Section 3
Site Selection
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3 SITE SELECTION ................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.1 Scope........................................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1.2 Considerations .......................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Bridge Alignment.............................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.3 Type of Crossing .............................................................................................................................. 3-3
3.3.1 Crossing Suitability ................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.2 Bridge Types............................................................................................................................. 3-3
3.3.3 Site Conditions.......................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.4 Combined Arrangements.......................................................................................................... 3-4
3.3.5 Waterway Calculations ............................................................................................................. 3-6
3.4 Soil Investigations ............................................................................................................................ 3-8
3.5 Costs and Other Considerations...................................................................................................... 3-8
3.6 Final Selection of Site ...................................................................................................................... 3-8
FIGURES
Figure 3.1: Square versus Skew Alignment ................................................................................................... 3-2
Figure 3.2: Consideration of Bridge and Road ............................................................................................... 3-2
Figure 3.3: General Types of bridges............................................................................................................. 3-5
Figure 3.4: Flood plain Structures .................................................................................................................. 3-5
Figure 3.5: Bridge during Flood...................................................................................................................... 3-6
Figure 3.6: Waterway Area............................................................................................................................. 3-7
DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003 Section 3 – Site Selection
Page i of i
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
3 SITE SELECTION
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 Scope
This section of the manual discusses the basic principles of site selection which AACRA anticipate designers
will investigate, analyse and report on when selecting a suitable bridge site prior to proceeding onto a
detailed site investigation.
The process of selecting a suitable bridge site is a step by step procedure, with information being collected in
the field and then analysed in the design office. This cycle of field work followed by office work may have to
be repeated several times.
3.1.2 Considerations
In selecting a bridge site, AACRA require all relevant factors to be considered. The main factors to be taken
into account are:
• bridge alignment
• type of crossing
• soil investigations
• costs
In many cases, it is impossible to satisfy all of these requirements simultaneously and the bridge designer
can only select the best solution from a multi-criteria evaluation.
3.2 Bridge Alignment
The general principle to be followed is that the bridge should be square, that is, at right angles to the
obstacle (for example, a river) and it should be as short as practicable. Figure 3.1 compares a square
alignment with a skew one.
Figure 3.1 shows that the length and hence cost of the skew solution will obviously be greater than the
square alternative. However the assessment is not as simple as this. It is important to consider the bridge as
part of the road. Thus the structure must satisfy the geometric road design standards for the facility it carries
and hence the geometry of the structure will be governed by the function of the road. All this simply means
that the simplistic comparison of Figure 3.1 is not always true. For instance, in Figure 3.1, Alternative B will
be, in most cases, better than Alternative A.
An acceptable bridge site is then one for which the bridge and approaches are entirely satisfactory from the
point of view of road design. It should be pointed out again that an increasing number of structures are being
determined by road grading requirements which overrule other factors such as waterway requirements.
In most cases, then, the alignment of a bridge will be settled through discussions between the road designer
and the bridge designer. Both sides must compromise to reach a speedy and realistic solution. The relative
importance of the road alignment and bridge are compared on the basis of overall costs and benefits. In
many cases, the demands of traffic volume and safety dictate the location and alignment of the structure. In
some instances, the road alignment can be varied on the grounds of bridge economy, especially so in the
case of major structures in less strategic areas.
The process in which a tentative road alignment, and hence bridge location, is selected usually involves a
submission of alternative alignments by the road designer to the bridge designer. Each of these alignments
is feasible from the point of view of road design standards and economy. The bridge designer will then look
at these alternatives from the point of view of bridging and make a recommendation. Other factors that need
to be considered are detailed in the following sections. The designer however needs not look at these factors
in detail. A complete and thorough assessment will be done once the general problem of location has been
solved, and a bridge type has been selected.
DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003 Section 3 – Site Selection
Page 3-1
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
Figure 3.1: Square versus Skew Alignment
Figure 3.2: Consideration of Bridge and Road
Section 3 – Site Selection DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003
Page 3-2
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
3.3 TYPE OF CROSSING
3.3.1 Crossing Suitability
The suitability of each alternative crossing put forward as a possible bridge site will depend on the type of the
crossing including the river characteristics, where applicable.
Where a river crossing is involved, it is important to make a relatively detailed study of the waterway
requirements at an early stage of the investigation. This study should cover the magnitude and frequency of
floods, flood levels, stream velocities, position of river bed and general hydraulic behaviour at each possible
crossing site.
An idea of the type, height and length of bridge required should then be obtained for each crossing
considered.
