Case Study
Share this
article
Dismantling of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Main Span
-
Dismantling of
1930s steel bridge trusses and cantilever spans as part of
demolition phase 1
-
Staged
construction modelling of existing structure incorporating all
renovations made during its lifetime
-
Detailed
stage by stage demolition analysis using LUSAS to ensure safe removal
of structure
The new and the
old East Spans of the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge prior to
the dismantling
of the old East Main Span. Following
the construction of the new East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge in 2013, phase 1 of the dismantling of the old East Span
included a requirement for the piece by piece removal of the
cantilever truss main span. Due to the complexity of the structure, Foothills
Bridge Co. (the
contractor’s engineer of record for phase 1) used LUSAS Bridge
analysis software to model and develop a fully engineered dismantling
sequence on behalf of its clients Silverado Contractors, Inc. and
California Engineering Contractors, Inc. for the bridge owner, Caltrans.
Background
-
The San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge crossing was the longest
bridge in the world when it opened in 1936. It was formed
of a series of structures comprising a West Span of two
consecutive suspension bridges; a tunnel through Yerba
Buena Island; and an East Span formed of a major
cantilever truss and numerous other truss spans.
-
Following a
7.1 magnitude earthquake in 1989, a portion of the East
Span collapsed requiring California Department of
Transporation to carry out a seismic evaluation of the
crossing as a whole. After investigation it was decided
that, whilst seismic retrofit work should be carried out
on the West Span, it would be more cost-effective in the
long term for the East Span to be re-built to meet the
required seismic design criteria.
-
After an
eleven year construction period the new East Span
crossing, which includes a self-anchored suspension structure and precast segmental concrete viaduct, was
opened to traffic in September 2013.
-
Demolition of
the two mile long East Span of the old bridge started in
October 2013. Phase 1 of its demolition includes the
dismantling of the East Main Span. Phase 2 will see the
dismantling of the series of 504’ (153m) and 288’
(88m) truss spans to the east of the main span. Phase 3
will remove all piers, pilings and foundations.
|
Layout and primary
dimensions of the old East Main Span.
Bridge construction
The old East Main Span was a steel
cantilever truss bridge consisting of built-up truss and bracing
members composed of plates and rolled sections. The chords and larger
diagonals were box-shaped with solid plates on all 4 sides. Lighter
members were latticed with lacing angles and/or bars. Eyebars were used
for chords and primary diagonals with large tension loads. The main
span was approximately 2,416’ (736m) long with a clear span of 1,400’
(428m) between the two primary bridge piers. The bridge had two decks.
In the original configuration, the upper deck carried automobile
traffic in both directions, and the lower deck carried trains and
truck traffic. In the 1960s the bridge deck was retrofitted to remove
train traffic from the bridge. After the retrofit the upper deck
carried all westbound traffic (to San Francisco), and the lower deck
carried all eastbound traffic (to Oakland). Additional retrofits were
completed after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake to repair damage
caused by the earthquake and to improve future seismic performance. In
the years following the earthquake it was determined that it would be
cost prohibitive to retrofit the bridge to comply with all modern
seismic design requirements, and this contributed to the decision to
construct a new bridge and dismantle the original east span.
A single
LUSAS model was used to simulate the entire dismantling sequence for the
old East Main
Span.
Modelling in LUSAS
Before any bridge dismantling
procedures could be modelled, a single global model representing the
current in-service configuration needed to be created using accurate
member cross-sections and weights. A thorough review of the 1930s era
as-built fabrication drawings, which were provided by Caltrans,
provided section properties, member weights, and deck weights. The
original design drawings that were available included stress sheets
that provided the original designer’s member forces as well as pier
reactions. This information allowed the LUSAS model to be
"benchmarked" against the original design and ensured that
bridge member forces and reactions could be reliably predicted. After
the model was benchmarked, it was updated with the various retrofits
that had been carried out. This included modifying the deck weight and
updating the floor system. At first glance, it appeared that the
erection sequence would not have much bearing on the output of the
model. However, as the erection sequence was studied in greater
detail, it was found that during several stages of construction the
bridge was jacked at various locations to allow for correct fit-up of
members and to ensure that the deformed shape of the bridge was
correct. This jacking resulted in locked-in erection forces that
needed to be considered in the model. Modelling this erection sequence
was critical in the development of an accurate model.
In-service axial forces
prior to dismantling being carried out
Bridge dismantling
The proposed dismantling sequence
approximately reversed the sequence used to construct the bridge.
Caltrans made available a detailed description of bridge erection
procedures so that the subtleties of the bridge erection could be
modelled and accounted for in the dismantling procedure. All
dismantling was generally carried out using hydraulic cranes and
excavators located on the bridge lower deck. Each dismantling stage
in the model considered the positioning of the equipment and removal
of truss members.
Key aspects of the dismantling
sequence for which LUSAS was particularly useful were:
Carrying out "The cut"
at midspan.
Indicating where temporary truss
members and local tension release devices were needed.
Indicating when temporary support
towers and temporary truss members were required in the anchor spans.
In-service axial
forces prior to dismantling being carried out, with the suspended span
easily identifiable.
