Low Water Stream Crossing: Design and Construction Recommendations, December 2001

Most counties have bridges that are no longer adequate, and are faced with large capital expenditure for replacement structures of the same size. In this regard, low water stream crossings (LWSCs) can provide an acceptable, low cost alternative to bridges and culverts on low volume and reduced maintenance level roads. In addition to providing a low cost option for stream crossings, LWSCs have been designed to have the additional benefit of stream bed stabilization. Considerable information on the current status of LWSCs in Iowa, along with insight of needs for design assistance, was gained from a survey of county engineers that was conducted as part of this research (Appendix A). Copies of responses and analysis are included in Appendix B. This document provides guidelines for the design of LWSCs. There are three common types of LWSCs: unvented ford, vented ford with pipes, and low water bridges. Selection among these depends on stream geometry, discharge, importance of road, and budget availability. To minimize exposure to tort liability, local agencies using low water stream crossings should consider adopting reasonable selection and design criteria and certainly provide adequate warning of these structures to road users. The design recommendations included in this report for LWSCs provide guidelines and suggestions for local agency reference. Several design examples of design calculations are included in Appendix E.

Low Water Stream Crossing: Design and Construction Recommendations, Decemeber 2001

Most counties have bridges that are no longer adequate, and are faced with large capital expenditure for replacement structures of the same size. In this regard, low water stream crossings (LWSCs) can provide an acceptable, low cost alternative to bridges and culverts on low volume and reduced maintenance level roads. In addition to providing a low cost option for stream crossings, LWSCs have been designed to have the additional benefit of streambed stabilization. Considerable information on the current status of LWSCs in Iowa, along with insight of needs for design assistance, was gained from a survey of county engineers that was conducted as part of this research (Appendix A). Copies of responses and analysis are included in Appendix B. This document provides guidelines for the design of LWSCs. There are three common types of LWSCs: unvented ford, vented ford with pipes, and low water bridges. Selection among these depends on stream geometry, discharge, importance of road, and budget availability. To minimize exposure to tort liability, local agencies using low water stream crossings should consider adopting reasonable selection and design criteria and certainly provide adequate warning of these structures to road users. The design recommendations included in this report for LWSCs provide guidelines and suggestions for local agency reference. Several design examples of design calculations are included in Appendix E.

Low Water Stream Crossing: Design and Construction Recommendations; A Selection and Design Guide, February 2003

Most Iowa counties maintain low volume roads with at least one bridge or culvert that is structurally deficient or obsolete. In some counties the percentage of deficient drainage structures may be as high as 62%. Replacement with structures of similar size would require large capital expenditures that many counties cannot afford. Low water stream crossings (LWSCs) may be an acceptable lowcost alternative in some cases.

Asbestos Fibers in Type B Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course, MLR-67-1, 1968

The Standard Specifications for this project included requirements for placing two 500 foot test sections of Type B asphaltic concrete with 1-1/2 per cent asbestos fibres (mix size 3/8 inch, lift thickness 3/4 inch) as part of the regular construction of the surface course. These requirements were designed to provide asbestos modified mixtures for laboratory analysis and road performance evaluation. This report provides the preliminary results and analysis of test data obtained from tests on the mixtures placed on the roadway. Previous research by G. S. Zuelke (1) and J. H. Kestzman et al (2) indicated that asphaltic concrete mixtures modified with asbestos fibres improved stability, decreased permeability, and allowed the use of higher bitumen contents. This study indicated that the addition of asbestos fibres would permit the use of higher bitumen contents, theoretically improving durability, without adverse results. An indication was also obtained to the effect that asbestos mixtures were more difficult to compact in the field.

Evaluation of "FIBERMESH" Synthetic Fibers in P.C. Concrete Bridge Barrier Rail, MLR-88-17, 1988

Ten bridges were chosen to have their concrete barrier rails constructed with one rail having "Fibermesh" synthetic fibers added and the other rail without the fibers. The rails were constructed in 1985, 1986, or 1987. All the bridges were inspected in 1988 and no consistent reduction in cracking was achieved using Fibermesh fibers in the p.c. concrete bridge barrier rails.

Development of Railroad Highway Grade Crossing Consolidation Rating Formula, 2015

The goal of this project was to provide an objective methodology to support public agencies and railroads in making decisions related to consolidation of at-grade rail-highway crossings. The project team developed a weighted-index method and accompanying Microsoft Excel spreadsheet based tool to help evaluate and prioritize all public highway-rail grade crossings systematically from a possible consolidation impact perspective. Factors identified by stakeholders as critical were traffic volume, heavy-truck traffic volume, proximity to emergency medical services, proximity to schools, road system, and out-of-distance travel. Given the inherent differences between urban and rural locations, factors were considered, and weighted, differently, based on crossing location. Application of a weighted-index method allowed for all factors of interest to be included and for these factors to be ranked independently, as well as weighted according to stakeholder priorities, to create a single index. If priorities change, this approach also allows for factors and weights to be adjusted. The prioritization generated by this approach may be used to convey the need and opportunity for crossing consolidation to decision makers and stakeholders. It may also be used to quickly investigate the feasibility of a possible consolidation. Independently computed crossing risk and relative impact of consolidation may be integrated and compared to develop the most appropriate treatment strategies or alternatives for a highway-rail grade crossing. A crossing with limited- or low-consolidation impact but a high safety risk may be a prime candidate for consolidation. Similarly, a crossing with potentially high-consolidation impact as well as high risk may be an excellent candidate for crossing improvements or grade separation. The results of the highway-rail grade crossing prioritization represent a consistent and quantitative, yet preliminary, assessment. The results may serve as the foundation for more rigorous or detailed analysis and feasibility studies. Other pertinent site-specific factors, such as safety, maintenance costs, economic impacts, and location-specific access and characteristics should be considered.