Bridge 2 conference paper critically analysing Anzac Bridge, Sydney

Charlie Allen

University of Bath

Abstract: This article critically analyses the qualities of the Anzac bridge in Sydney under several headings.
The analysis will provide information on how the bridge performs structurally and aesthetically with
considerations made to how any sensible improvements could have been made in both cases.

1 General Introduction
2.1 Fulfulment of Function
The Anzac Bridge was designed when the old
Glebe Island failed to meet the traffic requirements for the The structure of the bridge and the function of
volume of traffic travelling between Pyrmont and the bridge is clearly shown. The obvious massiveness of
Balmain. The bridge was initially considered as a box the piers shows that it must have to withstand
girder bridge that would have followed roughly the same considerable compressive and bending stresses. Also the
shape as the deck on the actual bridge. The proposed materials present in the bridge are used in a way that
bridge had 2 piers that sat in the water. Checks were done makes the most of their inherent strength, thus, making it
to find whether a collision with a ship would affect any of clear what the different components are doing. Most
the underground services. It was concluded that the risk of notably using concrete in the piers for compression and
damaging the services was too great and the design was steel in the cables for tension. Also, the bases of the piers
thrown out. This left the design team needing a larger are considerably thicker than at the top. This clearly
span so that the piers could be out of the water and expresses that it requires the piers to be stronger at this
therefore required some sort of suspension structure. They position due to the higher bending moment.
chose to build a cable stayed bridge and that is what now
stands over the city of Sydney.
The bridge spans a total of 805m with a central
cable stayed span of 345m and cable stayed spans of
140m either side of this span. The Approach roads are
concrete box sections and have relatively short spans.
In the cable stayed portion, two concrete piers
support the deck through 128 cables. Each pier forms an
A-frame at which the cables join at the top and stretch to
the deck. The cables support two prestressed concrete
beams and anchor at 10.3m intervals along them. The
beams run along each edge of the deck and support
concrete cross girders that span the 32m width of the
bridge. The prestressed cross girders are placed at 5.7m
intervals, under and between the cables, and support the Figure 1: Photo showing large pier heads
main prestressed concrete slab of the bridge.
Each of the stay cables is surrounded by a plastic
sheath and these are all of equal size despite the cables
2 Aesthetics being of various sizes. Perhaps, for the integrity of the
structure, the cables could have been left open just with
Aesthetics are in most cases the publics’ their waxy coating, showing their true size. Therefore it
understanding of a bridge and will therefore be judged would be clear that the cables nearest the piers are three
most heavily on it. Of course the quality of the times smaller than the ones furthest away from the pier
engineering in the bridge carried over into the aesthetics and therefore make it more obvious which cables are
of the bridge and is therefore taking most load.

