Development of Abutment Design Standards for Local Bridge Designs, Volume 1 of 3, Development of Design Methodology, August 2004

Several superstructure design methodologies have been developed for low volume road bridges by the Iowa State University Bridge Engineering Center. However, to date no standard abutment designs have been developed. Thus, there was a need to establish an easy to use design methodology in addition to generating generic abutment standards and other design aids for the more common substructure systems used in Iowa. The final report for this project consists of three volumes. The first volume (this volume) summarizes the research completed in this project. A survey of the Iowa County Engineers was conducted from which it was determined that while most counties use similar types of abutments, only 17 percent use some type of standard abutment designs or plans. A literature review revealed several possible alternative abutment systems for future use on low volume road bridges in addition to two separate substructure lateral load analysis methods. These consisted of a linear and a non-linear method. The linear analysis method was used for this project due to its relative simplicity and the relative accuracy of the maximum pile moment when compared to values obtained from the more complex non-linear analysis method. The resulting design methodology was developed for single span stub abutments supported on steel or timber piles with a bridge span length ranging from 20 to 90 ft and roadway widths of 24 and 30 ft. However, other roadway widths can be designed using the foundation design template provided. The backwall height is limited to a range of 6 to 12 ft, and the soil type is classified as cohesive or cohesionless. The design methodology was developed using the guidelines specified by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials Standard Specifications, the Iowa Department of Transportation Bridge Design Manual, and the National Design Specifications for Wood Construction. The second volume introduces and outlines the use of the various design aids developed for this project. Charts for determining dead and live gravity loads based on the roadway width, span length, and superstructure type are provided. A foundation design template was developed in which the engineer can check a substructure design by inputting basic bridge site information. Tables published by the Iowa Department of Transportation that provide values for estimating pile friction and end bearing for different combinations of soils and pile types are also included. Generic standard abutment plans were developed for which the engineer can provide necessary bridge site information in the spaces provided. These tools enable engineers to design and detail county bridge substructures more efficiently. The third volume provides two sets of calculations that demonstrate the application of the substructure design methodology developed in this project. These calculations also verify the accuracy of the foundation design template. The printouts from the foundation design template are provided at the end of each example. Also several tables provide various foundation details for a pre-cast double tee superstructure with different combinations of soil type, backwall height, and pile type.

Development of Abutment Design Standards for Local Bridge Designs, Volume 3 of 3, Verification of Design Methodology, August 2004

Several superstructure design methodologies have been developed for low volume road bridges by the Iowa State University Bridge Engineering Center. However, to date no standard abutment designs have been developed. Thus, there was a need to establish an easy to use design methodology in addition to generating generic abutment standards and other design aids for the more common substructure systems used in Iowa. The final report for this project consists of three volumes. The first volume summarizes the research completed in this project. A survey of the Iowa County Engineers was conducted from which it was determined that while most counties use similar types of abutments, only 17 percent use some type of standard abutment designs or plans. A literature review revealed several possible alternative abutment systems for future use on low volume road bridges in addition to two separate substructure lateral load analysis methods. These consisted of a linear and a non-linear method. The linear analysis method was used for this project due to its relative simplicity and the relative accuracy of the maximum pile moment when compared to values obtained from the more complex non-linear analysis method. The resulting design methodology was developed for single span stub abutments supported on steel or timber piles with a bridge span length ranging from 20 to 90 ft and roadway widths of 24 and 30 ft. However, other roadway widths can be designed using the foundation design template provided. The backwall height is limited to a range of 6 to 12 ft, and the soil type is classified as cohesive or cohesionless. The design methodology was developed using the guidelines specified by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials Standard Specifications, the Iowa Department of Transportation Bridge Design Manual, and the National Design Specifications for Wood Construction. The second volume introduces and outlines the use of the various design aids developed for this project. Charts for determining dead and live gravity loads based on the roadway width, span length, and superstructure type are provided. A foundation design template was developed in which the engineer can check a substructure design by inputting basic bridge site information. Tables published by the Iowa Department of Transportation that provide values for estimating pile friction and end bearing for different combinations of soils and pile types are also included. Generic standard abutment plans were developed for which the engineer can provide necessary bridge site information in the spaces provided. These tools enable engineers to design and detail county bridge substructures more efficiently. The third volume (this volume) provides two sets of calculations that demonstrate the application of the substructure design methodology developed in this project. These calculations also verify the accuracy of the foundation design template. The printouts from the foundation design template are provided at the end of each example. Also several tables provide various foundation details for a pre-cast double tee superstructure with different combinations of soil type, backwall height, and pile type.

