Seminar Report

On

Case Study of The Millau Viaduct

Submitted by:

Name: Mohd Rafiq Mir

Roll No: CE-14-54

Department of Civil Engineering

 Department Of Civil Engineering

Candidates Declaration:

I hereby declare that the work which is being presented in the seminar report
entitled, ‘Case Study Of The Millau Viaduct’ is for the partial fulfillment of the
requirement for the award of degree of Bachelor Of Technology in Civil
Engineering and is submitted in the Department Of Civil Engineering Islamic
University Of Science And Technology Awantipora Pulwama. This report has not
been submitted by me for the award of any other degree or diploma of this or
any other University/Institute.

Name Roll No

Mohd Rafiq Mir CE-14-54

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 2

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this occasion to thank Almighty for blessing me with his grace
and taking my endeavor to a successful culmination. I extend my
sincere and heart full thanks to esteemed faculty members of
Department Of Civil Engineering for providing me the right guidance
and advice at the crucial junctures and for showing me the right way.

Last but not the least, i would like to thank my friends for the
support and encouragement they have given me during the course of
preparation.

Name Roll No

Mohd Rafiq Mir CE-14-54

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 3

 Abstract
Cable-stayed bridges have become very popular over the last five decades due to
their aesthetic appeal, structural efficiency, the limited amount of material usage
and financial benefits. The rapid increase of new techniques creating longer
spans, slender decks and more spectacular design has given rise to a major
concern of the dynamic behavior of cable-stayed bridges. This has resulted in a
more careful modeling procedure that will represent the reality in the most
particular way. A model is simply an approximation of the reality, thus it is
important to establish what simplifications and approximations that are
reasonable to make in order for the model to be as accurate as possible.

The Millau Viaduct is a cable-stayed bridge unique of its kind. At the time
that it was built it was breaking many records: span length, height of deck above
the foundations and the short construction time in just three years. Due to the
slenderness of the structure, the extreme height and the location in a deep valley,
the viaduct is naturally subjected to external loads. The models have been refined
in order to be compared between the programs and to the reality i.e. the
measured mode shapes and frequencies obtained from reports.

The viaduct required many specially designed solutions in order to obtain

the elegance and the aesthetic appeal. Approximations in geometry have been
essential due to the many details that the viaduct consists of, but the details are
nonetheless important to capture to get the structural mechanics correct. The
support conditions have been considered as important as these were designed to
allow for moment that were caused by a combination of the external loads and
the slenderness of the structure. The most critical support conditions were the
deck-pier connection in which the piers are split into two columns equipped with
spherical bearings allowing for angular rotation. The two shafts were modeled by
one single column and the spherical bearings were simulated by creating two
alternative models; one assigned with a pinned constraint to allow for the angular
rotation and the second, since this support condition is in fact rigid has been
assigned as used.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 4

Contents

TOPIC PAGE NO

 Declaration 02

 Acknowledgment 03

 Abstract 04

 Introduction 07

 Construction 09

 Construction Statistics 13

 Engineering Specialties 14

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 5

  Innovations 15

 Loadings 16

 Structural Assessment 19

 Foundation Design 21

 Conclusion 24

 References 24

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 6

INTRODUCTION

The Millau Bridge or Viaduct provides the final missing link in the A75 autoroute ultimately
connecting Paris to Barcelona. Prior the viaducts construction traffic would have had to
descend the Tarn Valley causing a bottle neck in the town of Millau especially during the
summer months of July and August. The multi-span cable stayed bridge passes over the Tarn
valley at its lowest point between two plateaus. In order to do this it had to become the tallest
road bridge in the world creating the world’s tallest bridge piers standing at 242m, the
structure rising to 343m at the top of the pylon. The bridge also holds the title of the world’s
longest multi-span cable stayed bridge with a total length of 2460m. There is a slight gradient of
3% from North to South as well as a slight curve about a radius of 20,000m. The piers are of
post tensioned reinforced concrete and the deck and pylons are of steel. Several initial
proposals were at first considered by the French Highway Department in linking the existing
autoroutes to the north and south of the Tarn Valley. These included the idea proposed by
initially by bridge designer Michel Virlogeux. This included a route that would partially descend
the valley, cross the Tarn with a 700m span cable stayed bridge and then tunnel through the
steeper North side of valley until and joining up with the autoroute.

