at midspan to 5.7 ft
(1.7 m) at the ends. A schematic dia-
gram of the bridges is shown in Fig. 5.
Because the longitudinal and trans-
verse bridge girder geometries are

Fig. 4a. Design A plan view. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.

72 PCI JOURNAL
Fig. 4b. Design B plan view. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in. Note: 1 mm × 0.03937 = 1 in.

critical to any good bridge design, it Precast Concrete Girder Design suitable shape and size. The design
was carefully determined that 7.2 ft of the beams for the Megaplaza Inter-
(2.2 m) center-to-center girder spacing Girder Geometry: The most impor- change Bridges called for a variable
across the bridge width was required tant aspect in the design of the precast depth along their length.
with a bridge section composed of six concrete bridge beams is the selection Each girder for the Megaplaza In-
transverse precast concrete girders. of a beam profile and cross section of terchange Bridge has a clear span
The bridge surface geometry called for
a 1.5% slope from the bridge centerline
to each side. Structural design is based
on HS-20 loading per the American
Association of Highway Transportation
Officials load-resistant factor design.
Precast, prestressed concrete girders
were fabricated by the Conhsa-Payhsa
Group and transported to the project
site by truck.

Description of
Superstructure
Each of the Megaplaza Interchange
Bridges consists of a superstructure
system that contains two basic pre-
cast concrete components and a cast-
in-place concrete slab on top. In the
completed structure, the entire bridge
cross section, shown in Fig. 6, has full-
thickness integral decks. Fig. 5. Schematic drawing of Megaplaza Interchange Bridges’ superstructure.

