Millau Viaduct

Table of Contents
Table of Contents........................................................................................................ 1
Introduction................................................................................................................ 2
Body........................................................................................................................... 2
Choosing the Design............................................................................................... 2
Main Criteria for Selecting the Final Design..........................................................3
Different design options and choosing the final design of the bridge..................3
Challenges............................................................................................................... 4
Financial challenges............................................................................................. 5
Environmental challenges.................................................................................... 5
Technical challenges............................................................................................ 6
Construction Process............................................................................................... 6
Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 8
References.................................................................................................................. 8

Introduction
With a central pillar higher than Eiffel Tower, the Millau Viaduct is considered to be the tallest
bridge in the world. Crossing the River Tarn in the Massif Central Mountains of Southern
France, this inspiring engineering marvel is both beautiful and highly functional in its capacity as
a road bridge.
For such an amazing structure, the Millau Viaducts beginnings were rather banal. At the rear of
the valley lay the town of Millau which, especially during the summer months, was plagued by
congestion as a result of traffic problems from the route between Paris and Spain. A new route
was needed, and a bridge across the valley was essential to that route. The Millau Viaduct
would be that bridge.
(Wikipedia 2011)

Body
Plans were discussed by CETE to come up with a decision by October 1991 to build the cablestayed bridge Millau Viaduct. Seven architects and eight structural engineers were consulted to
work on the project. In 1996 another associated group of five architects and structural engineers
started a definitive study. In June 2000, a construction contest for the contract was launched. In
March 2001 Eiffage established the subsidiary Compagnie Eiffage du Viaduc de Millau (CEVM)
and was declared winner of the contest.

Choosing the Design

A group of international characters with knowledge and experience in technical, architectural
and landscaping fields were lead by Jean-Franois Coste to identify the options available and to
select from the choices that were available to the project.

Main Criteria for Selecting the Final Design

Many things had to be considered in the approval of the construction the bridge.
Firstly, there had to be an ease of transport between the Northern and Southern parts of France.
Shortening the journey time would greatly improve mobility between communities. A bridge such
as the Millau Viaduct would halve the length and time necessary for the journey.
Secondly, the bridge should serve as a landmark. The bridge serves as a landmark just as the
Eiffel tower serves as a major landmark to France, and also enhances the natural beauty of the
valley, the bridge appears to be floating on clouds despite its length. On first sight, the
impression is of boat sailing on a sea of mist as seen in the figure below.
Thirdly, the bridge should enhance economic activities. A bridge would make the distribution
channel of goods and service much faster which would results into more returns of trade. It
would also enhances economical activities by making transportation easier and more flexible.
Finally, the bridge should affirm the notion of France as a strong engineering nation. In this
modern world of megastructures and increasing construction competition, a bridge like the
Millau Viaduct was necessary to improve the level of development and reputation of engineering
in France.
Different design options and choosing the final design of the bridge
Several proposals were initially considered by SETRA (the French Highway Department) in
constructing a bridge connecting the existing auto routes to the North and South of the Tarn
valley. One of these proposals was presented by the bridge designer Michael Virlogeux. In
1990, he presented the idea of a cable stayed bridge that would first cross the valley with a
seven hundred metre span before tunneling through the steeper north side of the valley. This
proposal was good, but it was declined because it was too expensive and not environmentally
friendly.

In 1993, another proposal was forwarded by a company named Foster and Partners; it
proposed a design quite similar to the one by Michael Virlogeux. This new proposal illustrated a
bridge consisting of seven piers with a span of three hundred forty-two metres across all seven
piers except for both ends of the bridge which would have a span of two hundred four metres.
After all parts of this proposal, from the design to the load analysis (dead loads, superimposed
dead load, live traffic loads, wind load, temperature loading and other loading effects) were
assessed, it was decided in 1998 that the design by Foster and Partners would be used
alongside a few elements of Virlogeuxs plan.
When the construction proposal was approved, President Jacques Chirac of France said if the
construction is successful, it will be monument of French engineering all over the world.

Challenges
Any structure as creative and ambitious as the Millau Viaduct could not be built without some
difficulty. During the design and construction of the bridge, many financial, environmental, and
technical challenges were encountered and conquered. This section will investigate a few of
these challenges.
Financial challenges
At approximately four hundred million Euros, the initial cost of bridge was deemed to be very
high. A huge effort on behalf of the France government was required in order to obtain the large
number of resources necessary for the construction of the bridge.

Because of this, opponents of the bridge questioned whether it was even possible to fund the
bridge in an economical manner. They pointed out the amount of capital that would have to be
invested meant that it would be unfeasible for the bridge to justify its price during its operational
lifespan.

