Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa Volume III: Recommended Resistance Factors with Consideration of Construction Control and Setup, TR-584, 2012

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) mandated utilizing the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach for all new bridges initiated in the United States after October 1, 2007. As a result, there has been a progressive move among state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) toward an increased use of the LRFD in geotechnical design practices. For the above reasons, the Iowa Highway Research Board (IHRB) sponsored three research projects: TR-573, TR-583 and TR-584. The research information is summarized in the project web site (http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/lrfd/). Two reports of total four volumes have been published. Report volume I by Roling et al. (2010) described the development of a user-friendly and electronic database (PILOT). Report volume II by Ng et al. (2011) summarized the 10 full-scale field tests conducted throughout Iowa and data analyses. This report presents the development of regionally calibrated LRFD resistance factors for bridge pile foundations in Iowa based on reliability theory, focusing on the strength limit states and incorporating the construction control aspects and soil setup into the design process. The calibration framework was selected to follow the guidelines provided by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), taking into consideration the current local practices. The resistance factors were developed for general and in-house static analysis methods used for the design of pile foundations as well as for dynamic analysis methods and dynamic formulas used for construction control. The following notable benefits to the bridge foundation design were attained in this project: 1) comprehensive design tables and charts were developed to facilitate the implementation of the LRFD approach, ensuring uniform reliability and consistency in the design and construction processes of bridge pile foundations; 2) the results showed a substantial gain in the factored capacity compared to the 2008 AASHTO-LRFD recommendations; and 3) contribution to the existing knowledge, thereby advancing the foundation design and construction practices in Iowa and the nation.

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa: Volume II: Field Testing of Steel Piles in Clay, Sand, and Mixed Soils and Data Analysis, September 2011

In response to the mandate on Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) implementations by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on all new bridge projects initiated after October 1, 2007, the Iowa Highway Research Board (IHRB) sponsored these research projects to develop regional LRFD recommendations. The LRFD development was performed using the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) Pile Load Test database (PILOT). To increase the data points for LRFD development, develop LRFD recommendations for dynamic methods, and validate the results ofLRFD calibration, 10 full-scale field tests on the most commonly used steel H-piles (e.g., HP 10 x 42) were conducted throughout Iowa. Detailed in situ soil investigations were carried out, push-in pressure cells were installed, and laboratory soil tests were performed. Pile responses during driving, at the end of driving (EOD), and at re-strikes were monitored using the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA), following with the CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) analysis. The hammer blow counts were recorded for Wave Equation Analysis Program (WEAP) and dynamic formulas. Static load tests (SLTs) were performed and the pile capacities were determined based on the Davisson’s criteria. The extensive experimental research studies generated important data for analytical and computational investigations. The SLT measured loaddisplacements were compared with the simulated results obtained using a model of the TZPILE program and using the modified borehole shear test method. Two analytical pile setup quantification methods, in terms of soil properties, were developed and validated. A new calibration procedure was developed to incorporate pile setup into LRFD.

Nonlinear Pile Behavior in Integral Abutment Bridges, HR-227, Part 1, 1982

The highway departments of all fifty states were contacted to find the extent of application of integral abutment bridges, to survey the different guidelines used for analysis and design of integral abutment bridges, and to assess the performance of such bridges through the years. The variation in design assumptions and length limitations among the various states in their approach to the use of integral abutments is discussed. The problems associated with lateral displacements at the abutment, and the solutions developed by the different states for most of the ill effects of abutment movements are summarized in the report. An algorithm based on a state-of-the-art nonlinear finite element procedure was developed and used to study piling stresses and pile-soil interaction in integral abutment bridges. The finite element idealization consists of beam-column elements with geometric and material nonlinearities for the pile and nonlinear springs for the soil. An idealized soil model (modified Ramberg-Osgood model) was introduced in this investigation to obtain the tangent stiffness of the nonlinear spring elements. Several numerical examples are presented in order to establish the reliability of the finite element model and the computer software developed. Three problems with analytical solutions were first solved and compared with theoretical solutions. A 40 ft H pile (HP 10 X 42) in six typical Iowa soils was then analyzed by first applying a horizontal displacement (to simulate bridge motion) and no rotation at the top and then applying a vertical load V incrementally until failure occurred. Based on the numerical results, the failure mechanisms were generalized to be of two types: (a) lateral type failure and (b) vertical type failure. It appears that most piles in Iowa soils (sand, soft clay and stiff clay) failed when the applied vertical load reached the ultimate soil frictional resistance (vertical type failure). In very stiff clays, however, the lateral type failure occurs before vertical type failure because the soil is sufficiently stiff to force a plastic hinge to form in the pile as the specified lateral displacement is applied. Preliminary results from this investigation showed that the vertical load-carrying capacity of H piles is not significantly affected by lateral displacements of 2 inches in soft clay, stiff clay, loose sand, medium sand and dense sand. However, in very stiff clay (average blow count of 50 from standard penetration tests), it was found that the vertical load carrying capacity of the H pile is reduced by about 50 percent for 2 inches of lateral displacement and by about 20 percent for lateral displacement of 1 inch. On the basis of the preliminary results of this investigation, the 265-feet length limitation in Iowa for integral abutment concrete bridges appears to be very conservative.