July–August 2006 73

Fig. 6. Basic precast concrete components of Megaplaza Interchange Bridge
superstructure. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.
of 131 ft (40 m) and total length of
134 ft (40.8 m). The girders vary in
depth from 6 ft (1.8 m) at midspan to 5 ft
(1.5 m) at both ends, with 2.5-ft-wide
(760 mm) and 2.2-ft-wide (660 mm)
top and bottom flanges, respectively.
The Conhsa-Payhsa Group developed
and standardized the girder section
(Fig. 7). The basic design concepts
for the girders and the ramps for the
Megaplaza Interchange project are the
following:
• The ramps at both ends were
backfilled at a 6% slope, and the
girders were designed with slop-
ing top flanges to accommodate
water runoff. Girder geometry
in longitudinal profile is a pen-
tagon shape, with a 1.5% slope
in the top flange on each side;
• A reduction in the volume of
precast and cast-in-place con-
crete for the superstructure was
attained by sloping the girder
top flanges. This also reduced
the weight of bridge girders;
• The heights of the ramps were re-
duced about 1 ft (0.3 m) and the
length was also reduced about
33 ft (10 m), reducing the total
volume of ramp fill material by
about 3140 yd3 (2400 m3); and
• Web thickness of the girder is
5.9 in. (150 mm) for the middle
section, with a girder span-to-
depth ratio of approximately 22.
Prestressing Strand Distribution:
The objectives of the study were to
74 PCI JOURNAL
determine the strand distribution of
the girder (Fig. 8). A total 47 strands,
0.5 in. (13 mm) in diameter, were
used in each girder. Forty-five strands
were placed in the bottom flange,
distributed in three rows of fifteen
strands each. Each row of prestressing
strand is separated by a vertical space
of 1.6 in. (40 mm).
As shown in Fig. 9 and 10, strands
in each girder bottom flange are ar-
ranged in three rows as follows: Eight
strands in the top row are unbound for
their complete length (to reduce the
total compressive force in the bottom
flange and to accommodate long-line
prestressing beds); in the bottom row,
four strands are unbound for a distance
of 5 ft (1.50 m) at each end to reduce
end cracking; and to minimize crack-
ing, five strands in the middle row are
unbound at each end for a distance of
10 ft (3 m).
There are only two prestressed
0.5-in.-diameter (13 mm) strands in
each girder top flange. Each top flange
has four 0.8-in.-diameter (22 mm) mild
steel reinforcing bars. Placement of two
prestressed strands in the top flange is
necessary to eliminate cracking in the
top flange and to control accurate posi-
tioning of the mild steel reinforcement
cage in the top flanges. Reinforcing
and concrete placement in a precast
concrete plant setting provide optimal
quality control.
Concrete Design: The girder con-
crete compressive strength was de-
signed at 9000 psi (62 MPa). On av-
erage, the concrete strength at the
time of prestressing strand release was
6300 psi (43 MPa). Typical concrete
compressive strength gain curves of
9000 psi (62 MPa) are shown in Table
2 Chart. The concrete design follows:
• Cement content: 1060 lb/yd3
(630 kg/m3);
• Water-cementitious materials
ratio (w/cm): 0.29;
• Tested slump of fresh concrete:
from 5 in. to 6 in. (125 mm to
150 mm);
• Maximum aggregate size: 0.4 in.
(10 mm); and
• Water-reducing and concrete-
set–retarding admixtures.
Diaphragms
Composite diaphragms were placed
26 ft (8.0 m) apart along the length
of the girders (Fig. 11). Two types
of diaphragms were used with the in-
tegral deck construction. One type
was the partially precast concrete dia-
phragm slabs, fabricated by second-
ary concrete placements at the precast
concrete facility. The gap between the
diaphragm slabs was later filled with
cast-in-place concrete to a final mono-
lithic configuration. The diaphragms on
both exterior sides of the bridge were
designed to support both the precast
concrete curb and the guard barrier pan-
els. Vehicular barriers were assembled
by putting a small cast-in-place concrete
column between two precast concrete
guard barrier panels (Fig. 10, 12).
Precast Concrete Deck Panels
The bridge deck was a composite
mixture of cast-in-place concrete on
the top and a precast concrete deck
panel in the bottom for an average total
depth of about 8 in. (200 mm). Twenty
precast, prestressed concrete deck pan-
els were used on each overpass.
The precast, prestressed con-
crete bridge deck panels were 34.3 ft
(10.4 m) long and 6.3 ft (1.9) wide,
and each contained eight preformed
holes to allow steel reinforcing bars to
project from the top of the longitudinal
girders into the deck topping. A cast-in-
place concrete topping reinforced with
0.5-in.-diameter (13 mm) steel bars
was placed on top of the bridge super-
structure and averaged 4 in. (100 mm)
Fig. 7. Section drawing of the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.

July–August 2006 75
Fig. 8. Size and location of prestressing strands in the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.
76 PCI JOURNAL
thick on top of the deck panels and 8 in.
(200 mm) thick over the diaphragms.
The connection system between the
deck and the girders consisted of eight
openings on each panel for shear stud
connectors. The inside dimension of
each panel opening is 2 ft (0.60 m) long
and 1.8 ft (0.56 m) wide. After the cast-
in-place concrete for the topping was
placed, every structural aspect of the
superstructure of the bridge integrated
into a monolithic structure, including
the diaphragms and parapets (Fig. 5, 6).
Precast Concrete Curb and
Guard Barriers

A total of 16 precast concrete com-

ponents were used for the curb and
the guard barriers on each side of
the bridge. The curbs and the barri-
ers were supported on the girder dia-
phragms. Thus, the span lengths of
the barrier and curb elements were
governed by the spacing of the dia-
phragms (Fig. 13).
The diaphragms were placed every
26.2 ft (8.0 m) along the girder, and the
Fig. 9. The 151-ft-span (46 m) girders during fabrication of the Megaplaza
Interchange Bridge.
diaphragms cantilevered transverse- After modification, a 13-ft-long (4 m)
ly 4.5 ft (1.4 m) on both sides of the double-tee steel form was adopted by
bridge. Precast, prestressed concrete the precaster to fabricate the curbs.
curbs were used. Their size and shape This scheme produced economies in
depended on the steel forms from the precast concrete process and the
which the double tees were fabricated. production schedule.