3.3.2 Bridge Types
Bridges are classified into four broad types depending on the relationship between the flood levels and the
deck levels of the structure. These are shown in Figure 3.3 and described below:
(a) High Level Bridge
A high level bridge is where the deck of the structure and of the approaches are flood free for the
design flood. This is usually the most expensive structure.
(b) Low Level Bridge
A low level bridge is where the deck of the structure is above the normal flow of the stream but
submerged by the design flood. This type of structure is usually adopted for reasons of economy. It
is a suitable proposition for dry areas, where large floods occur rarely or in mountainous country
where floods could be frequent but would be of short duration.
(c) Fords
Fords can be in the form of a paved crossing of the river bed which would be safe from scouring,
possibly a concrete slab. In normal flow, water passes over the slab at very shallow depth.
(d) Floodway or Causeway
A floodway or causeway, on the other hand, is constructed on a slightly higher level than the
stream bed. Very often a number of pipes or other types of openings are provided under the
causeway to take dry weather flow. A floodway can be expected to be available for use by traffic
for a greater proportion of the time than a ford but is usually more expensive.
The type of structure adopted for any particular crossing depends on the funds available and on
the importance of the road on which the crossing is situated. In general, the saving in cost has to
be weighed against the economic losses caused by the interruption to traffic.
3.3.3 Site Conditions
For each of the above types of bridge there are certain conditions which should be sought in the selection of
the site. Some of these conditions for each of these types are:
DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003 Section 3 – Site Selection
Page 3-3
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
(a) High Level Bridge
(i) Narrow, deep crossing allowing a square bridge;
(ii) Stream bed should be free from scour and saltation;
(iii) Broad flood plains or branching streams are undesirable since distribution of flow is difficult
to calculate and it varies from one flood to another;
(iv) Suitable foundation, for example, rock at shallow depth or firm materials for economical
piling.
(b) Low Level Bridge
(i) Flood plain situations are acceptable;
(ii) Narrow deep channels are not usually suitable unless the banks are cut. In many cases,
siltation then becomes a problem; and
(iii) Ideally, a broad and shallow stream bed with gently sloping banks is required. It is even
more important to prevent scour and siltation in this case than for a high level bridge.
(c) Fords and Floodways
(i) Broad, shallow and reasonably level stream beds are required.
(ii) The stream bed must be stable.
Floodways can be used in conjunction with pipes or other types of culverts which will pass
the dry weather flow (Figure 3.3d).
(d) Culverts
In many instances, it is more economical to use culverts instead of bridging. The bridge designer
must always keep this in mind since culverts can be the best solution. A few relevant points
regarding the use of culverts are listed below.
(i) May be better than bridges in steep country requiring high fills for bridges provided waterway
requirements are satisfied;
(ii) Useful for part-width road construction;
(iii) Useful where the bridge geometry becomes too complex, for example, short radius road
curves, particularly in combination with skew crossings and vertical curves;
(iv) Pipe culverts can be economical in isolated sites;
(v) Should not be used where debris is possible, where the foundation material is soft, or where
extensive stream bed excavation is necessary; and
(vi) Permanent water at the site can also be a problem.
3.3.4 Combined Arrangements
Finally, AACRA require an investigation into the combination of all these general types of bridges and
culverts. This is because in many instances, it may be far more economical to provide for a combination of
structures rather than, say, a single high level bridge. A typical example is that of a flood plain situation
where no well defined channel exists and the whole area is flooded during the design flood. In such a case,
two or more bridges (Figure 3.4a) or a bridge in conjunction with a floodway (Figure 3.4b) or a bridge with a
battery of culverts (Figure 3.4c) could be used.
Section 3 – Site Selection DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003
Page 3-4
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
Figure 3.3: General Types of bridges
Figure 3.4: Flood plain Structures
DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003 Section 3 – Site Selection
Page 3-5
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
Figure 3.5: Bridge during Flood
3.3.5 Waterway Calculations
At this stage, for each of the alternative alignments proposed, a good idea of the number and type of
structure required has been obtained. In order to cost out each proposal as far as bridging is concerned, the
length of the bridges to be used and the number and size of any culverts proposed must be obtained. This
requires a hydrologic and hydraulic study for each possible site. In many instances, rough estimates only are
acceptable at this stage, the detailed investigation being left to the time when a definite crossing has been
selected.
In order to obtain an idea of the dimensions of the structures to be used for each proposal, the bridge
designer must first determine upon the magnitude and frequency of the design flood. The frequency is
dependent on the importance of the road and set by the design standards. The magnitude of the
corresponding flood must, however, be estimated by various methods.
