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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

Reliability-based calibration for a mechanics-based fatigue cracking design procedure

Most pavement design procedures incorporate reliability to account for design inputs-associated uncertainty and variability effect on predicted performance. The load and resistance factor design (LRFD) procedure, which delivers economical section while considering design inputs variability separately, has been recognised as an effective tool to incorporate reliability into design procedures. This paper presents a new reliability-based calibration in LRFD format for a mechanics-based fatigue cracking analysis framework. This paper employs a two-component reliability analysis methodology that utilises a central composite design-based response surface approach and a first-order reliability method. The reliability calibration was achieved based on a number of field pavement sections that have well-documented performance history and high-quality field and laboratory data. The effectiveness of the developed LRFD procedure was evaluated by performing pavement designs of various target reliabilities and design conditions. The result shows an excellent agreement between the target and actual reliabilities. Furthermore, it is clear from the results that more design features need to be included in the reliability calibration to minimise the deviation of the actual reliability from the target reliability.

Lateral load distribution for curved steel I -girder bridges

Lateral load distribution factor is a key factor for designing and analyzing curved steel I-girder bridges. In this dissertation, the effects of various parameters on moment and shear distribution for curved steel I-girder bridges were studied using the Finite Element Method (FEM). The parameters considered in the study were: radius of curvature, girder spacing, overhang, span length, number of girders, ratio of girder stiffness to overall bridge stiffness, slab thickness, girder longitudinal stiffness, cross frame spacing, and girder torsional inertia. The variations of these parameters were based on the statistical analysis of the real bridge database, which was created by extracting data from existing or newly designed curved steel I-girder bridge plans collected all over the nation. A hypothetical bridge superstructure model that was made of all the mean values of the data was created and used for the parameter study. ^ The study showed that cross frame spacing and girder torsional inertia had negligible effects. Other parameters had been identified as key parameters. Regression analysis was conducted based on the FEM analysis results and simplified formulas for predicting positive moment, negative moment, and shear distribution factors were developed. Thirty-three real bridges were analyzed using FEM to verify the formulas. The ratio of the distribution factor obtained from the formula to the one obtained from the FEM analysis, which was referred to as the g-ratio, was examined. The results showed that the standard deviation of the g-ratios was within 0.04 to 0.06 and the mean value of the g-ratios was greater than unity by one standard deviation. This indicates that the formulas are conservative in most cases but not overly conservative. The final formulas are similar in format to the current American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Load Resistance and Factor Design (LRFD) specifications. ^ The developed formulas were compared with other simplified methods. The outcomes showed that the proposed formulas had the most accurate results among all methods. ^ The formulas developed in this study will assist bridge engineers and researchers in predicting the actual live load distribution in horizontally curved steel I-girder bridges. ^

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa, 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 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.

Development of LRFD Procedures for Bridge Pile Foundations in Iowa Final Report, June 2010

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.

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.

Development of a Database for Drilled Shaft Foundation Testing (DSHAFT), June 2012

Drilled shafts have been used in the US for more than 100 years in bridges and buildings as a deep foundation alternative. For many of these applications, the drilled shafts were designed using the Working Stress Design (WSD) approach. Even though WSD has been used successfully in the past, a move toward Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) for foundation applications began when the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) issued a policy memorandum on June 28, 2000.The policy memorandum requires all new bridges initiated after October 1, 2007, to be designed according to the LRFD approach. This ensures compatibility between the superstructure and substructure designs, and provides a means of consistently incorporating sources of uncertainty into each load and resistance component. Regionally-calibrated LRFD resistance factors are permitted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to improve the economy and competitiveness of drilled shafts. To achieve this goal, a database for Drilled SHAft Foundation Testing (DSHAFT) has been developed. DSHAFT is aimed at assimilating high quality drilled shaft test data from Iowa and the surrounding regions, and identifying the need for further tests in suitable soil profiles. This report introduces DSHAFT and demonstrates its features and capabilities, such as an easy-to-use storage and sharing tool for providing access to key information (e.g., soil classification details and cross-hole sonic logging reports). DSHAFT embodies a model for effective, regional LRFD calibration procedures consistent with PIle LOad Test (PILOT) database, which contains driven pile load tests accumulated from the state of Iowa. PILOT is now available for broader use at the project website: http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/lrfd/. DSHAFT, available in electronic form at http://srg.cce.iastate.edu/dshaft/, is currently comprised of 32 separate load tests provided by Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Nebraska state departments of transportation and/or department of roads. In addition to serving as a manual for DSHAFT and providing a summary of the available data, this report provides a preliminary analysis of the load test data from Iowa, and will open up opportunities for others to share their data through this quality–assured process, thereby providing a platform to improve LRFD approach to drilled shafts, especially in the Midwest region.

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.

Iowa ABC Connections, RB06-013, 2015

For several years the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT), Iowa State University, the Federal Highway Administration, and several Iowa counties have been working to develop accelerated bridge construction (ABC) concepts, details, and processes. Throughout this development, much has been learned and has resulted in Iowa being viewed as a national leader in the area of ABC. However, at this time, the Office of Bridges and Structures does not have a complete set of working standards nor design examples to accompany ABC portions of the bridge design manual (now called the Load and Resistance Factor Design/LRFD Bridge Design Manual). During the fall of 2013, the Iowa DOT constructed a bridge on IA 92 in Cass County using an ABC technique known as slide-in bridge construction. During the design of the Cass County Bridge, several questions were raised about the performance of critical design and construction details: the pile-to-pile cap connection and the polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) coated bearing pads on which the bridge would slide. The timing of this specific need and the initiation of this project offered a unique opportunity to provide significant short- and long-term value to the Office of Bridges and Structures. Several full-scale laboratory tests, which included several variations of the pile-to-pile cap connection and bearing pad slides, were completed. These tests proved that the connection was capable of achieving the desired capacity and that the expected coefficient of friction of the bearing pads was reasonably low. Finally, a design tool was developed for the Office of Bridges and Structures to be used on future projects that might benefit from a precast pile cap.