Chaudière Crossing Bridge Rehabilitation



Similar documents
Safe & Sound Bridge Terminology

Source: Port Mann Bridge Plans Unveiled Today, CBC News, February 4, 2009.

CITY OF TRAIL MEMORANDUM

Project Information. New Hope - Lambertville Toll Bridge - Pavement Rehabilitation & Approach Bridges Repairs -

Emergency repair of Bridge B421

REHABILITATION PACKAGE 1-a

INCREASE OF DURABILITY AND LIFETIME OF EXISTING BRIDGES. PIARC TC 4.4 EXPERIENCE.

June 2007 CHAPTER 7 - CULVERTS 7.0 CHAPTER 7 - CULVERTS 7.1 GENERAL

Informational Workshop Public Meeting Kanawha Falls Bridge Project

Amendment to OPSS 415 (Nov 2008) Construction Specification for Pipeline and Utility Installation by Tunnelling

Open House Public Meeting for the Thurmond Bridge Rehabilitation Project State Project: State Project S310-25/ Federal Project: BR-0252(001)D

BRIDGES ARE relatively expensive but often are

Red Wing Bridge Project. PAC #5/TAC #8 Meeting July 18, 2013

BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR CULVERT LINER SELECTION

Ross River Suspension Bridge Ross River, Yukon. Life Cycle Cost Analysis

Sewer Pipe Lining An Economic Solution for Pipe Rehabilitation By Tawana Albany Nicholas, Virgin Islands Waste Management Authority

State of Illinois Department Of Transportation CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR S CHECKLIST FOR STORM SEWERS

Section 2100-Trenching and Tunneling

Guide to the Jamey Stillings Photographs of the Mike O Callaghan-Pat Tillman Memorial Bridge and the Hoover Dam

Rehabilitation of Locks on the Kentucky River

Virginia Approach Spans

IH-635 MANAGED LANES PROJECT, SEG. 3.2

KOSCIUSZKO BRIDGE PROJECT BRIDGE PRIMER

Section 2 Specification 2.18 Concrete and/or Corrugated Steel Storm Sewer TABLE OF CONTENTS

HIGH LEVEL SEISMIC UPGRADE COST ESTIMATE FOR CENTRE BLOCK, PARLIAMENT HILL

PART E SPECIFICATIONS

CONCEPTUAL REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE

Materials. Estimating Steel. Players. Materials. Shop Drawings. Detailing Process. Standard shapes. Fabricated members, Built-up sections

Wastewater Capital Projects Management Standard Construction Specification

Township of Enniskillen. Asset Management Plan

TD AMERITRADE Park Omaha

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SERIES 8000 PRECAST CONCRETE

Designer s NOTEBOOK DESIGN ECONOMY, PART 3

5 ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS AND EVALUATION

Table 4.9 Storm Drain Inlet Protetion Applicable for

Moving Small Mountains Vesuvius Dam Rehab

GRWF BOP TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROTOCOL

TECHNICAL NOTE Culvert Sliplining and Lining of Casings with HPPipe

INDEX DESCRIPTION MATERIALS APPROVAL OF SUBBASE COURSE CONSTRUCTION MEASUREMENT PAYMENT 6

REPAIR AND STRENGTHENING OF HISTORICAL CONCRETE BRIDGE OVER VENTA RIVER IN LATVIA

OSHA GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FALL PROTECTION IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION

LARGE DIAMETER PIPELINE INNOVATIVE FAST TRACKED REPAIR

Culvert Rehabilitation A presentation by ms consultants, inc. engineers, architects, planners

MHD BRIDGE SECTION WEIGHTED AVERAGE UNIT PRICES GUIDELINES FOR THE USE OF THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE UNIT PRICE TABULATION SHEETS

Micropiles Reduce Costs and Schedule for Merchant RR Bridge Rehabilitation

CHALLENGES AND INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS FOR BRIDGE FOUNDATION REPAIRS

Design of Bridges. Introduction. 3 rd to 4 th July Lecture for SPIN Training at the University of Dar es Salaam

STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT. Full Metal Jacket Building 0 Prince Street, Alexandria, VA

Unit Price Averages Reports

Hanson Building Products. precast basement solutions

San Antonio Water System Standard Specifications for Construction ITEM NO SLIP-LINING SANITARY SEWERS

The Manitoba Water Services Board SECTION Standard Construction Specifications PIPE EXCAVATION, BEDDING AND BACKFILL Page 1 of 11

1.3.2 Method of construction and restoration of existing water service connections. This shall include:

53.03 MATERIALS FOR SEWER LINER PIPE AND FITTINGS: The following materials are approved for installation in sanitary sewer lines:

Section 402. STORM SEWERS

Civil Engineering Design

CHAPTER 4 FIELD INSPECTION, DATA COLLECTING, REPORT WRITING AND REPORT REVIEW

3.1 Historical Considerations

Engineered Material Handling. Overhead Bridge Cranes and Gantry Cranes

Approval Services Unit

The ACR : Advanced Design Features for a Short Construction Schedule

Public Information & Public Scoping Meeting

Engineers at Liftech designed the structure of the first container crane and have designed and reviewed thousands of container cranes since.

PUBLIC WORKS DESIGN, SPECIFICATIONS & PROCEDURES MANUAL LINEAR INFRASTRUCTURE

WorkSafe Guidance Document FALL PROTECTION IN RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION

DESCRIPTION OF WORK:

SECTION ABANDONMENT OF SEWER MAINS

2015 ODOT Bridge Design Conference May 12, DeJong Rd Bridge High- Seismic Zone Case Study: Bridge Rehab vs. Replacement.

FEBRUARY 2014 LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN 4-1

SPECIFICATIONS FOR SEWER PIPE AND LINING INSERTION - TRENCHLESS; GENERAL GUIDELINES (As Provided by NASSCO)

Stormwater/Wetland Pond Construction Inspection Checklist

The Rehabilitation Alternative Huey P. Long Bridge Case Study. Bruce E. Peterson, P.E. Project Manager Modjeski and Masters, Inc.

CIRCULAR LETTER Page 2 of 5 November 30, 2007

Outlet stabilization structure

1,045 m length of the Deh Cho Bridge

Chapter 3 Pre-Installation, Foundations and Piers

High Density Polyethylene Liners for Rehabilitation of Corroded Pipelines

SECTION STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM

ITS specification Jointing chambers and pull pits (ITS-02-02)

Earth Retaining Structures

SECTION GRAVITY SANITARY SEWERS

Acceptance Codes APPENDIX - A. Acceptance Criteria

The purpose of this meeting is to inform the public of the updates to the project, and to get input before the finalization of the project.

DESIGN OF PRESTRESSED BARRIER CABLE SYSTEMS

Structures Construction Pre-Work Checklist PRE-WORK SHEET FOR PROJECT MANAGERS

CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN (CTMP)

C-2 Construction, Inc. - NAICS Codes

Trenching and Excavation Safety

Chapter 5 Bridge Deck Slabs. Bridge Engineering 1

Value Engineering vs. Alternate Designs in Bridge Bidding

Advancements in GPR for a Sustainable Tomorrow

SECTION STORM DRAINAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS

Report to INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES Committee for noting

Transcription:

