BRIDGE REHABILITATION IN REMOTE AREA

--------------
BY

R.K. DHIMAN

Abstract

Bridges are generally designed for 100 years but there are cases where
distress has been observed prematurely. The reason for such distress may be poor
design, faulty construction and lack of maintenance. Each component of the bridge
has to play a vital role during serviceability period. In case any distress noticed, same
should be attended to in a planned way. Bridge construction in remote area is a
challenge due to number of factors like variation in foundation strata, space
restriction for launching superstructure, restricted weather conditions, highly
seismically active area. In case of natural calamity like cloud burst, earthquake,
flashflood distress in bridges has been observed leading to disruption in traffic. At
many location the distress to such bridges has been handled based on local
resources to make bridges traffic worthy. Generally distress are dislocation of
bearing, excessive scour around pier and washing away of approach to bridge proper
and some time collapse of superstructure. Once the distress is noticed a detailed
observation are taken along with proposed corrective measures. Opinion of the
bridge expert is also taken wherever required to address the problem in shortest
possible time. Bridge rehabilitation can be better handled if the engineer are fully
conversant with the sequence of construction involved in a particular bridge. There
are many cases where systematic approach and analysis simplified the rehabilitation
process and bridges are now serving well.

Border Roads had done rehabilitation of number of such bridge in remote area
departmentally Case studies of Ranga, Kunifer, Deo and Bhinni bridges has been
discussed in this paper.

Key Words : Rehabilitation, Dislocation of bearing, Scour, Protection

works.
________________________________________________________________________

Email : d_himan12@yahoo.com
1.0 Introduction

Bridge rehabilitation is a challenge for bridge engineers in remote area due to various
logistic problem. Remote area also devoid of latest technology and trained manpower. Few
bridges are located in high altitude and snow bound area. Infact if the engineers responsible
for maintenance of bridges are aware about the construction sequence of bridges, then
rehabilitation became easier. Major cause of distress is nonfunction of bearing, expansion
joint, excessive scour around pier, approach washed away. Rehabilitation of Ranga Deo
Kunifer, and Bhini Bridge has been discussed in this paper.

2.0 Rehabilitation of Bridges in remote area An over view

Border roads had constructed number of bridges in remote area, there had been
major problems during construction of foundation and superstructure. Foundation strata
posed big challenge due to heterogeneous mix underneath, flash flood and deep gorges
posed challenges for constructions of superstructure.

(a) There are number of bridges where approach washed away or structural
damage making bridge unfit for traffic, this is due to non compaction of approach or
due to non consideration of impact of high current on U/S of approach. Bridge where
such danger has been observed are Siji bridge on Lekhabali along road,Dimwo
bridge on Silapather -Pasighat road, (In Arunachal Pradesh and Assam).( Fig 1&2)

FIG 1&2 APPROACH WASHED AWAY AND DISTRESS IN CAP BEAM LOCATION

(b) Bridges where excessive scour observed on side of abutment or on two

pier in case of multi span bridges. Bridge where bearing has been either dislocated
or not functioning properly leading to non function of expansion joint of bridge. ( Fig
3 &4)

FIG 3 & 4 EXCESSIVE SCOUR AND DISLOCATED BEARING

 Rehabilitation of all these bridges are not very difficult provided we are sure that
what is cause of distress. All such distress has been attended to in house with the trained
manpower within the organization and bridges are functioning well. Basic positive point in
completion of this rehabilitation departmentally was the dedication and devotion of
manpower in the organization.

3.0 CASE STUDIES

3.1 RANGA-II BRIDGE

Ranga-II bridge is located on Kimin-Zero road in Arunanchal Pradesh and was

completed during Feb 1968.. Due to flash flood on 18/19 Jun 1968 there was heavy rain in
the river, which was not accommodated by the channel. There was out flanking of discharge
with heavy current and lead to erode the bank, which formed a big channel on the Zero side
banks. Later on river started flowing in this channel and broke the line of communication.
After flash flood, Bailey bridge was launched and it remained at site for about 18 years (Fig
1). In the mean time a scheme for extension of span to connect the breached portion on
Zero side was examined. After studying condition of design of existing bridge, it was
observed that abutment on Zero side is not capable to accommodate the reaction of the
extended simply supported span. Also the design of the abutment well as a pier was difficult
due to scour consideration.

