Abstract
Integral abutment bridges (IABs) are prevalent in the US due to their lower maintenance and construction costs, as well as longer service life. However, approach slabs at IABs experience complex demands owing to the fact that there are no expansion joints between the ends of a bridge and its approach slabs. To provide comprehensive field data on the response of IAB approach slabs, a four-lane IAB cast-in-place approach slab and a three-lane IAB precast approach slab were instrumented during construction to elucidate approach slab structural behavior due to live load and thermal effects. Static truck load tests were conducted at various traffic lanes and shoulder locations on each of the instrumented approach slabs. Finite-element analysis (FEA) models were developed to simulate slab behavior under controlled live loading and thermal effects. Numerical modeling of slabs subjected to truck loads is used to estimate the modulus of subbase support under the approach slab. The strain and stress results from numerical modeling are consistent with the truck-induced behavior measured in the field, validating key assumptions of approach slab boundary conditions. A nonlinear thermal gradient profile is proposed to improve the ability of the FEA models to properly capture slab behavior under thermal effects. Solar radiation is found to introduce peak stresses greater than the live load stresses. It is also observed that simplified structural analysis in practice (neglecting parapets) can significantly underestimate stresses in approach slab edge regions.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
All data, models, or codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The research presented in this paper is part of the project “Investigation of Approach Slab Construction and Evaluation of Modular Approach Slab Designs,” which is funded by the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (ISTHA). The contents of this paper reflect the view of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of ISTHA. The authors thank the members of the project Technical Review Panel, chaired by Dan Gancarz of ISTHA, for their valuable assistance with this research. The assistance of Ricardo Dorado Saucedo in preparing some figures is also gratefully acknowledged.
References
AASHTO. 2017. LRFD bridge design specifications. 8th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Abdullah, N. H. H., K. S. Ng, I. B. M. Jais, and J. Idrus. 2022. “Use of geosynthetic reinforced soil-integrated bridge system to alleviate settlement problems at bridge approach: A review.” Phys. Chem. Earth. A/B/C 129: 103304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2022.103304
Barker, R. M., and J. A. Puckett. 2013. Design of highway bridges: An LRFD approach. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Breña, S. F., C. H. Bonczar, S. A. Civjan, J. T. DeJong, and D. S. Crovo. 2007. “Evaluation of seasonal and yearly behavior of an integral abutment bridge.” J. Bridge Eng. 12 (3): 296–305. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2007)12:3(296).
Briaud, J. L., S. F. Maher, and R. W. James. 1997. “Bump at the end of the bridge.” Civ. Eng. 67 (5): 68–69.
Burdette, E. G., E. E. Ingram, J. B. Tidwell, D. W. Goodpasture, J. H. Deatherage, and S. C. Howard. 2004. “Behavior of integral abutments supported by steel H-piles.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1892 (1): 24–28. https://doi.org/10.3141/1892-03.
Cai, C. S., X. M. Shi, G. Z. Voyiadjis, and Z. J. Zhang. 2005. “Structural performance of bridge approach slabs under given embankment settlement.” J. Bridge Eng. 10 (4): 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2005)10:4(482).
Chu, K., K. M. A. Hossain, and M. Lachemi. 2022. “Joint-free bridges with engineered cementitious composite sliding approach slabs under static and fatigue loading.” Eng. Struct. 268: 114787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.114787.
Dassault Systems. 2017. “Abaqus.” Accessed August 12, 2021. https://www.3ds.com/products-services/simulia/products/abaqus/.
Fahnestock, L. A., M. Chee, G. Liu, U. Kode, and J. M. LaFave. 2022. “Synthesis of bridge approach slab behavior, design and construction practice.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 27 (3): 04022032. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000704.
Greimann, L., B. Phares, A. Faris, and J. Bigelow. 2008. Integral bridge abutment-to-approach slab connection. Rep. No. IHRB Project TR-530 and TR-539. Ames, IA: Iowa State Univ, Center for Transportation Research and Education.
Greimann, L. F., R. E. Abendroth, D. E. Johnson, and P. B. Ebner. 1987. Pile design and tests for integral abutment bridges. Final Rep. No. Iowa DOT Project HR-273. Ames, IA: Iowa Dept. of Transportation.
Hoppe, E. J., and J. Gomez. 1996. Field study of an integral backwall bridge. Rep. No. VTRC 97-R7. Charlottesville, VA: Virginia Transportation Research Council.
