A comparative analysis of the conservative bridge transition design approaches

Differential settlement at the bridge approach between the deck and rail track on ground is often considered as a source of challenging technical and economical problem. This caused by the sudden stiffness changes between the bridge deck and the track on ground, and changes in soil stiffness of backfill and sub-grade with soil moisture content and loading history. To minimise the negative social and economic impacts due to poor performances of railway tracks at bridge transition zones, it is important, a special attention to be given at design, construction and maintenance stages. It is critically challenging to obtain an appropriate design solution for any given site condition and most of the existing conventional design approaches are unable to address the actual on-site behaviour due to their inherent assumptions of continuity and lack of clarifying of the local effects. An evaluation of existing design techniques is considered to estimate their contributions to a potential solution for bridge transition zones. This paper analyses five different approaches: the Chinese Standard, the European Standard with three different approaches, and the Australian approach. Each design approach is used to calculate the layer thicknesses, accounting critical design features such as the train speed, the axle load, the backfill subgrade condition, and the dynamic loading response. Considering correlation between track degradation and design parameters, this paper concludes that there is still a need of an optimised design approach for bridge transition zones.