Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers
Bridge Engineering 163
September 2010 Issue BE3
Pages 125–135
doi: 10.1680/bren.2010.163 .3.125
Paper 900026
Received 03/07/2009
Accepted 05/01/2010 Paul W. Corbett Roger J. Buckby
Technical Director, Senior Consultant,
Keywords:
Halcrow International Bridge Engineering,
bridges/piles & piling/viaducts
Patnership, Halcrow Group,
Abu Dhabi, UAE Swindon, UK
Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
P. W. Corbett MSc, DIC, CEng, MICE, MIStructE, R. J. Buckby MSc, CEng, FICE, FIHT, FIStructE and E. L. Wee BSc (Hons),
MICE, PE, MIEM
The Penang Bridge is a 13?5 km long road crossing
connecting Penang Island to peninsular Malaysia. In order
to increase traffic capacity, approximately 6 km of low-
level viaduct sections of the crossing were widened by the
addition of a new lane and hard shoulder in each
direction.
This challenging project invovled the construction of new
decks, piers and deep-piled foundations in close proximity
to the existing structure, with extensive use of heavy
plant and machinery mounted on marine barges.
Key project objectives were to maintain an operational
highway at all times and to safeguard the existing
structure during the works. The latter invovled the
development of a construction sequence designed to
minimise the load transfer from the new works onto the
existing structure, and the implementation of a rigorous
monitoring regime during pile constrution.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Penang Bridge
The Penang Bridge was built in 1985 and currently provides the
only fixed link between Penang Island and peninsular Malaysia.
The bridge is a tolled road crossing, maintained and operated
under a concession agreement awarded by the government of
Malaysia in 1994. The overall length of the crossing, including
interchanges on either side, is approximately 13?5 km, of which
8.5 km is over water. The marine sections comprise a 440 m long
cable-stayed bridge over the main navigation channel, high-
level approach viaducts, a 1?8 km long low-level approach
viaduct on the Penang Island side, a 3?96 km long low-level
approach viaduct on the Prai (mainland) side and several
interchange structures on the Penang Island shoreline. The
existing cable-stayed bridge and high-level approach viaducts
were built to dual three-lane standard, but the low-level
approach viaducts were only built to dual two-lane standard. As
traffic increased with time, the dual two-lane approaches
severely limited traffic capacity during peak periods.
1.2. Project brief
Under the terms of the concession agreement, the concession
company, Penang Bridge Sdn. Bhd., was required to widen the
existing dual two-lane low-level viaducts at an appropriate time
Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Eng Leong Wee
Chief Resident
Engineer, HSS
Integrated Sdn. Bhd.,
Penang, Malaysia
in the concession period to enable traffic capacity and toll
revenue to be maximised.
The key project requirement of the concession company was
therefore to provide a cost-effective design for widening the
low-level viaducts, with minimum disruption to traffic and
without detriment to the existing structure.
1.3. Project details
In 2003, the concession company commissioned HSS Integrated
Sdn. Bhd., and its structural design subconsultant, Halcrow
Group Ltd, to examine options for widening the low-level
viaducts and the ramps on the interchange at the Penang Island
shoreline.
Following completion of the detail design by the consultants, a
contract for construction of the widening scheme was awarded
in December 2005 to United Engineers Malaysia Construction
(UEMC) Sdn. Bhd.
Opus International Consultants Bhd. was employed by the
concession company as project manager for the scheme.
The contract price for widening the low-level viaduct structures
was RM 409 million (approximately £65 million), plus RM 54?7
million (approximately £9 million) for additional widening
works to structures within the Penang Island interchange.
2. DESIGN CONCEPT AND KEY CONSIDERATIONS
2.1. Existing low-level approach viaducts
The location of the low-level approach viaducts in relation to
the overall crossing is shown in Figure 1. The eastern low-level
viaduct, known as the Prai Shore Approach, has 19 5640 m
standard span units, plus (at the eastern end) one 3640 m span
unit, and a single (end) span of 38 m. The western low-level
viaduct, known as the Middle Bank Bridge, has nine 5640 m
standard span units.
Each 40 m standard span has eight precast, post-tensioned
concrete I-beams, acting compositely with an in-situ reinforced
concrete deck slab to give an overall deck width of 18?25 m.
Within each five-span continuous deck module, the beam-and-
slab deck is restrained against translation at the two central
piers, and is free to translate longitudinally at the remaining
piers. Movement joints are provided in the deck between
Corbett et al. 125
 North

