Sunteți pe pagina 1din 9

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

2009/001

Bridge Technical Note

PROTECTION OF BRIDGE SUPPORTS FROM COLLISION BY ROAD


TRAFFIC
1.

SCOPE

This Technical Note provides guidance on the provision of collision protection for bridge
piers and other supports. It shall be read in conjunction with the provisions of AS5100
Bridge Design.
It does not address collision loads on bridge superstructures from over-height vehicles nor
impact from rail traffic.
2.

BACKGROUND

AS5100.1 Clause 11 COLLISION PROTECTION specifies the responsibilities of the


relevant authority in determining the requirement for provision of collision protection
systems for new bridges and other structures over roadways and railways.
It requires that:
An assessment be made of the risk of a vehicle impacting the bridge supports and
other elements;
A determination be made of the level of protection required and the appropriate
performance levels for such protection.
For the consideration of collision from road traffic, it requires that:
The relevant authority determine the minimum clearance of a pier or column from
the roadway beyond which a road traffic barrier protection system will not be
required;
Supports for pedestrian bridges be either located to avoid collision from road traffic
or be protected from such collision.
AS5100.2 Clause 10 COLLISION LOADS sub-clause 10.2 Collision from road traffic
specifies that where the supports for a bridge are not behind appropriate protective traffic
barriers, they shall be designed for a minimum equivalent static ultimate load of 2000kN in
combination with the ultimate design dead loads acting on the structure.
This design requirement ensures that new bridge piers are designed to have a minimum
level of robustness to protect them against minor impacts from road traffic. This force is
potentially orders of magnitude less than the collision load that would be applied to a
bridge support in the event of a head-on impact by an errant, high speed, heavy
commercial vehicle.

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 1

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

Existing bridge supports designed prior to the implementation of the 1992 Austroads
Bridge Code, were not required to be designed for the above minimum collision load and
thus may be less robust.
3.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 Risk Assessment


A site specific risk assessment needs to be undertaken in conjunction with benefit / cost
considerations to determine whether a bridge support / pier protection system shall be
provided as part of the construction of a new roadway or a widening or a road safety
upgrading of an existing roadway.
Specific attention shall be given to bridge supports located within the centre median of
divided carriageways, adjacent to the outside edges of trafficked lanes and adjacent to
freeway exit and entry ramps and to other situations where impact could reasonably occur
on a bridge support.
The site specific risk assessment shall take into consideration all relevant parameters,
including, but not limited to the:
Class of road;
Design and operational speed of the road;
Total traffic volume;
Percentage of commercial vehicles;
Road crash records for this (if existing) and similar roadways;
Potential outcomes of a vehicle impact with pier support with consideration to both
vehicle occupants and third party persons and property;
Potential risks associated with introduction of bridge support protection system(s);
Road geometry;
Differences in levels between divided carriageways, surface levels and drainage
requirements in the central median area;
Distance from trafficked lanes to the face of new or existing bridge supports;
Presence of a sealed shoulder or emergency stopping lanes between the trafficked
lanes and the bridge supports;
The strength and robustness of existing and proposed bridge supports;
The geometry of the existing or proposed bridge supports, with particular attention
on tapered columns that might snag high vehicles.
There are several specific situations that will be referred to in this Technical Note:
An existing divided carriageway with a single continuous concrete median barrier
that is being widened on the outside;
An existing divided carriageway that is being widened into the median and that has
existing or proposed bridge supports within this median;
A new divided carriageway with bridge supports located within the median;
Situations where bridge supports are located close to the outside edges of trafficked
lanes;
VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 2

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

Situations where bridge supports are located close to entry and exit ramps from
freeways and major highways.

3.2 Concept drawings


Figures 1 to 3 are provided to show concept details of typical systems currently being used
by VicRoads for the collision protection of existing and new bridge supports located in the
central median of freeways. Similar details can be used on major highways and arterial
roads with divided carriageways.
Figure 1 shows a plan view and a side elevation for a typical median pier collision
protection system.
Figure 2 shows a cross-section of a typical collision protection system for a median pier
with vertical faces parallel to the trafficked lanes.
Figure 3 shows a cross-section of a typical collision protection system for a median pier
with inclined faces parallel to the trafficked lanes. This arrangement increases the
potential risk for high vehicles to snag the pier and should be avoided.
This figure also has applicability to situations where the pier is skewed relative to the
trafficked lanes. In these circumstances, circular or elliptical pier columns should be used
or at least the ends of the piers should be rounded or angled to reduce the probability and
severity of impact..
Urban divided highways with lower speed environments may, for example, require collision
protection for existing pedestrian bridge supports located within the median at high risk
locations.
Similar details can be used for the protection of bridge supports on the outside of
roadways by providing a single barrier based on one side of the system shown in
Figures 1 to 3. These barriers also shall be protected by a secondary flexible (wire rope)
system except in circumstances where the ends of the barriers can be terminated within a
roadway batter cut or similar.
3.3 System components
The main component of the bridge support protection system, shown in Figure 1, is the
reinforced concrete coffer dam type section. This system is intended to avoid medium to
heavy vehicles directly imparting collision loads to the bridge support system.
This type of system is intended to provide protection to an existing, non-robust bridge
support system. It shall be designed to act independently of the bridge support system, by
relying on its self-weight and independent foundations. A clearance cavity shall be
provided around the bridge supports to minimise the probability of collision load transfer to
them.

