NEWS AND INFORMATION FROM THE STEEL BRIDGE FORUM • SUMMER/FALL 1993

Why Integral Bridges?

I nterest
1
in integral bridges or jointless Many other states
bridges is increasing and their outstanding shared in the develop-
performance has gained international ment, design, and
attention. For instance, a recent meeting in construction of end-
Cambridge, England, sponsored by the jointed continuous bridges,
British Group of The International Associa- and jointless integral
tion for Bridge and Structural Engineering bridges including the
focused exclusively on this one subject. In states of California,
the United States, Tom Bolte, P.E., of Illinois, Iowa, Missouri,
Burgess & Niple, Ltd., addressed this subject Oregon, Tennessee,
at recent meetings of the Steel Bridge Forum and others. Tennes-
in Baltimore, Maryland, and Albany, New see has been the Shaded areas
York. What provoked such widespread boldest. For show states using
interest? example, its Long Jointless Bridges.
Presumably, the primary reason for this Island Bridge at (Wolde-Tensae & Klinger, 1987)

interest is due to the acceptance of integral Kingsport, Tennessee, is

bridges by many transportation departments an end-jointed bridge with 29 continuous foremost, multiple span integral bridges with
throughout the United States. This accep- spans with an overall length of 2,700 feet. embankments and pile supported stub-type
tance is not a passing fad. For example, the
Bureau of Bridges of the Ohio Highway
Department adopted the routine use of end-
jointed continuous construction for multiple
span steel and concrete bridges in the early
1930’s, more than sixty years ago. Follow-
ing the success of these early end-jointed (a)
continuous bridges, Ohio adopted embank-
ments and stub-type integral abutments for
many of its continuous steel beam and girder
bridges more than thirty years ago. And
these bridges were not exceptions. They now
constitute the majority of bridges being built
by the Ohio Department of Transportation.

1
Although various types of integral or jointless (b)
bridges have been constructed, the term integral
used in this article refers to the typical small Fig. 1: Different bridge types: a) Single span with wall-type abutments.
single or multiple span continuous bridges with b) Multiple span with stub-type abutments.
pile-supported stub-type flexible abutments.

