The Transit New Zealand Bridge Manual Recent

Amendments and Future Directions

Donald Kirkcaldie is a Principal in bridge and earthquake engineering and Team

Leader of the Bridge Group in the Wellington office of Opus International Consultants
Limited, with his last 26 years specialised in bridge engineering. Donald has been
intimately involved in the ongoing development of the Transit New Zealand Bridge
Manual since 1990.

Frank McGuire is a Senior Roading Engineer with Transit New Zealand responsible
for the development of standards and specifications for the design, construction and
maintenance of roads and bridges. As a member of Austroads Technology Bridge
Publications Review Panel, Frank aims to harmonise New Zealand Bridge
technology with Australian practice.
 The Transit New Zealand Bridge Manual Recent
Amendments and Future Directions
D.K. Kirkcaldie, Principal Bridge & Earthquake Engineering,
Opus International Consultants Limited
and
J.F. McGuire, Senior Roading Engineer,
Transit New Zealand

Donald Kirkcaldie is a Principal in bridge and earthquake engineering and Team

Leader of the Bridge Group in the Wellington office of Opus International Consultants
Limited, with his last 26 years specialised in bridge engineering. Donald has been
intimately involved in the ongoing development of the Transit New Zealand Bridge
Manual since 1990.

Contacts Ph.: +64 4471 7186

Fax +64 4471 1397;
Email: donald.kirkcaldie@opus.co.nz

Frank McGuire is a Senior Roading Engineer with Transit New Zealand responsible
for the development of standards and specifications for the design, construction and
maintenance of roads and bridges. As a member of Austroads Technology Bridge
Publications Review Panel, Frank aims to harmonise New Zealand Bridge
technology with Australian practice.

Contacts Ph.: +64 4496 6690

Fax: +64 4496 6666;
Email: frank.mcguire@transit.govt.nz

Audiovisual Requirments: Microsoft Powerpoint

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire

 The Transit New Zealand Bridge Manual Recent
Amendments and Future Directions
D.K. Kirkcaldie, Principal Bridge & Earthquake Engineering,
Opus International Consultants Limited; and
J.F. McGuire, Senior Roading Engineer, Transit New Zealand

Abstract

Transit New Zealands Bridge Manual is the bridge design standard adopted in New
Zealand for all highway bridging funded or subsidised by Land Transport New
Zealand. Since publication of the current Second Edition in 2003 three final
amendments and a provisional amendment have been issued. This paper
summarises the key features of the amendments, which have encompassed
compatibility with AS/NZS 1170, design loadings, bridge side protection, bearings,
deck joints and load limiting devices, foundations and earth retaining structures,
seismic design, the durability of concrete structures, and provision for climate
change. It also briefly outlines a current study to review AS 5100 with a view to its
possible adoption for use in New Zealand, which is expected to influence the future
development of the bridge design standard for New Zealand.

Introduction

The Transit New Zealand Bridge Manual has evolved over time from documents
published by the Ministry of Works, (later to become the Ministry of Works and
Development), firstly the 1956 Bridge Manual, followed by the Highway Bridge
Design Brief, first published in 1971 with three further editions up to 1978. The 1956
Bridge Manual drew significantly from North American practice, adopting, for
example, the H20-S16 vehicle live loading. The Highway Bridge Design Brief was
instrumental in introducing the HN-HO-72 design vehicle live loading, still in use
today, and initiated the introduction of modern earthquake engineering design
philosophy. Following a major study of the seismic design of bridges under the
auspices of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering, published
in 1980, the current capacity design philosophy for earthquake resistance was
introduced through an addendum to the Highway Bridge Design Brief.

Corporatisation of the Ministry of Works and Development in the late 1980s led to
the formation of Transit New Zealand as a separate entity and development of the
Bridge Manual: Design and Evaluation, (Draft for Comment) as a largely performance
based specification of requirements, with advisory material of the previous Highway
Bridge Design Brief, now considered to be intellectual property of Works Consultancy
Services, culled out. This document was superceded by the First Edition of the
Bridge Manual in 1994.