Charlie Allen

2.2 Proportions
The bridge generally expresses good proportions,
however the size of the anchorage points at the top of the
piers are particularly large and makes the piers look
particularly top heavy. In order to have remedied this
problem the arrangement of the cables could have been
changed to reduce the anchorage points in a given area or
the number of cables could have been reduced. Obviously
the latter has large implications on the size of the deck
and therefore would probably ruin its proportions.
However, by making the arrangement of the cables more
harped as opposed to the present more fanned
arrangement you could spread the anchorage points down
in to the legs of the piers and reduce the amount of
concrete required at the top of the pier. As well as
changing the cable arrangement the size of the piers could
have been increased towards the top so that the anchorage
at the top doesn’t look so obviously big relative to the
legs.
The height of the pier relative to the deck’s
clearance seems to have good proportions.
The cable stays are spaced so that they can
clearly be seen, however I feel that the spacing is too
close and the repetition is overdone as a result. It would
seem more correct if they were spaced slightly farther
apart. This would again increase the span of each deck
segment and hence its depth, which could have an adverse
effect on the proportions.
2.3 Order
There is a definite order to the Anzac bridge.
There is a clear biaxial symmetry about the centre of the
bridge when you look at in plan. This symmetry creates
an ordered feel.
Any changes that can be observed in the cables
are gradual and ordered such as the spacing of the cables
at the deck. As a result of this spacing the angles that the
cables make change regularly. The anchorage positions at
the top of the piers are evenly spaced again creating order.
When your eye goes across the bridge in
elevation from a distance it easily flows across it without
getting caught on any disorder within the bridge.
Charlie Allen
Figure 2: Criss-cross of cables
When viewing the bridge from an oblique angle, because
of the 2 sets of cable some crossover occurs between them
creating a lot of disorder and your view is suddenly ruined
as your eye notices the severe and quite disordered
changes of angle of the cables (see fig2).
In order to prevent this problem there are several things
that can be done. Most severely, one line of cables could
be used, however, this has huge effects on the rest of the
bridge and it would essentially become a completely
different bridge.
Secondly the arrangement of the cables could be
changed so as to limit the criss-cross effect.
By using a harp arrangement it limits the amount of
cross over because all the angles are the same. Finally, by
making the cable less obvious by changing their colour
the effect of the crossover could be reduced.
2.4 Refinements
The corners of the piers on the underside of the
deck have been chamfered to create a less acute angle and
therefore reduce the number of sharp angles on the piers.
The chamfer also tapers to the top so that it accentuates
the fact that the concrete is thicker at the bottom. In my
opinion tapering the chamfer as much as they have was a
bad idea because it makes the bridge base look bulky and
squat.
At each end of the cable stay groups there are a
group of 4 cables that are much closer together. This
refinement creates a sort of border to the cable groups,
telling you when they are beginning and ending.
The pier elements have been made thinner at the
top in an attempt to make the piers more elegant, whilst
also making the piers more efficient in bending.
Under the deck on the piers there is a concrete
beam that acts to tie the two arms of the A-frame pier. It
has been positioned under the deck where it is hidden and
therefore doesn’t wreck the way that the A-frames of the
pier acts as a gateway onto the bridge. When looking at
the bridge close up there are vertical street lamps that line
the edge of the roads. These street lamps cross the cables
and draw your eye away from the flow of the cables. The
lamps could have been designed more conscientiously
trying to incorporate them into the cables somehow.
2.5 Integration into the environment
Anzac Bridge spans between the suburban area
of Balmain and the central part of the city in Pyrmont.
The tall piers of the bridge blend in well with the towers
of the nearby central business district on the Pyrmont
side. Their shear size seems to overbear on the low-lying
Balmain and for this reason it feel cabled stayed
construction was a poor choice. I feel as though a low
lying bridge would have suited the crossing between these
very different areas better.
Rather more successfully, the piers seem to act
as gateways between Balmain and Pyrmont accentuating
the passage between the two.
Although there is an existing bridge (Glebe
island bridge), it has very little effect on the Anzac
bridge’s integration to the environment because it is so
small and is very easily ignored when viewing Anzac were available. I shall be considering some of the load
bridge. over a segment which is considered as 10.3m X 32m
I shall consider the load of one of the 10.3m deck
2.6 Texture segments that has 2 main edge beams and cross girders. A
section of the deck is shown below.
The Bridge uses a matt finish on all the concrete
elements which is good and it also uses a shiny plastic
cover over the cables. This allows for the cables to reflect
light from street lights so that they are visible in the dark
and also the effect is seen in sunlight.

2.7 Colour

The concrete has been left plain probably more

for practical reasons and I see no benefit to colouring it. It
needs to be quite subtle because it is already bold by its Figure 3: Section of Deck
size.
The cables are coloured black which means that
they can be seen against white/grey cloud and against
blue sky and as stated before are shiny so that they reflect
light and are visible with low light.
In my opinion a light coloured cable would have Figure 4: Section of Cross girder
been a better choice because this would have softened the
criss-crossing effect of the cables. The Density of concrete I am using is
2400kg/m3 = 24kN/m3.
2.8 Character
The weight of the slab per segment:
This bridge is quite straight forward and really
doesn’t have a great deal of character. The towers do 0.25 × 10.3 × 32 × 24 = 1980 kN
stand out above the suburbs like a new skyscraper which
gives the bridge some character. The bridge is quite The weight of each longitudinal beam per
simple and because of this people can see how it works segment:
and accept it.
1 × 1.85 × 10.3 × 24 = 457 kN
2.9 Complexity
The weight of each cross girder :
The complexity of this bridge is indeed kept to a
minimum as addressed in function. This a particularly
common style of cable stayed bridge and therefore 0.5 × 1.6 × 32 × 24 = 614 kN
complexity seems as though it would be completely
superfluous. 3.2 Super-imposed Dead Load