Coastal line
Prai
land

interchange
n
Penang Is

To Georgetow

Penang Bridge i
interchange Pra
Intercha
nge brid
L = 330 ge 7
Pier 24W Pier 24E
Ch.4639.88 Ch.6840.28
Pier 69W Penang Bridge
Ch.2839.88 880 toll plaza
440
880
Abutment

ine
Ch.10747.42

L
s

tal
pa

Intercha To Prai

oas
Le

nge
and
Bridge 3 Middle b To Penang Isl
an

ank bri

C
Bridge 8
L = 242 L = 1800 dge
y

L = 272 South ch
Ba

annel b
L = 2200 ridge proach
To

Prai shore ap
L = 3960
All dimensions in metres
Figure 1. Penang Bridge: general layout

adjacent five-span modules. Figure 2 shows typical spans on the
low-level approach viaducts.
The piers on the existing low-level viaduct spans are simple
reinforced concrete portal frames, consisting of a crosshead and
three circular columns. The columns are cantilevered from pilecaps,
which were constructed as precast reinforced concrete shells (per-
manent formwork) with structural in-situ reinforced concrete infill.
Each pilecap is supported on a group of driven 1?0 m diameter
precast prestressed spun concrete piles. The majority of the piles
are raked outwards. The spun concrete piles were extended on
site during driving, as required, by butt-welded steel plate
connections.
2.2. Cross-section of widened carriageway
Widening of the low-level approach viaducts to dual three-lane
standard was required, including new hard shoulders on each
carriageway. This increased the overall deck width to 27?85 m.
2.3. Structural considerations
Key requirements in the conceptual design for the widening
scheme (Buckby et al., 2009) were that:
(a) the widening should be able to be constructed with
minimum disruption to normal traffic operation
(b) the widening works should not cause damage to the existing
viaduct approach spans or their piled foundations.
These considerations led to the following fundamental decisions.
(a) The design and construction should allow as much of the
structural widening as possible to be completed indepen-
dently of the existing structure and outside the extent of the
existing deck, thereby minimising disruption to traffic.
(b) Any carriageway widening works requiring traffic man-
agement should take place over the minimum possible
construction period.
(c) Any new piled foundations should be low-displacement
piles so as to mitigate the risk of causing differential
settlement and/or structural damage to the existing
foundations or the viaduct structure during pile
construction.
(d) Any new piled foundations should be designed to minimise
settlement of the new widening works under full design
loading.
(e) The design and the construction sequence should allow the
majority of the additional dead load caused by the widening
works to be applied to the new foundations before the
widening works are structurally connected to the existing
structure.

2.4. Design concept for the widening

The design concept for widening involved extending the
substructure at each pier location and providing two additional
longitudinal beams with a composite deck slab on each side of
the deck in each span.

At each pier, two reinforced concrete bored piles would be

provided at each end of the existing pilecap to support an
extension to the pilecap, a new column and an extension of the
existing crosshead in order to accommodate the extended deck.
Structural connections between the existing and new works
Figure 2. Typical low-level viaduct spans on the Prai Shore
would be provided at the pilecap and at the deck slab, but the
Approach
crosshead extension was designed to be structurally

126 Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al.

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 CL
Existing viaduct
13925 (widened)

9125 (existing)
Widening section

2% New parapet
2%

2250 2200 2200 New precast concrete U-beam

New precast concrete I-beam

New crosshead
1220

25 mm gap
9125 2275 1585 215

New 1200 diameter column

New pilecap extension

New 1000 diameter bored pile

All dimensions in millimetres

Figure 3. Typical cross-section of completed viaduct widening (symmetrical about centreline of existing viaduct)

discontinuous from the existing crosshead in order to simplify Stage 2: Construct the new column and the extension to the
construction. crosshead on the extended pilecap.