Making "The
cut" at midspan
The bridge was constructed with the two
halves of the cantilever extending to midspan, the opposing halves
cantilevering 700 ft (214m) from each of the main piers. Jacks on the
upper chord and lower chord adjusted the position of the bridge so
that the two halves could be aligned and connected. After the bridge
was connected at midspan, the suspended span was "swung" by
releasing the upper chord at both ends of the suspended span, allowing
the bridge to relax into its designed configuration. The swinging
resulted in the 576 ft (176m) suspended span simply hanging from the
tips of the opposing cantilever arms. The contractor opted to remove
the cantilevered structure by substantially reversing the original
engineered erection sequence. To accomplish this, the main span needed
first to be converted from its relaxed "swung" configuration
into two independent cantilevers, then severed at midspan prior to
proceeding with the dismantling of the opposing halves. This procedure
of severing the main span became known to the engineers as "The
cut". Nathan Miller, Bridge Engineer at Foothills Bridge Co.
explains: "Before this could be done, the upper chord at each end
of the suspended span needed to be re-engaged to convert the suspended
span into extensions of the cantilever, and then be jacked to relieve
the forces in the suspended span. This would then allow the bridge to
be cut at midspan without a large release of energy and minimal bridge
deflections. By using LUSAS to model this sequence we could provide
the contractor with the required jacking forces and expected bridge
displacements." At each end of the suspended span, the upper
chord was jacked to approximately 2,000,000 lbs (8900kN) of force per
truss, equating to a displacement of approximately 5" (125mm).
Additionally, the lower chord was jacked with 250,000 lbs (1100kN)
force in each truss to relieve a small remaining tension in the lower
chord prior to cutting. Bridge jacking was modelled in LUSAS by
applying the jacking force and then activating the relevant bridge
member in the model in order hold the force (and displacement). The
observed bridge displacements during upper chord jacking agreed
favourably to those predicted by the LUSAS model, and provided the
contractor with a high level of confidence in carrying out "The
cut".
Initial dismantling
following "The cut" at midspan.
Axial forces in truss
members after initial dismantling at midspan.
Temporary Truss Members
and Local Tension Release
After the two halves of the bridge were
separated numerous stages in the dismantling process had to be
considered. A series of loadcases were defined in LUSAS to account for
various equipment arrangements on the bridge, the removal (the
deactivation in the model) of truss members and the installation (the
activation in the model) of temporary truss members and support
towers. The modelling sequence performed in LUSAS allowed the
engineers to identify critical dismantling stages when primary load
path members needed to be removed and temporary members needed to be
installed. Several demolition stages involved the removal of primary
truss members with significant residual tension. To prevent sudden,
uncontrolled force transfer between existing and new temporary
members, local tension release devices were employed, using design
forces and displacements provided by the LUSAS model.
Location of temporary
truss members and additional bracing members required for particular
stages of dismantling.
Anchor Span Temporary
Towers and Temporary Truss Members
The upper chord in the anchor arms (and
cantilever arms) was composed of eyebars, which were under significant
tension in the bridge’s in-service condition. However, as the bridge
was dismantled back from midspan, the weight in the cantilever was
reduced, and consequently the eyebar tension also reduced. This meant
that at some point, the weight of the anchor span relative to the
weight of the cantilever would become critical and the tension in the
eyebars would be eliminated. Since the eyebars were very slender and
had essentially no compressive capacity, this would have created an
unstable structure. So, in order to prevent the premature detensioning
of the anchor span eyebars, temporary support towers in the anchor
span were used to support/lift the anchor span, inducing more tension
in the anchor span eyebars. LUSAS was used to monitor the eyebar
tension in the anchor span and highlighted when temporary support
towers were required for a particular dismantling stage. The temporary
tower jacking/installation was modelled in LUSAS by applying the
jacking force at the required node, activating the tower support, and
then removing the jacking force. After the temporary towers were
installed, the truss was jacked into a favourable position to balance
the critical variables of the eyebar force, temporary truss member
design forces, and pier reactions. As dismantling of the truss
approached the main piers, the temporary towers alone would not be
adequate to maintain tension in the anchor span eyebars, so in order
to maintain the stability of the structure, temporary members were
installed to create an alternate load path. After the installation of
the anchor span temporary truss members, the anchor span eyebars were
no longer required and could be removed or allowed to buckle.
Location of temporary
towers and temporary truss members
Dismantling progressing
Typical
LUSAS results obtained
Animation of axial
forces during erection, in-service alterations, and dismantling.
Animation of axial
forces in members during dismantling
Detail of axial force
results for western anchor span
In summary
Foothills Bridge Co. used a single
LUSAS model to model the entire dismantling sequence of the East Main
Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. The model incorporated
equipment and environmental loads (in addition to dead load), and
determined existing truss member forces, temporary truss member design
forces, temporary tower loads, and temporary tower jacking forces.
Forces and bridge displacements were monitored by the contractor the
throughout the dismantling sequence and these field measurements were
found to be in compliance with those predicted by the LUSAS model,
verifying the bridge was behaving as expected, and providing
confidence to all during the dismantling process.
"By identifying and analyzing the
critical steps in the planned dismantling sequence, LUSAS proved to be
an invaluable tool in helping us to evaluate bridge stability and
predict dismantling effects on a very large and complex
structure."
Nathan
Miller, Bridge Engineer,
Foothills Bridge Co.
Animation of
bridge dismantling from
September 2014 to April 2015 (based on images courtesy of Caltrans)
Unless otherwise noted, all
photographic images are courtesy of Sam Burbank.
Share this
article
Find out more
Other LUSAS Bridge case studies:
|