Upload
others
View
13
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Use of EPS Geofoam in Transportation Systems
Steven F. Bartlett, Ph.D. P.EAssociate Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringIstanbul, Turkey
Geofoam Research Consortium
Geofoam Research Consortium
Jan VaslestadSteven Bartlett David Arellano Jan Vaslestad
Resources
Authors: Stark, Bartlett and Arellano, 2012
www.civil.utah.edu\~bartlett\geofoam
Topics
• EPS Properties • Design and Construction Considerationsg• Applications for Transportation Projects• Performance Monitoring
EPS Manufacturing
raw styrene beads steam expanded (1st steam heating)
block molding (2nd steam heating) block placement
Summary of EPS Geofoam Properties
(EPS19 is the most commonly used density for roadway construction)
Source: ASTM D6817
Expanded‐Polystyrene Block Geofoam
• Typical Block• Typical Block dimensions
– 0.6 x 1.2 x 2.4 m – 0.8 x 1.2 x 4.9 m
• Density/unit weight16 to 45 7 kg/m316 to 45.7 kg/m3
(Legacy Highway Project, Utah Dept. of Transportation)( g y g y j , p p )
Topics
• EPS Properties • Design and Construction Considerationsg• Applications for Transportation Projects• Performance Monitoring
Material, Design and Construction Considerations
• Material • Density
• Construction• Bedding Material
• Compressive Resistance (Modulus)• Insect Control Additive• Flame Resistance Additive
i b i
Bedding Material• Compaction• Handling• Block Dimensions
• Moisture Absorption
• Design•Concentrated Loads
• Block Layout & Placement • Cover and UV protection
•Concentrated Loads• Seismic Loads• Drainage / Buoyancy• Protection Against Chemical Degradation
• Quality Assurance/Control• Specifications / Provisions• Testing and Sampling I tiProtection Against Chemical Degradation
• Settlement• Creep• Internal and External Stability
• Inspection• Corrective Action
y• Bearing Capacity• Pavement Design
Compressive Resistance
0.9
1
0.7
0.8
Stress EPS19‐4
0 4
0.5
0.6
d Ve
rtical
0 2
0.3
0.4
Normalize
d
Design Value
0
0.1
0.2N
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0Vertical Strain (%)
Design Guidance for Transportation Projects
• Current Design Methods / Guidance• Norwegian Public Roads Administration (1987 1992)• Norwegian Public Roads Administration (1987, 1992) • Japanese – EDO (1996, 2001)• Draft European Design Code (1998)
• I‐15 Reconstruction Project (1998‐2001) • NCHRP 529 and Web Document 65 (2004)• European EPS White Book (2011)p ( )• NCHRP Project 24‐11(02) Phase I Study (slopes) (2011)• Various Research Reports• Technical Papers• Technical Papers
Available from: www.civil.utah.edu\~bartlett\geofoam
Topics
• EPS Properties • Design and Construction Considerationsg• Applications for Transportation Projects• Performance Monitoring
Primary Uses For Transportation Projects
• Roadway widening y g• Road construction over poor soils• Bridge abutments• Bridge underfill• Bridge underfill• Culverts, pipelines and buried structures• Railway embankment• Light‐weight backfill• Slope stabilization
Roadway Widening
Roadway Widening (I‐15 Project)
Salt Lake CityUtah, USA
Roadway Widening (I‐15 Project)
Largest geofoam project worldwide100,000 cubic meters of geofoam
Road Widening (I‐15 Project)
Upper Bonneville Clay
Lower Bonneville Clay
Interbeds
Subsurface Profile in Salt Lake Valley
Road Widening (I‐15 Project – Settlement Record)
Primary Settlement
2.5 year duration
Primary Settlement
Roadway Widening (I‐15 Project)
Geofoam Embankment, Salt Lake City, Utah
Roadway Widening (I‐15 Project)
I‐15 Reconstruction ProjectSalt Lake City, Utah
Roadway Widening (I‐15 Project)
Completed Load Distribution Slab
Reinforced ConcreteLoad Distribution Slab
Geofoam for Rapid ConstructionComparison of Construction TimesComparison of Construction Times