The line and visual appearance of the deck edge in elevation
would be improved by using precast U-beams for the edge
girders on the widened structure, rather than the standard
precast I-beams used in the original structure.
The typical cross-section of the widened viaducts that was
adopted is shown in Figure 3. The design concept allowed
almost all of the widening works to be constructed indepen-
dently of the existing structure and outside the existing
parapets, without disruption to traffic. Traffic management was
only required for the demolition of the existing parapets and for
stitching the new deck slab to the existing deck.
3. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
3.1. Construction sequence
In order to minimise transfer of load between the new
construction and the existing structure, the following con-
struction sequence was assumed in design and was subsequently
specified on the contract drawings:
Stage 3: Install bearings and place new precast beams on the
crosshead extension. Construct in-situ concrete deck dia-
phragms at the piers.
Stage 4: Working outside the existing parapet, construct the
deck slab widening and new parapet. Install street lighting on
the new parapet.
Stage 5: Cast the in-situ concrete stitch between the existing and
new pilecaps. Install temporary concrete barriers along the
nearside edge of the existing carriageway, remove the existing
street lighting and break out the existing parapet. Stitch the new
deck slab to the existing deck slab.
3.2. Constraints imposed on new foundations
Severe constraints were imposed on the location, size and
number of new piles that could be installed by the spacing, rake
angle and rake direction of the existing piles and by the need to
minimise the risk of damage or settlement to the existing
structure during new pile construction.

Stage 1: Construct new piles adjacent to the existing pier
support and install the precast concrete permanent formwork
shell for the pilecap extension. Cast the in-situ pilecap
extension within the precast shell, leaving a temporary
‘stitching’ gap between the existing pilecap and the pilecap
extension.
A further constraint was imposed by the need to avoid widening
the existing pilecap in the longitudinal (span-wise) direction, as
any such widening would have resulted in additional obstruc-
tion to tidal flow and local scour at the pile group. It would also
have made the pilecaps more visually obtrusive than the
existing simple rectangular plan shape.

Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al. 127

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 In addition, all new piles had to be located sufficiently far from
the outer face of existing bridge parapets to allow a piling rig
and other piling equipment to work safely at all times without
disrupting road traffic.
Based on the above considerations and constraints, it was
concluded that the most cost-effective solution was to provide
two vertical 1?0 m diameter cast in-situ bored piles at each end
of the existing pilecaps.
Over their upper lengths, the pile bores would be stabilised
within the soft marine clay layer by short permanent steel
casings, installed using minimal driving effort to toe into the
top of the underlying sand strata. Below this, the pile bore
would be stabilised using a bentonite or polymer drilling
fluid.
The aim was to provide a well-established standard method of
construction at all locations that would be suitable for the
varying subsoil conditions that were known to exist over the
length of the crossing.
Figure 4 shows a typical layout of piles in the existing
foundations. Figure 5 illustrates the severe dimensional con-
straints that existed in adding new piles.
3.3. Foundation conditions
The subsoil conditions at the site are variable, but can generally
be characterised by a deep layer of soft marine clay (typically
15–30 m deep) overlying medium dense silty sands and silty
clays. In some locations, the silty sands overlay residual soils
formed from weathering of the granite bedrock. The depth to the
bedrock horizon varies considerably across the site and is
deepest on the eastern side, where bedrock was found at depths
exceeding 100 m. On the western side, the bedrock is found at
shallower but variable (50–68 m) depths. The silty sand layers
are also denser on the western side.
Water depths vary along the crossing, from shallow mudflats at
the shorelines up to a maximum of 15 m.
Prestressed concrete spun piles (mainly raked) with welded joints
Condition of welds cannot be determined
Welded joint in each pile
at 25_30 m depth
Figure 4. Typical layout of piles in existing foundation
128 Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
New piles have to be installed
immediately adjacent to existing
pile group and within it
New piles
New piles
Figure 5. Location of new piles in widened foundation
Information on the subsoil conditions and results of load tests
on several of the existing spun concrete piles were available
(Chin, 1988) but no pile driving records or records of toe levels
for the existing piles were found.
Extensive geotechnical investigations were undertaken as the
widening design and construction progressed. In total, 72
boreholes were drilled.
3.4. Pile design
Each 1?0 m diameter working pile on the low-level viaducts was
designed for a working load of 395 t using skin friction only.
Provisional pile toe levels were calculated at the design stage
using the ‘Malaysian method’ (Gue et al., 2003), and were given
on the contract drawings. Toe levels varied in depth from 50 m
to 67 m for the Middle Bank Bridge viaduct and from 65 m to 85
m for the Prai Shore approach viaduct.
At certain locations along the Middle Bank Bridge viaduct,
where the granite bedrock horizon is found at relatively shallow
depths, the geotechnical design indicated that the skin friction
that could be generated in the overlying layers was not
sufficient to carry the design loading, and rock sockets in the
underlying weathered granite bedrock were specified.
4. PILE CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGES
AND INNOVATIONS
4.1. Scope of piling works
In total, some 620 piles were constructed in widening the low-
level viaducts, with a further 92 piles constructed for the Penang
interchange widening works. The majority of the piles were
constructed over water using barge-mounted reverse circulation
drilling (RCD) rigs for pile excavation. However, on the Penang
Island interchange, 22 land-based piles for the widening works
were constructed using a rotary percussion drilling rig.
4.2. Changes to pile construction method
Following the award of the contract, the contractor submitted an
alternative proposal to construct the piles using full-depth
permanent steel casings.
Corbett et al.
 3m Ground level/sea 3m
level Ground level/sea level

