Steel Construction
Analysis and design of floating bridges
Eiichi Watanabe and Tomoaki Utsunomiya
Kyoto University, Japan
Summary
The history of floating bridges can be dated back
to 2000 BC. There are many types of floating
bridges, depending on the conditions of the land
and the types of barriers to cross. As compared
with land-based bridges, only limited information
is available for floating bridges in many respects,
such as past construction records, meteorological
and durability conditions. In recent years it has
been possible to design floating bridges more
Key words: floating bridges; waves; hydrodynamic analysis; load and load combinations
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144 (DOI: 10.1002/pse.151)
Basic concepts
No doubt suspension bridges can be described
as the type of bridges that provides the largest
span length. The most important structural element
may be thought as the main cable and at the
present time, the parallel wires of high-strength steel
are the most suitable for bridges. In the world’s
largest span bridge, Akashi Strait Bridge, the
strength of the cable is 1.8 GPa. Although the
strength will be further improved, the maximum
span length may be limited to about 3000 m because
of the large specific weight of steel wires and other
lighter yet stronger structural materials, such as FRP,
may have to be developed to overcome the effect of
gravity.
When the water depth at the site is very large
or the seabed is extremely soft, conventional piers
become impractical and floating bridges taking the
advantage of natural buoyancy of water might
become a good choice since neither conventional
piers nor foundations are necessary. Only an
anchorage system is needed to keep the bridge
in the proper transverse and longitudinal alignments.
It is needless to say that economic factors
are very important. According to M. Myint Lwin,
for a site where the water is 2–5 km wide, 30–60 m
deep and there is a very soft bottom extending
another 30–60 m, a floating bridge is estimated
to cost three to five times less than a long-span
fixed bridge, tube or tunnel[1].
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
scientifically because of theoretical developments
in the hydrodynamic interactions between fluid
and floating bodies. This paper aims to overview
the design and analysis of floating bridges
following a recently published design manual by
JSCE, and describes the recent development of
their design with special emphasis on the use of
steel.
Types of floating bridge and existing
examples
Table 1 and Fig. 1 classify the types of floating bridges
and tunnels, mainly in terms of spatial position.
Examples of Type 1, an underwater tunnel, are the
Dover Strait Tunnel and the Seikan Tunnel in Japan.
Examples of Type 2, an immersed tunnel, are found at
many places, including Osaka Bay and Tokyo Bay.
Since Types 3–5, submerged bridge or tunnel and
bridge with submerged or semi-submerged
foundations, are quite new, there have been only a
few projects such as submerged floating tunnels at
Hfgsfjord, Norway and at Volcanic Bay, Hokkaido,
Japan[2]. These projects have not been implemented
yet. Examples of Type 6, a bridge with separated
pontoon foundations, can be found in the Galata
Bridge, Bergsoy Bridge, Northhordland Bridge and
Yumemai Bridge (Fig. 1(e))[3]. The first is in Turkey,
the second and the third are in Norway[4] and the last
is in Japan[5–9]. As for Type 7, a pontoon girder bridge,
the First, Second, Third Lake Washington Bridges and
the Hood Canal Bridge are typical examples[10–16].
Type 8 is very special and is a proposal by Ohta[2].
Historical floating bridges
The first floating bridges were probably boat bridges,
dating back 4000 years[17]. About 480 BC, King Xerxes
of Persia led millions of troops across the Hellespont,
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
128
Table 1 Classification of floating bridges and tunnels
Types and Spatial Position
................................................................................................................................
1 Deeper than seabed
2 Just beneath seabed
3 Structure completely immersed in water
4 Foundation completely submerged
Foundation(s) resting on seabed
Continuous foundation
Separated foundation
5 Semi-submerged foundations
6 Pontoon foundations
7 Pontoon girders
8 Trains running in water without shield
9 Foundations secured at seabed
................................................................................................................................
Fig. 1 Floating Bridge: (a) continues pontoon bridge; (b)
separeted pontoon bridge; (c) semi-submerged foundation; (d)
bridges with gravity foundation; (e) long-spanned separated
foundation
now called the Dardanelles, using two rows of
floating bridges each consisting of about 300 boats
laid side by side[18]. Military floating bridges are used
also nowadays to carry soldiers, vehicles and
ammunition with the use of sophisticated launching
technologies and high-tech materials.
In 1874, a 124-m-long floating moveable wooden
pontoon railroad bridge was built across the
Mississippi River in Wisconsin and was repeatedly
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
Description
Underwater tunnel
Immersed tunnel
Submerged floating bridge or tunnel
Bridges with gravity foundation(s) (See Fig. 1d)
Floating bridge with continuous submerged foundation
Floating bridge with separated foundations
Floating bridge with semi-submerged foundations (see
Fig. 1c)
Floating bridge with pontoon foundations (see Fig. 1b)
Continuous pontoon bridge (see Fig. 1a)
Amphibious train
Conventional (land-based) bridges
rebuilt and finally abandoned. Brookfield Floating
Bridge is still in service at the present time in
Brookfield, Vermont. This is the seventh replacement
structure of a 98-m-long wooden floating bridge[1].
In 1912, a steel floating bridge, the Galata Bridge,
was completed across the Golden Horn, Istanbul at a
depth of 41 m, using 50 steel pontoons connected side
by side by hinges (Table 2). However, in 1992,
immediately after a new bridge was erected just
beside the original bridge[19], a fire broke out and the
old Galata was burned down. The sunken floating
bridge is now located upstream after having been
raised from the seabed. In view of the fact that the
pontoons of the Galata Bridge are made of steel and
have been in service for so long, corrosion may not
pose a serious problem, in spite of the general belief
that steel structures may not be advantageous in a
corrosive environment such as the sea.
Modern floating bridges
SEATTLE, CANADA AND HAWAII
In 1940 a 2018-m-long floating bridge, the First Lake
Washington Bridge, also called the Lacey V. Murrow
Bridge, was completed in Seattle, using concrete
pontoon girders, and was followed by the Hood
Canal Bridge in 1961, the Second Lake Washington
Bridge, also called the Evergreen Point Bridge, in 1963
and the Third Lake Washington Bridge, also called the
Homer Hadley Bridge, in 1989 (Table 2). As has been
mentioned earlier, the original Lacey V. Murrow
Bridge was found to cost five times less than any
other alternatives[1]. Fig. 2 shows the First Lake
Washington Bridge (left) and the Third Lake
Washington Bridge (right). Fig. 3 shows the Hood
Canal Bridge. The first Lake Washington Bridge was
accidentally sunk during repair work in 1990 and was
reconstructed in 1993[16]. The Hood Canal Bridge was
damaged and sunk by a severe storm in 1979 and
rebuilt in 1983[10–16]. These bridges may be classified
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
 FLOATING BRIDGES 129

Table 2 Floating Bridges Turkey and United States

1st Lake 2nd Lake 3rd Lake
Washington Washington Washington
Bridge Galata (Lacey V. Murrow) Hood Canal (Evergreen Point) (Homer Hadley)
....................................................................................................................................................
Completed yr. 1912 1940 1961 1963 1989
Length (m) 457 2018 1988 2310 1771
Pontoons
Type 6 7 7 7 7
Material steel Precast concrete Precast concrete Precast concrete Precast concrete
Number 50 23 25 33 18
Mooring Chain anchor Cable anchor Cable anchor Cable anchor Cable anchor
Girder connection Pins Pins. End Truss Pins. End Truss Pins. End Truss Pins. End Truss
Bridges Bridges Bridges Bridges
Linearity Linear Linear Linear Linear Linear
Mechanism Swing Drawer Drawer Drawer and Lift Span None
Maximum water 41 65 104 61 65
depth (m)
Variation of water +0.5/
0.14 +0.3/
0.9 +3.9/
1.4 + 0.3/
0.9 +0.3/
0.9
level (m)
Current speed 0.6 knot (0.27 m/s) None 3 knot None None
(1.3m/s)
Design wave Unknown 2.4 3.4 2.7 2.4
height (m)
Significant wave Unknown Unknown but Unknown but Unknown but Unknown but
period 45 s[1] 4 5 s[1] 4 5 s[1] 4 5 s[1]
Design wind Unknown 28 28 37 28
velocity (m/s)
Notes Burned down, Partly sunk, Western Half
1992 1990 sunk, 1979
....................................................................................................................................................

