Investigation of Techniques for Accelerating the Construction of Bridge Deck Overlays, 2016

Use of bridge deck overlays is important in maximizing bridge service life. Overlays can replace the deteriorated part of the deck, thus extending the bridge life. Even though overlay construction avoids the construction of a whole new bridge deck, construction still takes significant time in re-opening the bridge to traffic. Current processes and practices are time-consuming and multiple opportunities may exist to reduce overall construction time by modifying construction requirements and/or materials utilized. Reducing the construction time could have an effect on reducing the socioeconomic costs associated with bridge deck rehabilitation and the inconvenience caused to travelers. This work included three major tasks with literature review, field investigation, and laboratory testing. Overlay concrete mix used for present construction takes long curing hours and therefore an investigation was carried out to find fast-curing concrete mixes that could reduce construction time. Several fast-cuing concrete mixes were found and suggested for further evaluation. An on-going overlay construction project was observed and documented. Through these observations, several opportunities were suggested where small modifications in the process could lead to significant time savings. With current standards of the removal depth of substrate concrete in Iowa, it takes long hours for the removal process. Four different laboratory tests were performed with different loading conditions to determine the necessary substrate concrete removal depth for a proper bond between the substrate concrete and the new overlay concrete. Several parameters, such as failure load, bond stress, and stiffness, were compared for four different concrete removal depths. Through the results and observations of this investigation several conclusions were made which could reduce bridge deck overlay construction time.

Establishing Load Transfer in Existing Jointed Concrete Pavements, HR-1041, 1985

In this paper are described the results of a research project that had the objective of developing construction procedures for restoring load transfer in existing jointed concrete pavements and of evaluating the effectiveness of the restoration methods. A total of 28 test sections with various load transfer devices were placed. The devices include split pipe, figure eight, vee, double vee, and dowel bars. Patching materials used on the project included three types of fast-setting grouts, three brands of polymer concrete, and plain portland cement concrete. The number and spacing of the devices and dowel bars were also variables in the project. Dowel bars and double vee devices were used on the major portion of the project. Performance evaluations were based on deflection tests conducted with a 20,000-lb axle load. Horizontal joint movement measurements and visual observations were also made. The short-term performance data indicate good results with the dowel bar installations regardless of patching materials. The sections with split pipe, figure eight, and vee devices failed in bond during the first winter cycle. The results with the double vee sections indicate the importance of the patching material to the success or failure of the load transfer system: some sections are performing well and other sections are performing poorly with double vee devices. Horizontal joint movement measurements indicate that neither the dowel bars nor the double vee devices are restricting joint movement.

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa, Volume I: An Electronic Database for PIle LOad Tests (PILOT), TR-573, 2011

For well over 100 years, the Working Stress Design (WSD) approach has been the traditional basis for geotechnical design with regard to settlements or failure conditions. However, considerable effort has been put forth over the past couple of decades in relation to the adoption of the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach into geotechnical design. With the goal of producing engineered designs with consistent levels of reliability, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued a policy memorandum on June 28, 2000, requiring all new bridges initiated after October 1, 2007, to be designed according to the LRFD approach. Likewise, regionally calibrated LRFD resistance factors were permitted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to improve the economy of bridge foundation elements. Thus, projects TR-573, TR-583 and TR-584 were undertaken by a research team at Iowa State University’s Bridge Engineering Center with the goal of developing resistance factors for pile design using available pile static load test data. To accomplish this goal, the available data were first analyzed for reliability and then placed in a newly designed relational database management system termed PIle LOad Tests (PILOT), to which this first volume of the final report for project TR-573 is dedicated. PILOT is an amalgamated, electronic source of information consisting of both static and dynamic data for pile load tests conducted in the State of Iowa. The database, which includes historical data on pile load tests dating back to 1966, is intended for use in the establishment of LRFD resistance factors for design and construction control of driven pile foundations in Iowa. Although a considerable amount of geotechnical and pile load test data is available in literature as well as in various State Department of Transportation files, PILOT is one of the first regional databases to be exclusively used in the development of LRFD resistance factors for the design and construction control of driven pile foundations. Currently providing an electronically organized assimilation of geotechnical and pile load test data for 274 piles of various types (e.g., steel H-shaped, timber, pipe, Monotube, and concrete), PILOT (http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/lrfd/) is on par with such familiar national databases used in the calibration of LRFD resistance factors for pile foundations as the FHWA’s Deep Foundation Load Test Database. By narrowing geographical boundaries while maintaining a high number of pile load tests, PILOT exemplifies a model for effective regional LRFD calibration procedures.