Since that time, incremental amendments to the Bridge Manual have continued with
the objective of maintaining the Bridge Manual as much as possible as a state of the
art design standard for highway bridges in New Zealand. A study, funded by New
Zealands road funding agency, Transfund New Zealand, completed in 1997,
proposed a format for an ideal road structures design manual and compared the

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 1 of 11

Bridge Manual with the 92 Austroads Bridge Design Code as well as drawing on
other recognised international bridge design standards. That study has provided the
basis for many of the subsequent amendments to the Bridge Manual, which have
tended to progressively harmonise New Zealand practice with Australian, where
appropriate, culminating in publication of the Second Edition of the Bridge Manual in
2003.

The evolution of the Bridge Manual continues, and the purpose of this paper is to
present a summary of the amendments to the Bridge Manual since the publication of
the Second Edition.

Amendment 1, June 2004

This amendment encompassed revisions to Section 3: Design Loading and to

Appendix B: Bridge Side Protection.

Section 3: Design Loading

Under Traffic Loads, the terminology impact factor was replaced by dynamic load
factor to align with the terminology adopted by the Austroads Bridge Design Code
and subsequently by AS 5100.

Also, the reduction factor for concurrent loading in multiple traffic lanes was revised
to incorporate the lane reduction factors from the Canadian Highway Bridge Design
Code (also adopted by AS 5100). This allows a greater reduction in the live loading
for multiple lanes loaded concurrently. The previous requirement to not apply the
lane reduction factor to congested traffic conditions was also deleted. This has now
been catered for by amendment of the serviceability limit state live loading to
incorporate a load factor that allows for the effect of closed-up stationary vehicles,
(as discussed below).

Under Loads Other Than Traffic, the following revisions were introduced:

An allowance of 0.25 kPa to be applied to the bridge superstructure for future

additional services;
A specific requirement to consider the secondary moments arising in
indeterminate structures due to shrinkage, creep and prestressing;
For wind load, a restriction on the maximum wind load required to be
considered as acting concurrently with traffic loading. Above this limiting wind
speed, traffic tends to cease to operate as vehicle instability increases;
Provisions for water pressure acting on bridge superstructures and for forces
acting normal to the direction of flow due to structural elements being inclined
at an angle to the flow. For bridge superstructures, this revision was driven by
the introduction of new criteria for the design of bridge waterways, especially
for the ultimate limit state, when the Second Edition was published, which
introduced the need to consider the possibility of inundation of the bridge.
A definition for ordinary water pressure, previously not defined.
Under Earth Loads, the various types of earth loads to be considered, and
those earth pressures to be considered in calculating static earth pressure;

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 2 of 11

 The criteria for consideration of vibration when pedestrians are significant
users of a bridge are now also to apply in respect to cyclists;
Forces locked in by the erection sequence, as a specific loading;
Criteria for collision loads from road traffic, trains and ships acting on bridges.
These have been drawn primarily from the Austroads Bridge Design Code,
but also from the British Highways Agencys standard BD 37/01.

A number of modifications were also made to the Combinations of Load Effects.

These include the following:

Centrifugal force effects due to traffic loading have been separated from other
horizontal traffic load effects such as traction and braking. As centrifugal load
effects are directly related to the traffic gravity load on a bridge, their load
factor has been taken as the same as for the gravity load.
Locked in forces due to the erection sequence, as a permanent load has been
added to all load cases, and an additional load combination incorporating
collision loading has also been added.
In the load combinations for the serviceability limit state including the normal
live load (HN load), a load factor has been applied to the normal live load.
This modification to the load combinations resulted from an analysis of weigh-
in-motion data of the effects of live loading extrapolated over the life of
structures for both the serviceability and ultimate limit states. The current load
factors for the ultimate limit state were found to be adequate, but the HN
loading unfactored was found to not adequately model the effects of closed-up
stationary vehicles that could occur in the event of congestion for spans over
40 m, or the effects of moving traffic on spans less than 40 m, at the
serviceability limit state.
In the ultimate limit state load combination including earthquake response,
application of the k factor to dead load has been clarified for the situations of
when horizontal or vertical earthquake response is being considered.

