Task 15.2 Research Synthesis Statement

PROBLEM TITLE: Segmental Concrete Bridge Design and Construction Practices

RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT:

Segmental concrete bridge construction has become a very important method in spanning deep valleys, wide water crossings, and across highways and existing facilities without the use of costly and often environmentally sensitive falsework.

The concept of segmental bridge construction began in Europe in 1950s. The first cast-in-place segmental concrete bridge was built across the Lahn River in Balduinstein, Germany in 1950. The first precast segmental concrete bridge was built to cross the Seine River, France in 1962. Since then the concept of segmental bridge construction has spread from Europe to all parts of the world.

In 1973, the first U.S. precast segmental concrete bridge was built and opened to traffic in Corpus Christi, Texas. In 1974, the first U.S. cast-in-place segmental bridge was built and opened to traffic near San Diego, California. Since then, hundreds of precast and cast-in-place segmental concrete bridges have been constructed throughout the U.S.A. Improvements and refinements in design and construction have been made over the years.

Every segmental bridge construction project has its own challenges in type and size selection, in design, fabrication, erection and construction. Many valuable lessons have been learned and re-learned from successes, failures and problems. The lessons are somewhat scattered in reports and news briefs. While many remain dormant in the memories and files of engineers and engineering offices.

Bridge designers on new projects continue to have to sort through voluminous reports and databases, and make numerous inquiries to seek answers to many questions and current issues, such as, (1) should precast or cast-in-place segmental construction be used for the proposed bridge site? (2) should wet or dry joints be used for the precast segments? (3) should external or internal tendons be used? (4) what type(s) of grouts should be used for the tendons? (5) what is the square foot cost, unit cost, life-cycle cost? (6) What is the optimum span arrangement? etc., etc. Additionally, the synthesis should, at least, address the following: (1) What successful technology transfer activities are most effective, (2) What are the limiting factors (or current-state-of-the-art-practice) for fabrication, construction and handling of the segment sizes before special equipment are required, (3) What QC/QA plans or processes for precast versus cast-in-place, and (4) What are some of the good and bad experience for bridge owners.

The main objectives of this proposed synthesis are: (1) To organize, evaluate and document the lessons learned and the current state of the practice in design and construction of segmental concrete bridges, (2) To develop a comprehensive listing of design and construction issues/options/features, and guidelines describing the parameters by which to evaluate features and options and (3) To develop a flowchart showing the steps involved in developing a project. The synthesis should be of immediate usefulness to bridge designers in assessing the feasibility and cost effectiveness of segmental bridge construction, and in developing a segmental bridge project. The data and results of this synthesis should be organized and divided in such a format that updating can be readily made to the individual divisions in the future.

SUPPORT AASHTO THRUST AREA

This proposed synthesis supports Thrust Area - Efficient Maintenance, Rehabilitation, and Construction identified by the AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures and outlined in NCHRP 20-07/Task 121 Project Report, and addresses the "Building Blocks" that deal with best practices, methods, and models to optimize service life of segmental concrete bridges.

NAMES OF SUBMITTERS:

Segmental Concrete Bridge Technology Virtual Team (SCBVTeam) Team Members

Myint Lwin, Co-Team Leader Structural Design Engineer FHWA, Western Resource Center San Francisco, California	Benjamin Tang, Co-Team Leader Senior Structural Engineer FHWA, Office of Bridge Technology Washington, D.C.
Joey Hartmann Structural Research Engineer Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Mclean, Virginia	Hala Elgaaly Structural Engineer FHWA, EFLHD Sterling, Virginia
Jesus Rohena Structural Engineer FHWA, Western Resource Center Baltimore, Maryland	Claude Napier Division Bridge Engineer FHWA, Virginia Division Richmond, Virginia
Doug Edwards Division Bridge Engineer FHWA, Florida Division Tallahassee, Florida	George Poirier Division Bridge Engineer FHWA, Maine Division Augusta, Maine
Larry O'Donnell Division Bridge Engineer FHWA, Massachusetts Division Cambridge, Massachusetts	Nancy Bobb Division Bridge Engineer FHWA, California Division Sacramento, California
Majid Madani Senior Bridge Engineer California Department of Transportation Sacramento, California	Mark Leonard State Bridge Engineer Colorado Department of Transportation Denver, Colorado
Dean Van Landuyt Senior Bridge Engineer Texas Department of Transportation Austin, Texas	Shri Bhide Bridge Program Manager Portland Cement Association Skokie, Illinois
Joseph Tse Deputy Department Manager Parsons Brinckerhoff New York, New York	Rafael Manzanarez Vice President T.Y. Lin International San Francisco, California