Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
96 State DOT Survey Questionnaire A P P E N D I X B
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 97Â Â Survey Overview Page description: Dear AASHTO Committee on Bridges and Structures Member: The Transportation Research Board (TRB) is preparing a synthesis on Design and Construction Practices for Durability, Ride, and Water Management of Bridge Approach Systems. This is being done for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), under the sponsorship of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The purpose of this questionnaire is to document practices used by bridge owners for the design, construction, and maintenance of bridge approaches and resulting ride quality. The results of the questionnaire will be incorporated into a synthesis of highway agency practice, with the intent of helping agencies evaluate and improve their current practices for bridge approaches. This questionnaire is being sent to the voting member of the AASHTO Committee on Bridges and Structures (COBS) for each state department of transportation. If you are not the appropriate person at your organization to complete this questionnaire, please forward to the correct person. Please complete and submit this questionnaire by Friday, February 7, 2020. We estimate that it should take approximately 30 minutes to complete. If you have any questions or problems related to this questionnaire, please contact our principal investigator Dr. Mohamed ElBatanouny at (847) 753-6395 or melbatanouny@wje.com. There are a total of 26 questions broken into 4 topics: 1. Design and construction of bridge approach systems (10 questions), 2. Water and joint management (7 questions), 3. Operation and maintenance (5 questions), and 4. Performance issues and mitigation practices (4 questions). QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUCTIONS 1. To view and print the entire questionnaire, click on the following link to download a pdf version of the survey NCHRP51-02_SurveyPDF. 2. To save your partial answers and complete the questionnaire later, click on the "Save and Continue Later" link on the top of your screen. A link to the incomplete questionnaire will be emailed to you from SurveyGizmo. To return to the questionnaire later, open the email from SurveyGizmo and click on the link. We suggest using the "Save and Continue Later" feature if there will be more than 15 minutes of inactivity while the survey is opened, as some firewalls may terminate due to inactivity. To pass a partially completed questionnaire to a colleague, click on the "Save and Continue Later" link on the top of your screen. A link to the incomplete questionnaire will be emailed to you from SurveyGizmo. Open the email from SurveyGizmo and forward it to a colleague. 3. You can review and download a pdf version of your answers in the last page before submitting the survey. 4. To submit the survey, click on "Submit" on the last page. Thank you for your time and expertise in completing this important questionnaire. Please provide the following information about yourself and the agency you are representing. Name (Required) * Title Agency (Required) * Department Email
98 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Page description: This page contains 10 questions on design and construction practices used by your agency for bridge approach systems. Never Rarely Previously, But Not Currently Occasionally Often Always Integral abutments Semi-integral abutments Stub abutments Mechanically-stabilized abutments Full-height, closed abutments Full-height, spill-through abutments Enter another option Enter another option Enter another option Comments 1. How often does your agency use the following types of abutments? Typical schematics of each type of abutment listed are provided below for reference. Part 1: Design and Construction of Bridge Approach Systems
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 99Â Â Included in: Thickness (inches) Length (feet)Standard Specifications/Plans Special Provisions Not used Reinforced concrete approach slab Unreinforced concrete approach slab Rigid pavement (no approach slab) Flexible pavement (no approach slab) Comments Rigidly tied together Move independently of each other Not applicable Integral abutments Semi-integral abutments Stub abutments Mechanically-stabilized abutments Full-height, closed abutments Full-height, spill-through abutments Enter another option Enter another option Enter another option Comments 2. Please indicate the types of approach pavement or slabs used by your agency and their typical length and thickness, as applicable. 3. Are the abutment and the approach slab/pavement rigidly tied so they move together, or are they jointed such that they may move independently of each other? If you have further details on the connection, such as steel bar/dowel size and spacing, please provide it in the comments box. 4. Does your agency use precast approach slabs or any other experimental bridge approach systems? If so, please describe the system.