Appendix B: Bridge Side Protection

In Appendix B: Bridge Side Protection, amendments were primarily to correct errors

in figures and to add clarity to aspects of the text, affecting mainly figures B7 B9
and Table B2. A new clause, B6.2 Design of Deck Slabs to Resist Barrier Forces,
was added to clarify the Side Protection design criteria, and includes design
requirements that are intended to ensure that damage from a collision is confined to
the barrier, for both flexible and rigid barrier systems, and that the deck slab is
protected from damage.

Amendment 2, September 2004

This amendment encompassed five primary topic areas:

Alignment of the Bridge Manual with AS/NZS 1170

Bearings and Deck Joints
Load Limiting Devices
Foundations, and
Retaining Walls

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 3 of 11

Alignment with AS/NZS 1170

While AS/NZS 1170 has been written with a primary focus on buildings, its
application not been limited to buildings. Rather the standard is promoted as setting
out general principles relevant to the design of any structure. The standard is
intended for citation by the New Zealand Building Code as an acceptable solution for
structure design loadings in New Zealand. Through this status, it is likely to set the
principles by which the derivation of design loadings will be expected by Territorial
Authorities, in the issuing of Building Consents, to conform.

Consequently, significant revisions have been made to Section 2, in particular, to

align the Bridge Manual to the AS/NZS 1170 philosophy and approach. Importance
level categorisations for bridges have been incorporated. For each of the importance
categories, annual probabilities of exceedance for loadings derived from
environmental events have been specified. In each case, these have been aligned
with those adopted by AS/NZS 1170 for buildings, except for snow loading where it
was considered that there wasnt a justification for adopting different annual
probabilities of exceedance to those for wind or flood.

AS/NZS 1170 has been adopted as the source of design wind gust speeds, but the
UK approach of giving consideration to wind acting on adverse and relieving areas,
as presented in BS 5400 Part 2 has been adopted for the application of wind loading
to bridge structures. Aerodynamic effects are also to be considered for footbridges
with spans exceeding 30 m. In general, wind is not the critical lateral loading on
bridges in New Zealand.

Snow, a new loading added, will not be critical for road bridges, for which live load is
the critical superimposed gravity load, but may be critical for longer span footbridges
in alpine regions.

For flood loading, aligning with the AS/NZS 1170 annual probabilities of exceedance
for environmental events results, at the ultimate limit state, in a design return period
of 5000 years for bridges of the highest importance category, of which there are few
in number and even fewer that are river crossings. For most state highway bridges,
the ultimate limit state design return period has risen from 2000 years to 2500 years.

Additional loadings specified in AS/NZS 1170, ground water on buried surfaces, and
water ponding, have been incorporated. Corresponding amendments have been
made to the design load combinations to accommodate these new loadings.

Structural robustness is now specifically required to be addressed. With the objective

of providing robustness against unanticipated extreme loading events such as
extreme flood, earthquake or vehicle collision, all parts of the structure are now
required to be interconnected in both the horizontal and vertical planes.

Requirements for special studies have also been incorporated. Special studies are
to be undertaken when:

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 4 of 11

 A structural form or method of construction is proposed which is not covered
by accepted standards or design criteria (e.g. to determine design parameters,
factors of safety, or durability), or
New materials are to be applied, the technology of which is still undergoing
significant development.
These studies are to be documented in complete reports, which are to be included as
appendices in the Bridge Design Statement, the document prepared by the design
consultant and endorsed by Transit New Zealand as setting out the form of the
solution to be adopted for final design and the basis for that design.

Bearings and Deck Joints

Studies have shown that deck joint deterioration is the most common maintenance
problem affecting New Zealand bridges, while bearings are also recognised as one of
the components of bridges most responsible for incurring maintenance costs.

Internationally, design codes and bridge authorities have placed increasing emphasis
on bearings and deck joints, developing criteria for their use and design. In
particular, in North America and the UK, the trend has been towards eliminating
bearings and deck joints wherever possible, and making bridge structures fully
integral. In these countries, where the use of de-icing salts on their roads in winter is
common practice, leaking of the deck joints giving rise to corrosion of metal bearings
and other deterioration of the substructure has been a major problem. This approach
is not considered to be appropriate in New Zealand, where the precast concrete
industry is highly developed and extensive use is made of precast concrete elements
in bridge superstructures. Supporting these elements on bearings has been a
popular, convenient and economic solution in New Zealand bridge construction. With
most New Zealand bridges comprised of relatively short spans, elastomeric bearings
have been widely used in more modern bridges, minimising problems of corrosion of
critical bearing components.