2.10 Nature Next, considering Superimposed dead load,

This bridge incorporates nature well. Like a
spiders web there is a foundation for the web to be strung
from and these are the piers. The cables are acting as the
web. A spider’s web uses the material that are available to
it well. Using them in their most appropriate mode just as
the cable stayed bridge.
3 Loading
In this section the loads of the bridge will be
calculated for dead, super imposed dead and live loading.
3.1 Dead Load
calculate a load for the asphalt over one segment using
density = 23kN/m3:
0.05 × 32 × 10.3 × 23 = 380 kN
3.3 Live Loading
Considering the live loading I must take into
account HA loading, HB loading and KEL.
The bridge is well over 380m in length and
therefore a loading of 9kN/m per notional lane is used.
For HB loading it is suitable, due to the size of
the bridge to consider the full 45 units to be applied to the
HB load. This means that each axle will impart 450 kN
B

Firstly I shall consider the dead load that the
bridge will be exposed to. In order to do this I will be
neglecting the steel within the concrete for simplification
and treating it as solid concrete. I have had to assume
some of the dimensions because of a lack of information
however they are based on some of the dimensions that
onto the deck. The position of these axles will depend on
the specific load case that will have the most adverse
effect. Any HB loading will have to straddle two lanes.
The width of an HB truck is 3.5m however the actual lane
widths of the bridge are 3.1m.

Charlie Allen
 A Knife Edge Load of 120kN per notional lane
will be applied where necessary transversely across a line q = 0.613vc
2
on the deck along with HA loading.
q = 1030 N / m 2
3.4 Converting Loads
Finally converting this into horizontal wind load:
The width of each carriageway lies between
11.4m and 15.2m and therefore is considered to have 4
lanes. This makes 8 notional lanes for the whole of the Pt = qA1C D
bridge deck. The live loads can now be calculated into a Where:
more useful load /m2. The actual lane width is 3.1 m and
therefore: d = d3 = 1.85 +4
HA = 9 ÷ 3.1 = 2.9kN / m 2 = 5.85 m
CD = 1.3
The KEL can also be converted: q = 1030 N/m2
A1 = 5.85 x 620
= 3630 m2
KEL = 120 ÷ 3.1 = 38.7 kN / m
∴ Pt = 1.03 × 3630 × 1.3
Although the live loading on a bridge is often
much smaller than the dead load, considerations should be Pt = 4.9 MN
made about the position that you apply the live loads to
create the most adverse effect. For horizontal loading the case for wind loading
without HA or HB is not critical because there are no
No Centrifugal loading should be considered bearings that would be susceptible to horizontal load. For
because the bridge or at least the cable stayed portion of this reason the height was taken as a the full depth of the
the bridge that I am considering is straight. deck and the height of the truck above it.
Longitudinal loading should be considered on 3.6 Horizontal wind load on Piers
the bridge. Firstly, 8kN/m should be applied along one
notional lane along with a 200kN force. When HB The breadth and depth of the piers vary largely,
loading is applied 25% of the total nominal HB load affecting the ratios as shown below, so an average value
should be applied longitudinally over 2 axles. Using will be used in calculating the drag coefficient.
maximum units of HB loading HB skidding force per axle
is:
2 t
〈 〈1
0.25 × 1800 ÷ 2 = 900kN 3 b
&
An accidental skidding load should be applied as h
250kN force acting in the plane of the deck in any 30〈 〈18.5
b
direction.
For a collision force acting against the parapet,
Therefore use a conservative average of Cd = 2.
25 units of HB load, equating to 1000kN in the case of
this bridge would be used. No other impact loads need to
The elevation of the pier is:
be considered as the bridge deck is essentially separate
from the piers.
Longitudinal loads will be generally ignored
when calculating forces because of their complexity.

