Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • A Practical Guide To Bridge Expansion Joints PDF

    Uploaded by

    amraja2001
    13 views85 pages

    Original Title

    A Practical Guide To Bridge Expansion Joints.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    13 views85 pages

    A Practical Guide To Bridge Expansion Joints PDF

    Uploaded by

    amraja2001

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 85
    PLA ert) Practical guide to the use of bridge expansion joints by C P Barnard (Chairman of the Working Group) and J R Cuninghame (TRL) Application Guide 29 ‘The Transport Research Laboratory isthe largest and most comprehensive centee forthe study of road transport in the United Kingdom. For more than 60 years it has provided information that has helped Frame transport policy, set standards and save lives ‘TRL provides research-based technical help Which enables its Government Customers to set standards for highway and vehicle design formulate policies on road safety, transport and the environment, and encourage good traffic engineering practice ‘Asa national research laboratory TRL has developed close working links with many other international transport centres tals sels its services to ther customers inthe UK and overseas, providing fundamental and applied research, working asa contractor. consultant oF providing facilities and staff. TRL’s customers include local and regional authorities, major civil engineering contractors, transport consultants, industry, foreign governments and international aid agencies ‘TRL. employs around 300 technical specialists - among them mathematicians, physicists, psychologists, engineers, geologists, computer expets, statisticians - most of whom are based at Crovwthome, Berkshire. Facilities include a state of the art driving Simulator, a new indoor impact test facility, a 3.8km test track, a separate self-contained road network, u structures hall, an Indoor facility that ean dynamically test roads and advanced computer programs which are used to develop sophisticated traffic control systems, ‘TRL also has a facility in Scotland, based Edinburgh, that looks ater the special needs of road transport in Scotland. ‘The laboratory's primary objective isto carry out commissioned research, investigations, studies and tests tothe highest levels ‘of quality reliability and impartiality. TRL cartes out its work in such a way as to ensure that customers recive results tht not ‘only meet the project specification or requirement but ar also geared to rapid and effective implementation. In doing this, TRL. recognises the need ofthe customer tobe able to generate maximum value from the investment ithas placed wit the laboratory. ‘TRL covers all major aspects of road transport, and is able wo offer a wide range of expertise ranging trom detailed specialist analysis to complex muli-dsciplinary programmes and from basic research to advanced consultancy. ‘TRL with its breadth of expertise and facilities ean provide customers with a research and eonsultaney capability matched to the ‘complex problems arising across the whole transport field. Areas such as safety, congestion environment and te infrastructure equite a multi-disciplinary approach and TRL is ideally structured to deliver effective solutions ‘TRL prides iset on its record for delivering projects that meet customers’ quality, delivery and cost targets. The laboratory has, however, instigated a programme of continuous improvement and continually reviews customers satisfaction to ensure that its performance stays in line with the increasing expectations of its customers, TRL operates a quality management system which is ertficated as complying with BS EN 180 9001 The Highways Agency (HA) is an executive agency of the Department of Transport, It was established in April 1994 by the Secretary of State for Transpon to manage, maintain and improve England's 6300 miles of motorway and trunk roads. These Foads account for 33% of all road travel and more than $0% ofall Jory travel within the country. ‘The HA role is to ensure tha the network is safe efficient, reliable and environmentally acceptable, The aim isto make the best use ofthe existing national road network through efficient management and maintenance and to improve the network by man aging the design, procurement and construction of schemes in the Government's road progrannine, which are set out inthe Trunk ‘Roads in England 1994 Review. Aso a substantial numberof smaller network improvement and safety schemes are undertaken ‘each year ‘The HA is acustomer-responsive organisation and must take into account the diverse interests and opinions of all those who are affected by road use. Teams have been set up that provide consultation committes for interest groups, charter statements ‘outlining what customers can expect and commitment to regular surveys of road users (o assess how well these requirements are being met. ‘The HA suppor collaborative research and development in areas where technology and improvements can be implemented into the network and this project isan example of that commitment, “Transport Research Foundation Group of Companies “Transport Research Foundation (a company limited by guarntce)tsding a Tranpor Research Laboratory. Registered in England, Number 301746, TRL Limited. Registered in England, Number 314 Repstered Office: Oid Wokingham Road, Crowthonte, Berkshire, ROAS 6AU TRANSPORT RESEARCH LABORATORY ae APPLICATION GUIDE 29 PRACTICAL GUIDE TO THE USE OF BRIDGE EXPANSION JOINTS by C P Barnard (Chairman of the Working Group) and J R Cuninghame (TRL) This report describes work commissioned by the Bridges Engineering Division of the Highways Agency under E548B/BC, Survey of Bridge Expansion Joints. The work also formed part of the programme of the County Surveyors Society Working Party on Highway Research under the chairmanship of T W Thompson, Director of Planning and ‘Transportation, Leicester County Council. Copyright Transport Research Laboratory 1997. All rights reserved. Transport Research Laboratory Highways Agency Old Wokingham Road St Christopher House Crowthorne, Berkshire, RG45 6AU. Southwark Street, London SE1 OTE, ‘Transport Research Foundation Group of Companies ‘Transport Resech Foundation (a company limited by gurantee) wading as Transport Research Laboratory. Registered in England, Number 3011746, ‘TRL Limited. Registered in England, Number 342272. Registered Offices: Old Wokingham Road, Crowthorne, Berkshire, RG4S 6AV. ‘Tae information contained herein is the property of the Transport Research Laboratory. ‘This report has been produced by the Transport Research Laboratory under a contract, placed by the Department of Transport. Any views expressed in it are not necessarily ‘those of the Department. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the matter ‘Presented in this report is relevant, accurate and up-to-date at the time of publication, the Transport Research Laboratory cannot accept any liability for any error or omission, First Published 1997 ISSN 1365-6929 CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 1 Abstract 3 1, Introduction 3 2. Background and definitions 3 24 Definitions 4 22 Joint types 4 23. Joint performance 3 3. General conclusions from the Working Party report 8 4. Joint selection ° 4.1, Preliminaries u 42. Bridge movements 2 42.1 Movement ranges for different bridge types 3B 4.22 Joint movement ranges “4 4.23 Tralfic induced movement 15 4.24 Setting joins 1 425 Skew 1s 4.26 Traffic loading 16 43. Site specific factors 18 43.1. Footways and verges 18 4.3.2. Service pipes and ducts 23 43.3 Water management 26 434 Environmental noise 31 43.5. Skid resistance 31 43.6 Traffic management 31 43.7 Lane rental 32 44 Consultations 33 4.5. Suitable joint types 34 435.1 Report findings 34 45.2 Performance factors 35 4.6 Whole life costing 37 4.6.1 Calculation of whole life costs 37 4.6.2 Discussion of whole life costs 38 6 1. Page 4.7 Final joint selection 40 4.7.1 Design! installation 40 4.72 Selection 40 4.73. Further developments 41 Joint procurement 2 5.1 Method of procurement a 5.2 Preparatory works “4 5.3 Contract preparation 45 53.1 Technical specification 46 54 Responsibilities for installation 47 5.5. Inspection and maintenance 48 Acknowledgements 52 References 2 Appendix A: Data sheets for different joint types 54 Appendix B: Whole life costing 65 ‘Appendix C: Checklists n MEMBERSHIP OF THE WORKING GROUP Mr Chris Barnard Formerly West Sussex County Council (Chairman) Mr Jeff Chrimes Cheshire County Council Mr Graham Cole Surrey County Council Mr John Cuninghame Transport Research Laboratory (Secretary) Mr John Darby Oxfordshire County Council Mr Steve Francis Formerly Highways Agency, Department of Transport Mr Derek Ives Highways Agency, Department of Transport Mr Richard Jordan ‘Transport Research Laboratory Mr Steve Pearson Derbyshire County Council Mr Colin Swash Formerly Wiltshire County Council EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Working Group was set up in 1992 under the auspices of, the County Surveyors’ Society (CSS) and Transport Re- search Laboratory (TRL) Working Party on Highway Re- search. The overall objective of the project was to propose the means to improve the consistency of performance and. value for money of expansion joints, reducing the inci- dence of premature failure and leakage. This was achieved largely by drawing on the expertise of practising bridge ‘maintenance engineers. ‘The first stage of the project was to collect and analyse information concerning the condition of currently installed expansion joints on existing bridges. A questionnaire sent tothe majority of bridge owners produced a snapshot of the current situation and indicated the problem areas. An interim report was produced at the end of stage 1 (Cuninghame, 1994), describing the survey and providing ‘a detailed breakdown of the data. Subsequently each aspect of joint selection, performance and maintenance was studied; selected joints from the survey were examined; discussions were held with bridge ‘maintenance engineers; and laboratory tests were carried ‘out on samples of asphaltic plug joint material. A key part of the project was a whole life cost study to weigh the benefits of high initial cosviong-life joints against low initial cost/short-life options. ‘There is general agreement that the number of joints on a bridge should be kept to a minimum by using continuous construction, or to remove the joints between spans and abutments by constructing ‘integral’ bridges where the ‘oad surface is continuous from one approach embankment to the other. Where joints have to be used, sub-surface joints are preferred, to avoid trapping water within the surfacing - particularly with porous asphalt surfacing. Many Engineers are unhappy with the performance of at least some types of expansion joint and there are wide variations in performance, particularly with regard to dura- bility. This appears to be a consequence of the methods used to select, purchase and install joins. At all stages, the pressure is for the joint Supplier to achieve the lowest supply cost and the shortest installation time. There is insufficient incentive to produce a durable joint. ‘The total cost of an expansion joint is very much greater than the supply and installation cost. On busy roads, traffic ‘management and delay costs for joint repair or replacement are such that the cost of the joint is almost irrelevant. A. study of whole life costs for expansion joints on typical roads showed that it is always worth paying extra for increased service life. It is recommended that the current ‘procurement method be changed to one based on the whole life cost of the joint. A workable method, which would {guarantee an agreed service life, could not be found within this study and itis recommended that further work should bbe carried out to devise such a system. I was found that most joint failures are caused by traffic loading, faulty installation, poor detailing, or movements, ‘much less than the maximum expected - very few are due to the design movement capacity of the joint being ex- ceeded. Therefore, the whole range of service conditions should be taken into account when selecting joint type(s) for a particular application. ‘The survey and inspections showed that elastomeric in ‘metal runner joints were performing better than other types. ‘Within their limits, buried joints were also highly regarded by maintenance engineers. A hybrid joint, the "Clwyd Buried Plug’ was found to be performing well on spans up to 35 metres, This significantly extends the movement range of sub-surface joints and it should be used more ‘widely. The performance of Asphaltic Plug Joints was found to be variable, but they have significant advantages ‘such as speed of installation and versatility, so should be ‘developed further to improve durability. ‘The findings of the Group are reported separately (Barnard and Cuninghame 1997) and have formed the basis for this Practical Guide, which sets out procedures and recommen-

    You might also like