Integral vs. Jointed Bridges abutments are composite structures. Whereas

Route to: _______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
_______________________
A review of some of the primary differences
between integral bridges and their jointed
counterparts should help to clarify why
integral designs are gaining widespread
interest and acceptance.
1. Reduced Substructure Costs. First and
single span jointed bridges with wall-type
abutments must be designed to support
embankments (Fig. 1a), continuous multiple
span integral bridges on the other hand are
built compositely with embankments and are
supported by them (Fig. 1b). In the first
Continued on page 2
Continued from page 1
case, expensive wall-type abutments and
abutment foundations are needed to support
embankments. In the second, cost savings
are realized because integral bridges receive
much of their longitudinal and lateral
support from embankments.
2. No Bearings and Joints. Integral bridges
can be built without bearings and deck
joints. Not only will this result in savings in
initial costs, the absence of joints and
bearings will reduce maintenance efforts.
This is an important benefit because
presently available deck joint sealing
devices have such short effective service
lives.
3. Simplified Construction. The simple
characteristics of integral bridges make for
rapid and economical construction. For
example, there is no need to construct
cofferdams, make footing excavations, place
backfill, remove cofferdams, prepare bridge
seats, place bearings, backwalls, and deck
Fig. 2: Integral abutment.
STEEL BRIDGES
joints. Instead, integral construction
generally results in just four concrete
placement days. After the embankments,
piles, and pile caps have been placed and
deck stringers erected, deck slabs,
continuity connections, and approach slabs
can follow in rapid succession. In extreme
cases, some multiple span integral bridges
have been completed with just two
concrete placement days; one for the
structure itself, and one for the approach
slabs.
4. Minimized Deterioration. The most
obvious reason why integral bridges have
become so popular, especially with
transportation departments located in and
above the snow belt, is their outstanding
resistance to deicing chemical corrosion
and deterioration. Since these bridges do
not have movable deck joints at abutments
(Fig. 2), deck drainage contaminated by
deicing chemicals cannot penetrate bridge
deck slabs and adversely effect the
primary bridge members.
2 SUMMER/FALL 1993
5. Simplified Bridge Replacement. When
using multiple span integral bridges to
replace single span structures with wall-type
abutments, the great adaptability of integral
bridges allows them to span across existing
foundations, thus avoiding the need to
remove them. Since small bridges are
usually replaced in 50-year cycles, use of
integral bridges with their simple pile
foundations will considerably simplify
future bridge replacements. Also, the more
durable integral bridges should help to
increase the serviceable bridge age and
extend replacement cycles by two or more
decades.
6. Extraordinary Resistance. One of the
most important attributes of integral bridges,
an attribute that is seldom recognized, is
their substantial reserve strength capacity.
The integrity of their unified structural
system makes them extremely resistant to
the potentially damaging effects of illegal
superloads, pressures generated by the
Continued on page 3
Chairmen’s Message
Robert Nickerson, P.E., President of
NBE, Ltd., (former Chief, Structures
Division, FHWA) has developed for AISI
a training course for designing and detailing
cost effective steel bridges. The course is
focused on eliminating current design
practices that add cost, but no value to
bridges. The course material is based on
actual case histories of typical bridges that
had alternate steel and concrete bids. The
course has been very successful, and the
demand for it has been overwhelming. It has
Continued from page 2
restrained growth of jointed rigid pave-
ments, earthquakes, and debris laden flood
flows.
7. Secondary Effects. Like most of their
jointed bridge counterparts, integral bridges
are subjected to secondary effects due to
shrinkage, creep, thermal gradients,
differential settlement, and differential
deflections. They are also subjected to
passive pressure effects when abutment
backfill is compressed during superstructure
elongation, and to pavement relief joint
pressures when moisture and sustained high
temperatures trigger pavement growth. The
stress levels generated by these secondary
effects are generally understood but as yet
not well quantified. However, they can be
controlled and be provided for to such an
extent that except for continuity connections
at supports, they usually need not be
considered when designing short single span
or multiple span continuous bridges less
than 300 feet long.
This simplification is possible because
design specifications usually permit higher
stresses when secondary stresses (shrinkage,
creep, passive pressure, etc.) are combined
with primary stresses (dead load, live load,
and impact) to determine maximum
allowable service stresses. Also, it should be
emphasized that the secondary effects do
not alter the ultimate load capacity of the
structure.
Limitations
Like any other type of design, the attributes
of integral bridges are accompanied by
some limitations.
1. Design of Continuous Spans. Although
the characteristics of integral bridges
provide many design simplifications, their
unified structural system does require the
STEEL BRIDGES
been presented to over 800 Engineers in
Pittsburgh, Columbus, Nashville, Austin,
Atlanta, Jefferson City, Seattle, Boston,
Indianapolis, Baton Rouge, and Orlando. The
staffs of DOT's and consultants have been the Alex Wilson Dwight Williams