Fig. 2 Lacey V. Murrow bridge (left) and 3rd Lake Washington Fig. 3 Hood Canal bridge
bridge (right)

according to Table 1 as pontoon girder bridges
of Type 7.
The 640-m-long Kelowna Floating Bridge was built
of concrete on Lake Okanagan in British Columbia,
Canada and was opened to traffic (two lanes) in
1958[20]. In 1998, a floating bridge, Ford Island
(Admiral Clarey) Bridge was completed at Pearl
Harbor, Oahu Island, Hawaii by a method similar to
that used in Washington (Table 3)[21].
NORWAY
Norway is a mountainous country with a long
coastline and many fjords. Fjords provide a beautiful
landscape, but pose barriers to building bridges, owing
to their great depth. Since the development of oil wells
in the North Sea, the Norwegians have been leading in
the field of offshore structures. The expertise and
experience on the design of offshore structures have
been applied for innovative floating bridges (Table 3).
In 1992, Bergsoysund Bridge was completed at
Bergsoyfjord near Kristiansund at a sea depth of 320 m.
The bridge, 845 m long in total, is horizontally curved
with the radius of curvature of 1300 m and rests on
seven concrete pontoon foundations with a steel pipe
truss superstructure. This resulted in significantly
improved resistance to the rolling motion while the
water current and waves were not hindered.

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
130 STEEL CONSTRUCTION

Table 3 Floating Bridges Norway, Japan, UK, Hawaii

Bergsoysund Nord-Hordland Yumemai West India Ford Island
Norway Norway Osaka Japan Quay Footbridge Hawaii
......................................................................................................................................................
Complete yr. 1992 1994 2000 1996 1997
Length (m) 845 1246 410 94 (Clear span 90 m) 457
Pontoons
Type 6 6 6 6 6
Material Prestressed Prestressed Steel Prestressed Prestressed
concrete concrete concrete concrete
Number 7 10 2 24¼8 1
Mooring None None Dolphins Pontoons moored Chain anchor
to sinkers with
tension guides
Connections Flexible rods Flexible plates Transition girders Spine beams Pins
with abutments with abutments supported by
pairs of tubular
crossed legs on
pontoon
Linearity Curved Curved Linear Linear Linear
Mobility None None Swing Bascule Drawer
Maximum water 320 500 10 Deck 3.7 m above 13.5
depth (m) W. L.
Variation of +2.0/
2.0 +1.6/
1.4 +4.8/
0.52 Unknown Unknown
water level (m)
Current speed (m/s) 1.3 1.75 0.2 Unknown 0.36
Design wave height (m) 1.4 1.7 1.4 (4.4 outer sea) Unknown 1.5
Significant wave 3.3–5.2 3.6–5 5.7–7.7 Unknown Unknown
period (s)
Design wind 38 27 42 Unknown 45
velocity (m/s)
Notes Steel pipe Steel box Titan clad steel Aluminum deck/
truss girders girders at side walls diagonal grid: stainless
of pontoons steel angles connected
to central spine beam
......................................................................................................................................................

reaction forces at each of the ends where the floating

Fig. 4 Bergsoysund bridge
The use of steel members in the superstructure is
also very effective since it acts as either an arch rib,
that is structurally much stiffer than a girder of the
same cross-section when the current is coming from
its convex side, or as a similarly effective catenary
cable, even when the current is reversed. Through this
arch or catenary action, the hydraulic loads are found
to be effectively and predominantly transformed into
axial member forces in the superstructure and
part is only connected by a flexible rod to an abutment
on the land, resulting in a construction method that
does not involve excavation of the seabed[3,22]. The
flexible rod is designed so as torsional moment,
shearing forces and the axial force at both ends are
transferred and at the same time appropriate
flexibility is provided enabling absorption of the
relative vertical displacement due to tidal variation.
In 1994, a second bridge, Nordhordland Bridge,
was completed at a sea depth of 500 m at Salhus near
Bergen. In order to provide the bridge with navigation
channel, a cable-stayed bridge is connected with the
1246-m-long floating part[3,23]. The length, navigation
width and the clearance of the cable-stayed bridge are
350, 50 and 32 m, respectively. The basic design
concepts of this bridge remain the same as
Bergsoysund Bridge and it is similarly horizontally
curved but with some differences, such as a minimum
radius of curvature of 1700 m, a superstructure of steel
box girders and the use of flexible plates instead of
flexible rods for connecting the floating part to the
abutments at both ends. The flexible plates transmit
torsional moment, shearing forces and axial force and
provides the flexibility to absorb vertical
displacements caused by tidal changes. Figs. 4 and 5

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144

Fig. 5 Nordhordland bridge
Fig. 6 Yumemai bridge
show the Bergsoysund Bridge and the Nordhordland
Bridge, respectively.
UNITED KINGDOM
New pedestrian bridges have been completed in
London’s Docklands, and among them a 90-m
floating bridge that resembles a giant pond skater, the
West India Quay Floating Footbridge (Table 3), brings
people closer to the water[24].
OSAKA, JAPAN
A 410-m-long floating swing arch bridge, with a main
span of 280 m, was constructed across a water
channel; rests on two hollow steel pontoons
(Fig. 6, and Table 3). The floating bridge is part of a
940-m-long road crossing, the Yumemai Bridge,
connecting two reclaimed islands to the regional
road network. The design has addressed specifically
the actions of waves, wind and earthquakes, swinging
mechanism and durability. The double-arch rib
bridge is 38.8 m wide and accommodates six
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FLOATING BRIDGES 131
traffic lanes. The bridge can swing around a pivot
axis near one end of the girder. The pontoons are
protected against corrosion by lining their sides
with titanium plate, with the other wet surface under
cathodic protection. The mooring system consists of
dolphins with movable reaction walls and rubber
fenders. The reaction walls are located on the
fixed dolphins with piles driven into the seabed.
The structure is designed to be strong and stable
enough to withstand typhoon-level winds and
waves.
The swing system of the floating bridge (Fig. 7)
allows large vessels to pass through the channel as
needed, a few times a year. The swinging operation
begins by inserting the pivot axis and jacking up the
transitional side bridges. Then the reaction walls
are released from their mooring position and rotated,
and the bridge is swung about the pivot axis by
tugboats. After rotation is completed, the bridge is
temporarily moored in the open position. Reversing
the procedure restores the floating bridge to its
original position[5–9].
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
132
Fig. 7 Swing mechanism of the Yumemai bridge
Outline of design and analysis
The purpose of the design outline is to elucidate the
procedure for the design and analysis of floating
bridge. Since floating bridges are only special types of
bridge, their design should comply with the general
rule of design practice for bridges, but also address
special criteria inherent to floating bridges. Design
guidelines have been published by JSCE following the
format of performance-based design[2,25–27]. Table 4
summarizes the proposed design procedure
according to the guidelines. The general flow of the
design and analysis for floating bridges will be
described, primarily following this guidelines, but
with reference to the relevant laws or ordinances and
specifications[25–37]. Whenever necessary, references
will be quoted; otherwise, the description reflects the
philosophy of the subcommittee.
Table 4 Design and Analysis
Main items
........................................................................................................................................................
1 General principle
2 Conditions for basic planning
3 Fundamentals for design
4 Loads and load effects
5 Materials
6 Limit states
7 Design and analysis peculiar to floating bridges
8 Design of floating bridge body
9 Design of mooring structures
10 Design of substructure
11 Design of incidental facilities
12 Trial design
........................................................................................................................................................
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
Range of application
1. The guidelines are applicable to the design of all
roads as governed by the Road Law[25].
2. The guidelines specify floating bridges with
separated pontoon foundations with equivalent
span length of less than 200 m. However, they can
be used even for continuous pontoon bridges with
slight modifications. Moreover, even in case of a
span length over 200 m, the guidelines may be
made applicable if appropriate considerations such
as the aerodynamic stability and the phase
difference of input earthquake ground motion are
made. Items not specified in the guidelines shall
comply with Specifications and Commentaries on
Roadway Bridges[27].
Terminology
Figs. 8–10 illustrate the terminology for floating
bridges. The task of a floating bridge is to carry
vehicles, trains, pedestrians and bicycles across a
barrier, which is a body of water. Inasmuch as a
floating bridge crosses a barrier, it generates a barrier
for navigation. A floating bridge generally consists of
a floating bridge body and a mooring facility, as
shown in Fig. 8. The floating bridge body then
consists of the bridge body and floating bodies. The
bridge body consists of the superstructure and piers.
Since the floating bridge body must adjust itself to the
change of water height, it shall be conveniently
connected either by transient girders to absorb the gap
in the relative vertical displacement between the
floating offshore side and the fixed onshore end or by
Context
Range of application; terminology
Road conditions; heights of planning bed; plan and elevation
alignments; environmental effects on floating bridge of surroundings;
local plan for disaster prevention; others
Basic concepts; design service life; coefficient of importance;
earthquakes; waves; tsunami; structural plan
Types of loads and their descriptions; load combinations
Concrete; steel; other materials; physical constants for design
calculations
Limit states for floating bridges; engineering indices for performance
check
Stability; criteria for displacement; global structural analysis; stability
for driving; fatigue; earthquakes
Design of superstructure and floating body
Types, disposition and number of mooring structures; analysis of
motion; additional conditions for mooring structure; design of
mooring structures
Loads to be considered; selection of type
Connecting structures; bearings; expansion; facilities for mainte-
nance, repair and wave-dissipation
Basic planning and design; loads; materials; motion due to wave;
mooring and connecting structures
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144