Short casing

Soft alluvial/
marine clay

3 m penetration into stiff sandy soil

Full-depth permanent
steel casing

Bentonite stabilised
Stiff sandy soils
uncased section

Design concrete toe Design concrete

level toe level

(a) Original consultant's design 3 m (minimum) deep

soil plug
inside casing

(b) Contractor's alternative design

Figure 6. Original and alternative pile construction method

Against the advice of the consultant that the use of full-depth
casings would increase the length and cost of the piles and
would be likely to cause settlement and risk damage to the
welded joints of the existing spun piles, which would go
undetected, the contractor’s proposal was accepted by the
concession company on the basis of the project manager’s
advice that it would eliminate any risk of collapse of the pile
shaft. Figure 6 illustrates the original and alternative methods.
A comparison of the two methods is given in Table 1.
During the course of pile construction, the contractor also proposed
and implemented an alternative construction detail for the piles,
which reduced the depth of reinforced concrete in the pile shaft to a
level at which flexural and shear effects were sufficiently low to
allow the permanent steel casing alone to carry the imposed loading.
This variation produced some time and cost savings for the
contractor’s full-depth casing method, but did not provide any
saving in casing length, as the geotechnical capacity depended
solely on the skin friction generated at the steel casing/soil interface.

Pile construction method Advantages Disadvantages

Design option specified by consultant: bored
cast in-situ reinforced concrete piles con-
structed under bentonite/polymer drilling
fluid, with short permanent steel casings
through upper soft marine clay
Contractor’s alternative method: full-depth
permanent steel casings with
bored cast in-situ reinforced concrete
inside
Low displacement mitigates risk of adverse
settlement of existing structure and of
damage to existing piles and welded joints
Able to install piles in residual soils and
facilitates socketing into granite bed rock
Minimum pile length consistent with speci-
fication limits on settlement at working and
ultimate load
No risk of collapse of pile shaft during
construction
No disposal or recirculation of
drilling fluid in marine conditions required
Water may be used as a drilling fluid for
RCD operations within the casing
Requires specialist marine piling con-
tractor with experience in constructing
bored piles under bentonite/polymer
Lower frictional resistance per unit
length of pile
Higher cost of steel casings
Risk of differential settlement of existing
pile groups, with the potential for
flexural cracking at the head of existing
raked piles, due to downdrag in the
existing soils
Risk of damage to existing piles (cracking
at welded joints in existing spun piles) by
casing driving, not possible to detect by
inspection
Risk of casings stuck prematurely on
localised hard layers before reaching the
required toe level

RCD, Reverse circulation drilling.

Table 1. Comparison of pile construction methods

Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al. 129

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.