primary participants. Another 10 presentations
are scheduled by end of this June as shown on
page 6. Because of this great success, the next
issue of Steel Bridges will present an overview
of this seven hour course. Alex Wilson Dwight Williams
Look forward to seeing you at our future Chairman Chairman
meetings. N.E. Section S.E. Section
design of continuous spans for multiple span approach pavement. For the shortest bridges,
bridges. However, with the help of computer the usual pavement expansion joint should
programs and design aids, the extra effort of be sufficient. For longer bridges, however,
designing continuous spans can be mini- specially designed cycle control joints
mized. With the development of State should be devised and provided.
standard designs for a wide range of three 4. Pile Loading. One primary concern
and four span continuous bridges, even this expressed about the construction of integral
extra effort can be further minimized. bridges with pile supported flexible
2. Approach Slabs. Integral bridges should abutments is the uncertainty about abutment
be provided with approach slabs to prevent pile flexural stresses. However, for typical
vehicular traffic from consolidating backfill two and three span bridges, the amount of
adjacent to abutments, to eliminate live load thermal movement is less than an inch.
surcharging of backfill, and to minimize the Consequently, these stresses generally can
adverse effect of consolidating backfill and be ignored. For longer bridges, actual bridge
approach embankments on movement of performance has shown that high pile
vehicular traffic. For bridges with closed flexural stresses do not adversely effect
decks (curbs, barriers, etc.), approach slabs bridge performance.
should be provided with curbs to confine and 5. Buoyancy and Uplift. Care must be
carry deck drainage across backfill to the exercised when using integral bridges for
approaches and prevent erosion, or saturation stream crossings because most deck type
and freezing of the backfill. integral bridges are buoyant. Consequently,
Because of the continual cyclic movement for those bridges with superstructures which
of integral bridges, approach slabs must be can become submerged, air vents must be
anchored to the bridges; otherwise, continual provided through the top of beam webs,
bridge movement and joint infiltration will and anchorage to piers should be
shift slabs toward flexible approach pave- considered.
ment, away from abutments and off the For multiple span bridges with short end-
approach slab seats. spans, deck slab concrete for the end-spans
3. Joints off the Bridge. Cycle control joints, must be placed first to prevent end-span
joints which facilitate longitudinal cycling of uplift during deck slab placement. Once
bridges and approach slabs, should be constructed, however, integral bridges are
provided between approach slabs and Continued on page 4
CongratulationsTo:
Dr. Karl Frank, Professor of Civil Engineering, at the University of Texas, Austin, was
given the AISI Transportation Structures Subcommittee Award during the AASHTO-AISI
Bridge Task Force meeting in Teton Village, Wyoming, in August, 1993.
Mr. Edward P. Wasserman, P.E., Civil Engineering Director, Structures, Tennessee
Department of Transportation, was given on October 28, 1993, the award of the Steel
Bridge Forum, “in recognition for outstanding contributions to the implementation of
innovations in steel bridge design, construction and aesthetics”.
3 SUMMER/FALL 1993
Continued from page 3
more resistant to end-span uplift than their
continuous end-jointed bridge counterparts
since the substantial weight of integral
abutments provides the necessary uplift
restraint, even for end-to-center span length
ratios down to 0.5 and below.
6. Embankments. Since integral bridges
receive significant support from embank-
ments, such bridges should be built only in
conjunction with stable, well consolidated
embankments. Consequently, integral bridge
embankments must be constructed first to
ensure that embankments and subfoundation
soils are consolidated and stabilized before
the flexible pier and abutment piles are
driven.
7. Other Considerations. Integral
bridges should be restricted to sites where
not less than 10 or preferably more than 15
feet of overburden is present (to ensure pile
flexibility and effective pile end-bearing), to
Alternate Procedure to Jointless Bridges
A nother
approach to
eliminating joints
from multi-span
bridges, is to
rigidly connect
beams to pier caps
and abutments
and then provide
a continuous
reinforced
concrete or asphalt
wearing surface.
When steel
sections are used,
for example, shear
connectors are
welded to beam Fig. 3: Alternate jointless bridge detail
ends and encased
in reinforced concrete pier caps and
abutments. Shear connectors are also welded monolithically with the pier caps to encase
to the top flanges to develop composite
action with a reinforced concrete deck slab.
These methods have been used extensively
in New Zealand and Australia in lengths up
to 160 feet.
A typical construction of a steel beam
jointless bridge is shown in fig. 3 and is
described as follows:
Place the steel beams with shear
connectors and vertical end plates between
the piers. The beams then rest on temporary
supports and formwork.
STEEL BRIDGES
sites where appreciable settlement is remote
(these bridges cannot easily be adjusted to
compensate for large settlements), to sites
where skews of 30 degrees or less are
appropriate, and to uncrowded sites where
embankments and extra spans can be added
to avoid the use of wall-type abutments.
For More information...
A series of papers and articles have been
published to provide more background on
the evolution, design, and construction of
integral bridges. They include “Bridge
Approach Pavements, Integral Bridges and