Section 3 – Site Selection DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003
Page 3-6
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
The design flood discharge then allows the designer to look at and calculate, as applicable, the following
stream data:
• the design flood level
• the waterway area required
• the velocity through the structures
• the afflux or the head of water built up by the construction
• the presence and type of debris, and hence the amount of clearance or freeboard
• normal water levels
• navigation clearances, if applicable.
The meanings of most of the items listed can be best understood with reference to Figure 3.5 where a high
level bridge is considered.
The design flood level for the specified return period, for example, 100 year flood for normal structures, is
usually taken to be the flood level for the unrestricted channel. This is usually calculated from the design
discharge and site characteristics, or even from historical records.
Figure 3.6: Waterway Area
The amount of waterway to be provided determines the length of the bridge, and is basically defined as
being the area below flood level at the site with the proposed bridge in place (see Figure 3.6).
The waterway area must be of sufficient amount so as to keep the velocity of flow through the structure
within acceptable limits so that no or tolerable scouring occurs, and to maintain the backwater effect or afflux
within specified limits. The afflux (see Figure 3.5) is the heading up which occurs upstream from the crossing
as a consequence of introducing such a constriction in the stream. It becomes an important consideration if
properties upstream of the bridge are likely to be flooded as a result of building the new structure. In many
cases, it is also important to determine the extent of this heading up or backwater effect.
Where a bridge is designed to pass floods of high return periods, clearance is provided between the
underside of the structure and the design flood level, to provide for the passage of debris. This clearance is
also known as freeboard. The amount of freeboard, which also determines the level of the bridge deck,
depends on the likely incidence and size of debris.
Normal water level as well as minimum water levels are useful for both designer and bridge builder.
DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003 Section 3 – Site Selection
Page 3-7
GUIDELINE 4
AACRA BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL
The hydraulic investigation can become very complex especially in cases where several structures, for
example, a bridge and a battery of culverts, must be provided at the same crossing. Past calculations have
often been very approximate and ad-hoc, but today with the availability of backwater curve computer
packages a more rational approach can be applied. Details on the application of these analyses are provided
in the AACRA Drainage Design Manual.
3.4 SOIL INVESTIGATIONS
At this early stage of deciding on the best location to adopt, a preliminary soil investigation should be carried
out to determine the suitability or not of the various sites for the bridge types the designer wants to use.
Soil conditions can and do vary from site to site and this can dramatically affect the overall cost of the bridge.
However, it is not normally economically feasible to spend a lot of time and money on soil testing. In the
majority of cases, for bridge structures, the choice will be between driven piles, spread footings or in-situ pile
foundations. At this stage, the preliminary foundation investigation must be sufficient to allow a tentative
judgement to be made of the foundation type suitable and allow comparative estimates to be made.
Some of the common methods used are:
• Inspection of the site to look at the general soil condition, for example, presence of rock, type of soil, etc.
• Look at information already available such as existing bridges at nearby locations, and geological maps.
• In some instances, test holes can be drilled but the timing of preliminary bores usually depends on the
importance of the structure. And, this is only carried out after the site location has been chosen.
3.5 COSTS AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
The various possible crossings are basically compared on a cost basis. Therefore economy is of prime
importance. Additional factors which must be looked at for each alternative include:
• Need and extent of land and building acquisition.
• Need to maintain a smooth traffic flow during construction. It is usually preferable to retain an existing
bridge to carry this traffic rather than dismantle it to enable a new bridge to be constructed. Stage
construction in part widths is usually slow and expensive.
• A knowledge of the availability, quality and cost of construction materials should be obtained. The
suitability of areas close to the crossing for setting up a construction depot, stock piles, a casting yard,
etc. should be investigated. And, it is also important to find out if good access for vehicles carrying bridge
materials, components and equipment is available.
3.6 FINAL SELECTION OF SITE
The final selection of bridge site is not as difficult as it might seem from the foregoing. Although it is rare for
one alignment to satisfy all the requirements which must be considered, the bridge designer, to start off with,
must be constrained to adopt the preferred line of the road designer. This is especially so in cases where the
road costs far exceed the costs of bridging. It is also very rare that this preferred line is so poor from the point
of view of bridge design and construction that no feasible bridge layout is possible.
In most cases, once the types of structure and their dimensions have been determined for each route it is
easy to cost these alternatives and, in consultation with the road design engineer, make a recommendation.
The general type of bridge to be used is almost invariably preset by the importance of the road, and
preliminary waterway calculations will quickly give a good idea of the bridge dimensions. It is often only then
that soil conditions and other requirements listed in Section 3.5 are considered.
An outline of factors and final site selection recommendations shall be reported to AACRA as part of the
preliminary design report as described in Section 4 of this Manual.
Section 3 – Site Selection DRAFT FINAL Rev.0 - January 2003
Page 3-8