Figure 5 Changed flow pattern of river 1968

Figure 6 General arrangement of Ranga II Bridge

 Figure 7 Rehablitated view of Ranga II Bridge
Keeping in view the ground problems and scour observations, it was found that bed has not
shown any excessive scour since 1968 up to 1986. Accordingly the abutment well was
found safe on structural/hydraulic considerations. Keeping in view of this, there were three
alternatives available to for rehabilitation.

(i) River training works on Zero side and to confine the flow into the designed
channel only. However this proposal had demerit that there could be more scour
around piers.

(ii) To add additional single span of 67.00 m, in that case it was not possible to
accommodate the load on abutment A2 and also due to vertical clearance
consideration as the depth of superstructure (67.00m) is more than the existing
girders of 40 M span (Total 120 = 40 x 3).

(iii) To add an independent structure on zero side based on cantilever

construction method and connect the same with end span (A1 side) and end
abutment (new) with a gap slab of 3.50 m only at both the locations.
Third alternative was adopted. A balanced cantilever span of 67.00 m was made
which will not put any load on the abutment (A2) and this will be now treated as a pier
(A1 abutment) after addition of span (Fig 5,6 and 7). Extension of span was basically
to cater for additional discharge if any in future. With this scheme the requirement of
the river training works was also not required. Bridge is behaving well now without
any aggradation/degradation in the channel.

3.2 DEO BRIDGE

Deo bridges is located on road Agartala-Churaibari at KM 153.92 (NH-44) and was

constructed during Apr 1991 Excessive scour at Deo bridge location created certain
problems on one abutment and disrupted traffic. After thoughtful exercise a solution was
found which was eye opener and saved excessive cost of model study which was being
planned. The salient features of the bridge are as under:-

(a) Length of the bridge : 91.51 Mtrs (30.17 + 31.17+30.17)

(b) Carriage Way : 7.50 Mtr (with footpath)

(c) Type of Foundation : RCC Pile of 1.2m dia

 (d) Type of Bridge : Simply supported PSC Box type
superstructure

(e) Type of Approaches : Earth filled in High RCC Box Cell

type superstructure

(f) HFL : RL 42.670 Mtr

(g) LWL : RL 32.200 Mtr

(h) LBL : RL 31.100 Mtr

(j) Scour Level : RL 28.000Mtr

(k) Discharge : 2000 Cum/Sec

(l) Velocity of flow : 3.02 Mtr/Sec

(m) Silt Factor : 1.15

(m) Foundation Level : RL 24.000 Mtr

There was a change in the flow pattern of the river and most of the discharge started
flowing through one span of the bridge due to silting observed on the u/s right side with the
continuous flow of water towards the left bank. There was a sizable damage to the abutment
consequent to which the reinforcement got exposed. The box return made towards
approaches on Agartala side got exposed and water started flowing below the foundation of
box return. This caused extensive damages to the bridge and rendering the bridge unsafe
for traffic. The damages were due to following reasons:-

(i) River changed its course and flow pattern with passage of time. Maximum
discharge of the river was flowing through A1 and P1. ( Fig 8)

Figure 8 Changed flow pattern of DEO Bridge

(ii) Scour observed was 3 to 4 mtrs at A1 location and P1 location. This also
damaged the piles with the repeated hitting of debris and floating trees and
other material ( Fig 9)
 Figure 9 Exposure of pile reinforcement due to excessive scour

The pile reinforcement at A1 and P1 location are exposed due to damage of cover to
the piles

(iii) Since the flow pattern is towards left side of the bridge, there has been
extensive damage to the box return on Agartala side due to piping action. This has
led to removal of soil below the foundation of box return. Due to piping action below
box return the earth filled in one of the chamber of the box has been taken away by
the water.