Cycle Control Joints,” “Integral Bridges,”
“Integral Bridges: Attributes and Limita-
tions,” and “A Practitioner’s Approach to
the Design of Integral Concrete Bridges.”
The first three papers have been published
by the Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, in Transporta-
tion Research Records 1113, 1275, and
Cast short lengths of the deck slab
the beam ends over the piers and abutments.
Once the formwork and other supports
are removed, the beam dead load is carried
through the shear connectors at the end
plates into the pier caps. Moments are
carried by compression in the bottom flanges
of the beams, end plates, and pier caps.
Tensile forces are transferred from the top
flanges through vertical shear connectors
into the reinforced concrete slab. The
remainder of the deck slabs are then cast to
link the slab sections together, making it
4 SUMMER/FALL 1993
1393, respectively. The last reference, a
magazine article, appeared in the June, 1993,
issue of Concrete International, published
by the American Concrete Institute. These
papers also contain bibliographies for other
papers and research reports pertinent to the
subject.
Interest by Federal officials in the design
and construction of integral bridges is
evidenced by current research sponsored by
the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA). For example, FHWA is presently
sponsoring a comprehensive three year
project on the subject. A final report on this
project conducted by Construction Tech-
nologies Laboratory of Skokie, Illinois,
should be available sometime in late 1995.
This article was abstracted from the
papers noted above by their author,
Martin P. Burke, Jr., P.E., Bridge
Consultant with Burgess & Niple, Limited,
Engineers and Architects of Columbus,
Ohio. ◆
continuous for all loads except beam dead
load.
REF: Wolde-Tensae, A., Klinger, J.,
“Integral Abutment Bridge Design and
Construction,” University of Maryland,
FHWA/MD- 87/07.
Welcome Aboard:
The Steel Bridge Forum Executive
Committee would like to welcome
Central Steel Service Center, Inc. of
Pelham, Alabama, as a new Contributing
Member to the activities of the Forum.
Economics 101: $teel Bridges
(This is the ninth topic in a continuous from (Fig. 4) the
series that was compiled in part from theoretical fixed center
Tennessee Structures Memorandum - of structure.
SM045- 01/06, and dated 7/1/89. = total thermal
Economics 101 will be continued in movement due to
the next issues of Steel Bridges). expansion and
contraction (in.)
9. Thermal Expansion and Contraction
L = distance from
General Policy–Structures must be designed theoretical fixed center
to accommodate the movements and stresses of structure to pier in
caused by thermal expansion and contrac- question (ft.)
tion. Bridge designers should not accommo- Fig. 5: Fixed pier
date these movements by using unnecessary = pier height (ft.)
bridge deck expansion joints and expansion MB = moment at base of column (ft-kips) due Fixed Pier Design - (Top of column is
bearings. This solution creates more to /2 displacement at the top. considered pinned for rotation).
problems than it solves. Structural deteriora- MT = moment at top of column (ft-kips) With the following substructure conditions
tion due to leaking expansion joints and due to /2 displacement at the top. (Fig. 5):
frozen expansion bearings constitute major
P = force required to produce /2 /2 = P 3/3EI therefore P = 3EI /2 3
bridge maintenance problems.
displacement (lbs.) Considering some footing rotation:
To eliminate the problems associated
with leaking expansion joints and frozen E = 1.0 X 106 for concrete column in long MT = 0, and MB = P /2 = 3EI /4 2
expansion bearings, it is our policy to design term deflection (lbs/in2). Example: Assume a steel superstructure and
and construct bridges with continuous I = Moment of inertia of column (ft4). 2'-6" square reinforced concrete column with
superstructures, fixed or integral bearings at = 15 ft. and L = 214 ft.
the piers and abutments, and no bridge deck Design Criteria - Fixed and Integral Piers. = 0.00936 X 214 = 2.00 inches.
expansion joints unless absolutely necessary. Calculations for determining fixed or MB = 3(106 lb/in2)(3.26 ft4)(2.0 in)
When expansion joints are necessary, they integral column moments due to thermal (12 in/ft)/(4)(152 ft2)(103lb/kip) = 261 ft-kips
will normally be provided only at abutments. expansion or contraction shall be as follows: If the moments are excessive the column
The guidelines presented in this memo-
may be hinged at the
randum are minimum conditions for
base or an expansion
providing fixity and continuity. The designer
bearing may be
may increase these limits by the use of
used at the top to
special details and proper design.
eliminate the
Movement Calculations–The total super- moment at the base.
structure movement should be based on the When columns are
following design parameters: hinged at the base
Structure Type: Steel the remaining fixed
Temp. Range: 0°F-120°F supports must be
Coef. of Exp.: 0.0000065 designed to resist
Total Movement: 0.936"/100ft., longitudinal forces
i.e., = 0.00936L. from the superstruc-
The total movement per hundred feet is ture and a note must
applicable to the structure length measured Fig. 6: Integral pier be added to the
plans requiring the
contractor to support the hinged columns
until the superstructure is in place.
Integral Pier Design–With the following
substructure conditions (Fig. 6):
3 3
/2 = P /12EI, therefore P= 6EI /
Considering some rotation of the footing
and moment distribution:
2
MT = MB = P /4 = 3EI /2
For the previous example:
MT= MB = 522 ft-kips. If the resulting
moments are excessive the column may
be hinged at the base. Then: MB = 0, and
MT = 3EI /4 2 or 261 ft-kips as for the
Fig. 4: Definition of variables above example. ◆