Previously, the Bridge Manual has only catered for elastomeric bearings, requiring
them to comply with AS 1523 or BE 1/76, generally for them to be chosen from those
commercially available, and for them to be designed to be replaceable. Guidance
for the design, selection and installation of deck joints has similarly been minimal.

In this amendment, particular focus has been placed on harmonising with Australian
practice, with the AS 5100 criteria adopted where appropriate, and on ensuring the
robustness of bearings to the response of the bridge structures to earthquakes.

For the design of elastomeric bearings, AS 5100 has adopted criteria which possess
significant differences from those presented in AS 1523 or BE 1/76, standards which
in New Zealand, in the past, have provided satisfactory performance. It is believed
that there is considerable dissension within the elastomeric bearing industry over
what criteria are appropriate for the design of elastomeric bearings, and that revision
of AS 1523 has failed to eventuate because of this. Consequently, AS 5100s criteria
for the design of elastomeric bearings have not been adopted until a detailed study
can be completed to identify the effect and significance of the differences, and to
resolve, if possible, which criteria are the more appropriate.

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 5 of 11

For deck joints, the AS 5100 criteria are generally complimentary to the Bridge
Manuals previous requirements. In addition to adopting the AS 5100 criteria, this
amendment has introduced modifications to the criteria and guidance to address the
following:
Minimisation of the number of deck joints. The number of deck joints is to be
the practical minimum;
Modification of the design loads on deck joints to conform to New Zealand
practice and nomenclature;
Anchorage of deck joints;
Water-tightness of deck joints, and collection of stormwater where open joints
are used;
Timing of deck joint installation, to be after completion of the deck slabs of the
adjacent spans;
Guidance on the selection of deck joint systems. Proprietary deck joint
suppliers are also to be required to provide a ten year warranty on the
serviceability of their joints from the date of installation;
The properties of joint seal elements, and their positioning relative to the road
surface;
Nosings, and their function of providing a dam for the surfacing and isolating
the surfacing from forces imposed on the deck by the joint;
The proportioning of asphaltic plug joints.

Load Limiting Devices

Load limiting devices are a common feature in modern New Zealand designs, and on
occasion shock load force transfer devices have also been adopted. They are
usually adopted as part of the system for earthquake resistance of a bridge structure.
These devices include: abutment knock-off elements, deck joint knock-up
elements, base isolation mechanical energy dissipating devices (e.g. lead-rubber
bearings), and shock load force transfer devices. Criteria for the performance and
design of these devices have been added or expanded.

Foundations and Earth Retaining Structures

Previously treated together, foundations and retaining walls are now covered in
separate sub-sections.

The sub-section on foundations has been amended to adopt the ultimate limit state
design approach, in line with the approach adopted by the New Zealand Building
Code Verification Method for foundation design. References to relevant current
standards and codes of practice have been incorporated, and strength reduction
factors have been reviewed and amended to take into account current methods of
analysis and testing and the variability in conditions and level of redundancy common
in highway structures. The need to consider the effects of earth deformation on
structures has also been specified more explicitly. Down-drag forces on piles arising
from liquefaction during earthquake is one such aspect to be taken into
consideration. A requirement for foundation capacities to be confirmed during
construction has also been included, with guidance provided on acceptable practices.

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 6 of 11

Within the earthquake resistant design section, a new sub-section on soil liquefaction
has been introduced. Reference is included to appropriate methods for the
assessment of liquefaction, and liquefaction is to be mitigated to a level consistent
with the performance requirements for the road link. Other amendments within the
earthquake resistant design section focus mainly on requiring the strength and
stiffness degradation of the soils under earthquake shaking to be taken into account.