In 1990 the decision was made to pass the valley at the bridges current location with a 2500m
bridge. Michel Virlogeux proposed a design very similar to the final structure consisting of
seven main piers with approach piers and a slightly different cable arrangement. The only

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 7

design similar to Virlogeux’s was forwarded by Foster and Partners. In 1995 the second design
phase took place in which it was decided that the design proposed by Foster and Virlogeux
would be used. The decision to construct the bridge under concession agreement was made in
1998 and the competition for construction tender took place in 2000. It was announced in
March 2001 that Eiffage would be concessionaire under a new subsidiary company created for
the construction - Compagnie Eiffage du Millau Viaduct. The company holds a 75 year operating
concession with income from the tolls paying for the construction. The bridge was inaugurated
on 14th December 2004 and opened to traffic two days later.

Fig: Elevation Of The Millau Viaduct

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 8

CONSTRUCTION
One of the most important phases of the building of a bridge. The construction phase is wear
mistakes on any prior steps will show through and the constant vigilance of the engineers is
required to make sure that every step is completed as it should. The Construction of the Millau
came in three parts the concrete, the steel and then the final construction. The Viaduct used
many different specialties in the field of civil engineering and innovations in their approach to
construction of the bridge, which in turn cut costs and increased speed of construction.

Stages

 Concrete

o Foundation - The most important step in any major project is insuring that a
solid foundation is laid for the structure to rest on. In the case of the Viaduct
seven foundations had to be laid for each one of the piers.
 On December 14, 2001, the first stone was laid to begin the construction
process.
 The soil where the foundations were to be set on consisted of mostly
lime stone that contains holes and fissures.
 For a proper foundation to be developed a Geotechnical engineer must
assess the grounds strength and design a foundation that will be able to
support the immense weight of the bridge.
 The engineers came up with a design to help ensure solid foundations.
 The foundations each consisted of a base plate and four piles. The piles
were 5 meters in diameter and 14 meter long. The bases were made out
of reinforced concrete and steel.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 9

 Fig: One of the seven foundations for the piers

o Piers - The piers were the towering part of the structure with the tallest one
reaching over 245 meters tall. The piers hold the road way and the pylons.
 The piers were constructed using reinforced concrete. The piers had the
design of tapering down from top to bottom. The seven piers are
identical except for the length due to the valley bottom.
 The piers had to be constructed using an automatic rail climbing system
or ACS. The system required the bottom section the pier be constructed
then the climbing system attached to rail secured to the pier. Allowing
the system to move up the piers independently .
 The ACS would pour 4 meter sections of concrete at a time allowing
accurate pours and ensuring structural stability.
 The ACS enabled the piers to be built on schedule. The system allowed
for a correct pour each time it moved up the pier.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 10

  Steel
o Road Deck - The most important part for the driver. The road deck includes all
the areas people will actually move on. The designers decided to go with a steel
road deck instead of a concrete because of weight and cost.
 The road deck if made from concrete would weigh near 200,000 metric
tons and be 7 meters deep. Using steel the deck is only 36,000 metric
tons and 4 meters deep.
 The design of the road deck is a trapezoidal box girder design. To improve
strength and weight reduction.
 The deck was built on site and using hydraulic movers the first of
eighteen 171 meter sections of the deck were slowly moved onto the
piers. Using GPS satellites the decks were each moved with precision
accuracy to their correct position.
 On May 28, 2004 the north and south sections of the deck conjoined in
the middle above the Tarn River.

 Masts (pylons) and stays - The final stage in the construction process is putting up the
final pieces. The masts and the stays are used in supporting the deck of the bridge.

o Masts
 The masts were made out of the reinforced concrete the same as the
piers.
 The masts are 87 meters tall and each weighs 700 metric tons.
 Each mast holds 11 pairs of stays which vary in length.
o Stays
 The stays are used to support the deck of the bridge.
 Each stay is made out of 55 to 91 high tensile steel cables.
 The cables are protected with three layers of galvanization, a coating of
petroleum wax and an extruded polyethylene sheath to prevent from
corrosion and damaging of the cables.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 11

  The stays are coated with a double helix formation to prevent running
water and vibration that could cause deformation and compromise the
stability of the road deck.