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 3

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

In the case of new bridge supports or existing robust supports that satisfy AS5100
requirements, consideration may be given to designing a similar concrete pier protection
system that acts integrally with the bridge supports.
A secondary flexible (wire rope or similar) system is provided in front of the concrete
collision protection system to safely contain and redirect light to medium mass vehicles
without any contact with the rigid concrete barrier.
The combination of flexible barrier and tapered rigid concrete system is also intended to
safely redirect an errant medium to heavy vehicle impacting at a low angle of incidence. It
is also intended to partially contain and redirect heavier vehicles, particularly buses and
similar to minimise the severity of any collision with the rigid system and avoid head on
impact with the end of the system. The above features are aimed at minimising the risk of
serious injury to vehicle occupants.
The ends of the concrete barrier system potentially represent a hazard to multi-passenger,
medium mass vehicles such as buses. Such vehicles may have sufficient momentum to
deflect the flexible barrier system more than the minimum 2.5m offset specified in Figure 1.
Site specific consideration shall be given to the provision of additional end protection, such
as a crash cushion impact system.
3.4 Geometric details
The details shown in Figure 1 are based on a straight alignment and bridge supports
oriented parallel to the trafficked lanes. It also assumes a minimum median width of about
6m or 4.5m between the flexible roadside barrier systems along each carriageway.
The approach traffic face of the barrier is flared at a 1 in 10 slope away from the traffic
from a minimum offset of 1m at the bridge supports until a minimum offset of 2.5m to the
flexible (wire rope barrier) system is achieved at the approach end. This offset is based on
the requirements of Road Design Note 3-18F, Appendix A..
The trafficked face runs parallel with the trafficked lanes from a distance of approximately
1500mm prior to the bridge supports for the distance required to achieve the appropriate
offset from the flexible barrier system on the other carriageway.
If the road alignment is curved, the concrete protection system may have to be flared at a
rate of 1 in 10 on both sides to maintain the minimum clearance to the flexible barrier
system; this will result in a longer length of concrete barrier.
3.5 Height considerations
The height of the concrete bridge support protection system shown in Figures 1 and 2 is
1500mm in the region of the bridge supports. These figures are based on both
carriageways being at the same level and a horizontal median surface.

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 4

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

This height is equivalent to that of a High performance level bridge barrier and is required
to safely redirect a heavy commercial vehicle at an operational speed of about 100 km/hr.
The height is required to ensure that the barrier provides redirection to the tray of
commercial vehicles. This is important to:
Redirect the errant heavy vehicle;
Minimise the lateral rotation of an errant high heavy vehicle and potential for
snagging of the bridge supports.
The determination of appropriate height and clearance of the pier protection system from
the bridge supports, as shown in Figures 2 and 3, shall be based on the provisions of the
Austroads Guide to Road Design Pt 6: Roadside Design, Safety and Barriers Figure 6.20
and Table 6.11.
The height of the concrete system is gradually reduced away from the bridge supports to
reduce the size of the potential impact area at each end of the system. The height and
width of the barrier at each end should be minimises or shaped to reduce the severity of a
direct impact with the end of the barrier whilst simultaneously minimising the probability of
the barrier acting as a ramp and launching a heavy vehicle. The slope on the top surface is
of the order of 1 in 10.
For applications where the operational speed of the road is 80 km/hr or less, site specific
risk assessment might indicate that a reduced height of about 1100 to 1200mm might be
adequate to re-direct heavy vehicles, subject to considerations about the probability of
bridge support snagging and the robustness of these supports.
3.6 Structural details
The concrete protection systems that are designed to act independently of pier supports,
shall be designed for the following road traffic collision loads:
The collision loads specified in AS5100.2 Clause 10 to be applied to bridge support
systems; and
The traffic barrier design loads specified in AS5100.2 Clause 11 and BTN 2005/006
for a barrier of the same performance level
whichever has the greater effects.
A1500mm high system shall be designed as a High performance level barrier system
whilst an 1100 to 1200mm system shall be designed as a Medium performance level
barrier system.
3.7 Foundation details
Appropriate foundations, in the form of bored piles or similar, shall be provided to resist the
collision loads referred to above in accordance with the requirements of AS5100.

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 5

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

3.8 Urban design considerations


Consideration shall be given to the appearance of pier-protection barriers. For example,
flat surfaces may be divided by fluting and feature grooves parallel with the base of the
barrier. The upper surface of the barrier may be bevelled or formed into a V-shape. Where
grooves and shaping are used, the nominal cover to reinforcement shall be maintained at
the root of the feature and all surfaces shall be freely self-draining to prevent
accumulations of standing water.

MARIO FANTIN
PRINCIPAL BRIDGE ENGINEER
For further information please contact:
Principal Bridge Engineer
3 Prospect Hill Road Camberwell Vic 3124
Telephone: (03) 9811 8307
Facsimile:
(03) 9811 8329
Email:
mario.fantin@roads.vic.gov.au
Bridge Technical Notes are subject to periodic review and may be superseded

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 6

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

Figure 1 - Typical median pier collision protection system

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 7

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

Figure 2 - Typical collision protection system for a median pier with vertical faces parallel to the
trafficked lanes

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 8

BTN 2009/001 Protection of Bridge Supports

Figure 3 - Typical collision protection system for a median pier with inclined faces parallel to the
trafficked lanes

VERSION:

2.0

DATE:

June 2009

Page 9

S-ar putea să vă placă și