Horvath, J. S. 2000. Integral-abutment bridges: Problems and innovative solutions using EPS geofoam and other geosynthetics. Res. Rep. No. CE/GE-00-2. Bronx, NY: Manhattan College.
Kim, W., and J. A. Laman. 2014. “Seven-year field monitoring of four integral abutment bridges.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 26 (1): 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000250.
Kunin, J., and S. Alampalli. 2000. “Integral abutment bridges: Current practice in United States and Canada.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 14 (3): 104–111. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2000)14:3(104).
LaFave, J. M., G. Brambila, U. Kode, G. Liu, and L. A. Fahnestock. 2021. “Field behavior of integral abutment bridges under thermal loading.” J. Bridge Eng. 26 (4): 04021013. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001677.
Lawver, A., C. French, and C. K. Shield. 2000. “Field performance of integral abutment bridge.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1740 (1): 108–117. https://doi.org/10.3141/1740-14.
Lin, J., B. Briseghella, J. Xue, H. Tabatabai, F. Huang, and B. Chen. 2020. “Temperature monitoring and response of deck-extension side-by-side box girder bridges.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil 34 (2): 04019122. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001399.
Liu, G. 2023. “Structural behavior of integral abutment bridge approach slabs.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
Ma, S. 2011. “Bridge approach slab analysis and design incorporating elastic soil support.” M.Sc. thesis, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Missouri-Columbia.
Martin, R. D., and T. H. K. Kang. 2013. “Structural design and construction issues of approach slabs.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 18 (1): 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000133.
Nadermann, A., L. Greimann, and B. Phares. 2010. Instrumentation and monitoring of precast bridge approach tied to an integral abutment bridge in Bremer county. Rep. No. 08-335. Ames, IA: Iowa State Univ.
Nassif, H., N. Suksawang, N. Shah, and T. Abu-Amra. 2007. Field implementation and monitoring of bridge approach slabs. Rep. No. FHWA-NJ-2007-012. Rutgers, State University; Florida International University; University of Alabama at Birmingham. Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, US Dept. of Transportation.
Oesterle, R. G., H. Tabatabai, T. J. Lawson, T. M. Refai, J. S. Volz, and A. Scanlon. 1999. Jointless and integral abutment bridges summary report. Final Rep. Washington, DC: FHWA.
Puppala, A. J., S. Saride, E. Archeewa, L. R. Hoyos, and S. Nazarian. 2009. Recommendations for design, construction, and maintenance of bridge approach slabs: Synthesis report. Rep. No. FHWA/TX-09/0-6022-1, University of Texas at Arlington; University of Texas at El Paso. Austin, TX: Texas Dept. of Transportation.
Roy, S., and G. Thiagarajan. 2007. “Nonlinear finite-element analysis of reinforced concrete bridge approach slab.” J. Bridge Eng. 12 (6): 801–806. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2007)12:6(801).
Soltani, A. A., and A. R. Kukreti. 1992. Performance evaluation of integral abutment bridges. Transportation Research Record No. 1371, Bridge, Culvert, and Tunnel Research. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Thiagarajan, G., V. Gopalaratnam, C. Halmen, S. Ajgaonkar, S. Ma, B. Gudimetla, and R. Chamarthi. 2010. Bridge approach slabs for Missouri DOT: Looking at alternative and cost-efficient approaches. Rep. No. OR 11.009. Kansas City, MO: Univ. of Missouri Kansas City, Univ. of Missouri.
Wasserman, E. P., and J. H. Walker. 1996. Vol. 2 of Highway structures design handbook. Washington, DC: American Iron and Steel Institute.
White, D., S. Sritharan, M. T. Suleiman, and S. Chetlur. 2005. Identification of the best practices for design, construction, and repair of bridge approaches. Rep. No. CTRE Project 02-118. Ames, IA: Iowa Dept. of Transportation.
White, D. J., M. M. Mekkawy, S. Sritharan, and M. T. Suleiman. 2007. “Underlying causes for settlement of bridge approach pavement systems.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil. 21 (4): 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2007)21:4(273).
Wight, J. K. 2022. Reinforced concrete: Mechanics and design. 8th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 29 • Issue 4 • April 2024
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 28, 2022
Accepted: Nov 11, 2023
Published online: Jan 17, 2024
Published in print: Apr 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Jun 17, 2024
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.