Fig: The road way being moved onto the piers

 Adding The Final Touches - The Viaduct was structurally sound after the mast and stays
were put up but for people to be able to drive on the bridge certain safety features had
to be installed.
o At the end of September the final needed parts were added including road
surfaces, safety systems, lights, and the toll gate.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 12

Final Construction Statistics
 The performance figures

o Length: 2460 m

o Breadth: 32 m

o Maximum height: 343 m, 19 m higher than the Eiffel Tower

o Slope: 3.025%

o bending radius: 20 km

o height of the tallest pier (P2): 245 m

o Height of towers: 87 m

o Length bays: two side spans of 204 m span and 6 span current 342 m
span

o Cable-stayed Number: 154

o Shroud tension: 900 to 1200 t.

For the longest

o Steel deck weight: 36,000 tons, or 5 times the Eiffel Tower

o Volume of concrete: 85 000 m3, or 206,000 t.

o Construction cost: € 400 million (+ Viaduct toll gate)

o Duration of the concession: 78 years (3 years of construction and 75

years of operation)

o Warranty of the book: 120 years

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 13

Civil Engineering Specialties
 Geotechnical Engineering

 Foundation: The bad soil conditions of the ground where the bridge was to built
made it challenging to be able to make a secure foundation. Geotechnical
engineers take soil tests to determine the type of foundation needed to safely
support the bridge.

 Structural Engineering

 Design:
o The Chief engineer Michel Virlogeux of the design process was a
structural engineer. Working with an architect they were able to design a
bridge that was aesthetically appeasing while being structurally sound and
innovative.
 Build process:
o During the construction stage the structural engineer will help the watch
over the construction and make sure that everything is going according to
plan. Also if any problems should arise they are on site to solve them.

 Transportation Engineering

 Road design:
o Transportation engineers are used to design road ways that lessen traffic
and improve safety. A transportation engineer will work with the structural
engineers to help with the design of the road and areas such as drainage.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 14

Innovations

 Automatic Rail Climbing System

o Use
 The use of the ACS gave the construction crews the ability to work faster
and more efficient.
 The use of the ACS allowed the workers to repeat the same results every
time they poured the concrete on the seven piers.
 Deck Installation
o Pre-fabricated road deck
 The pre-fabricated road deck saved time and allowed the bridge to be
built on time.
o ENERPAC System
 A hydraulic system that was used to lift the pre-fabricated deck and move
it slowly forward using GPS and laser alignment to ensure that the bridge
was in the correct place during each phase of moving the decks closer
together.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 15

Loadings
In 1990 the initial study for the bridge was undertaken using French standards. The loadings
used in the actual design process are therefore likely to be different to those about to be
considered. As well as the basic loads applied to all bridges the geometry and design of the
bridge leads to other loads and effects which need to be considered. The constant curvature
introduces horizontal centrifugal loading and the single plane of cables requires consideration
to be given to torsion effects.

Dead Loads

The dead load is primarily just the steel deck. The cornice and wind screen can also be
considered as dead load as removing these will seriously affect the aerodynamics of the deck so
will never happen. The fixings for the cables and also the cables themselves may be considered
as dead loads as well as the pylons.

Super Imposed Dead Loads

The black top surfacing (a surface developed especially for this bridge), concrete and steel crash
barriers, handrails and all drainage can be considered as super imposed dead loads. These are
all considered permanent but can potentially be removed. When the bridge was constructed
the loads just mentioned were added after the main structure (dead load) had been completed.