Figure 7. Static load testing of trial pile
4.3. Trial piles and pile toe level revisions
Before construction was permitted to commence on works piles
in any zone of the widening works, the contractor was obliged
by the specification to construct and load test a trial pile in that
zone (see Figure 7). This requirement was imposed firstly to
confirm that the contractor’s method of construction was
satisfactory and secondly to ensure that the pile settlement at
working load did not exceed the specification limit of 6 mm and
at twice working load did not exceed 25 mm. These specification
requirements proved to be crucial in safeguarding the basic pile
design performance requirements with the contractor’s alter-
native method of construction.
The contract originally provided for six trial piles to be
constructed and tested to twice working load. During the course
of the contract, the number of trial piles was increased to 13.
The determination of toe levels for the working piles with full-
depth casings was essentially the Malaysian method, but using
values of ultimate shaft resistance factor, Ksu, determined by
back-analysis of the static load tests on trial piles. The value of
Ksu determined in this way varied from 1?2 to 2?0, which is
much lower than the theoretical value of 2?6 that was originally
used in the design for bored cast in-situ piles constructed under
bentonite, in which the frictional resistance is developed
between a rough cast in-situ concrete surface in contact with the
surrounding soil. This reduction was accounted for partly by the
lower friction that exists between a steel casing and soil, but this
could not fully explain the values of Ksu of less than 2?0, which
is the generally adopted value for driven steel tubular piles.
The other factors that were thought to have contributed to the
unusually low friction values obtained from the trial pile load
tests we listed below.
(a) The silt content in the alluvial sands may have been higher
than the soil sampling indicated.
(b) The disturbance caused by the dynamic action of installing
long casings by prolonged vibration and/or a drop hammer
may have created a ‘lubricant film’ of very soft cohesive
clayey silt around the casing.
(c) Casing installation may have caused the soft marine clays to
consolidate; the resulting ‘downdrag’ (negative skin friction)
130 Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
on the piles would add to the applied loading but would not
be recorded in the trial pile jacking load value, whereas the
additional settlement of the pile would have been recorded.
(d) External stiffening rings welded on to the toe of some of the
casings may have contributed to the reduction in interface
friction.
On a number of the trial piles, the static load tests were repeated
after a lapse of 2–3 months after initial testing, and showed
some improvement in load–settlement behaviour, ultimate load
and the back-analysed Ksu value. At one trial pile location, a
load test was conducted after a lapse of 1 year from the original
test to ascertain a ‘long-term’ Ksu value. In total, 27 load tests
were undertaken.
The design toe levels for the working piles were finally
determined using the Ksu value obtained from the back-analysed
results of the nearest trial pile and the standard penetration test
‘N’ value profile from the nearest borehole.
The change to full-depth casings resulted in longer piles with
depths of between 50 m and 86 m for the Middle Bank Bridge
viaduct and between 70 m and 96 m for the Prai Shore
Approach viaduct.
4.4. Marine piles for low-level viaducts
Marine piles for the viaducts were constructed using the RCD
method of excavation, all within full-depth steel casings (with
the exception of 22 rock socketed piles and 23 piles with casings
stuck on dense layers above the target toe level on the Middle
Bank Bridge viaduct).
4.4.1. Casing installation. The 12 mm thick steel casings were
delivered in lengths of up to 36 m on barges and were pitched
and extended by full penetration butt welds, before being driven
to final depth either by vibrohammers or by 20 t drop hammers
operating from barge-mounted cranes (Figure 8). The toes of
the casings were stiffened by welding on 12 mm thick curved
plates.
Many casings reached refusal in dense soil at various depths
before reaching the required geotechnical depth. Prolonged
vibration and hard driving of stuck casings resulted in
settlement of the existing pilecaps at some piers (see Section
5.2).
Figure 8. Casing installation using vibrohammer
Corbett et al.
 At locations where the casing could not be installed to the
required geotechnical depth, the contractor employed a number
of different solutions. These included:
(a) additional subsoil investigations to determine the nature of
the obstruction and to enable an assessment to be made of
alternative methods for advancing the casing and for
completing pile construction
(b) changing from the original vibrohammer installation
method to drop hammer methods with redriving of stuck
casings under controlled drop height
(c) partial boring and removal of soil within the stuck casing,
loosening of the soil plug at the casing toe and redriving
with controlled drop hammer to required toe level
(d) at certain locations, redesign of the new foundation
extension to adopt a three-pile group with shorter pile