3.5 Wind Loading

The Equation to find max gust is:

v c = vk1 S1 S 2
Where:
v = 25m/s (assumed)
K1 = 1.4
S2 = 1.17 Figure 5: Elevation of pier
S1 = 1 ( no funnelling )
Projected area of concrete A1 = 658 m2
∴ vc = 41m / s
Force on pier:

Converting this into dynamic pressure head:

Charlie Allen
 ∴ Pt = 1.03 × 658 × 2 Figure 6: Loading for worst sagging in slab

Pt = 1.36 MN

Vertical Wind Load case 2, cross girder in bending

The equation giving the vertical wind force that

can be considered up or down is given by the equation:

Pv = qA3 C L

Where
q= 1030 N/m2 Figure 7: Worst loading for Cross girder in bending
A3= 19840m2
These loads would be accompanied by a
The vertical load should be considered as both uplift and downward wind force.
downward force. The uplift should be used to give the
worst bending in the piers and the downward force should Load Case 3, Longitudinal Beam in sagging
be used for various worst case loading combinations. For
uplift you want to minimise downward force and
therefore would not consider vehicular loading. As a
result the depth, d, is considered as d1= 1.85m.
Conversely, the downward wind will be worst
with vehicular loading and therefore d = 5.85m.
These give CL values of :
Figure 8: Loading for Sagging in central span
CL LOADED = 0.4
The live loaded spans should be accompanied by a
CL UNLOADED = 0.15
downward wind force and the other spans an upward
wind force.
∴ PVDOWN = 1.03 × 19840 × 0.4
PVDOWN = 8200kN

PVUP = 1.03 × 19840 × 0.15

PVUP = 3065kN

Longitudinal wind loads

These wind loads are important but are too

complicated to consider in analysis. However it is likely
that these winds will most adversely affect bending in the
pier and the cable stress.
3.6 Load Cases
Figure 9: Lane Loading for bending in Cross girder
The live loaded spans would be accompanied by
a downward wind. In this case the formtraveller would be
supported in the central span

Below are load cases that bring about the most

adverse effect in various different members. For dead load Load Case 4, cables in tension
that is relieving the effect of live loading, a load factor of
1 should be applied.

Load case 1,slab in sagging

Figure 11: construction forces acting with dead load and

wind

Charlie Allen
 ϒf3 = 1.1

Total vertical reaction of cable P:

1.15 × 1.1 × ( 2620 + 4120 ) × 0.5 = 4260 kN

Load Case 5, Pier in Bending Resolving this into the tension T in the worst case cable at
the middle of bridge:

T = 4260 ÷ Sin29.2 = 8700kN

The remaining cables on the central span have been
calculated and tabulated along with the number of cables
that would be required relative to the actual number of
cables. The cables are ordered from the middle of the
bridge towards the piers.
Figure 10: Loading for bending in piers
Angle Cable Tension Number of 15.7mm
This loading will give worst bending in the towers. An (degrees) (kN) cables
upward wind force should also be applied to the central 29.2 8740 27.4
span. A KEL and HB loading should also be loaded in the 30.4 8428 26.4
middle of one of the outer spans to further accentuate the 31.7 8111 25.4
bending. Longitudinal forces from breaking and wind 33.2 7788 24.4
could also be considered to worsen the bending in the
34.8 7459 23.4
piers.
36.7 7126 22.3
Load Case 6, General case Loading for max 38.9 6789 21.3
hogging moment 41.3 6452 20.2
44.2 6116 19.1
47.4 5784 18.1
51.2 5462 17.1
55.7 5157 16.1
60.9 4876 15.3
66.9 4631 14.5
Figure 11: Loading case for hogging 73.8 4436 13.9
81.6 4307 13.5
This a general load case for a continuous span. An uplift
wind should also be applied to the unloaded areas. The
Distance between the Axles of the HB load will depend Table 1: Forces in Stay Cables
on the size of the spans but if possible 2 axels should be
applied to adjacent spans as shown above. Comparing this to the actual number of cables I
know that the number of cables at the middle of the
3.7 Calculating Cable Tensions bridge was 74 compared to the 27.4 calculated here.
This discrepancy is most likely due to the many
The Worst load case as far as the cables are assumptions that have been made and neglecting more
concerned is during construction when the travelformer is complicated loading types will also reduce the forces in
in position to cast on the extreme slab. This comes under the cables. Also an assumption was made that the strength
load combination 2, ignoring any traffic on the road of the steel used was 1650N/mm2. The actual value for the
because it is very unlikely that the bridge will have those strength of the steel used might have been used as much
types of loading on it during construction. This loading is less than this.
shown in load case 4.
Considering a single segment of the deck I know 3.8 Calculation of the deck compression
that when the formtraveller is on the outer segment the
next segment in will feel roughly half the weight of the For simplicity HB loading has been ignored for
travel former (262 tonnes) and the weight of a whole this calculation. HB loading would have a relatively small
segment in dead weight (412 tonnes). Additionally. A effect due to the summation of the compression values
wind load would also be added but I’ve neglected it for between the middle of the deck and the pier. Also wind
simplicity of calculation. loading has been neglected.
The load factors for use here are:
ϒfl = 1.15 (erection load)
ϒfl = 1.15 (dead load) ϒfl = 1.15 (dead load)

Charlie Allen
ϒfl = 1.75 (superimposed dead)
ϒfl = 1.5 ( HA loading) The capacity of the concrete is 31MPa so this stress is
ϒf3 =1.1 very small. This value would then need to be checked
with bending in the deck but has not been considered
here.