STEEL BRIDGES 5 SUMMER/FALL 1993

Steel Bridge Forum Contributing Members
• American Iron and Steel Institute
• Armco Steel Inc.
• Assoc. for Bridge Construction and
Design
• Augusta Iron & Steel Works, Inc.
• Bethlehem Steel Corp.
• Carolina Steel Corp.
• Central Steel Service Center, Inc.
• Chesapeake Specialty Products
• Dofasco Inc.
• Exodermic Bridge Deck Institute
• High Steel Structures, Inc.
• Inland Steel Industries, Inc.
• Institute of the Ironworking Industry
• IPSCO Inc.
• Ironworkers International Union
• Ironworkers of Boston
• Ironworkers of Chicago
• Ironworkers of Connecticut
• Ironworkers of Detroit
• Ironworkers of Florida
• Ironworkers of New York City
• Ironworkers of Philadelphia
• Ironworkers of Pittsburgh
• Lincoln Electric Co.
• LTV Steel Co.
• Lukens Steel Co.
• National Steel Corp.
• Orleans Materials & Equipment Co.
• Owen Steel Co., Inc.
• Qualico Steel Co., Inc.
• Rouge Steel Co.
• Steel Institute of New York
• Stelco Inc.
• Trinity Industries, Inc.
• Union Iron Worker Employers of
Central Pennsylvania
• U.S. Steel Group
• WCI Steel, Inc.
• Weirton Steel Corp.
• Williams Bridge Co.

Mark Your Calendar!
February 23-25, Structural Materials
Technology- An NDT Conference,
Atlantic City, NJ. Sponsored by NJ DOT
and FHWA. For information, contact
Robert Scancella at 609/292-5619.
February 27-March 2. National
Association of County Engineers’
Annual Meeting, Reno/Sparks, Nevada.
For information, contact 202/393-5041.
April 25-27. ASCE Structures Con-
gress, Atlanta. For information, contact
800/548-ASCE.
June 4-8. AASHTO Subcommittee on
Bridges and Structures, New Orleans.
June 13-15. International Bridge Confer-
ence, Pittsburgh. For information, contact
412/261-0710.
August 8-11. 4th International Conference
on Short and Medium Span Bridges,
Canada. For information, write to: SMSB
IV, P.O. Box 1000, Halifax, Nova Scotia,
Canada B3J 2X4, Attn: Ms. J. Thorburn
1994 AISI - AISC Marketing Inc.
Schedule for Steel Bridge Training
Course:
Nebraska (April 12); Iowa (April 14);
Virginia (April 19); North Carolina
(April 21); Oregon (April 28); Colorado
(May 10); For information, contact AISC
at 312/670-2400; Fax 312/670-5403.
Schedule for Presentations on Lead
Paint Abatement. The Steel Structures
Painting Council announced two
educational courses addressing industrial
lead paint issues. The courses will be
presented at fourteen locations through-
out the United States: Atlanta, Baltimore,
Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Detroit,
Greenwich (CT), Houston, Jacksonville
(FL), Lafayette (LA), Los Angeles,
Louisville (KY), Orlando, and San
Francisco. For more detailed information
contact SSPC at 412/687-1113.
Future Meetings of the Steel
Bridge Forum
Date Location

Seismic Seminar Mar. 9 Vermont/

New Hampshire*
The first U.S. Seminar on Seismic Roberts of Caltrans. The seminar was Mar 24 West Virginia*
Evaluation and Retrofit of Steel Bridges co-sponsored by the American Iron and Apr. 21 Ohio
was held on Monday, October 18, 1993 Steel Institute. For a copy of the proceed- May 5 Maine*
at the Hyatt Regency, San Francisco. ings, contact Kay Wade, UC Berkeley at T.B.A. Arkansas*
The seminar was organized by Professor 510/ 642-1698.
*
Astaneh of UC Berkeley and Jim Steel Bridge Training Course

Address Change strip-in

logo
Add to mailing list. Name

Remove from mailing list. STEEL BRIDGE FORUM

Change my address
as shown.
Please include the current
mail label in all correspon-
dence.
New Address
American Iron & Steel Institute
1101 17th St., N.W.
City
Washington, D.C. 20036
Camille George Rubeiz, P.E.
State Zip Telephone: (202) 452-7190
FAX: (202) 463-6573

STEEL BRIDGES 6 SUMMER/FALL 1993