With our environment becoming increasingly developed, retaining walls are being
used more extensively for supporting roads, in addition to bridge abutments. The
retaining wall sub-section has been upgraded significantly to introduce the different
broad types of retaining wall and their performance requirements. Types
encompassed include:
Gravity and reinforced concrete cantilever walls;
Anchored walls (including anchored gravity and cantilever walls and anchored
soldier pile walls); and
Mechanically stabilised earth walls (including soil nailed walls and reinforced
soil walls)

Particular attention has been given to anchored and reinforced soil walls.
Requirements for retaining structure performance in response to earthquake shaking
have been specified. Displacement-based design has been introduced as an
acceptable approach for some situations.

Provisional Amendment December 2004

The Bridge Manual references other New Zealand and international standards for its
material design requirements and some other aspects of design. As design
standards undergo revision, drafts are commonly released for public comment.
Where new proposals differ dramatically from those of the existing standards, this
can have the effect of undermining the credibility of the existing standards, and in
cases where the process of revising a standard becomes long and drawn out this
becomes an unsatisfactory situation. When revision of a significant aspect of design
in a standard is understood to have virtually reached finalisation, but finalisation of
the standard as a whole has become drawn out, Transit New Zealand has moved to
introduce the revised criteria for that aspect of design into practice.

This amendment was promulgated to introduce into practice, ahead of the relevant
revised standards being published, updated criteria for:
Earthquake resistant design loading
Durability of concrete structures

Earthquake Design Loading and Methods of Analysis

The design earthquake hazard spectra proposed for adoption by NZS 1170.5 have
been introduced to supercede those previously specified by the Bridge Manual. In
introducing these spectra, the categorisation of structures for importance and the
annual probabilities of exceedance for design earthquake loadings have been
aligned with the AS/NZS 1170.0 approach and where appropriate with those
previously adopted for other environmental loadings. The effect of this is a significant
increase in the design annual probabilities of exceedance to be designed for, but off-

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 7 of 11

setting this, in many cases, the regional seismicities are significantly different from
those that previously applied. The combined effect in the North Island, is a general
decrease in the design loadings in areas north of a line between Wanganui and
Napier, and a corresponding increase in areas south of this line, with Wanganui
decreasing and Napier increasing. In the South Island, a band passing through
Kaikoura and extending along the southern alps will experience an increase in design
earthquake loadings, while elsewhere the loading will generally be similar or have
minor reductions in the design loadings.

In New Zealand, the bulk of major new bridge construction is currently occurring in
the vicinity of the major urban centres, particularly around Auckland. Consequently,
the net effect from the revised seismic resistance provisions is that costs are not
expected to increase overall. However, in some regions of the country, particularly
on softer soils, the increase in earthquake loading is very large, and for bridges
proposed to be sited in these locations, more substantial foundations and
substructures will be required.

As an interim measure, this amendment has also sought to prevent the use of site
specific studies to justify lower design earthquake loadings than specified by this
amendment. The design earthquake hazard spectra incorporate a lower bound
placed on the zone factor (Z) that is designed to ensure that structures designed for
strength and ductility to achieve objective (a) of clause 5.1.1 of the Bridge Manual will
also be able to satisfy objective (c), collapse avoidance under the maximum credible
earthquake event for the site. The specified hazard spectra have been developed to
provide at least a predetermined minimum combination of structural strength and
ductility capacity relative to the demand imposed by the maximum credible event for
the site. The hazard spectra also allow for the possibility that blind faulting, (faulting
that does not leave an expression on the ground surface), may occur. Some site
specific studies have failed to take these considerations into account.

In considering vertical seismic response, this action is specified to be taken as acting

non-concurrently to horizontal seismic loading. For earth retaining walls, the
equations related to the earthquake response now explicitly incorporate the structural
performance factor (Sp) instead of it being contained within a factor.

Subsequent to the issue of this Provisional Amendment, NZS 1170.5 has been
finalised and published, and a full revision of the earthquake resistant design
requirements of the Bridge Manual has been drafted, on which public comment is
currently being sought.

Durability of Concrete Structures

NZS 3101:1995s requirements are based on providing satisfactory durability for a

service life of 50 years. Subsequently, the New Zealand Building Code, Clause B2
introduced the requirement:

Building materials, components and construction methods shall be

sufficiently durable to ensure that the building, without reconstruction
or major renovation, satisfies the other functional of this code
throughout the life of the building.

