Internal Reinforcement of Backfill Behind Integral Bridge Abutments To Mitigate Approach Slab Distresses
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

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

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

i

Internal Reinforcement of Backfill Behind Integral Bridge Abutments To Mitigate Approach Slab Distresses

Filetype[PDF-12.74 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
English
Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Creators:
  • Corporate Creators:
    University of Kansas. Dept. of Civil, Environmental and Architectural Engineering
  • Corporate Contributors:
  • Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Publication/ Report Number:
    K-TRAN: KU-19-1
  • Resource Type:
    Tech Report
  • Geographical Coverage:
    United States
  • Edition:
    Final Report July 2018–June 2021
  • Corporate Publisher:
    Kansas. Department of Transportation
  • Abstract:
    Integral abutment bridges have become popular worldwide by eliminating movable shoes which are expensive to purchase, install, and maintain in conventional bridges. However, the behavior of bridge abutments subjected to air temperature changes for integral bridges is different from that of conventional bridges. Expansion and contraction of bridge girders due to temperature variations are accommodated by joints between bridge girders and abutments for conventional bridges. Expansion of bridge girders at high temperatures moves the integral bridge abutment toward its backfill, causing high lateral earth pressures behind the abutment, while contraction of bridge girders at low temperatures moves the integral bridge abutment away from its backfill, causing backfill surface settlements. The backfill behind the abutment cannot maintain its stability after the integral abutment moves away so that the backfill material within the upper portion slumps and moves downward and toward the abutment. Cyclic movements of the integral abutment due to temperature changes disturb the backfill and further reduce its self-stability when the integral abutment moves away from the backfill in the next cycle. In addition, soil erosion and compression of backfill and foundation soil can aggravate the backfill surface settlements for both integral bridges and conventional bridges. An approach slab is commonly used to provide a smooth transition between the backfill and the bridge abutment. The approach slab may lose some support from the backfill as the backfill surface settles. Consequently, more traffic loads on the approach slab are transferred to the end of the approach slab near the adjacent pavement, resulting in a differential settlement at the joint between the approach slab and the adjacent pavement. A sleeper slab has been proposed for placement underneath the joint between the approach slab and the adjacent pavement, thus minimizing this differential settlement. However, an excessive gradient may still develop for the approach slab due to the differential settlement between two ends of the approach slab. This situation may be aggravated by the concave deformation of the approach slab due to traffic loading. Therefore, backfill surface settlements and traffic loading are the two main causes for the distresses of the approach slab. These distresses may be mitigated by the use of geosynthetic reinforcement because it is expected to increase the stability of the backfill and reduce the settlement of the sleeper slab. However, the benefits of the geosynthetic reinforcement for this application are not well investigated and confirmed. Six physical model tests were conducted in this study to investigate the benefits of geogrid reinforcement in reducing the settlements of the backfill surface and the sleeper slab. In the physical models, a manual jack was used to push and pull the integral abutment to simulate the expansion and contraction of bridge girders due to temperature increase and decrease, respectively. In addition, a hydraulic cylinder was adopted to simulate traffic loading on the approach slab at four positions (Position I to Position IV) of the model abutment top related to the four seasons (spring to winter) in a year. Test results show that both the simulated seasonal temperature change and traffic loading induced backfill surface settlements. Geogrid reinforcement increased the stiffness of the soil under the sleeper slab and enhanced the sleeper slab to carry more traffic load transferred, thus reducing the traffic load transferred to the backfill behind the abutment. Consequently, the geogrids under the sleeper slab reduced the backfill surface settlements due to traffic loading. Horizontal geogrids in the backfill increased the backfill surface settlements near the abutment but reduced the settlements of the backfill away from the abutment. Geogrids with wrap-around facing significantly reduced the backfill surface settlements due to the seasonal temperature changes and traffic loading. An increase of the top geogrid length with wrap-around facing further reduced the backfill surface settlement.
  • Format:
    PDF
  • Funding:
    C2130
  • 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