Figure 10 & 11 Breaking of piers of old bridge and removal of earth

(iv) Based on detailed examination of U/S and D/S it was observed that existing
structures of old bridge on U/S were disturbing the flow which were removed and
water started flowing through all span. Bridge is behaving well now).( Fig 10 &11).

3.3 BHINI BRIDGE

Steel truss bridge with timber decking of 236 mtr length located at km 42.590 on
Dhar- Udhampur road in Jammu & Kashmir. This bridge was constructed during 1962 for
single lane requirement. The bearing of the bridge got dislocated due to traffic movement
and due to repeated seismic activity in the area has been rectified.
 Salient features of the bridge are as under :-

(a) Name & location : Bhini at km 42.590 on Dhar-Udhampur road

(b) Type : Inglish Steel Bridge (simply supported)

(c) Span : 8 x 29.50m (236m)

(d) Type of foundation : Open

(e) HFL : RL 576.960m

(f) LWL : RL 572.040m

(g) Carriage way : 3.75m

(h) Bearings : Rocker and Roller bearing

There are 8 spans of the bridge and bridge is single lane only. Dislocation of bearing
was observed during are inspection.

Fig-12 & 13 Road level view of existing Inglish Steel Bridge

Due to dislocation of rollers out of bearing plate at two bearing location, bridge
become unsafe for heavy traffic. Immediately it was decided to relocate this bridge bearings.
The wooden sleepers were placed under the cross girder on the pier cap girder near bearing
(both upstream and downstream sides) to stop further movement of rollers of bearing as a
temporary measure.

Based on this defect, a rehabilitation plan was made and on assessment of the dead
weight of the superstructure, it was decided to jack up bridge. Based on the calculation, it
was found that the dead load was approximately 45 MT and jacking up plan was made
accordingly alongwith position of jacks for application. Acton was implemented by the
trained team of technician of department and whole task of relocation of bridge bearings was
accomplished in six hours..( Fig 12,13,14& 15)

(a) Placing of wooden sleepers below girder (near bearings) to stop further
movement of bearings.

(b) Placing of 04 nos mechanical jack 50 ton lifting capacity below end of main
girder.
 (c) Lifting of girder with jack and making roller position free

(d) Placing bearings on base plate in grooves in original position manually.

(e) Down the jack and allowing bridge decking load on

(f) A slopper plate was fixed to stop further moment of roller in future bridge is
now behaving well.

Fig-14 Jack placed in position on D/S of Truss

3.4 KUNIFER BRIDGE

A Kunifer bridge located NH-1on Jammu-Srinagar road. Silent feature of bridge are
as under:-

(a) Length of Bridge = 18 Mtr

(b) Superstructure = Three girder
(c) Type of bearing = Rock Roller
(d) Year of construction = 1952
(e) Type of foundation = Open foundation stone

It was observed that there is dislocation of bearing. Abutment was bulging out and
cracks in the cap beam. The cap beam was not reinforced during initial construction.
Details of defects are as under:-

(a) Abutment cap on left side crushed under the roller on U/S girder.
(b) Top plate of roller bearing of U/S girder slipped by 10 cms and roller moved
by 20 cms.

(c) Bearing is out of location and affected the load transfer mechanism.

(d) Expansion joints at both side were also not functioning due to problems in
bearing.
 Fig-15 & 16 Dislocated and Jammed Bearing

Based on the distress observed and review of cracks, a detailed rehabilitation plan
was made to bring the bridge into original condition for regular traffic. Following actions
were planned for this bridge( Fig 15&16)

(a) Jacketing of the bulged abutment.

(b) Replacement of existing cap beam with reinforced cap beam after lifting the
superstructure.

(c) Grouting of cracks superstructure wherever applicable.

(d) Relocation of bearing to desired location.