Live Traffic Loads

The two types of loading, HA and HB will be placed at their most adverse locations. HA and HB
loading is considered to act vertically only in the form of UDL’s, Knife Edge Loads (KEL) and

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 16

point loads. There are other secondary traffic loads which would have been considered for
Millau. Below are two possible load combinations when trying to determine the most adverse
torsional effects. The HA loading would be factored accordingly but as advantageous, the dead
load would not. The possibilities show a continuous unbalanced live load acting the entire
length of the structure and the other shows it alternating between spans. According to the
British Standards the applied loading for a span of 9.5kN/m.

Wind Loading

The British standards obviously only apply to the British Isles and also to bridges spanning up to
200m. Designing to these or probably to any other standards is unlikely for a bridge of this size.
The deck of the bridge relies on aerodynamics to resist the wind loads. Comprehensive wind
tunnel testing was carried out to gain an understanding of the decks response to the applied
wind loads. Being located in a valley special consideration should be given to funnelling effects
acting to increase the wind speed and ultimately the wind load. Increases wind speeds and in
particular gusting may occur at the height the bridge is constructed to. The standards may be
of some use when considering the effects on the piers. Standard drag coefficients apply to
various cross sections, for an octagon (the closest thing to a hexagon) the drag coefficient
would be 1.3. These may have been used for an initial analysis before using an advanced
computer model in conjunction with wind tunnel results. The importance of wind tunnel testing

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 17

is crucial as in terms of dynamics it may prove impossible to successfully model the interaction
of the whole structure.

Temperature Loading

As with wind loading the British Standards are unlikely to be of much use as all maps and data
apply to the British Isles only. With the deck 2460m in length temperature effects are extremely
important. The design process would have into account the stresses induced with the
expansion joints clogged. With the effective temperature range for the design process taken to
be from -35ºC to 45ºC these stresses will be substantial and will considerably increase
compression in the deck. Another issue is the temperature difference between the upper and
lower surface of the deck. This will introduce bending into the deck for which the effect will
vary depending on the time of day.

Other Load Effects

With substantial amounts of concrete involved in the design one of the most important loads
to be considered is that associated with creep of concrete. For Millau the highest bridge pier in
the world was being constructed so any changes in height, particularly if uneven across the 7
different piers would lead to adverse effects as well as potentially aesthetic problems. The
construction technique used probably generated worse loading as the deck continuously
spanned 171m between piers and temporary piers unsupported by any cables as it is in its final
state. The deck is likely to have experienced more adverse tension and compression than can
be expected from the various load combinations during its serviceability lifetime. When looking
at pictures of the bridge during its construction the undulations caused from these forces are
obvious.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 18

Structural Assessment
The bridge takes the form of a multi-span cable stayed bridge. Having multiple spans there are
no back stays as with most cables stayed bridges to anchor the pylons to a rigid support.
Instead adverse loads on one span directly interact with the next as the pylons bend to
accommodate this. Due to the height of bridge it is important that the pylons have a relatively
low bending stiffness compared to the piers. If this is not the case and large bending moments
may be transferred to the pier, huge bending moments would result at the base of the piers.
Considering the poor bedrock of limestone containing significant cavities the piers are founded
on, this would potentially cause problems. The shapes of the pylons seem to be significant in
reducing the bending moment transferred to the piers. The longitudinal A frame appears to
encourage the resolution of moments into vertical forces.

With the cables inducing a bending moment in the pylon, one ‘leg’ of the pylon will go into
tension and the other compression. These forces can be transferred to the ground by the split
piers. The steel deck is placed into compression by the cable stays. The expectancy here would
be to use a pre- stressed concrete deck due to its good compressive strength. However the
chosen launching method dictated that the deck is of steel. During the launch effective spans
where 171m so the ductility of steel was taken advantage of. A concrete deck may have been
susceptible to cracking under its own weight which may have lead problems during its
serviceability lifetime. Preventing such cracking during the launch would mean pre-stressing the
deck in advance using tendons and also completely erecting the pylons and cables prior to
launch, effectively pre-stressing the deck superstructure. This would prove time consuming and
the steel deck was considered the more efficient option.

