Waiting Period for Closure Pours in Bridge Widening or Staged Construction
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 21, Issue 5
Abstract
Current practice in California requires up to a 60-day waiting period for closure pour after falsework release for both staged construction and bridge widening. The relatively long waiting period is intended to mitigate damage to the connected bridge deck as differential displacement develops between the new and previously constructed decks. The current waiting period does not take into account the displacement capacity of the closure slab, which depends on the dimensions and reinforcement details of the slab. In this paper, time-dependent deflection of two bridges under construction was measured up to approximately 12 months, and full-size tests were conducted to investigate the behavior of closure slabs when subjected to differential displacement. The objective of the tests was to determine the deformation capacity of the slab so that time-dependent deflection of the bridge can be directly taken into account when determining the waiting period for slab closure. Parameters in the test program included the length and thickness of the slab and the use of couplers in the slab reinforcement. Results indicated that attention needs to be paid to large stiff closure slabs, leading to a long waiting period, as brittle failure may occur at relatively small differential displacement.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
Special thanks are due to Peter Lee, John Drury, Darin Kishiyama, Jonathan Chi, and Ehab Wahed of Caltrans for their valuable assistance during design and testing of laboratory specimens as well as instrumentation of field bridges. The authors are also greatly indebted to the technical assistance provided by University of California (UC), Davis—namely, Bill Sluis and Daret Kehlet—and to Marcos Torres and Mayra Jimenez, undergraduate assistants funded under UC Davis’s California Alliance for Minority Participation. Opinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the view of the sponsors.
References
ACI (American Concrete Institute). (1992). “Prediction of creep, shrinkage, and temperature effects in concrete structures.” ACI 209R-92, Farmington Hills, MI.
Bažant, Z. P., and Baweja, S. (1995). “Creep and shrinkage prediction model for analysis and design of concrete structures—Model B3.” Mater. Struct., 28(180), 357–495.
Bažant, Z. P., and Baweja, S. (1996). “Short form of creep and shrinkage prediction model B3 for structures of medium sensitivity.” Mater. Struct., 29(10), 587–593.
Biswas, M. (1986). “Precast bridge deck design systems.” PCI J., 31(2), 40–94.
Caltrans. (1991). Widening existing bridges, memos to designers 9-3, Sacramento, CA.
Caltrans. (1999). Standard specifications, Sacramento, CA.
CEB (Comité Euro-International du Béton). (1993). CEB-FIP model code 1990: Design code, London.
Gardner, N. J., and Lockman, M. J. (2001). “Design provisions for drying shrinkage and creep of normal-strength concrete.” ACI Mater. J., 98(2), 159–167.
Gardner, N. J., and Zhao, J. W. (1993). “Creep and shrinkage revisited.” ACI Mater. J., 90(3), 236–246.
Lee, A., and Robertson, I. N. (1995), “Instrumentation and long-term monitoring of the North Halawa Valley Viaduct.” Research Rep. UHM/CE/95-08, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Hawaii, Manoa, HI.
Nottingham, D. (1996). “Joint grouting in Alaskan bridges and dock decks.” Concr. Int., 18(2), 45–48.
Sprinkel, M. M., Weyers, R., and Blevins, C. (2010). “Failure and repair of deck closure pour on Interstate 81.” Proc., Transportation Research Board 89th Annual Meeting (Jan 10–14), US Dept. of Transportation, Washington, DC Paper no. 10-1741.
Wight, J. K., and MacGregor, J. G. (2009) “Reinforced concrete mechanics and design,” 5th Ed., Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Zhu, P., and Ma, Z. J. (2010). “Selection of durable closure pour materials for accelerated bridge construction.” J. Bridge Eng., 695–704.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 21 • Issue 5 • May 2016
Copyright
© 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: May 7, 2015
Accepted: Oct 6, 2015
Published online: Jan 20, 2016
Published in print: May 1, 2016
Discussion open until: Jun 20, 2016
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.