Nonlinear Finite Element Study of Piles in Integral Abutment Bridges, HR-227, Part 2, 1982

The highway departments of the states which use integral abutments in bridge design were contacted in order to study the extent of integral abutment use in skewed bridges and to survey the different guidelines used for analysis and design of integral abutments in skewed bridges. The variation in design assumptions and pile orientations among the various states in their approach to the use of integral abutments on skewed bridges is discussed. The problems associated with the treatment of the approach slab, backfill, and pile cap, and the reason for using different pile orientations are summarized in the report. An algorithm based on a state-of-the-art nonlinear finite element procedure previously developed by the authors was modified and used to study the influence of different factors on behavior of piles in integral abutment bridges. An idealized integral abutment was introduced by assuming that the pile is rigidly cast into the pile cap and that the approach slab offers no resistance to lateral thermal expansion. Passive soil and shear resistance of the cap are neglected in design. A 40-foot H pile (HP 10 X 42) in six typical Iowa soils was analyzed for fully restrained pile head and pinned pile head. According to numerical results, the maximum safe length for fully restrained pile head is one-half the maximum safe length for pinned pile head. If the pile head is partially restrained, the maximum safe length will lie between the two limits. The numerical results from an investigation of the effect of predrilled oversized holes indicate that if the length of the predrilled oversized hole is at least 4 feet below the ground, the vertical load-carrying capacity of the H pile is only reduced by 10 percent for 4 inches of lateral displacement in very stiff clay. With no predrilled oversized hole, the pile failed before the 4-inch lateral displacement was reached. Thus, the maximum safe lengths for integral abutment bridges may be increased by predrilling. Four different typical Iowa layered soils were selected and used in this investigation. In certain situations, compacted soil (> 50 blow count in standard penetration tests) is used as fill on top of natural soil. The numerical results showed that the critical conditions will depend on the length of the compacted soil. If the length of the compacted soil exceeds 4 feet, the failure mechanism for the pile is similar to one in a layer of very stiff clay. That is, the vertical load-carrying capacity of the H pile will be greatly reduced as the specified lateral displacement increases.

Development of LRFD Design Procedures for Bridge Piles in Iowa – Field Testing of Steel H-Piles in Clay, Sand, and Mixed Soils and Data Analysis (Volume II), TR-583, 2011

In response to the mandate on Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) implementations by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on all new bridge projects initiated after October 1, 2007, the Iowa Highway Research Board (IHRB) sponsored these research projects to develop regional LRFD recommendations. The LRFD development was performed using the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) Pile Load Test database (PILOT). To increase the data points for LRFD development, develop LRFD recommendations for dynamic methods, and validate the results of LRFD calibration, 10 full-scale field tests on the most commonly used steel H-piles (e.g., HP 10 x 42) were conducted throughout Iowa. Detailed in situ soil investigations were carried out, push-in pressure cells were installed, and laboratory soil tests were performed. Pile responses during driving, at the end of driving (EOD), and at re-strikes were monitored using the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA), following with the CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) analysis. The hammer blow counts were recorded for Wave Equation Analysis Program (WEAP) and dynamic formulas. Static load tests (SLTs) were performed and the pile capacities were determined based on the Davisson’s criteria. The extensive experimental research studies generated important data for analytical and computational investigations. The SLT measured load-displacements were compared with the simulated results obtained using a model of the TZPILE program and using the modified borehole shear test method. Two analytical pile setup quantification methods, in terms of soil properties, were developed and validated. A new calibration procedure was developed to incorporate pile setup into LRFD.

Investigation of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design/DARWin-ME Performance Prediction Models for Iowa Pavement Analysis and Design, 2015

The Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) was developed under National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 1-37A as a novel mechanistic-empirical procedure for the analysis and design of pavements. The MEPDG was subsequently supported by AASHTO’s DARWin-ME and most recently marketed as AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software as of February 2013. Although the core design process and computational engine have remained the same over the years, some enhancements to the pavement performance prediction models have been implemented along with other documented changes as the MEPDG transitioned to AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design software. Preliminary studies were carried out to determine possible differences between AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design, MEPDG (version 1.1), and DARWin-ME (version 1.1) performance predictions for new jointed plain concrete pavement (JPCP), new hot mix asphalt (HMA), and HMA over JPCP systems. Differences were indeed observed between the pavement performance predictions produced by these different software versions. Further investigation was needed to verify these differences and to evaluate whether identified local calibration factors from the latest MEPDG (version 1.1) were acceptable for use with the latest version (version 2.1.24) of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design at the time this research was conducted. Therefore, the primary objective of this research was to examine AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design performance predictions using previously identified MEPDG calibration factors (through InTrans Project 11-401) and, if needed, refine the local calibration coefficients of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design pavement performance predictions for Iowa pavement systems using linear and nonlinear optimization procedures. A total of 130 representative sections across Iowa consisting of JPCP, new HMA, and HMA over JPCP sections were used. The local calibration results of AASHTOWare Pavement ME Design are presented and compared with national and locally calibrated MEPDG models.