Fig. 10. Precast concrete girder with inter-diaphragms for the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge at precast concrete assembly facility.

July–August 2006 77
 Each bridge has five pieces of the
precast concrete barrier panels and six
cast-in-place small columns on each
side of the bridge. The barrier panels
are rectangular and contain a folded
plate at the top. Each panel is 4.3 ft
(1.3 m) high, 25.2 ft (7.7 m) long, and
4.7 in. (120 mm) thick. The columns
of the barriers, which were designed to
resist lateral loads, were cast in place
between two barrier panels and con-
nected to the barriers and the curbs.
This aspect of the construction was
one of the keys to making the struc-
ture act monolithically. Small circu-
lar precast concrete elements (11.8 in.
[300 mm] diameter and 19.7 in.
[500 mm] high) were placed on the
tops of the column to provide an
aesthetically pleasing structure
(Fig. 13, 14).

Table 2. Compressive Strength Data for 62 MPa Concrete.

Beam No. Date of Production Compressive Strength (MPa)
1 Day 3 Days 7 Days 28 Days 60 Days
B-4 November 27, 2003 41.52 46.28 50.69 61.59 67.59
B-5 December 3, 2003 37.86 47.10 49.76 63.66 66.34
B-6 December 5, 2003 41.45 48.76 49.24 66.97 70.34
B-7 December 11, 2003 43.03 48.76 50.55 71.86 77.79
B-8 December 13, 2003 41.17 46.28 48.76 63.45 71.03
Average MPa 41.00 47.00 50.00 66.00 71.00
Note: 1 MPa = 145 psi.

Table 2 Chart. Typical strength gain curve for concrete used in Megaplaza Interchange Bridge, 62 MPa. Note: 1MPa = 145 psi.

78 PCI JOURNAL
 Bridge Substructure
The majority of the Megaplaza In-
terchange project substructure is con-
structed of precast, prestressed con-
crete elements.

Pile Foundations
A total of 15 precast, prestressed
concrete piles were used at each end
of the bridge: 2 vertical piles and 13
battered piles. The piles each had a
20-in.-diameter (500 mm) circular
cross section with a 12-in.-diam-
eter (300 mm) circular-spun hollow
core and a total length of about 85 ft
(26 m) (Fig. 15).
Structural analysis, substrata soils
data, and the designer’s past experi-
ence dictated that the piles be driven
to a minimum depth of 66 ft (20 m)
below the surface of the road to achieve
sufficient capacity. Above the surface Fig. 11. Close-up of Megaplaza Interchange Bridge girders shows transverse
of the road, the piles are as high as 16 diaphragms.
ft (4.8 m). The piles were driven into
place with a diesel-powered hammer.
The hammer weight was dropped from
a height of 10 ft (3 m) at a rate of 59
blows per minute.
The superstructure included 42.7-ft-
long (13.0 m), 4.3-ft-wide (1.30 m)
pile caps utilizing a single 2.3-ft-deep
(0.70 m) precast concrete box unit. The
unit was assembled using precast, pre-
stressed concrete panels and reinforc-
ing steel cages that were fabricated
and partially assembled in a precast
concrete manufacturing plant about
9.3 miles (15 km) away from the bridge
construction site.
Supported on 15 piles, the precast
concrete pile cap box unit served as
stay-in-place formwork for the place-
ment of the cast-in-place concrete
within the box unit. The precast con-
crete box elements were designed to
act monolithically with the cast-in- Fig. 12. Megaplaza Interchange Bridge girder with side diaphragms at precast
place concrete to form the completed concrete manufacturing plant.
structure (Fig. 16).
used on many bridge projects. Option top slab. Two precast, prestressed
Abutment
B was a folded-plate retaining wall concrete wall panels are used for the
The type of abutment used for a with drainage ports (spillthrough). retaining abutments above the folded-
project may significantly affect the Precast, prestressed concrete plate retaining wall, and the upper
cost of the bridge, particularly on a folded-plate retaining walls are sup- panels are supported on the pile cap
single-span bridge. During prelimi- ported on a cast-in-place foundation. (Fig. 17, 18).
nary design considerations, two con- The folded-plate walls are assembled In comparing the concrete quantities
crete design options were considered. using precast, prestressed concrete flat required under abutment Options A and
Option A was a fully cast-in-place re- slab units, and cast-in-place concrete B, it was apparent that Option B provid-
taining wall, a typical abutment design is used for the joints and the inclined ed the more economical structure, using
July–August 2006 79