Fig. 8 Terminology
A-A
Lanes Foot Path
Bridge Body
Floating Body
Anchor Cables
Fig. 9 Terminology of mooring anchor cables
A-A When Floating Body & Bridge Body Connected
-
Lanes Foot Path
Fender Fender
Reaction Wall Reaction Wall
Floating Body
Fig. 10 Terminology of dolphins (reaction walls and fenders)
some adjustable bearings. Figs. 9 and 10 show
mooring by anchor cables or chains and by dolphins
with reaction walls and fenders, respectively.
A dolphin consists of a reaction wall and fenders,
and its main role is to restrict the motion of the
floating body to the vertical direction, with fenders
protecting the body from direct contact with metal.
DATA AND REQUIREMENTS FOR BASIC PLANNING
Road details such as classification, design speed,
width, clearance limit and road alignment shall
comply with Road Structure Ordinance[26]. Target
performance shall be prescribed for motions of
floating bridges under natural loads such as wind,
wave, current and vehicle traffic. Heights of the
planning bed shall be appropriately prescribed for the
design of floating bridges after sufficient observation
and investigation of the water levels at the site. With
respect to the floating structure, planning shall
consider bridge structure, supporting structure as
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FLOATING BRIDGES 133
well as change of water level and motion of the
floating bridge structure at high tide, low tide or at the
maximum current speed in addition to basic
alignments.
For design of a floating bridge, environmental
effects on the bridge from its surroundings shall be
considered. These effects include the depth, tidal
change, current, wind velocity, wind direction, waves,
infiltration of salt, ground condition, drifting
materials and animals and plants. Planning such as
location and types of floating bridge shall
appropriately consider the regional planning,
including evacuation routes in the event of natural
disasters. Conditions for navigation channel such as
the width, clearance and depth shall be considered if
navigation is planned to cross the floating bridge.
Effects of the construction of the floating bridge on its
surroundings shall be studied and reduced as much
as possible. These include the effects on water current,
animals and plants and the environmental effect on
the surroundings. The bridge plan, such as the
location and type of the floating bridge shall comply
with the rules governing the water zone concerned.
Plans shall be provided for maintenance and
management to ensure the target performance of the
floating bridge and for a durable structure and for
inspection and management facilities.
DESIGN FUNDAMENTALS
Design of floating bridge shall be conducted to satisfy
the target performance in conformity with the
purpose of utilization, safety, durability, quality
assurance, ease of maintenance and management,
harmony with the environment, and economy. It shall
also consider the topography, geology and
geographical conditions in selecting structural type.
Not only structural members, but also the global
system of the floating bridge shall satisfy the target
performance of strength, deformation and stability.
Appropriate design service life shall be prescribed,
depending on the importance of the structure and the
return period of natural loads. The performance of
floating bridges is highly sensitive to environmental
conditions and natural actions such as wind, waves,
currents, tidal variations, seiche (secondary
undulation, namely, steady water oscillation of lakes)
and corrosion. Its service life is generally expected to
be as long as 75–100 yr with low cycle cost[1]. The
service life will be discussed together with the return
period of natural loads in the following section.
The coefficient of importance of floating bridges
shall comply with the Specifications and
Commentaries on Roadway Bridges, 2.3 V:
Earthquake-resistant Design[27]. Floating bridges shall
be classified into standard or especially important
floating bridges in ascending order of importance:
A-type floating bridges and B-type floating bridges,
respectively. Types A and B shall be classified
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
134
respectively as in Table 5 according to their
importance from the standpoint of disaster
prevention, i.e. the need for rescue activity and
emergency transport, the possibility of a secondary
disaster, alternative routes and the difficulty of
restoration.
Target performance required of floating bridges
shall be prescribed as shown in Table 6, depending on
the state of function of bridges. Performance level 0 is
peculiar to floating bridges as compared with other
performance levels 1–3. Floating bridges shall be
designed to secure the target performance level as
listed in Table 7 at service load, storm wave, tsunami
and earthquake, depending on the coefficient of
importance.
LOADS AND LOAD EFFECTS
Design loads
The following loads must be considered in the design:
dead load, live load, impacts (such as collision), earth
Table 5 Classification of floating bridges according to coefficient
of importance
Coefficient of Classification
importance
.........................................................................
A Floating bridges other than those described
below
B High-speed roadway, urban high-speed road-
way, designated city roadway, general national
road, double cross-sections, over-bridges,
over-railroad bridges and especially important
bridges of prefectural and municipal roads
.........................................................................
Table 6 Target performance levels for floating bridges
Performance Description on damage
level
.........................................................................
0 No damage to bridge stability
1 No damage to soundness of bridge function
2 Damages may limit bridge function but the
function soon recovered
3 Damages may cause loss of bridge function,
but limited so that the safety against collapse,
sinking and drifting secured
.........................................................................
Table 7 Relationships of load level, coefficient of importance
and performance level
Load and load level Coefficient of Performance
importance level required
.........................................................................
For ordinary loads and A or B 0 non-exceedance, namely, the probability of the design
at the service wave
conditions
Against level 1 earthquakes A or B 1 predicted a 60% or just below 40%, respectively from
Against stormy waves B 1
A 2
Against tsunamis and level B 2 probability of 100% corresponds to events occurring
2 earthquake
A 3
.........................................................................
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
pressure (on mooring system such as dolphins),
hydrostatic pressure (including buoyancy), wind
load, effects of waves (including swell), effects of
earthquakes (including dynamic water pressure),
effects of temperature change, effects of water current,
effects of tidal change, effects of ground deformation,
effects of movements of bearings, snow load,
centrifugal load, effects of tsunamis, effects of storm
surges, seiche (secondary undulation), ship waves,
seaquake, brake load, erection load, collision load
(including ship collisions), effects of drift ice and ice
pressure, effects of littoral transport, effects of drifting
bodies, effects of marine growths (corrosion and
friction) and other loads.
Table 8 classifies these loads into principal loads, P,
secondary loads, S, special loads equivalent to
principal loads, PP, and special loads equivalent to
secondary loads with indication of loads, specific to
floating bridges, PA. Some of these loads may not be
so important but the governing design loads may in-
clude load Numbers 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 16, 17, 22 and 23.
Buoyancy, waves, wind and return period
The buoyancy is given by integration of hydrostatic
pressure. The specific weight of seawater may be
taken to be 10.09 kN/m3 or 1.03 t/m3. In the design of
floating bridges, the change of water level due to tide,
tsunami and storm surge may become one of the
controlling loads. Since the point of action of
buoyancy depends on the tide and water level, the
most unfavourable case shall be considered. For
floating bridges a wind blowing perpendicular to the
bridged axis may control the design. Wind blowing
over water generates a sea state that induces
horizontal, vertical and torsional loads on a floating
bridge. These loads depend on the velocity, direction
and duration of wind, fetch length, configuration and
the depth of the channel. The design wind speed may
be specified as the 10-min average at a height of 10 m
above the sea surface. Natural load effects such as
wind and earthquake loads become critical in many
cases.
In discussing the frequency of natural actions, the
concept of return period is used. The probability of
non-exceedance PN, for the dominant natural action,
(wind speed, for example), may be given by means of
the return period T and the expected service life Q[2]:


1 Q
PN ¼ 1
(1)
T
In many cases, Q/T may be conventionally
assumed to be 0.5–1. In such cases, the probability of
load not occurring during the service life, may be
Eq. (1). A probability of about 50% looks reasonable
from the standpoint of risk management since a
inevitably; while probability of zero corresponds to
investing extra money or wasting money for events
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
 FLOATING BRIDGES 135

