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.

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.

Precast Concrete Panel Thickness for Epoxy-Coated Prestressing Strands, Volume 2, HR-353, 1994

This final report for Phase 1 of the research on epoxy-coated, prestressing strands in precast prestressed concrete (PC) panels has been published in two volumes. Volume 1--Technical Report contains the problem description, literature review, and survey results; descriptions of the test specimens, experimental tests, and analytical models; discussions of the analytical and experimental results; summary, conclusions, and recommendations; list of references; and acknowledgments. Volume 2--Supplemental Report contains additional information in the form of appendix material for Volume 1 on the questionnaires, strand forces, geometry of the specimens, concrete crack patterns that formed in the strand transfer length and strand development length specimens, concrete strains in the strand transfer length specimens, and load-point deflections and strand-slip measurements for the strand development length specimens. Appendix A contains the questionnaires that were sent to the design agencies and precast concrete producers. A summary of the results to the questions on the surveys are given as the number of respondents who provided the same answers and as paraphrased comments from the respondents. Appendix B contains graphs of strand force versus time, strand force versus temperature, and strand force versus strand cutting sequence for the concrete castings. Appendix C contains figures that show the location of each specimen in the prestress bed, the geometrical configurations for the strand transfer length (T-type) specimens and strand development length (D-type) specimens, and the concrete cracks that developed in some of the T-type specimens when they were prestressed. Appendix D contains figures that show the concrete cracks that developed in the D-type specimens during the strand development length tests. For each of these tests, the sequence of the failure for the specimen is specified. Appendix E contains graphs of concrete strain versus distance from the end of the T-type specimens that were instrumented with internal embedment strain gages. Appendix F contains graphs of load versus load-point deflection and load versus strand-slip for the strand development length tests of the D-type specimens.

Demonstration Project using Railroad Flatcars for Low-Volume Road Bridges, TR-444, 2003

The use of Railroad Flatcars (RRFCs) as the superstructure on low-volume county bridges has been investigated in a research project conducted by the Bridge Engineering Center at Iowa State University. These bridges enable county engineers to replace old, inadequate county bridge superstructures for less than half the cost and in a shorter construction time than required for a conventional bridge. To illustrate their constructability, adequacy, and economy, two RRFC demonstration bridges were designed, constructed, and tested: one in Buchanan County and the other in Winnebago County. The Buchanan County Bridge was constructed as a single span with 56-ft-long flatcars supported at their ends by new, concrete abutments. The use of concrete in the substructure allowed for an integral abutment at one end of the bridge with an expansion joint at the other end. Reinforced concrete beams (serving as longitudinal connections between the three adjacent flatcars) were installed to distribute live loads among the RRFCs. Guardrails and an asphalt milling driving surface completed the bridge. The Winnebago County Bridge was constructed using 89-ft-long flatcars. Preliminary calculations determined that they were not adequate to span 89 ft as a simple span. Therefore, the flatcars were supported by new, steel-capped piers and abutments at the RRFCs' bolsters and ends, resulting in a 66-ft main span and two 10-ft end spans. Due to the RRFC geometry, the longitudinal connections between adjacent RRFCs were inadequate to support significant loads; therefore, transverse, recycled timber planks were utilized to effectively distribute live loads to all three RRFCs. A gravel driving surface was placed on top of the timber planks, and a guardrail system was installed to complete the bridge. Bridge behavior predicted by grillage models for each bridge was validated by strain and deflection data from field tests; it was found that the engineered RRFC bridges have live load stresses significantly below the AASHTO Bridge Design Specification limits. To assist in future RRFC bridge projects, RRFC selection criteria were established for visual inspection and selection of structurally adequate RRFCs. In addition, design recommendations have been developed to simplify live load distribution calculations for the design of the bridges. Based on the results of this research, it has been determined that through proper RRFC selection, construction, and engineering, RRFC bridges are a viable, economic replacement system for low-volume road bridges.

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.