Identification of the Best Practices for Design, Construction, and Repair of Bridge Approches, 2005

Bridge approach settlement and the formation of the bump is a common problem in Iowa that draws upon considerable resources for maintenance and creates a negative perception in the minds of transportation users. This research study was undertaken to investigate bridge approach problems and develop new concepts for design, construction, and maintenance that will reduce this costly problem. As a result of the research described in this report, the following changes are suggested for implementation on a pilot test basis: • Use porous backfill behind the abutment and/or geocomposite drainage systems to improve drainage capacity and reduce erosion around the abutment. • On a pilot basis, connect the approach slab to the bridge abutment. Change the expansion joint at the bridge to a construction joint of 2 inch. Use a more effective joint sealing system at the CF joint. Change the abutment wall rebar from #5 to #7 for non-integral abutments. • For bridges with soft foundation or embankment soils, implement practices of better compaction, preloading, ground improvement, soil removal and replacement, or soil reinforcement that reduce time-dependent post construction settlements.

Identification of the Best Practices for Design, Construction, and Repair of Bridge Approaches, January 2005

Bridge approach settlement and the formation of the bump is a common problem in Iowa that draws upon considerable resources for maintenance and creates a negative perception in the minds of transportation users. This research study was undertaken to investigate bridge approach problems and develop new concepts for design, construction, and maintenance that will reduce this costly problem. As a result of the research described in this report, the following changes are suggested for implementation on a pilot test basis: • Use porous backfill behind the abutment and/or geocomposite drainage systems to improve drainage capacity and reduce erosion around the abutment. • On a pilot basis, connect the approach slab to the bridge abutment. Change the expansion joint at the bridge to a construction joint of 2 inch. Use a more effective joint sealing system at the CF joint. Change the abutment wall rebar from #5 to #7 for non-integral abutments. • For bridges with soft foundation or embankment soils, implement practices of better compaction, preloading, ground improvement, soil removal and replacement, or soil reinforcement that reduce time-dependent post construction settlements.

Rubber Buffings for Bridge Approach Expansion Joints, MLR-01-01, 2001

Many of the bridges in the state of Iowa have type ‘CF���, ‘EE’, or ‘EF’ expansion joints installed in the bridge approach slabs. These joints, which are typically 4” wide, are currently filled with a foam expansion joint material that is covered with a sealant. Over time the sealant begins to pull off of the walls of the joint and it ultimately fails. The joint, which is now exposed to the weather, is then filled with water and solids. The foam joint material, which is lighter than water, floats out of the joint onto the highway. This foam resembles a large 4” X 6” plank and poses a threat to motorists. A possible solution to this problem would be to replace the foam material with rubber buffings. Rubber buffings are a by-product of the tire retread industry.