depths designed to provide equivalent load capacity, the
additional pile being located centrally between the two
normal pile positions. This was only possible where there
was no existing laterally raked pile to prevent this.
4.4.2. Pile shaft excavation. Pile shaft excavation was
completed with RCD rigs initially using muddy seawater as a
stabilising fluid, while maintaining a 3 m head above mean sea
level. Before the adoption of the partial-depth concreting
alternative, a 3 m minimum deep ‘plug’ of undisturbed soil was
left at the casing toe to prevent potential base upheaval and
undermining of soil supporting the existing piles.
4.5. Land piles for eastern viaduct
For the widening at the eastern end of the Prai Shore approach
viaduct, which runs over land, the contractor used land-based
RCD rigs for pile shaft excavation. Aside from having land
access without the need to mount piling plant on marine barges,
the construction techniques employed were similar to those for
the marine piles.
Problems relating to full-depth casings reaching refusal
prematurely were again encountered, and similar solutions to
those described in Section 4.4.1 were used to overcome this.
In addition, when casings reached refusal prematurely at certain
settlement-sensitive piers, shaft grouting of the outer perimeter of
the pile casing was implemented to improve shaft resistance, by
using tube-a-manchette grouting techniques at 30–60 m depth.
The improvement in pile capacity at working load was then
assessed using a pile dynamic analyser test. A full-scale trial of this
method was undertaken before its use on working piles.
4.6. Rock socket piles for western viaduct
Over part of the Middle Bank Bridge viaduct, where the granite
bedrock is at shallower depth and rock sockets were specified, the
contractor’s alternative full-depth casing installation method failed
to provide a satisfactory construction method, and many casings
reached refusal prematurely above rock socket level.
At a small number of these locations, the contractor’s alternative
three-pile group design provided an acceptable foundation
solution, but at the majority of locations the contractor was
eventually obliged to complete pile shaft excavation using
bentonite, as originally specified in the consultant’s design.
Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
In total, 22 piles were completed with open boring below the
casing toe using bentonite stabilisation with a socket into ‘grade
II’ granite bedrock.
For all bentonite-stabilised piles, the shaft was first excavated by
RCD within the casing leaving a short internal soil plug above the
casing toe. The open bore was then filled with bentonite mud before
excavating below the casing toe using the RCD. Toe cleaning was
rigorously monitored by dipping to ensure all sediment was
removed before the start of the tremie concreting operation.
Contingency plans for toe grouting of rock socket piles were
prepared using the four full-depth sonic logging pipes (cast into
each pile) with the bottom of the sonic logging pipes modified,
as shown in Figure 9; however, this toe grouting was never
needed.
4.7. Remedial solutions for stuck casings and
defective piles
Marine bored pile construction was very demanding, as the process
involved heavy lifting cranes, RCD rigs and specialised equipment
working within the very restricted area of marine barges.
Piling operations routinely continued on a 24-hour-a-day basis,
with concreting of a single pile shaft taking up to 14 h to
complete for the deepest piles. A small number of piles required
remedial works to be carried out before they could be accepted
in the permanent works.
As enlargement of the extended pilecaps in the longitudinal or
transverse direction was not permitted, the use of additional
‘compensation’ piles outside the original plan area of the
extended pilecaps was precluded.
Any remedial works to non-compliant piles therefore had to be
achieved while maintaining the original plan area of the
extended pilecap.
4.7.1. Blocked or dislodged tremie pipes. With concrete for
piles being transported on marine barges, delays in delivery
often occurred, causing interruptions in the pile tremie
concreting operation and/or variable workability and blockages
in the tremie pipe.
In certain cases, attempts to clear concrete blockages resulted in
dislodgement of the tremie pipes, with lengths of the tremie
being left in the pile, or poor quality concrete being left at depth
in the pile shaft when removal of the tremie from the concrete
already placed was the only option. Sonic logging techniques
were then used to detect the position and extent of defective
concrete in the pile shaft.
One remediation solution that was adopted by the contractor
was to construct a concentric enlargement of the pile to provide
additional structural capacity over and above the zone of
defective concrete. This involved driving a larger diameter
casing over the standard casing to a depth below the weak
concrete zone. Soil within the annulus between the two casings
was then removed by water jetting, additional reinforcement
was placed within the annulus and the annulus was filled with a
high-strength expanding grout mixture. Figure 10 shows a
typical example of this method.
Corbett et al. 131
 Sonic logging pipes
(four nos per pile)

