Load Ratings for Standard Bridges, HR-239 Phase IV, 2008

In this report, sixteen secondary and primary bridge standards for two types of bridges are rated for AASHTO HS20-44 vehicle configuration utilizing Load Factor methodology. The ratings apply only to those bridges which: (1) are built according to the applicable bridge standard plans, (2) have no structural deterioration or damage, and (3) have no added wearing surface in excess of one-half inch integral wearing surface.

Investigation of the Impact of Dual-Lane Axle Spacing on Lateral Load Distribution, 2016

The spacing of adjacent wheel lines of dual-lane loads induces different lateral live load distributions on bridges, which cannot be determined using the current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) or Load Factor Design (LFD) equations for vehicles with standard axle configurations. Current Iowa law requires dual-lane loads to meet a five-foot requirement, the adequacy of which needs to be verified. To improve the state policy and AASHTO code specifications, it is necessary to understand the actual effects of wheel-line spacing on lateral load distribution. The main objective of this research was to investigate the impact of the wheel-line spacing of dual-lane loads on the lateral load distribution on bridges. To achieve this objective, a numerical evaluation using two-dimensional linear elastic finite element (FE) models was performed. For simulation purposes, 20 prestressed-concrete bridges, 20 steel bridges, and 20 slab bridges were randomly sampled from the Iowa bridge database. Based on the FE results, the load distribution factors (LDFs) of the concrete and steel bridges and the equivalent lengths of the slab bridges were derived. To investigate the variations of LDFs, a total of 22 types of single-axle four-wheel-line dual-lane loads were taken into account with configurations consisting of combinations of various interior and exterior wheel-line spacing. The corresponding moment and shear LDFs and equivalent widths were also derived using the AASHTO equations and the adequacy of the Iowa DOT five-foot requirement was evaluated. Finally, the axle weight limits per lane for different dual-lane load types were further calculated and recommended to complement the current Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) policy and AASHTO code specifications.

Development of Preliminary Load and Resistance Factor Design of Drilled Shafts in Iowa, RB03-012, 2014

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. To achieve part of this goal, a database for Drilled Shaft Foundation Testing (DSHAFT) was developed and reported on by Garder, Ng, Sritharan, and Roling in 2012. DSHAFT is aimed at assimilating high-quality drilled shaft test data from Iowa and the surrounding regions. DSHAFT is currently housed on a project website (http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/dshaft) and contains data for 41 drilled shaft tests. The objective of this research was to utilize the DSHAFT database and develop a regional LRFD procedure for drilled shafts in Iowa with preliminary resistance factors using a probability-based reliability theory. This was done by examining current design and construction practices used by the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) as well as recommendations given in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and the FHWA drilled shaft guidelines. Various analytical methods were used to estimate side resistance and end bearing of drilled shafts in clay, sand, intermediate geomaterial (IGM), and rock. Since most of the load test results obtained from O-cell do not pass the 1-in. top displacement criterion used by the Iowa DOT and the 5% of shaft diameter for top displacement criterion recommended by AASHTO, three improved procedures are proposed to generate and extend equivalent top load-displacement curves that enable the quantification of measured resistances corresponding to the displacement criteria. Using the estimated and measured resistances, regional resistance factors were calibrated following the AASHTO LRFD framework and adjusted to resolve any anomalies observed among the factors. To illustrate the potential and successful use of drilled shafts in Iowa, the design procedures of drilled shaft foundations were demonstrated and the advantages of drilled shafts over driven piles were addressed in two case studies.

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.

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.