Vertical Load per cable 3.9 Calculating the compression in the tower

Using the load case 4, making the assumption that both
the lanes of the full HA will be taken by the cable on that
side of the deck for simplicity.
Calculating the compression in the first span.
The cable tension is worked out in the same manner as
before and is then resolved back into a horizontal force
which then goes in to the deck. It has been simplified so
that both cables are carrying the same force despite the
load case above showing asymmetric loading. The forces
below are the sum of the effects of both cables. This force
is calculated for each span and they are summed towards
the pier. The first Segment was calculated as below.
In order to reduce the bending in the piers the
loads should be about equal on opposite sides of the pier.
Therefore, multiplying the total load down on half the
central span by 2, the total load in the pier can be
obtained; this value should then be halved to find the load
in each arm.
The total force P:
P = 2 × 16 × 3380 ÷ 2 = 54080kN
Using the smallest section under compression we
can find the stresses in the pier legs.

C = 2 × TCos29.2 = 12109kN A = (4.6 × 2 × 0.515) + (( 4.1 − ( 2 × 0.515)) × 0.515)

The rest of the compression values are shown below. A = 6.32m 2

Table 2: Compression Forces in Deck Using Eq (1):

Typical vertical Cable Deck
load (kN) Tension (kN) Compression (kN) σ = 54080000 ÷ 6320000 = 8.6 N/mm2
3380.0 6934 12109
This stress is much smaller than the yield stress
3380.0 6687 23650
of 31N/mm however again this would have to be checked
3380.0 6435 34602
with the bending in the pier which hasn’t been considered.
3380.0 6179 44947
3380.0 5918 54663 3.10 Temperature Loading
3380.0 5654 63727
3380.0 5387 72116 An assumption that has to be made when
3380.0 5119 79805 considering the effect of expansion due to temperature is
3380.0 4852 86767 that any expansion joints present are clogged up.
3380.0 4589 92976 A range of temperature in Sydney is assumed
3380.0 4334 98402 between 450C and – 50C. Also the datum temperature at
3380.0 4091 103013 which the deck became effectively restrained is assumed
3380.0 3869 106777 at 150C.The possible effective temperature rise is
3380.0 3674 109658 therefore considered as 300C. The concrete slab deck is in
3380.0 3519 111619 Group 4 and h=0.25m.
Maximum effective bridge temperature is given
3380.0 3417 112621
as 320C.
Again the results are ordered from the middle of the
T1=320C
central span to the pier.
T2=100C
Checking the maximum compression with the
T3=30C
cross section of the deck.
The Profile of the deck is shown below and this
is simplified to a linear temperature profile
σ = F/A. (1)