The steel deck was seen to undulate during construction but due to its high ductility this did not
result in any lasting structural problems. As a result the deck needs to be able resist any
associated buckling with the anticipated compressive loads which may not have been such an
issue as with a concrete deck.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 19

 Fig: Simplified Moment Distribution

When analyzed, the deck would have been considered continuous over a series of fixed cable
supports. Although technically not the case as the cables are elastic, this allows for a rough idea
of the tension in each cable to be obtained using the worst load case. When analyzed
computationally an iterative process will be used to obtain the optimum values of tensions in
the cables and compression and bending in the deck. The areas of the deck closest to the
pylons will experience the most compression as the cables acting over the rest of the span will
incrementally increase the compression up to this point. There is a ‘window’ in the cable stays
here as the increased compression effectively acts as a pre-stress improving bending stiffness.
As mentioned the bending moments will alter the compression force in the deck. Ideally the
deck will be acting solely in compression with the bending being considered and how it will
affect the compression across the section. A careful balance is required taking into account the
various load conditions ensuring the deck remains predominantly in compression but to avoid
buckling. Having a steel deck means that if adverse loading causes the deck to go into tension at
some point, this is not a problem due to steel’s ductile properties.

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 20

FOUNDATION DESIGN

The piers of the viaduct rest on different types of soils as shown in fig

The marls not only have weaker mechanical properties than the limestone, but also show
superficial slide which affects the upper part. Spread foundations were chosen for abutments
C0 and C8 which are founded on limestone. The foundation system is a monolithic set
composed of a 1m thick raft foundation for each rear abutment with the abutment platforms at
different levels.

The foundation design for each of the 7 piers is composed of 4 reinforced concrete piles with a
diameter of 5m and a depth of 10-15m drilled in the rock and bonded together at the top by a
3.5m thick reinforced concrete footing, which is itself bonded to the pier. In marls, the
foundation is thicker and the piles are deeper, with their base diameter being increased to 7m.

Foundation of the highest pier (2) is founded in limestone, while that of medium height pier (6)
is founded in marls. The behavior of this type of pier foundation system is complex. It is a piled
raft foundation system in which part of the load is transferred to the footing. The way that this
behavior was simplified is particularly assuming that footing bears no load and no skin friction is
created along the shaft except in case of tensile stresses.

This comes down to assuming that bearing capacity depends solely on the ultimate pressure on
the rock at the bottom of the shaft and that settlement results only from deformations of the
rock at the bottom of the shaft, which make the foundations more flexible than they really are.

Bearing capacity was defined using Terzaghi’s equations adapted to take into account the
inclination of the load and the proximity to the hillside, to which an overall stability calculation

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 21

was added for shafts drilled in marly hillsides, as well as for the foundation of pier 3 in
limestone whose overall stability had to be improved by a reinforcing soil retaining wall.

Several pile loading trial tests were carried out in the marly soils to assess the skin friction along
the shaft.

The load bearing capacity and settlement of the foundations were calculated taking least
favorable combinations for the ultimate limit and serviceability limit states. Vertical load
distribution was applied at the centre of the foundation to evaluate normal and horizontal
strains and the longitudinal and transverse bending moments.

Fig: Standard cross sections of piles in marls and limestone

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 22

 Fig: Loads applied to pier 2

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 23

CONCLUSION

From initial conception until the end of its lifespan, the Millau Viaduct was always huge in one way or another.
First required to solve a huge problem, and then designed to be huge in order to overcome huge obstacles,
before finally emerging as one of the hugest structures in the world where it will remain for the next century
and beyond. Therefore, the construction of the Millau Viaduct can be seen as a grand solution to a big problem.
Many challenges were faced, but through clever design, competent construction, and creative use of
resources, they were overcome. The result was an amazing structure that not only looks amazing but also
serves an important purpose. The engineers responsible can be proud of the fact that their hard work has
contributed to the existence of a structure that will continue to inspire generations from now.

REFERENCES

 Scribd
 Journal Of Rock Mechanics And Geotechnical Engineering
 Wikipedia
 A Simulation of the Millau Viaduct by Cathrina Bergsjo and Marcus Pettersson.
 Proceedings of Bridge Engineering University Of Bath, Bath, UK.
 Mega Transport Projects planning, appraisal and delivery: A review of case study
experiences and research finding

Department Of Civil Engineering Page 24