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 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 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 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.

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 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 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.

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.

Investigation of Negative Moment Reinforcing in Bridge Decks, TR-660, 2015

Multi-span pre-tensioned pre-stressed concrete beam (PPCB) bridges made continuous usually experience a negative live load moment region over the intermediate supports. Conventional thinking dictates that sufficient reinforcement must be provided in this region to satisfy the strength and serviceability requirements associated with the tensile stresses in the deck. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications recommend the negative moment reinforcement (b2 reinforcement) be extended beyond the inflection point. Based upon satisfactory previous performance and judgment, the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Bridges and Structures (OBS) currently terminates b2 reinforcement at 1/8 of the span length. Although the Iowa DOT policy results in approximately 50% shorter b2 reinforcement than the AASHTO LRFD specifications, the Iowa DOT has not experienced any significant deck cracking over the intermediate supports. The primary objective of this project was to investigate the Iowa DOT OBS policy regarding the required amount of b2 reinforcement to provide the continuity over bridge decks. Other parameters, such as termination length, termination pattern, and effects of the secondary moments, were also studied. Live load tests were carried out on five bridges. The data were used to calibrate three-dimensional finite element models of two bridges. Parametric studies were conducted on the bridges with an uncracked deck, a cracked deck, and a cracked deck with a cracked pier diaphragm for live load and shrinkage load. The general conclusions were as follows: -- The parametric study results show that an increased area of the b2 reinforcement slightly reduces the strain over the pier, whereas an increased length and staggered reinforcement pattern slightly reduce the strains of the deck at 1/8 of the span length. -- Finite element modeling results suggest that the transverse field cracks over the pier and at 1/8 of the span length are mainly due to deck shrinkage. -- Bridges with larger skew angles have lower strains over the intermediate supports. -- Secondary moments affect the behavior in the negative moment region. The impact may be significant enough such that no tensile stresses in the deck may be experienced.

A Continuous Span Aluminum Girder Concrete Deck Bridge - Part 2 of 2: Fatigue Tests of Aluminum Girders, Final Report, 1997

In 1957, the Iowa State Highway Commission, with financial assistance from the aluminum industry, constructed a 220-ft (67-m) long, four-span continuous, aluminum girder bridge to carry traffic on Clive Road (86th Street) over Interstate 80 near Des Moines, Iowa. The bridge had four, welded I-shape girders that were fabricated in pairs with welded diaphragms between an exterior and an interior girder. The interior diaphragms between the girder pairs were bolted to girder brackets. A composite, reinforced concrete deck served as the roadway surface. The bridge, which had performed successfully for about 35 years of service, was removed in the fall of 1993 to make way for an interchange at the same location. Prior to the bridge demolition, load tests were conducted to monitor girder and diaphragm bending strains and deflections in the northern end span. Fatigue testing of the aluminum girders that were removed from the end spans were conducted by applying constant-amplitude, cyclic loads. These tests established the fatigue strength of an existing, welded, flange-splice detail and added, welded, flange-cover plates and horizontal web plate attachment details. This part, Part 2, of the final report focuses on the fatigue tests of the aluminum girder sections that were removed from the bridge and on the analysis of the experimental data to establish the fatigue strength of full-size specimens. Seventeen fatigue fractures that were classified as Category E weld details developed in the seven girder test specimens. Linear regression analyses of the fatigue test results established both nominal and experimental stress-range versus load cycle relationships (SN curves) for the fatigue strength of fillet-welded connections. The nominal strength SN curve obtained by this research essentially matched the SN curve for Category E aluminum weldments given in the AASHTO LRFD specifications. All of the Category E fatigue fractures that developed in the girder test specimens satisfied the allowable SN relationship specified by the fatigue provisions of the Aluminum Association. The lower-bound strength line that was set at two standard deviations below the least squares regression line through the fatigue fracture data points related well with the Aluminum Association SN curve. The results from the experimental tests of this research have provided additional information regarding behavioral characteristics of full-size, aluminum members and have confirmed that aluminum has the strength properties needed for highway bridge girders.

Impact of Bottom Flange Confinement Reinforcement on Performance of Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders

For many years AASHTO provided no recommendation to state DOT’s on bottom flange confinement reinforcement for their bridge superstructures. The 1996 edition of AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges stated that nominal reinforcement be placed to enclose the prestressing steel from the end of the girder for at least a distance equal to the girder’s height. A few years later the 2004 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification changed the distance over which the confinement was to be distributed from 1.0h to 1.5h, and gave minimum requirements for the amount of steel to be used, No.3 bars, and their maximum spacing, not to exceed 6”. Research was undertaken to study what impact, if any, confinement reinforcement has on the performance of prestressed concrete bridge girders. Of particular interest was the effect confinement had on the transfer length, development length, and vertical shear capacity of the fore mentioned members. First, an analytical investigation was performed on the subject, and then an experimental investigation followed which consisted of designing, fabricating, and testing eight tee-girders and three NU1100 girders with particular attention paid to the amount and distribution of confinement reinforcement placed at the end of each girder. The results of the study show: 1) neither the amount or distribution of confinement reinforcement had a significant effect on the initial or final transfer length of the prestress strands; 2) at the AASHTO calculated development length, no significant impact from confinement was found on either the nominal flexural capacity of bridge girders or bond capacity of the prestressing steel; 3) the effects from varied confinement reinforcement on the shear resistance of girders tested was negligible, however, distribution of confinement did show to have an impact on the prestressed strands’ bond capacity; 4) confinement distribution across the entire girder did increase ductility and reduced cracking under extreme loading conditions.