Evalution of Hot Mix Asphalt Moisture Sensitivity Using the Nottingham Asphalt Test Equipment, July 2005

Moisture sensitivity of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mixtures, generally called stripping, is a major form of distress in asphalt concrete pavement. It is characterized by the loss of adhesive bond between the asphalt binder and the aggregate (a failure of the bonding of the binder to the aggregate) or by a softening of the cohesive bonds within the asphalt binder (a failure within the binder itself), both of which are due to the action of loading under traffic in the presence of moisture. The evaluation of HMA moisture sensitivity has been divided into two categories: visual inspection test and mechanical test. However, most of them have been developed in pre-Superpave mix design. This research was undertaken to develop a protocol for evaluating the moisture sensitivity potential of HMA mixtures using the Nottingham Asphalt Tester (NAT). The mechanisms of HMA moisture sensitivity were reviewed and the test protocols using the NAT were developed. Different types of blends as moisture-sensitive groups and non-moisture-sensitive groups were used to evaluate the potential of the proposed test. The test results were analyzed with three parameters based on performance character: the retained flow number depending on critical permanent deformation failure (RFNP), the retained flow number depending on cohesion failure (RFNC), and energy ratio (ER). Analysis based on energy ratio of elastic strain (EREE ) at flow number of cohesion failure (FNC) has higher potential to evaluate the HMA moisture sensitivity than other parameters. If the measurement error in data-acquisition process is removed, analyses based on RFNP and RFNC would also have high potential to evaluate the HMA moisture sensitivity. The vacuum pressure saturation used in AASHTO T 283 and proposed test has a risk to damage specimen before the load applying.

Guide to Dowel Load Transfer Systems for Jointed Concrete Roadway Pavements, September 2011

This guide provides a summary of the factors and design theories that should be considered when designing dowel load transfer systems for concrete pavement systems (including dowel basket design and fabrication) and presents recommendations for widespread adoption (i.e., standardization). Development of the guide was sponsored by the National Concrete Consortium with the goal of helping practitioners develop and implement dowel load transfer designs based on knowledge about current research and best practices.

Evaluation of Hot Mix Asphalt Moisture Sensitivity Using the Nottingham Asphalt Test Equipment, July 2005

Moisture sensitivity of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) mixtures, generally called stripping, is a major form of distress in asphalt concrete pavement. It is characterized by the loss of adhesive bond between the asphalt binder and the aggregate (a failure of the bonding of the binder to the aggregate) or by a softening of the cohesive bonds within the asphalt binder (a failure within the binder itself), both of which are due to the action of loading under traffic in the presence of moisture. The evaluation of HMA moisture sensitivity has been divided into two categories: visual inspection test and mechanical test. However, most of them have been developed in pre-Superpave mix design. This research was undertaken to develop a protocol for evaluating the moisture sensitivity potential of HMA mixtures using the Nottingham Asphalt Tester (NAT). The mechanisms of HMA moisture sensitivity were reviewed and the test protocols using the NAT were developed. Different types of blends as moisture-sensitive groups and non-moisture-sensitive groups were used to evaluate the potential of the proposed test. The test results were analyzed with three parameters based on performance character: the retained flow number depending on critical permanent deformation failure (RFNP), the retained flow number depending on cohesion failure (RFNC), and energy ratio (ER). Analysis based on energy ratio of elastic strain (EREE ) at flow number of cohesion failure (FNC) has higher potential to evaluate the HMA moisture sensitivity than other parameters. If the measurement error in data-acquisition process is removed, analyses based on RFNP and RFNC would also have high potential to evaluate the HMA moisture sensitivity. The vacuum pressure saturation used in AASHTO T 283 and proposed test has a risk to damage specimen before the load applying.