Table 8 Loads to be considered in design of floating bridges Bridge. Moreover, in the case of steel bridges built in
Type of load Number Name (important Symbol Japan steel bridges, on average are in service for the
or special load loads or effects in first 30 yr and then, after possible reconditioning they
bold) are in service for another 30 yr. Thus, the total design
......................................................................... life of ordinary steel bridges may be 60 yr.
Principal loads (P)
1 Dead load D Furthermore, for safety, traffic shall be regulated
2 Live load L according to wind speed. A 20-yr windstorm
3 Impact load I condition is normally used to make operational
4 Earth pressure E decisions for closing the bridge to traffic to ensure the
5 Hydrostatic HP
pressure (including safety and comfort of the traveling public[1]. This
buoyancy) value shall be determined with respect to the
Secondary loads (S) characteristics of the floating bridge, facilities nearby
6 Wind load W and the local disaster protection plan. For example,
7* Effect of waves WP regulation for a wind velocity of 20 m/s has been
(including swell)
8* Effect of EQ reported. As for the power spectrum of irregular
earthquakes winds, the equations by Davenport, Karman or Hino
(including are well known. In Japan, Hino’s equation is quite
hydrodynamic popular, and considered to be realistic. To determine
load) the gust factor, defined as the ratio of the maximum
9 Effect of temperature T
instantaneous value and the average value of the
change
10 Effect of current F wind speed within the observation time, the
observation of the wind velocity at or near the site is
Particular loads
important. In case of 10-m observation, the gust factor
equivalent to
Principal loads (PP) may vary between 1.3 and 1.5, or shortly more[2].
11* Effect of tidal change TD
12 Effect of ground GD
deformation IRREGULAR WAVES
13 Effects of SD
Sea waves are very irregular. They consist of many
movement of
support components of different frequency and thus can be
14 Snow load SW decomposed into many regular waves. As for the
15 Centrifugal load CF return period, a similar consideration applies as in the
Particular loads case of winds. Storm loads due to wind and wave on a
equivalent to structure and that combined effect are discussed by
secondary loads (PA) Lwin[1], where the extreme storm conditions are
16* Effect of tsunami TU defined as the storm conditions that have a mean
17* Effect of storm SS
recurrence interval of 100 yr (the maximum storm that
surge
18* Seiche or HD is likely to occur once every 100 yr). On the other
secondary hand, the normal conditions adopt a mean recurrence
undulation interval of 1 yr rather than 100 yr. AASHTO
19* Ship wave SW recommends such return periods in the specifications
20* Seaquake SQ for wind and wave forces[1,28].
21 Brake load BK
22 Erection load ER Since the fundamental period of floating bridges
23 Collision load CO is larger than that of conventional bridges, the
including collision long-period components of waves are important.
with ships The wave spectrum is a representation of the energy
24 Ice and ice pressure IP distribution of waves in terms of the frequency f.
25 Littoral transport LT
26* Effect of drifting DM
When the wind blows for a certain horizontal distance
materials over the surface of the sea, waves progress gradually.
27 Effect of marine MG But after a certain time, they tend to stop increasing
grows and become steady. In this fully developed state of
28 Others O waves, the wave spectrum has certain steady forms in
.........................................................................
* Loads specific to floating bridges (in bold) terms of f. The Pierson–Moskowitz type is well-
known and it can be further classified into the
Bretschneider–Mitsuyasu[2,38], ISSC and JONSWAP
which never happen. A 100-yr return period and a spectrum, respectively. The Bretschneider–Mitsuyasu
50-yr service life seem to be quite commonly adopted spectrum will be described later. Furthermore, for
in view of the available statistical records and serviceability and fatigue strength, the statistical data
consideration of critical events, usually assumed to of waves such as the frequency distribution of the
occur once in 100 yr. This is the case for the Yumemai wave period, the wave height and the wave direction,

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
136
are necessary. Wind and current affect floating ice,
and may affect floating bridges[39–42].
LOAD COMBINATIONS
Load combinations are considered to cause the most
unfavourable effect, as shown in Table 9, where the
same symbols are used as in Table 8. The tide level
shall be considered as follows:
* during earthquake: between H.W.L. (high water
level) and L.W.L. (low water level);
* in storms: between H.H.W.L. (highest H.W.L.) and
L.W.L. or between H.H.W.L. and L.L.W.L. (lowest
L.W.L.);
* in service condition: between H.W.L. and L.W. L.
Moreover, no fatal damage shall occur due to either
extreme tidal changes between H.H.W.L. and L.L.W.L.
or rising and dropping water level during a Tsunami.
MATERIALS
Materials used for floating bridges such as
steel and concrete shall follow the relevant
specifications[27,36,37,43,44]. Naturally, considerations of
corrosion are especially necessary for floating
structures. Since the watertightness of concrete is
important, either watertight concrete or offshore
concrete shall be used for floating bridges. Moderate
heat Portland cement, Portland blast-furnace slag
cement, Portland fly-ash cement are regarded as
desirable[1,37]. For instance, the AASHTO Standard
Specifications and AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications specify the design of reinforced concrete
members at service load conditions and at the service
limit state[28,29]: except for sections where
reinforcement is to resist sustained hydrostatic forces,
the allowable stress in the reinforcing steel is required
not to exceed 97 MPa to limit crack width 0.1 mm, and
the ultimate flexural strength of the overall pontoon
section is computed for a maximum crack width of
0.25 mm, and is required not to be less than the loads
from the factored load combinations, or 1.3 times the
Table 9 Load combinations for floating bridges
Parts Number Load combinations
.......................................................................................................................................................
Bridge body 1 P+PP
2 P+PP+T
3 P+PP+W
4 P+PP+T+W
5 P+PP+BK
6 P+PP+CO
7 D+E+HP+EQ
8 W
9 BK
10 ER
.......................................................................................................................................................
* S1 (secondary load under normal condition) ¼ TD+W+WP+T+F
** S2 (secondary load under extreme condition) ¼ W+WP+EQ+TU
***PA ¼ particular load
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
cracking moment from past experience and
observations.
The effects of creep and shrinkage are considered
only when the pontoons are dry, and hence are not
considered once the pontoons are launched. High-
performance concrete containing fly ash and silica
fume is most suitable for floating bridges[12,13].
Recommended minimum concrete cover of
reinforcing steel is as shown in Table 10[1]. The
materials for the mooring system shall be selected
according to the purpose, environment, durability
and economy[45].
Steel used for floating bridges shall satisfy the
appropriate standard[27,36]. Because of the severely
corrosive environment, corrosion protection shall be
made, especially for parts just beneath the mean low
water level, M.L.W.L, where severe local corrosion
occurs. For such parts, cathodic protection is generally
applied; coating methods are applied for parts
shallower than the depth of 1 m below L.W.L. The
coating methods include painting, organic lining,
petrolatum lining and inorganic lining. The inorganic
linings include metal linings such as titanium-clad
lining, stainless steel lining, thermal spraying with zinc,
aluminum and aluminum alloy[36]. The rate of corrosion
with depth of water depends on the environment. Table
11 gives the standard values of the rate of corrosion and
Fig. 11 shows a sketch of the distribution of corrosion
according to depth of water and ground.
The splash zone provides the severest corrosive
environment, and its upper limit zone is determined
according to the installation of the structure. The ebb
Table 10 Recommended minimum concrete cover of
reinforcing steel (all values in mm)
Location Fresh Salt
water water
........................................................................
Top of roadway slab 65 65
Exterior surfaces of pontoons and Barrier 38 50
All other surfaces 25 38
........................................................................
Parts Number Load combinations
Substructure 1 P+PP
2 P+PP+T
3 P+PP+W
4 P+PP+T+W
5 P+PP+BK
6 P+PP+CO
7 D+E+HP+EQ
8 ER
Peculiar to Floating 1 P+PP+S1*
Bridge 2 D+E+HP+PP
CF+S2**
3 D+E+HP+PP
CF+PA***
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
 FLOATING BRIDGES 137

Table 11 Rate of corrosion Restoring Moment = W.GZ

Corrosive Environment Corrosion
GZ
Rate
(mm/year) Metacenter, M
........................................................................
Offshore side Above H.W.L. 0.3
H.W.L. to –1 m below L.W.L. 0.1–0.3
1 m below L.W.L. to seabed 0.1–0.2 GM
Mud Layer beneath seabed 0.03

Onshore side Air 0.1 Center of Gravity, G Z
Earth above water level 0.03
Earth below water level 0.02
........................................................................
KG
B
Center of Buoyancy: B K B'
Fig. 12 Static stability of a floating bridge: small inclination

cause progressive failure, finally leading to sinking of

the bridge.

DESIGN CRITERIA AND ANALYSES SPECIFIC TO

Fig. 11 Distribution of corrosion rate of steel
and flow zone corresponds to the next most severe
environment. Particular attention should be paid to
the part immediately below the L.W.L. In the salt
water zone, the environment becomes milder;
however, in some cases marine growths and water
current may accelerate the corrosion. Generally
speaking, the environment in the earth layer below
the seabed is even milder, although it depends on the
salt density, the degree of contamination, and
meteorological conditions. Compared with fixed
structures, it should be noted that the so-called ebb
and flow zone does not exist for floating structures
since they conform to the changing water surface.
FLOATING BRIDGES
Stability
The static stability consideration is primarily
concerned with turning over of floating bridges, as for
ships[34,46]. Fig. 12 determines if the floating structure
is stable at the onset of a small inclination. Since the
restoring moment is given by W  GZ, where W and
GZ refer to the total weight and the distance between
the vertical line through the metacenter M and the
center of gravity G, respectively, the larger the value
of MK, the more stable the floating body.
Dynamic stability is also very important taking into
account the whole range of inclination of the floating
bridge. As shown in Fig. 13, it involves comparison of
the external turning moment and the recovering
moment capacity. The condition for dynamic stability
may be given by an inequality with recommended
value of a ¼ 1.4[34,46]:
AreaðA þ BÞ5a  AreaðB þ CÞ (2)
The vertical displacement, horizontal displacement
and inclination are among the most important
quantities to be considered in design since floating
bridges undergo finite displacements and the stability,

Moment
LIMIT STATES Restoring Moment
The limit states for floating bridges have not yet been
clarified as to what engineering indices could be used Turning Moment
to check performance, however, a floating bridge shall A By Wind
C
have adequate ability to sustain potential damage
B
caused by ships, debris and logs, flooding, loss of
mooring cables and complete separation of the bridge

1 Inclination
2
3
4
body by a transverse or diagonal fracture[1]. While
water provides buoyancy to keep the bridge afloat, Fig. 13 Dynamic stability of a floating bridge: whole range of
water leaking into the interior of a floating bridge can inclination

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
138 STEEL CONSTRUCTION

Table 12 Permitted transalation and rotation response

accelerations.
Bergsoy bridge US floating
Norway[47] bridges[1]
........................................................................
2
Translational (m/s ) 0.6 0.5
Rotational (deg/s2) 2 2.9
........................................................................