Chaudière Crossing Bridge Rehabilitation Douglas K. Lowry P. Eng., Armtec Infrastructure Incorporated David Delicate, P.Eng. Public Works and Government Services Canada (Retired) Prepared for presentation at the Structures Bridges Innovations Session of the 2012 Conference of the Transportation Association of Canada Fredericton, New Brunswick Abstract: The Chaudière Crossing was the first bridge built over the Ottawa River and today provides a vital interprovincial transportation link between Ottawa, Ontario and Gatineau, Quebec. The Crossing is an essential component of the National Capital Region economy as it is a primary commuter route between the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau, carrying approximately 28,000 vehicles daily. As such, this crossing cannot be closed to traffic nor is it feasible to replace structures. Therefore, structure rehabilitation is the only practical solution. Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) was allocated $400 million over two years to repair Crownowned public infrastructure such as buildings and bridges. While this presented a great opportunity for PWGSC to accelerate the rehabilitation of the Crossing, it also posed a challenge to complete a major project in a tight timeframe. After much consideration, the solution selected was to re-line the existing arches with a series of precast arch elements and to grout the annulus between the host structures and the precast elements. This case study examines the various aspects of this project from the initial stages of design, through the various solution options, to the development of the final solution. More importantly, it explores the challenging manufacturing and construction operations that involved working with a series of large and heavy components, in a restricted space, over the Ottawa River. With a restricted time schedule and the above noted construction constraints, the paper details how those major obstacles were overcome to complete this project on time and on budget. 1

commercial link carrying 15% of all daily traffic between the two cities and 42% of the truck traffic between Quebec and Ontario. Figure 1. Chaudière Crossing of the Ottawa River (c1915) History: Commissioned by Colonel John By, the Chaudière Crossing, constructed between 1826 and 1828, was the first fixed crossing over the Ottawa River connecting Upper and Lower Canada and is located between what is now Ottawa, Ontario and Gatineau, Quebec. (Figure 1) The original crossing was composed of several stone arches connecting the various islands at Chaudière Falls with a timber arch over the main channel. Now managed by Public Works and Government Services Canada on behalf of the Government of Canada, the Crossing has evolved to a series of eight structures including two stone arches. Arch No.1 was built in 1847 and Arch No.3 was built in 1827. (Figure 2) The Chaudière Crossing is an essential component of the National Capital Region economy as it is a primary commuter route between the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau. It is one of five bridges connecting Gatineau and Ottawa and is one of the two bridges designated for truck traffic. It is a vital During what was expected to be a routine repair contract in December 2008, inspectors discovered that the deterioration of the stones of Arches 1 and 3 was more extensive than had been identified in the original inspections. These masonry stone arches were built more than 160 years ago. A combination of time, weather, and winter-related factors contributed to major deterioration of the stonework. Stones which were originally some 750mm thick had experienced 200mm to 250mm of deterioration. In addition, there was cracking in some stones causing large rock fragments to fall into the river. Immediate repairs were done, but further studies showed that a substantial rehabilitation of both arches would be required within a year. Figure 2. Aerial View of Site A design contract was awarded to Genivar in June 2009. Following a competitive tendering process, a construction contract was awarded to 2

Construction Kiewit CIE in October 2009. Design: As the crossing is a vital link in the transportation network between Ottawa and Gatineau, it simply could not be completely closed to traffic. Due to the location of Arch 1, it was not feasible to construct an on-site detour to allow replacement of the two structures. Therefore, rehabilitation of the masonry arches was the only option remaining. Numerous options were considered by the Owner and Genivar, the owner s Consulting Engineer. Key elements to this rehabilitation project included keeping the Crossing open to traffic and limiting construction access to the roadway while maintaining water flow. Preserving the existing ecosystem and the original bridges structural characteristics were also priorities. The chosen solution was to construct concrete arch liners on new footings inside the existing stone arches. The contract documents were prepared to allow either a cast-in-situ concrete or precast concrete solution. The successful contractor, Construction Kiewit CIE chose to proceed with the precast concrete option with Armtec Infrastructure as the precast supplier. Manufacturing: Historically, Armtec is known across Canada for a wide range of corrugated steel and geosynthetic solutions. In the past few years that all changed as precast facilities were acquired across Canada. Originally it was anticipated that Armtec, as suppliers of Bebo precast concrete arch bridges, would provide a standard Bebo arch shape for both structures. However, doing so would not have met the project s geometric requirements. As a result, custom designed and manufactured Bebo arches were produced for this project. Armtec s engineering team determined that the mass of the proposed shapes was such that it was not feasible to manufacture them as proposed in the tender documents. Therefore, it was recommended to raise the top of footing elevation of Arch 3 in order to reduce the dimensions and subsequent weight of the precast elements. For both shapes, the arch thickness was also reduced from 400mm to 300mm in order to further reduce the weight per piece. A detailed digital survey of the existing structures provided assurance that the proposed shapes were appropriate for the actual openings. Once the detailed design of Arches 1 and 3 was accepted by Public Works and Government Services Canada, the next step was production. Although consideration was originally given to providing two piece arch elements, the arches were ultimately cast as single leaf units that would span from footing to footing. The casting of these heavy units (24.8 metric tonnes) was carried out at Armtec s Ottawa precast plant located 3