F=112621kN

A= (2x1000x1850)+(32000x0.25)
= 3708000mm2

σ = 112621000/30708000
= 3.7 MPa
Charlie Allen

Figure 12: Temperature Profiles of slab
This Profile can then be used to find the strains and
stresses caused by the temperature rise. The CA is
assumed to be in the centre of the slab ie. neglecting
reinforcement. These steps are shown below:
Figure 13: Steps to find Axial Load and Moment caused
by temperature rise
The equations used for the above steps were:
ε = t ×α . (2)
. σ = ε × E. (3)
This moment and axial stress profile can then be used to
find their bending moment and axial force respectively.
Equations used are Eq(1) and:
My (3)
σ= . piers tied together does not create the torsional strength
I
(4)
bd 3
I= .
12
The force in the slab for 1m width is
Using Eq (1)
F = σA
F = 6.31× 1000 × 250 = 1.58MN
For a 1m wide section of the slab I = 1.3 x 109mm4
Using Eq (3)
M = 5.21 × 1.3 × 10 9 ÷ 125 = 54.2kNm
These loads should then be added to the position
at which they are most adverse. This is likely to be where
there is somewhere under heavy compression. However
the section at any given position may change and
therefore this load might not be applicable anyway in the
slab.
4 Design
The frame of the pier wraps around the deck and
joins back together at the base. The reason for doing this
is most likely that it saves money on foundations. By
localizing the foundation in one position under each pier
the cost of material and labour etc will be hugely reduced.
Charlie Allen
However, the resulting delta shape makes the structure
quite inefficient. The cables pull in line with the arms of
the pier above the deck but as the pier legs come back into
the middle of the pier, the line of the load leaves the
structure. This creates a lever arm between the line of the
load and the base. This causes a large moment to be set up
at the knee joint and at the base. The diagrams below
illustrate this problem, with a suggestion of a more
efficient frame
Figure 14: Schematic of actual pier next to possible
improved pier (arrows showing the line of force)
In order to combat this moment, a concrete tie has been
put in to tie the two halves of the pier together at the knee
joints. With the alternative design on the right this tie
would not be necessary and the design would appear a lot
more simple.
Ideally, for taking the vertical load the piers
would have vertical towers with cables, however this
would reduce the torsional strength and even having two
that the A-frame achieves. As well as this the A-frame
reduces the aesthetic deficiency caused by the
crisscrossing of fanned cables.
In order to reduce some of the effect of the wind
on the piers its profile could’ve been changed so that it
was more rounded and therefore had a much lower drag
coefficient. This could have been done in all directions
and this would help reduce the moment in the piers.
Changing the shape of the deck to a more aerodynamic
shape might be unwise though as it is very complicated
and it may involve creating an aerofoil which may limit
the bridges use for lorries in high winds.
5 Construction
5.1 Piers
The First part of the construction that was
undertaken was the 56 piles being driven to bedrock
under the position for the base of each pier. A steel pile
cap was then put on the piles.
The piers were the first visible concrete to be
constructed. These 120m tall hollow towers vary form
about 4m to 6.5m across with a 0.52m wall thickness.
Formwork was set up around the pile group,
tendons fixed to the base and then the first segment was
cast to around 4m high. Then the formwork is removed
and jacked up waiting for the segment to strengthen
before the next pour. The next pour required formwork to
be jacked up and attached to the leg with no attachment to
the ground. Each leg would be constructed
simultaneously so that no imbalance of loads would occur
and little bending would be induced in the piers. Once the
construction reached the knee joint of the A-frame a cross
bar that would tie the two legs together was cast with the
formwork held up on steel girders and support towers.
After this was complete the casting of the legs would
continue.
Figure 15: Simultaneous Casting of pier legs (formwork)
Fig 15 also shows clearly the concrete tie
between the legs of the pier.
As they grew, temporary ties were put in
between the towers so that they didn’t move too much in
the wind. Special formwork was then put in place to case
the final few pour of the pier head.
5.2 Cantilever Construction
This process involved balancing out the deck
from both piers in both directions until they meet in the
middle.
Figure 16: Image showing balanced cantilever
construction
To begin the process of casting the deck and attaching the
cables to it, scaffolding was erected around the base of the
piers and the formwork was fixed on top and the first
deck segment was poured. After the segment was poured
the tendons in the deck, girder and beams were jacked out
to post tension them. Once to the correct tension, grout
was injected into the tendon casing to bind them to the
concrete and keep the compression in the concrete. A
Charlie Allen
segment either side of this initial pour was also cast on the
scaffolding supported formwork.
To create the cables stays to fix in to the beams
several steps were taken. Firstly, a strand of the cable was
cut to length, one end fixed to the beam and the other end
drawn through the polyethylene tubing (also measured to
fit) to the tower head. Here a hydraulic jack tensioned the
strand and the ends were wedged. For the rest of the
strands a draw wire was sent down the tube to pull up
another strand to the tower. This was then tensioned and