Casing

Concreted bored pile

Grout holes

Casing toe

Rubber strip wrapped

Open bore around the pipe toe

Detail 'A'
Weathered granite layer

Granite bedrock 500 mm rock socket

Detail 'A'
Sonic log pipe toe
modified to allow
grouting of soft toe

Figure 9. Contingency toe grouting proposal

4.7.2. Prematurely stuck casing at land pier. At one land pier on
the eastern viaduct the casing reached refusal on a dense layer
before reaching the specified toe level and settlement of the pilecap
had been recorded during casing installation. As heavier driving
effort to advance the casing was not permitted, the contractor
elected instead to excavate the pile shaft leaving a soil plug at the
casing toe, and install a 900 mm diameter inner casing within the
stuck 1?0 m diameter casing to a revised (deeper) toe level.
The pile shaft within the inner casing was then concreted and
the annulus between casings grouted to ensure load transfer
between the two casings.
4.7.3. Casings damaged by dredging barge. Several casings
were accidentally struck by the contractor’s dredging barges (see
Figure 11). Underwater inspections were carried out to check the
integrity of the welded casing joints and the extent of damage to

Mixer
Pump

Grout hose
Pile head level

Overflow
1400 mm diameter x 10 mm thick external steel pile Sea level

Sea bed level

Non-shrink cement grout

500 mm lean concrete

Soil plug Toe level of external pile sleeve

Existing 1000 mm diameter bored

Casing toe level

Figure 10. Remedial works involving concentric casings

132 Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al.

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.

Figure 11. Damaged/deviated casings on the Prai Shore
Approach viaduct
the casings. The inspections confirmed that the casings would
have to be replaced.
In order to maintain the original two-pile group layout, the
damaged casings were cut at seabed level and abandoned, and
new casings were installed, raked at 1 in 12, with the pile head
maintained in the original position at pilecap level. The rake of
the replacement casing was sufficient to miss the abandoned
casing.
The same solution was used for a small number of casings that
were found to have distorted or to have failed at joints below the
seabed when driven through dense layers (the distortion or
failure being detected when lowering the RCD machine within
the casing).
4.7.4. Prematurely stuck casings: solution using bentonite. The
driven full-depth casing method, with associated remedial
solutions, was successfully used for 93% of the 620 bored piles
on the low-level viaducts.
For stuck casings in which all other solutions had been considered
and rejected, the contractor initially attempted to complete the
pile shaft excavation below the stuck casing toe level by RCD
using only muddy seawater as a drilling fluid, combined with a
3 m hydraulic head surcharge. In four piles in which this method
was tried, dipping revealed a 2–3 m sediment build-up before
starting the tremie concrete pour, indicating that excessive
sedimentation of mud slurry and/or localised side wall collapse
had occurred below the casing toe. The construction of these piles
was aborted and the excavated shaft was immediately backfilled
with sand to stabilise the open bore.
For the four bored piles that were aborted and for other
remaining stuck casings, bentonite equipment was finally
Hammer weight
7 t vibrohammer
10 t vibrohammer
13 t/14 t vibrohammer
20 t drop hammer
Table 2. ‘Refusal’ limitation imposed during casing driving
Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges
Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
mobilised and the piles were completed successfully to the
required toe level without collapse, sediment build-up or any
other problems. In total, 23 marine piles with stuck casings on
the Middle Bank Bridge viaduct were constructed using
bentonite stabilisation with a maximum of 27?6 m open bore
depth below the casing.
5. PROTECTING THE EXISTING BRIDGE
5.1. Controls on casing installation
A condition imposed by the Engineer on the construction of
piles using full-depth casings was that the settlement and
dynamic response of the pilecaps should be rigorously
monitored throughout pile construction.
Limits on settlement and dynamic response of the pilecaps were
imposed during casing driving, and casing installation was stopped
immediately if the ‘refusal’ values specified in Table 2 were reached.
As a general rule, the maximum drop height for the 20 t
hammers used on site was 400 mm. A higher drop height of 600
mm was cautiously used on a small number of casings, with
settlement and dynamic response closely monitored.
For vibrohammers, the drive duration was limited to between 5
and 10 min when low penetrations were achieved. Prolonged
vibration of casings that were stuck caused settlement and shear
flexure cracking in a small number of piers (see Section 5.3).
Generally, the use of drop hammers was found to be more
effective than vibrohammers in the controlled advancement of
casings through dense layers. Records of casing penetration
plotted against hammer blows were used to correlate with soil
strata standard penetration test ‘N’ value and capacity.
5.2. Pier settlement and vibration monitoring
Continuous monitoring of pier and pilecap movements, using
precise levelling, tilt meter readings (Figure 12) and vibration
meters (Figure 13), was carried out during casing driving and
bored pile construction. Settlement monitoring pins were
established at the outer corners of each existing pilecap for level
monitoring, and tilt meter housings were fixed on to the outer
columns at each existing pier.
Before commencing the widening works, baseline level and tilt
readings were established on these pins and tilt meters for
comparison during pile construction. A baseline visual condi-
tion survey was also carried out for all structural elements above
water before works commenced. These data were used as the
reference to trigger warnings of any signs of distress on piers
and columns during construction.
Vibrations induced from casing driving were kept to below
5 mm/s peak particle velocity, as measured by vibration meters
Minimum penetration rates before ‘refusal’
500 mm/10 min
500 mm/5 min
500 mm/5 min
100 mm/40 blows at 400 mm height drop
Corbett et al. 133
 Figure 12. Installation of tilt meter housing on existing column