100 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Comments Comments Comments 5. If you use an approach slab, is a sleeper slab typically used to support it in your currently preferred design? Yes No Not applicable 6. What types of backfill materials are specified by your agency for use behind abutments? Granular or porous granular material Controlled-density fill material Crushed gravel/rock Manufactured sand Material is not specified Other: 7. Please indicate which of the following properties of the backfill are specified by your agency, if any, and their requirements, as applicable: Moisture content at placement: Required compaction: Gradation according to AASHTO or USCS: Limit of fines (% passing No. 200 sieve): Other:
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 101Â Â Comments Comments 8. What material unique from the backfill is required to be placed behind the abutment backwall? Waterproofing membrane system Geosynthetic Expanded polyurethane Geocomposite drain No material is specified Other: 9. Does your agency use ground improvement methods for the subgrade soil? If so, please describe them. Yes No 10. Does your agency specify any construction acceptance or performance criteria of the approach after construction (e.g. ride quality)? If yes, please describe the performance metric(s) and their passing criteria below.
102 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Comments Comments Comments 11. Is water runoff from the bridge deck and approach slab/pavement captured and redirected using surface drains such as gutters, flumes, and paved ditches? Yes, water from both the bridge deck and the approach is captured and redirected. Only water from the bridge deck is captured and redirected. Only water from the approach is captured and redirected. Water is not captured from either the approach or the bridge deck. 12. Where is water collected from the bridge deck and/or approach ultimately released? Openly onto the surface of a slope. Openly at the bottom of a slope. Openly into the underlying backfill or embankment fill. An open drainage system is generally specified, but specifics are not provided. Into a culvert, storm drain, or other closed system. Other: 13. Is a drainage pipe typically used in the backfill underneath the approach slab/pavement for sub-surface drainage? If so, please describe the preferred types of pipe, the presence of any geosynthetic or waterproofing membrane, subdrain location, and other pertinent requirements. Yes No Part 2: Water and Joint Management Page description: This page contains 7 questions related to water and joint design and management for bridge approach systems.
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 103Â Â Location 1 Location 2 Either Location 1 or 2 (not specified) Both Locations 1 and 2 simultaneously No expansion joint is used Not applicable Integral abutments Semi-integral abutments Stub abutments Mechanically-stabilized abutments Full-height, closed abutments Full-height, spill-through abutments Enter another option Enter another option Enter another option Comments Comments 14. Where do you typically place an expansion joint(s) in your currently preferred design? Refer to the following graphic for location definitions. 15. What types of expansion joints are used? Compression seal Strip seal Backer rod and sealant Other, please describe:
104 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Compression seals: Strip seals: Sealants used with backer rods: Other seals: Comments Comments 16. How often does your agency typically replace the seal of the joint adjacent to the approach slab/pavement? 17. What type(s) of joint between the approach slab/pavement and the wingwalls/traffic barriers is typically used by your agency? Unsealed joint Sealed joint Sealed joint only if the joint width is larger than the following limit (please specify): No joint; two elements are tied together by reinforcment
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 105Â Â Comments Comments 18. Does your agency conduct periodic inspection of the following types of distress/deterioration? If so, please specify the inspection frequency. Differential settlement (bump), frequency: Joint seal failure, frequency: Void formation or approach embankment erosion under slab, frequency: Lateral spread of the approach embankment, frequency: Other distress type and frequency of inspection, frequency: 19. What method(s) does your agency use to quantify the severity of the differential settlement/bump? Severity is not quantified International Roughness Index (IRI) Rolling straight edge Qualitative description of ride quality Other: Part 3: Operation and Maintenance Page description: This page contains 5 questions related to operation and maintenance of approach systems.