wedged. This was done until the correct number of cables
were in place and they were all at the same tension. On
the west side, on land, a rolling frame (left of Fig 15) was
in place to support the formwork. The frame would
support the formwork until the pour had set and the frame
would be let down slightly so that it roll to its next
position. This frame along with temporary towers allowed
large segments to be cast. During construction the frame
anchored the deck to the ground and prevented it from
swaying in the wind.
It was always ensured the “out of balance”
segment was cast on the land said as this could be
supported on the frame and the whole tower wouldn’t
topple words the river. Also, weights were put on the land
side as an extra precaution against overbalancing on the
river side
When casting the slab out over the river a
formtraveller was used (see Fig 16) that was supported by
the deck itself moved the formwork incrementally out
over the water. Firstly as it casts a segment it is supported
using post tensioning bars and two C-braces that hook
around the side beams. Once the concrete has hardened
sufficiently, hydraulic jacks drop the formtraveller down
2.2m and it is slowly jacked forward into its next casting
position.
On the west side the frame couldn’t be used
because traffic needed to use roads under the construction.
Therefore, framework and trusses were used to give some
clearance for cars. This made the construction much more
expensive.
After the final stayed segments were cast came
the job of casting the two halves of the bridge together.
The final span was cast at night so that there was a more
constant temperature. The two halves were clamped
together by temporary beams and the span cast. This
segment was then compressed considerably using post
stressing to make sure that it didn’t go into compression.
Finally all the cables were tightened to give the
desired profile of the bridge.
A possible cheaper and quicker construction
technique might have been to use precast slabs that could
be lifted from a barge in the harbour and held by cranes in
place as they are tied in place by prestressing and stay
cable is threaded in to the section. The order of
construction wouldn’t change but there would be no
travelformer and the flexibility in construction would be
much greater.
6 Durability
 The cables were protected to improve their
durability. Each wire was galvanized, covered in a
polyethene sheath and then injected with petroleum wax.
A further polyethylene pipe covers the These all
protected the cables against oxidization.
The decks protection consisted of applying a
bitumen that fills in any of the cracks present in the
concrete. Then a polymerized binder was sprayed on the
this surface creating a waterproof coating. The pavement
surface could then be put on top. This protection should
reduce the water getting into the concrete and corroding
the steel inside. It will also help protect the concrete
against various types of chemical corrosion.
No data on the concrete mix or the sections could
be found so to ensure that the bridge remains durable the
sufficient cover should have been provided to protect the
steel. It should also have been compacted correctly and
the correct mix should have been used to help prolong its
life.
The durability can often be reduced by fatigue.
On a bridge this may come in the form of the cyclical
loads of traffic on the deck that can cause fatigue on the
concrete, particularly around the stay anchorages.
Large cyclical variations in temperature can also
lead to fatigue. There are no real ways to prevent these
effects and therefore the safest way to deal with them is to
monitor the carefully and regularly so that if it comes to it
a repair can be made at an early point before it becomes a
serious problem
7 Changes made to the bridge
One assition to the bridge is an elevator that goes
up one leg of a pier allowing service . Anzac Bridge has
already in its relatively short history had to make changes.
The bridge width does not seem to have been designed
with increasing the number of lanes in mind. Originally
the bridge contained two carriageways with three lanes in
each. The lanes were of a standard 3.65m width.
Obviously there has been a rise in traffic and the bridge
required widening. This meant that they actually had to
Charlie Allen
remove some of the lane width of each lane to have
enough width to add 2 lanes. The addition of 2 lanes of
traffic means that the lane width is now only 3.1m. No
more lanes should be expected on the bridge so the fact
that there is no more room shouldn’t pose a problem.
8 Susceptibility to intentional damage
This bridge is quite a successful design in terms
of how it reacts to intentional damage. If one of the cables
is taken out it is likely that the remaining cable should be
able to cope with the extra loading. Also, if one half of the
bridge is wiped out, theoretically the other half should be
able stand free as this was after all how it was
constructed. If any single part of the bridge is removed a
large proportion of the rest of the structure should
theoretically remain.
Acknowledgements
The guideline notes that were provided by
Professor Tim Ibell have given a basis for this conference
paper. I would like to thank him sincerely for making the
notes available.
References
[1] Moore,D., To build a Bridge Glebe Island Sydney
Australia ISBN 0 947322 10 8
[2] Engineers Australia Journal
August 1995 "Cable-stayed link across the bay"
[3] http://www.bh.com.au/capabilities/ViewProject.asp
x?ArtID=37
[4] http://www.vinidex.com.au/vinidex/live/me.get?
SITE.home&FFFF130
[5] http://www.ozroads.com.au/NSW/Freeways/West
ernDistributor/Anzac%20Bridge/anzacbridge.htm