Fig. 14 Floating body and coordinates

serviceability and safety depend on the values of
these displacements. Floating bridges shall be
designed so that they are comfortable to ride on
during normal storm (1-yr storm) conditions Table 13 Deflection and motion limits for normal (1-yr storm)
and also so that they avoid undesirable structural [1]
effects during extreme storm (100-yr storm) Loading Type of Maximum Maximum
conditions[1]. Response accelerations are also condition deflection deflection motion
expected to be within tolerable values. Examples of or motion
........................................................................
allowable limit for translational and rotational Vehicular load Vertical L/800
acceleration during a normal wind, corresponding to Winds (static) Lateral (drift) 0.3 m
a return period of 1 yr in terms of the effect of Rotation (heel) 0.58
the live load are shown in Table 12 for the Waves (dynamic) Vertical (heave)  0.3m 0.5 m/s2
Lateral (sway)  0.3m 0.5 m/s2
Bergsoysund Bridge, Norway and floating bridges in
Rotation (roll)  0.58 0.05 rad/s2
the USA[1,2,47]. ........................................................................

Summary of hydrodynamic analysis and basic

assumptions on potential flow
Water is assumed to be incompressible, nonviscous
and irrotational. A velocity potential F ¼ Fðx; y; z; tÞ
can be used to describe the fluid velocity vector
V(x, y, z, t) ¼ (u, v, w) at time t at the point x ¼ (x, y, z)
in a Cartesian coordinate system[48–69]. Fig. 14 shows a
general floating body and the boundaries, e.g. at the
sea surface, seabed and at the surface of a floating
body. A brief description of the potential theory is
provided in Appendix A.
In the case of large wave motions, however, the
time domain analysis may become necessary
because of the nonlinearity of the finite wave
amplitude and of the hysteresis of the restoring forces,
either in the chains or the rubber fenders and
dolphin moorings. On the other hand, the memory
effect, namely, the frequency dependence of the
radiation fluid forces should also be considered
in the time domain. Thus, the first task is to extend the
existing simulation program for a single floating
body, such as a cylindrical pontoon, that takes
into account the memory effect, to floating
foundations of arbitrary shape so that it can evaluate
simultaneously many other items, such as the
frequency-dependent fluid forces, slowly varying
drift forces due to irregular waves, radiation fluid
forces, nonlinear restoring forces caused by the
mooring and the elastic deformation of
superstructures[68,69].
Separated floating foundations and continuous
floating foundations are typical examples[2]. However,
only the floating bridges with separated floating
foundations are considered here for simplicity and
continuous floating foundations are not considered
for the time being. In the analysis of floating bridges
with separated floating foundations, the floating
foundations may be modelled simply as rigid bodies
and the elastic deformations may not need to be
considered when the dynamic fluid–structure
interactions are analysed. Furthermore, the distance
between floating foundations is assumed to be
sufficiently large that the interactions among floating
foundations may be neglected[69,70].
Stability for driving
Drivability, namely, comfort while driving is one of
the most important serviceability aspects. Motion
limits have been used and the following deflection
and motion limits are proposed as shown in Table 13
for a normal (1-yr) storm[1]. Driving simulations have
been conducted and comfort studies have been
performed[71].
Fatigue
The fatigue strength must be checked against wind,
waves and live loads. Evaluation methods for fatigue
strength shall be used just as for conventional bridges.
Effects of earthquakes
In view of the fact that floating bridges have long
natural periods the effect of long-period seismic
waves shall be investigated. Although floating
bridges are inherently base-isolated, the earthquake
resistance of the mooring system, particularly dolphin
and substructure shall be verified.

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
 FLOATING BRIDGES 139

DESIGN OF FLOATING BRIDGE BODY ANALYSIS OF PONTOON:

MESHDATA FOR SUBMERGED
The definition of a floating bridge body has been BODY SURFACE

given in Fig. 8. In this paper, a floating bridge is

assumed to have separated floating pontoons. As HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES IN FREQUENCY
explained in the previous section, the hydrodynamic
characteristic of each pontoon may be conveniently
evaluated separately, and the results then applied to EXCITING WAVE FORCES &
DRIFTING FORCES FOR REGULAR
RADIATION FORCES COEFF.
the analysis of the global bridge system. Practically, aij(f ), bij (f) (i, j=1,…,6)
WAVES

the global system may be analysed by discretization EXCITING WAVE FORCES &
methods, including the finite element method. In such COMPUTE MEMORY FUNCTION &
SLOWLY-VARYING DRIFT FORCES
FOR IRREGULAR WAVES

cases, the results obtained, such as the additional ADDED MASS aij (∞)

mass, hydrodynamic damping and the hydrodynamic

forces of each pontoon are considered and input at aij (∞)

each centre of flotation (geometric centre at the water MEMORY

FUNCTION
NODAL TIME SERIES DATA OF
HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES &
surface) of the pontoons. The flow chart for the FEM ANALYSIS
Lij (t) (i, j=1,6) DRIFTING FORCES ON FLOATING
STRUCTURE
general design is given by Fig. 15 and some additional OF GLOBAL
BRIDGE
remarks will be made as follows.
EIGEN VALUE ANALYSIS OF NONLINEAR
First, the fluid forces are evaluated by a program for GLOBAL BRIDGE SYSTEM RESTORING
FORCE
a single floating foundation, based on the linear
potential theory for a specified frequency f (Hz). This
EIGEN VALUES & VECTORS TIME SERIES ANALYSIS
program may be based on the boundary element
method, made applicable to arbitrary three-
dimensional bodies or on a finite element method. TIME SERIES DISPLACEMENT & ACC.
The solutions from this program have been compared RESPONSE FOR NODES OF FEM MODEL

with other analytical solutions for cylindrical floating

bodies in order to check if they possess sufficient Fig. 15 Flow chart for design and analysis of a floating bridge
accuracy[69,70].

Wave spectrum
60
Several standardized spectra have been proposed and
are expressed in terms of the frequency f. The most 50 I easy to construct
popular spectrum is problems the Pierson–Moskowitz III
Wind Speed (m/s)

type, expressed by the following formula:


c d
SðfÞ ¼ 5 exp
4 ðm2 sÞ (3)
f f
where c and d are constants. The well-known
Bretschneider–Mitsuyasu frequency spectra may be
obtained if the constants are given as[2,38]:
2
H1=3 1:03
c ¼ 0:257 4
; d¼ 4
(4)
T1=3 T1=3
where H1/3 and T1/3 are referred to as the significant
wave height and the significant wave period,
respectively. The significant wave height H1/3, is the
average wave height of the highest one-third of all
waves and the significant wave period T1/3, is the
average period of these highest one-third. The most
important quantities include the added mass at
infinite frequency, radiation damping coefficient,
hydrodynamic forces, drifting forces and the
recovering buoyancy force.
Design wind velocity and significant wave height
Fig. 16 shows the applicability range of pontoon-type
floating bridges in terms of the design wind speed
and significant wave height according to a report of
the port and harbour Bureau the Ministry of Transport
of the Japanese Government, 1991. The report states
that a significant wave height of 2.5 m is the critical
II possible depending
40 on wave period
30 III difficult to construct
I II
20
10
0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
H1/3 (m)
Fig. 16 Applicability range of pontoon-type floating bridges,
Ministry of Transport of Japan, 1991
value for pontoon floating bridges. In order to keep
the significant wave height below 2.5 m a measure
such as a breakwater is required. Both viscous effects
and potential flow effects may be important in
determining the wave-induced motions and loads on
marine structures. Included in the potential flow is
wave diffraction and radiation around the structure.
Fig. 17 shows the importance of the viscous effects or
the potential flow effects based on the horizontal
wave forces on a vertical circular cylinder standing
on the seabed and penetrating the free surface.
Let us consider a gravity platform where typical