Structural capacity of steel tubular cast-in-place piling

Steel tubular cast-in-place pilings are used throughout the country for many different project types. These piles are a closed-end pipe with varying wall thicknesses and outer diameters, that are driven to depth and then the core is filled with concrete. These piles are typically used for smaller bridges, or secondary structures. Mostly the piling is designed based on a resistance based method which is a function of the soil properties of which the pile is driven through, however there is a structural capacity of these members that is considered to be the upper bound on the loading of the member. This structural capacity is given by the AASHTO LRFD (2010), with two methods. These two methods are based on a composite or non-composite section. Many state agencies and corporations use the non-composite equation because it is requires much less computation and is known to be conservative. However with the trends of the time, more and more structural elements are being investigated to determine ways to better understand the mechanics of the members, which could lead to more efficient and safer designs. In this project, a set of these piling are investigated. The way the cross section reacts to several different loading conditions, along with a more detailed observation of the material properties is considered as part of this research. The evaluation consisted of testing stub sections of pile with varying sizes (10-¾”, 12-¾”), wall thicknesses (0.375”, 0.5”), and testing methods (whole compression, composite compression, push through, core sampling). These stub sections were chosen as they would represent a similar bracing length to many different soils. In addition, a finite element model was developed using ANSYS to predict the strains from the testing of the pile cross sections. This model was able to simulate the strains from most of the loading conditions and sizes that were tested. The bond between the steel shell and the concrete core, along with the concrete strength through the depth of the cross section were some of the material properties of these sections that were investigated.

Corrugated wood composite panels for structural decking

High flexural strength and stiffness can be achieved by forming a thin panel into a wave shape perpendicular to the bending direction. The use of corrugated shapes to gain flexural strength and stiffness is common in metal and reinforced plastic products. However, there is no commercial production of corrugated wood composite panels. This research focuses on the application of corrugated shapes to wood strand composite panels. Beam theory, classical plate theory and finite element models were used to analyze the bending behavior of corrugated panels. The most promising shallow corrugated panel configuration was identified based on structural performance and compatibility with construction practices. The corrugation profile selected has a wavelength equal to 8”, a channel depth equal to ¾”, a sidewall angle equal to 45 degrees and a panel thickness equal to 3/8”. 16”x16” panels were produced using random mats and 3-layer aligned mats with surface flakes parallel to the channels. Strong axis and weak axis bending tests were conducted. The test results indicate that flake orientation has little effect on the strong axis bending stiffness. The 3/8” thick random mat corrugated panels exhibit bending stiffness (400,000 lbs-in2/ft) and bending strength (3,000 in-lbs/ft) higher than 23/32” or 3/4” thick APA Rated Sturd-I-Floor with a 24” o.c. span rating. Shear and bearing test results show that the corrugated panel can withstand more than 50 psf of uniform load at 48” joist spacings. Molding trials on 16”x16” panels provided data for full size panel production. Full size 4’x8’ shallow corrugated panels were produced with only minor changes to the current oriented strandboard manufacturing process. Panel testing was done to simulate floor loading during construction, without a top underlayment layer, and during occupancy, with an underlayment over the panel to form a composite deck. Flexural tests were performed in single-span and two-span bending with line loads applied at mid-span. The average strong axis bending stiffness and bending strength of the full size corrugated panels (without the underlayment) were over 400,000 lbs-in2/ft and 3,000 in-lbs/ft, respectively. The composite deck system, which consisted of an OSB sheathing (15/32” thick) nailed-glued (using 3d ringshank nails and AFG-01 subfloor adhesive) to the corrugated subfloor achieved about 60% of the full composite stiffness resulting in about 3 times the bending stiffness of the corrugated subfloor (1,250,000 lbs-in2/ft). Based on the LRFD design criteria, the corrugated composite floor system can carry 40 psf of unfactored uniform loads, limited by the L/480 deflection limit state, at 48” joist spacings. Four 10-ft long composite T-beam specimens were built and tested for the composite action and the load sharing between a 24” wide corrugated deck system and the supporting I-joist. The average bending stiffness of the composite T-beam was 1.6 times higher than the bending stiffness of the I-joist. A 8-ft x 12-ft mock up floor was built to evaluate construction procedures. The assembly of the composite floor system is relatively simple. The corrugated composite floor system might be able to offset the cheaper labor costs of the single-layer Sturd-IFloor through the material savings. However, no conclusive result can be drawn, in terms of the construction costs, at this point without an in depth cost analysis of the two systems. The shallow corrugated composite floor system might be a potential alternative to the Sturd-I-Floor in the near future because of the excellent flexural stiffness provided.