Reinforced Polymer Bridge at Tubbs Lane
Martin Richardson
25/08/25
After reviewing the alternatives, HCC made the decision to undertake its first Fibre Reinforced Polymer (FRP) bridge scheme. FRP offered several advantages that made it the most suitable option for the location. The material is fire-resistant and UV protected, with a service life of over 60 years, and requires minimal maintenance compared to traditional materials. Its lightweight nature, with the deck weighing just 1.2 tonnes, also made installation more straightforward. Importantly, FRP enabled the project team to achieve a 9.9-metre single span without increasing section depth, ensuring structural efficiency and long-term performance.
The bridge was designed with a 120-year design life, using Eurocodes for actions and CUR96 for material properties. The deck, measuring 9.9 metres in span and 1.2 metres in width, was produced using a vacuum infusion method, ensuring strength, consistency, and durability.
The outcome of the Tubbs Lane FRP Bridge project marks a significant milestone for Hampshire County Council as its first FRP bridge scheme. The successful delivery demonstrates the potential of fibre-reinforced polymer as a viable alternative to conventional bridge-building materials. With its resilience, low maintenance requirements, and sustainable long-term performance, the project provides an excellent example of how innovative materials can address complex infrastructure challenges.
Hampshire County Council (HCC) faced significant challenges with the existing two-span reinforced concrete footbridge alongside a ford at Tubbs Lane in Broughton, Test Valley.
The bridge had deteriorated considerably over time, with noticeable section loss and exposed reinforcement, all within a damp environment that accelerated deterioration. A long-term replacement solution was needed in this tricky location for traditional materials, and several options were considered. Steel beams were ruled out due to concerns over rapid corrosion, reinforced concrete was dismissed as it required a thicker deck to achieve the necessary span, and timber was deemed unsuitable for the damp conditions.