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
140
Fig. 17 Relative importance of mass, viscous drag and diffraction
forces on marine structures[48]
cross-sectional dimensions are 100 m, subjected to a
regular wave of wave height 30 m and wavelength
300 m, which corresponds to extreme wave condition.
This implies that H/D and l=D are 0.3 and 3,
respectively[48].
According to Fig. 17, wave diffraction is the most
important. Thus, in this region wave diffraction
theory is considered to be reasonably applicable.
Although pontoons are different from the
aforementioned circular cylinder, wave diffraction
forces have been found to be the most important
forces both from experiments and theoretical
predictions. In fact, good correlation has been proved
to exist between experiments and predictions by
free-surface fluid flow potential theory, even under
the assumptions of an incompressible, irrotational and
nonviscid fluid. This is why wave diffraction theory
based on linear potential flow has been developed for
design purposes. The equations of motion, taking into
account the memory effect of the hydrodynamic fluid
forces, are given in Appendix B[72,73].
After leading with fluid forces, the memory
function matrix and the added mass matrix at the
infinite frequency are obtained by a program based on
the descriptions provided in Appendix B. The value
of the added mass matrix at infinite frequency should
be input at the node located at the centre of flotation.
FEM is then performed, using available program
packages such as NASTRAN or ANSYS, including
eigenvalue analysis. The nonlinear restoring force is
considered as the external force term at the stage of
time-domain analysis later on.
Next, the nodal external loads evaluated in the
previous step are input at the centres of flotation. The
exciting wave forces and unsteady drifting forces are
computed by a special program.
Finally, time-domain response analysis is
performed by a method such as the Newmark-b-
method. Modal condensation methods e.g. utilizing
the eigenvalues and eigenvectors, may prove very
efficient.
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
Design of superstructure
Superstructure design consists of the selection of the
type of superstructure, the design of structural
members and corrosion protection for the
superstructure. Careful consideration is required to
design the superstructure to be corrosion free as far as
possible.
Design of floating bodies
Design of the floating bodies is never encountered in
conventional bridge design. It consists of the selection
of floating body, the partition of floating body against
flood, design against the collision by ships,
consideration of the change of draft of the floating
body via the connecting structure fixed on land, the
design of structural members, corrosion protection,
the incidental facilities and the design of mooring
structures. In the analysis of floating bodies, they may
be modelled as rigid bodies and the elastic
deformations may be neglected when the dynamic
fluid–structure interactions are considered.
DESIGN OF MOORING STRUCTURES
The types, disposition and number of mooring
structures are determined. The design values for
wind; wave and current; earthquake; temperature
change; effects of tsunamis; seiche (secondary
undulation) and long-period wave, and design of
mooring structures such as dolphins; catenary
mooring; TLP (tension leg platform) and other
methods such as mooring by clamping both ends are
specified[22,23,30,36,37].
DESIGN OF SUBSTRUCTURE
The definition of substructure and its design in
general are described, such as the loads and the
selection of the type of substructure.
DESIGN OF INCIDENTAL FACILITIES
Descriptions are given of the selection of connecting
structures and their design, with special provision for
the translation motion of movable bearings and
expansion devices with special items such as the
determination of the clearance margin for the
translation movement and the design of facilities for:
maintenance and repair; inspection path and work
space; access; adjusting draft and against flood and
wave-dissipation apparatus such as breakwaters.
Concluding remarks
First, the historical development of floating bridges
has been outlined. In the remote past, floating bridges
were erected primarily for military purposes, and our
ancestors made ingenious use of the buoyancy forces,
although there is no clear evidence of the application
of fluid dynamics. With the recent development of the
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
 FLOATING BRIDGES 141

mechanics of fluid–structure interactions, it is Let p,r, and g designate the pressure, density of the
becoming increasing possible to make accurate fluid and the acceleration due to gravity respectively,
predictions of the interactions, and to design floating then, assuming the z-axis to be vertical and positive
structures accordingly. upwards, the Bernoulli equation. is given by:
Second, a general outline of the hydrodynamic @F r
analysis of floating bridges is provided, according to p þ rgz þ r þ V V ¼C (A3)
@t 2
the recently published Design Guideline for Floating
where C is an arbitrary time constant.
Bridges published by the Subcommittee of Floating
Bridges, Committee of Steel Structures, JSCE, which
follows the format of performance-based design. BOUNDARY CONDITION AT THE SEABED, ON THE
Interesting aspects of the analysis and design can be MOVING BODY SURFACE AND AT THE FREE
summarized as follows: SURFACE[ 48–69]
For a fixed body in a moving fluid, we have the body
1. Added mass coefficient and radiation damping boundary condition of ‘impermeability’:
coefficient are evaluated in the frequency domain
by a boundary element method or by other relevant @F
¼ 0 at seabed (A4)
methods. Then the memory effect function is @n
obtained in the time domain. Where @=@n denotes differentiation along the
2. Hydrodynamic properties in the time domain such normal to the body surface. If the body is moving
as the memory effect function, added mass, with velocity n, the above equation can be generalized
hydrodynamic exciting forces and drifting forces of to
each pontoon foundation are input at the centre of
@F
flotation of pontoon foundations in the finite ¼ v  n on the moving body surface (A5)
element model. @n
3. Nonlinearity, such as mooring forces and nonlinear Here m can be any type of body velocity. For a rigid
drifting forces, can be easily taken into account in body motion, it includes translation and rotations.
the analysis. Now, before the formulation of the kinematic free-
4. The use of steel in floating bridges is effective if surface condition we must recall the meaning of the
reasonable corrosion protection measures are substantial derivative DF/Dt of a function F(x, y, z, t).
taken. This implies the rate of change with time of the
function F if we follow a fluid particle in space:
DF @F
¼ þ V  rF (A6)
Appendix: A Dt @t
SUMMARY OF HYDRODYNAMIC ANALYSIS AND
where V is the fluid velocity at the point (x, y, z) at
BASIC ASSUMPTIONS ON POTENTIAL FLOW
time t. Let us define the free surface by the equation:
Water is assumed to be incompressible, nonviscous Fðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ z
zðx; y; tÞ ¼ 0, where z is the wave
and irrotational. A velocity potential F ¼ Fðx; y; z; tÞ elevation. A fluid particle on the free surface is
can be used to describe the fluid velocity vector assumed to stay on the free surface. Thus, the
V(x,y,z,t) ¼ (u,v,w) at time t at the point x ¼ (x, y, z) in a following kinematic boundary condition applies on
Cartesian coordinate system[48–69]. The velocity vector the free surface.
V(x, y, z, t) ¼ (u, v, w) can be expressed by the @
½z
zðx; y; tÞ þ rF  r½z
zðx; y; tÞ ¼ 0 (A7a)
following equation under the assumption of linear @t
wave theory of small amplitude thus,
@F @F @F @z @F @z @F @z @F
V ¼ rF  i þj þk (A1) þ þ
¼ 0 on z ¼ zðx; y; tÞ (A7b)
@x @y @z @t @x @x @y @y @z
where i, j, k are unit vectors along the x-, y- and z-
axes, respectively. The fluid is irrotational when the
DYNAMIC FREE-SURFACE CONDITION
vorticity vector o ¼ r  V is zero everywhere in the
The dynamic free-surface condition signifies that the
fluid. If the water is incompressible, namely,
water pressure is equal to the constant atomospheric
r  V ¼ 0, the velocity potential satisfies the Laplace
pressure, p0, on the free surface from the Bernoulli
equation:
equation Eq. (5). It is easy to show that
@2F @2F @2F "


 #
r  V ¼ DF ¼ r2 F  þ þ 2 ¼0 (A2) @F 1 @F 2 @F 2 @F 2
@x2 @y2 @z gz þ þ þ þ ¼ 0 on
@t 2 @x @y @z
Thus, the problem is to find the solution of the
z ¼ zðx; y; tÞ (A8)
Laplace equation Eq.(A2), with respect to the velocity
potential Fðx; y; z; tÞ. From this potential, the pressure By keeping only the linear terms, we find from eq.
and the hydrodynamic forces can be derived. (A4b) and (A5)

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
142 STEEL CONSTRUCTION

@z @F @f0 @fD
¼ on z ¼ 0 ðkinematic conditionÞ (A9) þ ¼0 (A15a)
@t @z @n @n
@F
gz þ ¼ 0 on z ¼ 0 ðdynamic conditionÞ (A10)
@t @fRj
¼
ionj ð j ¼ 1; 2; :::; 6Þ (A15b)
If these equations are combined, we have @n