Development of Abutment Design Standards for Local Bridge Designs, Volume 2 of 3, Design Manual, August 2004

Several superstructure design methodologies have been developed for low volume road bridges by the Iowa State University Bridge Engineering Center. However, to date no standard abutment designs have been developed. Thus, there was a need to establish an easy to use design methodology in addition to generating generic abutment standards and other design aids for the more common substructure systems used in Iowa. The final report for this project consists of three volumes. The first volume summarizes the research completed in this project. A survey of the Iowa County Engineers was conducted from which it was determined that while most counties use similar types of abutments, only 17 percent use some type of standard abutment designs or plans. A literature review revealed several possible alternative abutment systems for future use on low volume road bridges in addition to two separate substructure lateral load analysis methods. These consisted of a linear and a non-linear method. The linear analysis method was used for this project due to its relative simplicity and the relative accuracy of the maximum pile moment when compared to values obtained from the more complex non-linear analysis method. The resulting design methodology was developed for single span stub abutments supported on steel or timber piles with a bridge span length ranging from 20 to 90 ft and roadway widths of 24 and 30 ft. However, other roadway widths can be designed using the foundation design template provided. The backwall height is limited to a range of 6 to 12 ft, and the soil type is classified as cohesive or cohesionless. The design methodology was developed using the guidelines specified by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials Standard Specifications, the Iowa Department of Transportation Bridge Design Manual, and the National Design Specifications for Wood Construction. The second volume (this volume) introduces and outlines the use of the various design aids developed for this project. Charts for determining dead and live gravity loads based on the roadway width, span length, and superstructure type are provided. A foundation design template was developed in which the engineer can check a substructure design by inputting basic bridge site information. Tables published by the Iowa Department of Transportation that provide values for estimating pile friction and end bearing for different combinations of soils and pile types are also included. Generic standard abutment plans were developed for which the engineer can provide necessary bridge site information in the spaces provided. These tools enable engineers to design and detail county bridge substructures more efficiently. The third volume provides two sets of calculations that demonstrate the application of the substructure design methodology developed in this project. These calculations also verify the accuracy of the foundation design template. The printouts from the foundation design template are provided at the end of each example. Also several tables provide various foundation details for a pre-cast double tee superstructure with different combinations of soil type, backwall height, and pile type.

MEPDG Work Plan Task No. 5: Characterization of Unbound Materials (Soils/Aggregates) for Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide, 2009

The resilient modulus (MR) input parameters in the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) program have a significant effect on the projected pavement performance. The MEPDG program uses three different levels of inputs depending on the desired level of accuracy. The primary objective of this research was to develop a laboratory testing program utilizing the Iowa DOT servo-hydraulic machine system for evaluating typical Iowa unbound materials and to establish a database of input values for MEPDG analysis. This was achieved by carrying out a detailed laboratory testing program designed in accordance with the AASHTO T307 resilient modulus test protocol using common Iowa unbound materials. The program included laboratory tests to characterize basic physical properties of the unbound materials, specimen preparation and repeated load triaxial tests to determine the resilient modulus. The MEPDG resilient modulus input parameter library for Iowa typical unbound pavement materials was established from the repeated load triaxial MR test results. This library includes the non-linear, stress-dependent resilient modulus model coefficients values for level 1 analysis, the unbound material properties values correlated to resilient modulus for level 2 analysis, and the typical resilient modulus values for level 3 analysis. The resilient modulus input parameters library can be utilized when designing low volume roads in the absence of any basic soil testing. Based on the results of this study, the use of level 2 analysis for MEPDG resilient modulus input is recommended since the repeated load triaxial test for level 1 analysis is complicated, time consuming, expensive, and requires sophisticated equipment and skilled operators.