located on the adjacent existing pilecap. Prolonged vibration as

a result of the use of vibrohammers for casings stuck at dense
layers was strictly limited to reduce the risk of damage to the
existing spun concrete piles.

At piers where significant twist or differential settlement

between adjacent piers was observed from level pin monitoring,
structural analyses were carried out for the corresponding five-
span structure module at serviceability and ultimate limit states
in order to assess the magnitude of the additional load effects
induced in the existing structure. These analyses were also used
in determining remedial measures to be implemented. Figure 14. Strengthening of existing column

Settlements of existing piers of up to 40 mm were recorded, with

additional reinforced concrete collars for combined shear and
differential settlement of up to 20 mm between adjacent piers
flexural strengthening. Figure 14 illustrates a column
located at either end of a 40 m span.
strengthened by means of a collar at the base and carbon fibre
wrapping at the top.
5.3. Remedial works to piers
In spite of strict monitoring, shear-flexure cracking did occur in
6. CONCLUSION
the existing external columns and crossheads at a small number
The widening of the Penang Bridge presented many challenges,
of piers. This was generally remedied by epoxy resin injection of
most of which were related to the construction of new piles
the cracks.
adjacent to the existing structure.

Where the structural analyses indicated potential deficiencies in

In the authors’ opinion, the use of full-depth casings for the
capacity due to the effects of settlement, localised strengthening
construction of the bored piles on this project was not the
of the columns was carried out. This was achieved either by
optimum or most cost-effective method of construction for the
carbon fibre wrapping for improving shear capacity, or
pile foundations; nor was it as suitable or adaptable in the
variable ground conditions that existed at the site as the method

Figure 13. Vibration monitoring Figure 15. View of completed widening

134 Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al.

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 originally specified by the designer, which envisaged shorter
permanent casings and excavation under bentonite stabilisation.
However, in spite of the challenges posed by the concession
company’s acceptance of full-depth casings, the pile founda-
tions were eventually completed to the specified standards
through the cooperation, determination and teamwork of the
contracted parties.
Figure 15 shows the completed widening.
REFERENCES
Buckby RJ, Chen WP, Corbett PW and Singh M (2009) Widening
of the Penang Bridge, Malaysia. Structural Engineering
International 19(1): 41–45.
Chin FK (1988) The Penang Bridge – Planning, Design and
Construction. Malaysian Highway Authority, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia.
Gue SS, Tan YC and Liew SS (2003) A Brief Guide to the Design
of Bored Piles under Axial Compression – A Malaysian
Approach. Seminar on bridges, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

What do you think?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be forwarded to the
author(s) for a reply and, if considered appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as discussion in a future issue of the
journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be
2000–5000 words long (briefing papers should be 1000–2000 words long), with adequate illustrations and references. You can submit
your paper online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you will also find detailed author guidelines.

Bridge Engineering 163 Issue BE3 Penang Bridge widening: design and construction challenges Corbett et al. 135

Downloaded by [ UNIVERSITY OF READING] on [06/02/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.