@2F @F
þg ¼ 0 on z ¼ 0 (A11) ADDED MASS COEFFICIENT AND RADIATION
@t2 @z
DAMPING COEFFICIENT
When the velocity potential F is oscillating The wave pressure p (x, y, z, t) can be expressed in
harmonically with angular frequency o, this equation terms of the velocity potential, Fðx; y; z; tÞ, so that
can be rewritten as @F
@F p ¼ pðx; y; z; tÞ ¼
r

o2 F þ g ¼ 0 on z ¼ 0 (A12) " @t #
@z X
6

iot
¼ Re iorðf0 þ fD þ fRk xk Þe (A16)
k¼1
SOLUTION OF HYDRODYNAMIC PROBLEM FOR
Thus, the resultant fluid forces or moments can be
FLOATING BRIDGE
  expressed as
Fðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ Re fðx; y; zÞe
iot Z
(A13a) Fj ¼
pnj dSB
where Re implies the real part
"B Z ! #
r2 f ¼ 0 basic equation in the domain of fluid X 6
¼ Re
ior f0 þ fD þ fRk xk nj dSB e
iot
(A13b) B k¼1
" ! #
2
X
6
@f o
iot
¼ f : at free surface of fluid; z ¼ 0 (A13c) ¼ Re Fje þ FjkR xk e ð j ¼ 1; 2; :::; 6Þ (A17)
@z g k¼1

@f where
¼ 0 on the bottom surface; z ¼
H (A13d) Z
@z Fje ¼
ior ðf0 þ fD Þnj dSB
0 1
X ZB
@f @Un @ @X 6
¼ Vn ¼ Vj nj ¼ ¼ nj xj e
iot A FjkR ¼
ior fRk nj dSB ðj; k ¼ 1; 2; :::; 6Þ
@n j¼1;2;3
@t @t j¼1 B

X
6
¼ o2 ajk ðoÞ þ iobjk ðoÞ
¼ ð
ionj xj e
iot Þ (A13e)
j¼1 1   1  
ajk ðoÞ ¼ 2
Re FjkR ; bjk ðoÞ ¼ Im FjkR
o o
On the surface of the floating structure
Eqs. (A10c–e) imply the continuity and Bernoulli ð j; k ¼ 1; 2; :::; 6Þ (A18)
equations at the free surface of water, zero velocity at
and ajk ðoÞ and bjk ðoÞ are referred to as the added mass
the bottom and the continuity of velocity field at the
coefficient and the radiation damping coefficient,
surface of the floating body, respectively. The velocity
respectively, forces Fje and FjkR are referred to as the
potential, f ¼ fðx; y; zÞ, consist of that of the incident
diffraction force and the radiation forces, respectively.
wave, f0 , that of diffraction (scattering of wave due to
ajk ðoÞ and bjk ðoÞ will be used in the development of
a fixed body), fD , and that of radiation (scattering of
equations of motion in Appendix B.
wave caused by a moving body) fRi ði ¼ 1; 2; :::; 6Þ,
namely, due to unit motions of xj with j ¼ 1,2,. . .,6
corresponding to surge, sway, heave, pitch, roll and
yaw, respectively. Furthermore, n, nj (j ¼ 1,2,3), Un, Vj Appendix: B
and Vn designate the normal, its direction cosine at its
surface, the normal component of the displacement,
EQUATION OF MOTION
N 
X 
Z t 
the j-component and the normal component of the
mij þ aij ð1Þ ẍj þ Bij ẋj þ Lij ðtÞẋj ðt
tÞ dt þ Cij xj
velocity of the floating body, respectively. Thus, 0
j¼1
X
6
f ¼ fðx; y; zÞ ¼ f0 þ fD þ fRi xi (A14) þ Gi ðxi Þ ¼ Fi ðtÞ ði ¼ 1; 2; :::; N Þ (B1)
i¼1 where xj is the nodal displacement vector; mij: the
Since the diffraction is defined only in the case of mass matrix; aij(1) added mass matrix at infinite
zero motion of the floating structure, in addition to eq. frequency; Bij linear damping coefficient matrix; Lij(t)
(A10e), the following boundary condition must be memory effect function matrix; Cij stiffness matrix,
satisfied on the surface of the floating body: taking into account both the buoyancy of the floating

Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144

bodies and the structural stiffness of the bridge body;
Gi(xi) nonlinear mooring force vector; Fi(t) external
force vector; N total degrees of freedom. The memory
effect function matrix Lij(t) can be obtained from the
inverse Fourier transform of the radiation damping
coefficients in the following form.
Z [11] Lwin MM. Floating bridges: solution to a difficult terrain. In: Wu JTH &
2 1
Lij ðtÞ ¼ bij ðoÞcos ot do (B2)
p 0
where bij(o) is the radiation damping coefficient
matrix. The added mass matrix at infinite frequency
aij(1) may be obtained by consideration of an
appropriate frequency o:
Z Washington DC, 1995: 1.
2 1 do0
aij ðoÞ
aij ð1Þ ¼
bij ðo0 Þ 2 (B3)
p 0 o
o02
where aij(o) is the added mass matrix. It is to be noted
that aij(o) and bij(o) have been obtained by eq. (A15)
in Appendix A with i and j designating the ith and jth
mode, respectively, of a pontoon with six degrees of
freedom; whereas, i and j in eqs. (B2) and (B3)
designate the ith and jth node, respectively, now
ordered in the finite element scheme.
Acknowledgements
The study has been financially assisted by the Public
Works Research Institute under the title of
‘Development of Methods for Analysing Motions of
Floating Bridges under Waves and Wind’ with the
cooperation of Shin-Nippon Steel Ltd., Hitz Ltd. and
the Construction Technology Institute, Inc. The
authors wish to extend their appreciation to all the
members of the Subcommittee on Floating Bridges for
their kind suggestions and helpful criticisms.
We would like to express our sincere appreciation to
Professor Riccardo Zandonini for his kind invitation
for our contribution, and for his kindness in spending
his valuable time in checking the draft.
References
[1] Lwin MM. 22 Floating bridges. In: Chen W F & Lian Duan (eds) Bridge
Engineering Handbook. CRC Press. 2000: 22: 1–23.
[2] Watanabe E. Large offshore facilities in Japan; Proceedings of the
International Workshop on Floating Structures in Coastal Zone, Hiroshima 1994: 3–16.
[3] Subcommittee on Floating Bridges. Design Guideline for Floating
Bridges. Committee of Steel Structures. JSCE. 2002 (in Japanese).
[4] Landet E. Planning and construction of floating bridges in Norway.
Proceedings of the International Workshop on Floating Structures in Coastal Zone,
Hiroshima, 1994: 43–55.
[5] Watanabe E, Maruyama T, Kawamura Y & Tanaka. H. A new
floating bridge project in Osaka City: IABSE Reports: Long-Span and High-Rise Structures,
IABSE Symposium, Kobe, 1998: 79: 155–160.
[6] Watanabe E, Maruyama T, Kawamura Y & Tanaka H. A new
millennium steel pontoon swing arch bridge of Osaka. International Journal of Steel
Structures 2001: 1: 55–61.
[7] Watanabe E, Ueda S, Maruyama T, Kawamura Y, Tanaka H &
Takeda S. An Osaka floating bridge towed to the site from dockyard. Proceedings of
4th Symposium on Strait Crossings, Bergen, 2001: 293–299.
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
FLOATING BRIDGES 143
[8] Maruyama T, Watanabe E, Utsunomiya T & Tanaka H. A new
movable floating arch bridge in Osaka harbor. Proceedings of the 6th Asia-Pacific
Conference on Structural Engineering and Construction, Taipei: 1998: 429–434.
[9] Maruyama T, Watanabe E & Tanaka H. Floating swing bridge with a
280 m span, Osaka. Structural Engineering International (IABSE) 1998: 8(3): 174–175.
[10] Andrew CE. The Lake Washington pontoon bridge. Civil Engineering 1939:
9(12).
Barrett RK (ed.) Proceedings of the Conference on Transportation Facilities through
Difficult Terrain. Rotterdam: Balkema. 1993.
[12] Lwin MM. Floating Bridges in the United States. Proceedings of the
International Workshop on Floating Structures in Coastal Zone, Hiroshima, 1994:
56–73.
[13] Lwin MM, BrueschAW & Evans CF. High performance concrete for a
floating bridge. Proceedings of the 4th International Bridge Engineering Conference,
[14] Lwin MM. Use of high performance concrete in highway bridges in
Washington State. Proceedings of the International Symposium on High Performance
Concrete, New Orleans, 1997.
[15] Masui N. Recent trends in floating concrete structures; Concrete
Engineering 1990: 28(11): 34–37 (in Japansese).
[16] Wright AG. Buoyed by a water-tight design. Engineering News-Record,
1993. 22–25.
[17] Brown DJ. Bridges: three thousand years of defying nature. Reed
International, London. 1993.
[18] Study Group of World Cities. Seto Bridges Memorial Museum,
Kurashiki City, Japan Photo Printing Co. 1988 (in Japanese).
[19] Saul R. The new Galata Bridge at Istanbul. Proceeding of Composite
Construction III. Engineering Foundation Conference. Ivsee, 1996: 216–227.
[20] Pegusch W. The Kelowna floating bridge. The Engineering Journey.
Engineering Institute of Canada. Canada. 1957.
[21] Cho A. A buoyant crossing. Engineering News-Record 1997: 34–37.
[22] Solland G, Haugland S & Gustavsen JH. The Bergsoysund floating
bridge, Norway. Structural Engineering International 1993: 142–144.
[23] Meaas P, Landet E & Vindoy V. Design of the Salhus floating bridge
(Nordhordland bridge). Proceedings of Strait Crossings 94. 1994: 729–734.
[24] Gardner G. Winner small project: Floating bridge}West India Quay an
elegant floating footbridge unites 18th and 20th century London Docklands. The
Architects’ Journal 1994: 11: 10–11.
[25] Japanese Government. Road Law. Law No. 180. 1952.
[26] Ministry of Construction of Japan. Road Structure Ordinance. 1970 (in
Japanese).
[27] Japan Road Association. Specifications, Commentaries on Roadway Bridges.
1–5. 2002.
[28] AASHTO. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. 16th ed. Washing-
ton, DC. 1996.
[29] AASHTO. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Washington, DC. 1994.
[30] API. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Construction Tension
Leg Platforms. 1997.
[31] Gudmestad OT, Holand I & Jersin E. Manual for design of marine
concrete structures. SINTEF Report. 1996.
[32] Nippon Kaiji Kyokai: Japanese Maritime Association. Design Guide
for Mooring System. 1983 (in Japanese).
[33] Society of Steel Construction of Japan. Fatigue Design Guide and
Commentary. 1993.
[34] Coastal Development Institute of Technology of Japan. Technolo-
gical Manual for Floating Structures. 1991 (in Japanese).
[35] Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Design Handbook for Coastal Facility.
2000: 319–325 (in Japanese).
[36] Japanese Association of Port and Harbor. Technological Standard and
Commentary of Port and Harbor Facilities. 1999: 1&2. (in Japanese).
[37] Japan Society of Civil Engineers. Concrete Standard Specifications:
Design. 1996 (in Japanese).
[38] Mitsuyasu H. Observations of the directional spectrum of ocean waves
using a clover leaf buoy. Journal of Physical.Oceanography. 1975: 5.
[39] Nakazawa N. Ice force due to changes in water level, adfreese bond
strength between sea ice and various materials. Journal Offshore Mechanics and Arctic
Engineering (ASME). 1988: 10: 74–80.
[40] Saeki H & Ozaki A. Ice force on a pile. Proceedings of the IUTAM
Symposium, Copenhagen. 1979.
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144
144
[41] Sanderson TJO. A pressure–area curve for ice. Proceedings of the. 8th
IAHR, 1986: 2: 361–384.
[42] Truskov PA, Aslafiev VN & Surkov GA. Problems of choice of sea ice
cover parameters design criteria. Proceedings of the 7th International. Symposium on
Okhotsk Sea and Sea Ice, 1992: 21–25.
[43] Submerged Floating Tunnel Research Group. Submerged Floating
Tunnel. 1995 (in Japanese).
[44] Abe K. Application technology of weathering steel, evaluation of new
weathering Steels. Proceedings of the Symposium on Steel Structures, Bridges, JSCE, 2000:
67–75 (in Japanese).
[45] Ueda S, Shiraishi S, Maruyama T, Uezono A, Takasaki A &
Yamase H. Characteristics of rubber fenders for floating bridges, Proceedings of the
Ocean Engineering Symposium 1998: 359–364 (in Japanese).
[46] Rawson KJ & Tupper EC. Basic Ship Theory, 4 ed. London: Longman
Scientific & Technical 1994.
[47] Vavo P et al. Feasibility of a semi-submersible floating bridge. In:
Krokeborg S (ed.) Strait Crossings Balkema, Rotterdam 1990: 487–495.
[48] Falltinsen OM. Sea loads on ships, offshore structures. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press 1990.
[49] Sarpkaya T & Issacson M. Mechanics of wave forces on offshore
structures. Nostrand Reinhold, New York. 1981: 381–466.
[50] Garrison CJ. Hydrodynamic loading of large offshore structure: three-
dimensional source distribution method. In: Zienkiewics OC et al. (ed.) Numerical
Methods in Offshore Engineering. Wiley. 1978: 87–140.
[51] Matsui T, Kato K & Shirai T. A hybrid integral equation method for
diffraction and radiation of water waves by three-dimensional bodies. Computational
Mechanics 1987: 2: 119–135.
[52] MacCamy RC & Fuchs RA. Wave forces on piles}a diffraction
problem. Technical Memorandum. Beach Erosion Board. 1954: No. 69.
[53] Ursell F. On the heaving motion of a circular cylinder on the surface of a
fluid. Journal of Mechanics. and Applied Mathematics 1949: 2: 218–231.
[54] Havestock T. Wave due to a floating sphere making periodic heaving
oscillations. Proceedings of the Royal Society 1955: 231: 1–7.
[55] Ijima T, Tabuchi Y & Yumura Y. On the motions of a floating circular
cylinder in waves of finite water depth. Proceedings of JSCE 1972: 206: 71–84 (in
Japanese).
[56] Ijima T, Yoshida A & Yumura Y. On the motions of elliptical or
rectangular floating cylinder in waves of finite water depth. Proceedings of JSCE 1975:
244: 91–105 (in Japanese).
[57] Ijima T. The method of potential continuation and boundary element
method in water wave problems. Proceedings of JSCE 1987: 381: 25–34 (in Japanese).
Professor Eiichi Watanabe
School of Civil Engineering,
Kyoto University,
Kyoto 606-8501, Japan
E-mail: watanabe@str.kuniv.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Associate Professor Tomoaki Utsunomiya
School of Civil Engineering,
Kyoto University,
Kyoto 606-8501, Japan
Copyright & 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
[58] Garrison CJ & Philip YC. Wave forces on submerged bodies. Journal of
the Waterways, Harbours and Coastal Engineering Division (ASCE) 1972: 375–392.
[59] Garrison CJ. Interaction of oblique waves with an infinite cylinder. Applied
Ocean Research 1984: 6(1).
[60] Faltinsen F & Michelsen FC. Motions of large structures in waves at
zero Froude number. The Dynamics of Marine Vehicles and Structures in Waves. 1974:
11: 99–114.
[61] Isaacson M. Wave effects on offshore structures}some recent research.
Proceedings of Civil Engineering in the Oceans 1993: 381–426.
[62] Chakrabarti SK. Wave-structure interaction. In: Raddy DV and
Arockiasamy M (eds) Offshore Structures. Malabar, Florida: Krieger 1991. 101–124.
[63] Clauss G, Lehmann E & Ostergaard C. Hydromechanical analysis of
offshore structures. Offshore Structures, Vol. 1, English translation. Springer, London.
1992. 291–306.
[64] Watanabe E, Wu C & Utsunomiya T. Wave forces on large offshore
structures, an effective calculation of Green’s function. Proceedings of the 4th
International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 1994: 252–255.
[65] Watanabe E, Mase H, Utsunomiya T, Wu C, Takahashi M & Iida
T. Evaluation of waver forces on submerged foundation of ocean bridge. Proceedings
of Ocean Engineering ( JSCE) 1994: 41: 856–860 (in Japanese).
[66] Watanabe E, Furuta H, Sugiura K, Utsunomiya T & Okamura K.
Dynamic response analysis of a semi-submerged floating bridge due to waves.
Proceedings of the 3rd KU-KAIST-NTU Trilateral Seminar/Workshop on Civil Engineering,
1993.
[67] Clauss G, Lehmann E & Ostergaard C. Offshore structures. Offshore
Structures, Vol. 1, English translation. Springer, London. 1992. 25–321.
[68] Wehausen JV & Laitone EV. Surface waves. Encyclopedia of Physics. Berlin
Springer. 1960: 9: 469–479.
[69] Watanabe E, Utsunomiya T, Yoshizawa N, Hirahara N,
Fumoto I, Matsunaga S & Ito K. Wave response analysis of a floating body
in the time-domain considering memory effect. Journal of Structural Engineering ( JSCE)
2002: 48A: 963–969 (in Japanese).
[70] Watanabe E, Utsunomiya T, Hashimoto T, Hirahara N &
Fumoto I. Analytical solutions for wave forces on an array truncated floating
cylinders. Journal of Structural Engineering ( JSCE) 2002: 48A: 947–956 (in Japanese).
[71] Kawatani M et al. Vibration serviceability of a floating bridge. Journal of
Structural Engineering. ( JSCE) 1997: 43A: 757–764 (in Japanese).
[72] Cummins WE. The impulse response functions, ship motion. Schiff-
stechnik 1962: 9: 101–109.
[73] Takagi M & Arai S. Theory of Ships and Offshore Structures Resisting Waves.
Seizando. 1996: 567–575 (in Japanese).
Prog. Struct. Engng Mater. 2003; 5:127–144