Concrete Pavement Construction Basics, June 2006

General principles • Everyone at the construction site, particularly foremen and supervisors, is responsible for recognizing and troubleshooting potential problems as they arise. • Batches of concrete should be consistent and uniformly mixed. • A major cause of pavement failure is unstable subgrade. The subgrade should consist of uniform material, and the subgrade system must drain well. • Dowel bars are important for load transfer at transverse joints on pavements with high truck volumes. Dowels must be carefully aligned, horizontally and vertically, to prevent pavement damage at the joints. • Stringlines control the slipform paver’s horizontal and vertical movement and ensure a smooth pavement profile. Once stringlines are set, they should be checked often and not disturbed. • Overfinishing the new pavement and/or adding water to the surface can lead to pavement surface problems. If the concrete isn’t sufficiently workable, crews should contact the project manager. Changes to the mixture or to paver equipment may reduce the problem. • Proper curing is critical to preventing pavement damage from rapid moisture loss at the pavement surface. • A well spaced and constructed system of joints is critical to prevent random cracking. • Joints are simply controlled cracks. They must be sawed during the brief time after the pavement has gained enough strength to prevent raveling but before it begins to crack randomly (the “sawing window”). • Seasonal and daily weather variations affect setting time and other variables in new concrete. Construction operations should be adjusted appropriately.

Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil for Low-Volume Bridge Abutments, January 2012

This report presents a review of literature on geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) bridge abutments, and test results and analysis from two field demonstration projects (Bridge 1 and Bridge 2) conducted in Buchanan County, Iowa, to evaluate the feasibility and cost effectiveness of the use of GRS bridge abutments on low-volume roads (LVRs). The two projects included GRS abutment substructures and railroad flat car (RRFC) bridge superstructures. The construction costs varied from $43k to $49k, which was about 50 to 60% lower than the expected costs for building a conventional bridge. Settlement monitoring at both bridges indicated maximum settlements ≤1 in. and differential settlements ≤ 0.2 in transversely at each abutment, during the monitoring phase. Laboratory testing on GRS fill material, field testing, and in ground instrumentation, abutment settlement monitoring, and bridge live load (LL) testing were conducted on Bridge 2. Laboratory test results indicated that shear strength parameters and permanent deformation behavior of granular fill material improved when reinforced with geosynthetic, due to lateral restraint effect at the soilgeosynthetic interface. Bridge LL testing under static loads indicated maximum deflections close to 0.9 in and non-uniform deflections transversely across the bridge due to poor load transfer between RRFCs. The ratio of horizontal to vertical stresses in the GRS fill was low (< 0.25), indicating low lateral stress on the soil surrounding GRS fill material. Bearing capacity analysis at Bridge 2 indicated lower than recommended factor of safety (FS) values due to low ultimate reinforcement strength of the geosynthetic material used in this study and a relatively weak underlying foundation layer. Global stability analysis of the GRS abutment structure revealed a lower FS than recommended against sliding failure along the interface of the GRS fill material and the underlying weak foundation layer. Design and construction recommendations to help improve the stability and performance of the GRS abutment structures on future projects, and recommendations for future research are provided in this report.

Load Ratings For Secondary Bridges Final Report Highway Research Advisory Board Project HR-239, May 1991

Load Rating: . , :Evaluation of the capacity of a bridge to carry vehicle Inventory Rating: Lbad level which can safely utilize the bridge for an indefinite period of time Operating Rating: Absolute maximum permissible load level for the bridge A load rating states the load in tons which a vehicle can impose on a bridge. Changes in guidelines, standards, and customary uses of bridges require analyses of bridges to be updated and re-evaluated. In this report, twenty-two secondary bridge standards for three types of bridges are rated for the AASHTO HS20-44 vehicle configuration and three typical Iowa legal vehicles