arch were restraint cables to limit flexure and in turn damage to the individual arch sections during handling and erection. As well as lift points, pull points were also installed to assist the contractor in locating the arches in their final position in the field. approximately 20 kilometres from the site. Arch 1 elements had a span of 12.0 metres and a rise of 4.5 metres. Each of the 7 pieces had a lay length of 2.04 metres. Arch 3, comprised of 5 sections, had a span of 15.5 metres, a rise of 3.87 metres and a lay length of 1.66 metres. Both arches were dimensionally unique, so a custom form was required for each of the two shapes. A single steel form, which was modified to suit both arches, was produced in-house by the precaster. (Figure 3) Preparation and pouring of each arch section took approximately two days. Figure 4. Moving Arch to Storage Yard Construction: After mobilization in February 2010, the first step was dewatering of the Arch No.1 site. This was accomplished by constructing sheet pile coffer dams spanning between the existing arch foundations, upstream and downstream of the arch. Since the stream bed in this location was bedrock, the sheet piles were supported by steel frames and sealed to the bedrock by the pouring of tremie concrete. Figure 3. Preparing Form After that time period, the arch section was removed from the form, then moved to the storage yard (Figure 4) and preparation began for the next pour. These units were manufactured using regular stainless steel rebar and 45MPa concrete. Added features to the basic The original stone footing was examined for serious flaws and any required repairs were undertaken before construction of the new footing commenced. This new footing was anchored to the bedrock via dowels. In 4

both cases, temporary steel frames were constructed and connected to the upstream face of the new footing in order to create a landing area for the new arch sections. Erection: Upon arrival at the site, arch sections were leapfrogged into place by first moving the arch and then the crane along the roadway as space did not permit unloading the precast section at the final pick point.(figure 5) Figure 6. Rotating Arch Segment The precast segments were then lowered over the side of the bridge onto a sophisticated roller system installed on the steel frame footing extension. (Figure 7) Figure 5. Leapfrogging of Crane and Arch into Position Once both the crane and the arch were in the proper position on the existing bridge deck, the arch was hoisted and rotated into its proper orientation and the installation of the stainless steel rebar required for the annulus was completed. (Figure 6) Figure 7. Landing on the Rollers Pulling of the segment into position was achieved via a single cable and winch. Kiewit engineers designed a system of pulleys and cables that ensured that both sets of rollers moved in tandem with no racking of the arch. (Figure 8) 5

Both structures received new cast in place spandrel walls prior to the annulus being filled with 35MPa concrete. Conclusion: This project was undertaken under very tight time and space constraints. The innovative use of precast concrete arches allowed the rehabilitation of these bridges in record time with minimal disruption to the travelling public. Creative problem solving throughout the life of the project led to a successful outcome from both a time and budget perspective. Figure 8. Pulling First Arch Segment into Arch 1 Once the arch segment was in its final location, it was jacked up, the rollers removed, and the arch was lowered onto concrete shims. This process was repeated for the seven sections on Arch 1 (4 day duration) and the five arch sections required for Arch 3 (completed in 3 days). Although work was carried out from street level, at least one lane of the road and the pedestrian sidewalk remained open to traffic at all times. The ultimate success of this project can be attributed to the co-operative efforts of all of the contributing parties. Figure 9. Completed Structure - Arch 3 October 2010 6