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 8 of 11

In response to this situation, as an interim measure, Table 4.1 of the Bridge Manual
was developed from a review of international bridge design codes of the time, to
provide guidance on concrete covers to be provided in reinforced concrete structures
constructed using concrete manufactured with GP type Portland cement. Since the
development of Table 4.1, the understanding of concrete durability has improved
considerably and the use of supplementary cementitous materials to improve the
durability characteristics of concrete mix designs has become widespread. NZS
3101 has now been revised and was published as a new edition in March 2006. As
far as practical, durability requirements for a 100 year design working life have been
incorporated into the revised standard, and take into account the availability and
benefits of using supplementary cementitous materials to achieve durability when
conditions are particularly aggressive. This Provisional Amendment incorporated
these updated requirements into the Bridge Manual ahead of finalisation and
publication of the revised standard.

In addition, where a life prediction model or alternative durability enhancement

measures are proposed to be used, they are to be the subject of a special study and
to be fully documented as an appendix to the Bridge Design Statement.

Amendment 3, July 2005

This amendment introduced the need to consider the possible effects of climate
change, adding climate change as a factor to be specifically discussed in the Bridge
Design Statement. Effects identified that may influence the design include:
Changes in the intensity and frequency of precipitation, affecting waterway
crossings;
Changes in sea level, affecting bridges and culverts serving at estuarine
crossings and coastal sites.

Future Directions

Transit New Zealand, as a member of Austroads, have a policy of adopting

Austroads practice and documents wherever practical and appropriate. Funded as a
Land Transport New Zealand research project, a review is currently being
undertaken of the Australian standard AS 5100: Bridge Design with a view to
adoption of the standard in New Zealand. In undertaking the review of AS 5100 the
following is being considered:
Are the criteria presented appropriate for New Zealand conditions ?
How do the criteria compare to current Bridge Manual requirements ?
What modifications or additional documentation will be required to enable
adoption and application of AS 5100 in New Zealand ?

The outcome from this project will include a recommendation on whether AS 5100
should be adopted or if the Bridge Manual should continue to be used and
maintained into the future.

This project is expected to be completed in late 2006. It is too early to provide an

indication of the overall outcome expected from the project, but it is expected that in
some areas a large amount of supplementary documentation will be necessary to

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 9 of 11

enable adoption of AS 5100 for use in New Zealand. This is expected to apply, for
example, in the following areas:
Transit procedures for selection and approval of the option for final design
Earthquake resistant design
Live loading and associated secondary loads ( braking, centrifugal force)
Concrete materials design
Elastomeric bearings design
Compatibility with the New Zealand Building Act and Building Code

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the permission of Transit New Zealand to publish this
paper. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of
Transit New Zealand.

References

Bridge Manual (Second Edition, 2003), Transit New Zealand, Wellington, 2003

AS/NZS 1170 Structural Design Actions (including NZS 1170.5), Standards Australia,
Sydney, and Standards New Zealand, Wellington, jointly, 2002-2004

AS 5100 Bridge Design, Standards Australia, Sydney, 2004

Bridge Manual, Ministry of Works, Wellington, 1956

Highway Bridge Design Brief, CDP 701, Ministry of Works and Development, 1971,
1972, 1973, 1978

Bridge Manual: Design and Evaluation (Draft for Comment), Transit New Zealand,
Wellington, 1991

Bridge Manual, Transit New Zealand, Wellington, 1994, 2000

Kirkcaldie, D.K., A Framework for an Ideal Road Structures Design Manual,

Research Report No. 75, Transfund New Zealand, Wellington, 1997

92 Austroads Bridge Design Code, Austroads, Sydney, 1992

New Zealand Building Code, Building Industry Authority, Wellington, 2001

Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code, CSA International, Toronto, 2000

Loads for Highway Bridges, BD 37/01, Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Vol. 1,
Section 3, Part 14, Highways Agency, London, 2001

NZS 3101 Concrete Structures Standard, Standards New Zealand, Wellington, 2000

Transit Bridge Manual Amendments Kirkcaldie & McGuire Page 10 of 11