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa Final Report, June 2010

For well over 100 years, the Working Stress Design (WSD) approach has been the traditional basis for geotechnical design with regard to settlements or failure conditions. However, considerable effort has been put forth over the past couple of decades in relation to the adoption of the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach into geotechnical design. With the goal of producing engineered designs with consistent levels of reliability, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued a policy memorandum on June 28, 2000, requiring all new bridges initiated after October 1, 2007, to be designed according to the LRFD approach. Likewise, regionally calibrated LRFD resistance factors were permitted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to improve the economy of bridge foundation elements. Thus, projects TR-573, TR-583 and TR-584 were undertaken by a research team at Iowa State University’s Bridge Engineering Center with the goal of developing resistance factors for pile design using available pile static load test data. To accomplish this goal, the available data were first analyzed for reliability and then placed in a newly designed relational database management system termed PIle LOad Tests (PILOT), to which this first volume of the final report for project TR-573 is dedicated. PILOT is an amalgamated, electronic source of information consisting of both static and dynamic data for pile load tests conducted in the State of Iowa. The database, which includes historical data on pile load tests dating back to 1966, is intended for use in the establishment of LRFD resistance factors for design and construction control of driven pile foundations in Iowa. Although a considerable amount of geotechnical and pile load test data is available in literature as well as in various State Department of Transportation files, PILOT is one of the first regional databases to be exclusively used in the development of LRFD resistance factors for the design and construction control of driven pile foundations. Currently providing an electronically organized assimilation of geotechnical and pile load test data for 274 piles of various types (e.g., steel H-shaped, timber, pipe, Monotube, and concrete), PILOT (http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/lrfd/) is on par with such familiar national databases used in the calibration of LRFD resistance factors for pile foundations as the FHWA’s Deep Foundation Load Test Database. By narrowing geographical boundaries while maintaining a high number of pile load tests, PILOT exemplifies a model for effective regional LRFD calibration procedures.

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa: Volume I: An Electronic Database for PIle LOad Tests, September 2011

• Examine current pile design and construction procedures used by the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT). • Recommend changes and improvements to these procedures that are consistent with available pile load test data, soils information, and bridge design practice recommended by the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach.

Iowa Medicaid Congestive Heart Failure Population Disease Management Demonstration, October 2006

Results from the Iowa Medicaid congestive heart failure population disease management demonstration confirm that a population and technology based remote monitoring platform can greatly reduce the need for costly acute care services by involving patients in their care, improving care effectiveness and promoting healthy behaviors.

Demonstration of Load Rating Capabilities through Physical Load Testing: Sioux County Bridge Case Study, RB32-013, 2013

The objective of this work, Pilot Project - Demonstration of Capabilities and Benefits of Bridge Load Rating through Physical Testing, was to demonstrate the capabilities for load testing and rating bridges in Iowa, study the economic benefit of performing such testing, and perform outreach to local, state, and national engineers on the topic of bridge load testing and rating. This report documents one of three bridges inspected, load tested, and load rated as part of the project, the Sioux County Bridge (FHWA #308730), including testing procedures and performance of the bridge under static loading along with the calculated load rating from the field-calibrated analytical model. Two parallel reports document the testing and load rating of the Ida County Bridge (FHWA #186070) and the Johnson County Bridge (FHWA #205750). A tech brief provides overall information about the project.

Demonstration of Load Rating Capabilities through Physical Load Testing: Ida County Bridge Case Study, RB32-013, 2013

The objective of this work, Pilot Project - Demonstration of Capabilities and Benefits of Bridge Load Rating through Physical Testing, was to demonstrate the capabilities for load testing and rating bridges in Iowa, study the economic benefit of performing such testing, and perform outreach to local, state, and national engineers on the topic of bridge load testing and rating. This report documents one of three bridges inspected, load tested, and load rated as part of the project, the Ida County Bridge (FHWA #186070), including testing procedures and performance of the bridge under static loading along with the calculated load rating from the field-calibrated analytical model. Two parallel reports document the testing and load rating of the Sioux County Bridge (FHWA #308730) and the Johnson County Bridge (FHWA #205750). A tech brief provides overall information about the project.

Demonstration of Load Rating Capabilities through Physical Load Testing: Johnson County Bridge Case Study, RB32-013, 2013

The objective of this work, Pilot Project - Demonstration of Capabilities and Benefits of Bridge Load Rating through Physical Testing, was to demonstrate the capabilities for load testing and rating bridges in Iowa, study the economic benefit of performing such testing, and perform outreach to local, state, and national engineers on the topic of bridge load testing and rating. This report documents one of three bridges inspected, load tested, and load rated as part of the project, the Johnson County Bridge (FHWA #205750), including testing procedures and performance of the bridge under static loading along with the calculated load rating from the field-calibrated analytical model. Two parallel reports document the testing and load rating of the Sioux County Bridge (FHWA #308730) and the Ida County Bridge (FHWA #186070). A tech brief provides overall information about the project.