Fig. 13. Precast concrete curb and vehicular guard barriers of the Megaplaza
Interchange Bridge.
Fig. 14. Megaplaza Interchange Bridge superstructure detail. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.
about 60% less concrete than Option
A, assuming that all other construction
costs remained the same. The precast
80 PCI JOURNAL
concrete folded-plate wall panel with
spillthrough is an economical abutment
design. This rarely used abutment con-
struction was employed successfully on
the Megaplaza Interchange project.
Girder Precast
CONCRETE Operations
A total of 12 girders were produced
in the 295 ft (90 m) long-line prestress-
ing bed. Both pieces (the girder itself
and the five diaphragms on each side
of the girder) were fabricated at the
same time using two different con-
crete placements. The girders, utilizing
thirty-seven 0.5-in-diameter (13 mm)
prestressing strands, were designed to
accommodate the ultimate capacity of
the prestressing beds.
Girder forms and stiffeners were
made of both steel and wood. A total
of three pieces of steel plate form were
used in the middle 118 ft (36 m) of the
girder. Wooden molds were used at
the girder ends. The diaphragm molds
were made of steel plates. Molds were
securely anchored to the concrete floor
of the long-line prestressing bed and
were adjusted to prevent form defor-
mation. Fabrication time for the two
girder pieces ranged from seven to
nine days, and they were steam cured
for an average of ten hours at about
175 °F (80 °C) (Fig. 9, 19).
Transporting and
Erecting Girders
Since the bridge is located approxi-
mately 9.3 miles (15 km) via main
roads from Bufalo—a southern Hon-
duran city containing a certified pre-
cast, prestressed concrete fabrication
plant—girder transport methods had a
significant impact on the type of struc-
ture chosen, method of construction,
and cost of the bridge.
Girders were delivered from the
plant to the job site by truck. Transpor-
tation of the one-piece girders, which
weighed almost 68 ton (62 Mg), re-
quired trucks that were 198 ft (58 m)
long and equipped with three axles and
a lowboy trailer in the front with two
axles and a lowboy trailer in the back
with four axles (Fig. 20, 21).
Erection equipment for the precast
concrete elements consisted of both
a 99 ton (90 Mg) crane and a 68 ton
(60 Mg) crane for the girders and an-
other 44-ton-capacity (40 Mg) crane
for erecting the rest of the elements.
All of the concrete pieces were erect-
ed at night, between 10:00 p.m. and
2:00 a.m., to avoid interfering with rush
hour traffic on the main roads and to
minimize the potential for accidents.

CONCLUSION
The new 134-ft-long (40.8 m) gird-
er used in the Megaplaza Interchange
project has a variable section, in both
the longitudinal and transverse direc-
tions, that is unique in Honduras for
bridge construction of this span length. Fig. 15. The 20-in.-diameter (500 mm) Megaplaza Interchange Bridge piles in final
This girder geometry is well suited for position.
the project, with ideal structural behav-
ior for the application, because defor-
mation and cracking are minimized.
Long-line prestressing methods
consisting of fixed-bed technologies
were well suited for production of pre-
stressed concrete girders with 131 ft
(40 m) spans.
For the 131-ft-long (40 m) girder,
the use of 9000 psi (62 MPa) compres-
sive strength concrete was suitable for
an economical and efficient bridge
design and construction. The precast
concrete girders were cast in fixed steel
forms with maximum depth of 72 in.
(1830 mm) and web thickness of 5.9 in. Fig. 16. Precast concrete pile cap during erection at Megaplaza Interchange Bridge
(150 mm). site.
An all-precast concrete superstruc-
ture system was proposed for the Mega-
plaza Interchange Bridge. Diaphragms,
deck panels, curbs, and barriers were
all made of precast concrete, signifi-
cantly reducing time of construction.
An innovative structural solution
used precast folded-plate and precast
concrete panels at the bridge abutments,
permitting a reduced section and re-
duced earthmoving quantities. At the
present time, similar and identical struc-
tural designs are being used for other
bridges constructed in the city of San
Pedro Sula.