106 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Metric Main roadway: Approach slab/pavement: Bridge deck: Joints: Comments Comments 20. What metrics are used to assess ride quality of the main roadway, the approach slab/pavement, and the bridge deck, and across the joints between these sections? If ride quality is not assessed, then please indicate so. 21. What criterion or criteria does your agency use to trigger repair or rehabilitation of a bump between the approach and the abutment or bridge deck, or between the approach and the main roadway? No criterion is used to trigger repair or rehabilitation User-complaint criterion: Safety criterion: Smoothness/ride quality criterion: Other:
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 107Â Â Comments Part 4: Performance Issues and Mitigation Practices Page description: This page contains 4 questions related to performance issues and mitigation practices. Comments 22. What maintenance/repairs are used by your agency to restore ride quality and how frequently must they be carried out? Injection of a portland cement grout underneath approach slab/pavement. Frequency: Injection of expanded polyurethane underneath approach slab/pavement. Frequency: Replacement of approach slab/pavement. Frequency: Other repair (please specify): 23. What are the typical service lives of the three most common bridge approach systems used by your agency? End of service life is when repair or replacement is required exclusive of the joint seal. Please identify "other abutment type" in the comments box. If your agency primarily uses one or two system types, then you may leave the remaining answers blank. Abutment type: Approach slab/pavement type: Expansion joint location: System #1: Integral abutment Semi-integral abutment Stub abutment Mechanically-stabilized abutment Full-height, closed abutment Full-height, spill-through abutment Other abutment type RC approach slab Unreinforced approach slab Rigid pavement Flexible pavement Between approach and deck/abutment Between approach and roadway At both ends of approach At neither end of approach No expansion joint System #2: Integral abutment Semi-integral abutment Stub abutment Mechanically-stabilized abutment Full-height, closed abutment Full-height, spill-through abutment Other abutment type RC approach slab Unreinforced approach slab Rigid pavement Flexible pavement Between approach and deck/abutment Between approach and roadway At both ends of approach At neither end of approach No expansion joint System #3: Integral abutment Semi-integral abutment Stub abutment Mechanically-stabilized abutment Full-height, closed abutment Full-height, spill-through abutment Other abutment type RC approach slab Unreinforced approach slab Rigid pavement Flexible pavement Between approach and deck/abutment Between approach and roadway At both ends of approach At neither end of approach No expansion joint Typical life in years until rehabilitation/ replacement:
108 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Common Issues Rarely Occasionally Often Poor ride quality (bump) between approach slab/pavement and abutment or bridge deck Poor ride quality across approach slab/pavement Poor ride quality between approach slab/pavement and main roadway Failed sealant in expansion joints Failed sealant in other joints between approach slab/pavement and traffic barriers, wing walls, etc. Transverse cracking in approach slab/pavement Longitudinal cracking in approach slab/pavement Failed paving notch or seat at abutment (paving notch or seat refers to the structure supporting the approach at the abutment) Erosion of backfill material underneath approach Blockage of sub-drain pipe Differential settlement 24. What issues do the most common bridge approach systems in your agency typically experience? Please indicate in the comments if there are differences in the issues experienced by Systems #1, #2, and #3.
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 109Â Â Mitigation Practices Poor ride quality (bump) between approach slab/pavement and abutment or bridge deck Poor ride quality across approach slab/pavement Poor ride quality between approach slab/pavement and main pavement Failed sealant in expansion joint Failed sealant in other joints between approach slab/pavement and traffic barrier, wing walls, etc. Transverse cracking in approach slab/pavement Longitudinal cracking in approach slab/pavement Failed paving notch or seat at abutment (paving notch or seat refers to the structure supporting the approach at the abutment) Erosion of backfill material underneath approach slab/roadway Blockage of sub-drain pipe Drainage infiltration into fills and subsoils Differential settlement Enter another option Enter another option Enter another option Comments 25. What practices are typically used by your agency to mitigate or prevent issues with bridge approach systems? Please add any additional experiences and comments that you would like to share with researchers and other agencies related to problems with approach slab design and solutions to those problems including experimental or proposed solutions that are not part of current standards.
110 Practices for Bridge Approach Systems Comments Review and Follow-Up Comments If you wish to share any additional comments, experiences, or details, please contact Dr. Mohamed ElBatanouny at melbatanouny@wje.com. 26. Has your agency made any significant changes to the following items within the last 15 years to address issues with the bridge approach system? (If so, we would be interested in following up for more information.) Abutment type Abutment foundation type Backfill material and/or properties Approach slab design Expansion joint design Joint maintenance Water runoff collection and release Monitoring of ride quality Using the Browse button below, please attach the standard construction and design specifications and drawings (e.g. manuals, plans, etc.) published by your agency for the approach systems used by your state, including the following elements and their connections as applicable: Approach slab or pavement, Abutment, Wingwalls, Traffic barriers, Sleeper slab, Backfill, embankment fill, and subbase, Subdrains and geocomposite drains, Expansion and construction joints, and Smoothness criteria specifications. You may also provide a link(s) or web address where the standard construction and design specifications and drawings can be found in the Comments box. Browse...
State DOT Survey Questionnaire 111Â Â Thank You! Thank you for taking this survey. We appreciate the time and effort you have spent on your answers to help us conduct this synthesis. As a follow-up to this survey, would you be interested in additional email correspondence and/or a follow-up phone conversation to further assist this research? If yes, please provide a phone number and/or email address where we may contact you. Email: Phone:
