A comment on the use of polymer-impregnated concrete in bridge decks to achieve a reduction in material volume and first cost.
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

i

A comment on the use of polymer-impregnated concrete in bridge decks to achieve a reduction in material volume and first cost.

Filetype[PDF-1.14 MB]


  • English
    • Details You May Also Like

    Details:

    • Creators:
      Sprinkel, Michael M
    • Corporate Creators:
      Virginia Highway & Transportation Research Council
    • Subject/TRT Terms:
    • Publication/ Report Number:
      VHTRC 75-R68
    • Resource Type:
      Tech Report
    • Geographical Coverage:
      Virginia
    • Corporate Publisher:
      Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC)
    • Abstract:
      Three 180', simple span, composite plate girder structures were designed to approximate the material requirements and first cost associated with a polymer-impregnated concrete as compared to those for a conventional concrete bridge deck. The structures were designed by the working stress method, and although the AASHTO code was applied where applicable, some assumptions were made in the design of the polymer-impregnated deck. The results indicate that by using polymer-impregnated concrete rather than conventional concrete in a bridge deck, material requirements may be altered as follows, depending upon the assumptions and specifications applied in the design. 1. Deck concrete : 0 to 41% less, 2. Deck reinforcing steel : 0 to 115% more, 3. Structural steel : 0 to 16% less, 4. Substructure : 0 to 17% less. Assuming that polymer-impregnated concrete costs about twice as much as conventional concrete, the structures with a polymer deck cost from 0.5% less to 10.5% more than the structure with a conventional deck. Based on these findings it appears that the material savings that can be achieved by using polymer-impregnated concrete in a bridge deck may tend to offset the high unit cost of the concrete, but not enough to justify its use on a first cost basis. However, performance specifications for concrete polymer materials must be developed before an accurate determination of material savings can be made.
    • Format:
      PDF
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • Download URL:
    • File Type:

    Supporting Files

    • No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at rosap.ntl.bts.gov

    Version 3.26