Acknowledgments
The success of this project is due to
the energy and talent of many people,
each of whom played a significant
part. These individuals include vari-
ous researchers, designers, manufactur- Fig. 17. Schematic of folded precast concrete plate retaining wall shows location of
ers, suppliers, and builders who played drainage ports (spillthrough) in the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge.
July–August 2006 81
Fig. 18. Plan details of pile foundation and pile section drawing for the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge. Note: 25.4 mm = 1 in.

82 PCI JOURNAL
important roles in bringing about a suc-
cessful conclusion to the Megaplaza In-
terchange Bridge project. All are grate-
fully acknowledged by the authors. The
authors also appreciate the constructive
comments from PCI Journal reviewers
regarding this technical paper.
credits
Owner: Alcaldía Municipal M.S.P.S,
San Pedro Sula, Honduras: Oscar
Kilgore, Osmín Bautista, Ramón
Medina, and Marlon Diaz.
General Contractor: Conhsa-Payhsa,
San Pedro Sula, Honduras.
General Supervision: Consorcio
ASP-Geotec, Tegucigalpa, Honduras:
Amilcar Girón, Eddie Rivera,
Leonel Castillo, and Luis Rodríguez.
Conhsa-Payhsa Group; San Pedro
Sula, Honduras.
Coordination and Administration:
José Raúl Durón.
Design and Structural Analysis:
Conhsa-Payhsa Group, Engineering
Department; San Pedro Sula,
Honduras
Precast Concrete Producer: Gloria
Vásquez and Sabino Rivera.
Concrete Research and Quality
Control: Hector Bustillo.
Erection and Construction: Rafael
Fig. 19. Unbonded strands for the
Garzona and Carlos Lara.
Megaplaza Interchange Bridge during
Transportation: Oscar Vásquez. prestressing operations.

Fig. 20. Precast concrete girders for the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge in transit.

Fig. 21. A 131-ft-long (40 m) girder of the Megaplaza Interchange Bridge is erected.

July–August 2006 83
Preguntas a contestar:

1.- ¿Cual alternativa le parece más eficiente para el diseño del paso desnivel del
puente megaplaza?

2.- ¿Se podría diseñar una viga AASHTO para un claro en el caso de la alternativa A?
¿En caso de que no se pudiera diseñar que elemento propondría?

3.- ¿Se podría diseñar una viga AASHTO para un claro en el caso de la alternativa B?
¿En caso de que no se pudiera diseñar que elemento propondría?

4.- ¿Cuantas vigas tiene la alternativa B y que peralte tienen?

5.- ¿Qué porcentaje de la obra del puente es concreto prefabricado y concreto en sitio?

6.- ¿Qué elemento estructural del puente tiene el mayor volumen de concreto y cuál es
su valor?

7.- ¿Cuál es la resistencia a la compresión de los elementos prefabricados y colados en

sitio?

8.- ¿Cuánto es el claro del puente, según se diseño?

9.- ¿Qué tipo de cimentación se utilizo en el puente y porque piensa que se utilizo?

10- ¿Qué comentarios tiene con respecto al diseño final? ¿Que comentarios positivos y
por mejorar tiene usted con respecto a esta obra?