These concerns were especially troubling considering the availability of other designs and travel
routes which might presumably cost less.
Environmental challenges
The town of Millau possesses one of the largest tourist campsites in central France and is thus
considered something of a tourist centre. One concern regarding the bridge was that, by
providing another travel route which bypasses Millau, the bridge would make the town lose a
significant number of visitors, which would negatively impact local businesses.

Another concern was for the relatively untouched environment of the site, which had not been
subject to any construction work of this scale in the past. Locals were somewhat afraid of the
negative impact the building of the bridge might have on the environment.

While locals were worrying about the bridges effect on the environment, official were worrying
about the environments effect on the bridge. The construction site was often subject to
poor weather conditions and wind speeds reaching up to over one hundred fifty kilometres per
hour. There was also the possibility of earthquakes.
Technical challenges
In order to provide proper support for the bridge, the seven piers had to be very high. With some
measuring over two hundred metres in height, deep excavation was required to ensure a firm
foundation. Some of the piers had to be built on the waterway, which required additional
earthwork.

The bridge deck has a span of two thousand, five hundred metres and load of thirtysix tonnes, which together place could place a huge amount of stress on the bridge supports. If
not properly calculated and compensated for, this stress could lead to deformation of deck
or collapse of the supported columns during construction.

The expected traffic load for the bridge load was also large, as it was supposed to carry over
two thousand vehicles each day. This live load had to be considered as well in order to avoid the
deformation or collapse of the bridges components.

Construction Process
Before construction even began, testing was done to determine how the bridge would react to
wind conditions found in the valley.
The necessary components were prefabricated in factories. The components were transported
by road convoys to the worksites. The worksites were divided into four zones for easier
management.
The piers were constructed out of prestressed concrete, while pylons were constructed out of
prefabricated steel. Abutments were put into place on either side of the bridge.
The piers were created as seven separate worksites and each pier was treated as an
independent worksite. The formwork for the piers was self-climbing for the outer surfaces and
crane-assisted for the inner surfaces.
The pieces of the deck were first pre-fabricated in a factory. They were then transported to the
site by road convoys. Two on-site factories located behind the abutments pieced them together
in three zones: the first zone was for joining the pieces of the box girder together, the second
zone was for assembling other members of the girder, and the third zone was for painting the

completely-assembled deck and adding other finishing touches such as the protective meshes
and the wind-shielding elements. The deck was then installed by successive launching
operations.
Basically, the bridge was launched in two pieces from either side across both the temporary and
permanent piers. These temporary piers were telescoped into place. On all fourteen piers
(seven permanent and seven temporary), metal trimmers held up the launching system which
used a hydraulic launching system to move the bridge forward six centimetres per cycle with
roughly sixteen cycles completed each hour. Stay cables from the pylons stabilized the leading
edge (the front). A nose also facilitated stabilizing, along with emergency stops and docking.
The construction process approached completion when the two leading edges were welded
together under the watch of weathermen (because of the complications that would be brought
about by high winds). The pylons were then rolled into place by massive transporters and their
cables were stayed into place. Finally, all the temporary pieces of the construction such as the
temporary piers, trimmers, and launch rails were removed.
It is worth noting that throughout construction, monitoring equipment and methods were used to
ensure that the bridge was constructed accurately and safely and performing as expected.
(Centre National de Ressources, 2011)

Conclusion
From initial conception until the end of its lifespan, the Millau Viaduct was always huge in one
way or another. First required to solve a huge problem, then designed to be huge in order to
overcome huge obstacles, before finally emerging as one of the hugest structures in the world
where it will remain for the next century and beyond.
Therefore, the construction of the Millau Viaduct can be seen as a grand solution to a big
problem. Many challenges were faced, but through clever design, competent construction, and

creative use of resources, they were overcome. The result was an amazing structure that not
only looks amazing but also serves an important purpose. The engineers responsible can be
proud of the fact that their hard work has contributed to the existence of a structure that will
continue to inspire generations from now.

References
Centre National de Ressources, 2004. The Design and Construction of the Millau Viaduct [pdf]
Available at:
<http://cnrsm.creteil.iufm.fr/g01_dp/viaduc_millau_apk_44/01_greish/04_millau_steelbridge.pdf>
[Accessed 30 October 2011].
Wikipedia, 2011. Millau Viaduct [online] Available at:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct > [Accessed 30 October 2011].
Univerisity of Bath Architecture & Civil Engineering, 2007. Bridge Conference 2007
Saxton/Millau [pdf] Available at:
<http://www.bath.ac.uk/ace/uploads/StudentProject/Bridgeconference2007/conference/mainpag
e/Saxton_Millau.pdf>