(e) Replacement, expansion joints and approach slab on the both ends.
Rehabilitation was very cost effective

4.0 Recommendation

To ensure that bridge serve as per the designed life following recommendation are
made :-

(a) All the bridges should be constructed as per approved designed standard to
avoid any distress before completion of serviceability period.

(b) After construction, all bridges should be monitored closely on regular basis
and distress if any should be attended to avoid its aggravation.

(c) It has been observed that few bridge site have very serious distress but due
to non availability of fund it got aggravated led to major expenditure at later
date. There is need that all bridges where distress is noticed should be
attended to on priority. Financial requirement should also be managed in time
to avoid delay.

(d) There is need that manpower deployed in remote area should also have
sufficient training to handle distress to bridges as connectivity to remote area
is very important.

5.0 Conclusion
 Bridge rehabilitation in remote area is big challenges for engineers but with regular
monitoring the distress even at initial stage can be arrested and bridges can serve better.
There is need that all bridges in remote area should be closely studied in advances and
team should be prepared to handle to distress if any. Infact to handle distress in bridges
there is need that team deployed at site is fully aware about the construction history of
bridges so that rehabilitation is handled in time.

REFERENCE

1. Dhiman RK Effective Construction Management for Bridges

International Association of Bridges and Structural Engineers (IABSE) Dec-1996
2. Dhiman RK - Pneumatic Sinking - A Case Study Indian Road
Congress (IRC) Indian Highway - Feb 1996
3. Dhiman RK - Caisson Launching A- Case Study Civil
Engineering And Construction Review (CE&CR) - 1996
4. Dhiman RK - Foundation Level for Bridges A Programmatic Approach
1996 New Building Material And Construction World (NBM & CW)

5. Dhiman RK -Essence of Silt Factor for Scour Around Bridge Pier

International Conference on Scour of foundation (ICSF-I) held at Texas USA (17-20
Nov 2002)

6. Dhiman RK - Construction Problem of Bridges in Hilly Region A Review-

1997 International Association of Bridges and Structural Engineers (IABSE)

7. Dhiman RK Dimwe Bridge Foundation A Case Study 4th International

Seminar on Bridge and Aqueduct 1998

8. Dhiman RK - Well Foundation Construction in Bouldery Bed - A Case

Study International Association of Bridges and Structural Engineers (IABSE)
Colloquium Feb 1999

9. Dhiman RK Affects of Flash Flood- A Case Study Disaster

Management NERIST, Itanagar 1999

10. Dhiman RK - Caisson Sickness During Pneumatic Sinking International

Symposium at University of Dundee Scotland (UK) - Sep 2003

11. Dhiman RK Bridge Construction Problems and Solutions A Review

17th National Convention of Civil Engineering at Bhubneshwar - 2001

12. Dhiman RK Extension of Span Ranga II Bridge A Case Study - 17th

National Convention of Civil Engineering & Seminar on Modern Trend in
Construction and Maintenance of Roads, Flyover and Bridges Bhubaneshwar
Nov 2001

13. Dhiman RK - Tilt Rectification of Well Foundation A Case Study - Indian

Road Congress (IRC) Indian Highways May 2002.
14. Dhiman R.K. Essence of Training of Manpower for Concrete Technology,
Sixth International Conference on Concrete Technology (6ICCT) at Aman
(JORDAN) Oct 2003.

15. Dhiman R.K. Construction Challenges for Bridges in Hilly Area An Over
View - Indian Road Congress (IRC) Indian Highways Jan 2004.

16. Dhiman R.K. Damages to Bridges due to Flash Flood A Case Study -
Indian Road Congress (IRC) Indian Highways Oct 2004

17. Dhiman R.K.- Bouldery Bed Scour Proposed Formula Indian Road
Congress (IRC) Journal 65 Vol-3 Paper No. 508. Nov 2004

18. Special issue on Round Table Conference on Scour Around Bridge Pier
1993 Indian Institute of Bridge Engineering (IIBE), New Delhi.

19. Model Study Report of Pasighat Bridge by UPIRI, Roorkee-1984.

20. Indian Road Congress (IRC) 78:2000.