35
25
30ConventionalGeofoam
eeks)
15
20
Time (W
e
5
10
struction
0Preparation Construction Settlement Finish Work Total
Cons
Typical Construction Time from I‐15 Project
Field Testing and Monitoring ROW OF SURVEY POINTS AT FACE OF WALL
25 MM - PVC STAND PIPE
ROW OF SURVEY POINTS ALONG OUTSIDE EDGE OF EMERGENCY LANE
ROW OF SURVEY POINTS ALONG INSIDE EDGE OF MOMENT SLAB
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
ROAD BASELOAD DISTRIBUTION SLAB
LEVEL 7.5
SQUARE PLATE WITH MAGNET RINGLEVEL 6
6.5 TO 7.3 m
GEOFOAM BLOCKS
LEVEL 4
LEVEL 2
HEIGHT VARIES
GRANULAR BACKFILL
LEVEL 0
BEDDING SAND2.5 m
VIBRATING WIRE TOTAL PRESSURE CELL
Field Testing and Monitoring
Magnet ExtensometerMagnet Extensometer Installation
Field Testing and Monitoring
Vibrating Wire Total Pressure CellsHotwire Cut Slot for Pressure Cell
Pressure Cell Cast in Bridge Abutment Pressure Cell in Base Sand
Field Testing and Monitoring
Horizontal Inclinometer
Ground and Pavement Surveys
3300 South Compression of EPSDate
0
1/20
/99
3/21
/99
5/20
/99
7/19
/99
9/17
/99
11/1
6/99
1/15
/00
3/15
/00
5/14
/00
7/13
/00
9/11
/00
11/1
0/00
1/9/
01
3/10
/01
5/9/
01
7/8/
01
9/6/
01
Date
10
20
30m)
LEVEL 6
40
50
60ttlem
ent (
m
LEVEL 4
LEVEL 2
LEVEL 6
6m
60
70
80
Set
LEVEL 0
90
100Level 0Level 2Level 4Level 6
Construction Completed (8/2/99)
Level 6Level 8Load Distribution Slab placedLoad Distribution Slab Curb placedGranular Borrow placedOpen Graded Base placedPCCP Pavement placed
Field Testing and Monitoring
l i i hSettlement Monitoring 100 South Street
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
Flom Bridge – 1972 – Lillestrom, Norway
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
SR‐519 InterchangeSeattle, Washington
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
St. Rosa Road
Private RoadConstructed OverRice Fields
St. Rosa, Philippines
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
Reclaimed Land – Casino Project – Manila Philippines
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
Reclaimed Land – Aruze Project – Manila Philippines
Road Construction Over Poor Soils
Reclaimed Land – Casino Project – Manila Philippines
Bridge Abutments
Bridge Approaches
North Temple Viaduct – Salt Lake City, Utah
Bridge Abutment
Overpass, 5300 S. over UTA TRAXSalt Lake City, Utah
I‐15 Reconstruction,Salt Lake City, Utah
Temporary Bridge Supported on EPS
NorwayGrimsoyveien
y
Temporary Bridge Supported on EPS
Lokkeberg Bridge,Norway
Temporary Bridge Supported on EPS
Lokkeberg Bridge,Norway
Temporary Bridge Supported on EPS
Lokkeberg Bridge,Norway
Temporary Bridge Supported on EPS
Lokkeberg Bridge,NNorway
Permanent Bridge Supported on EPS
EPS blockHjelmungen bru, Norway
Permanent Bridge Supported on EPS
Hjelmungen bru, Norway
Permanent Bridge Supported on EPS
Hjelmungen bru, Norway
Permanent Bridge Supported on EPS
Hjelmungen bru, Norway
Bridge / Tunnel Underfill
Tunnel Infill Tucker Blvd.I 215 at 3300 South Tunnel Infill, Tucker Blvd.,St. Louis, Missouri
I‐215 at 3300 South,Salt Lake City, Utah
Culverts (Light‐Weight Fill)
Culverts (Light‐Weight Fill)
UTA Commuter Rail Widening Over Unknown locationgExisting Culvert, Corner Canyon, Draper, Utah
Pipeline Protection
W t hWasatch Fault
Wasatch Fault at Little Cottonwood Canyon
Pipeline Protection
Pipeline Protection
Wasatch Fault – Salt Lake City Segment
Pipelines (Light‐weight Cover Over Faults)
LDS
Asphalt
EPS
Pipe with Sand
Lightweight Cover SystemLightweight‐Cover System
Displacement Vectors During Failure
Pipelines (Light‐weight Cover Over Faults)
Force – Displacement Relation
Pipelines (Light‐weight Cover Over Faults)
Pipeline Crossing, Salt Lake City, Utah
Pipelines (Light‐weight Cover Over Faults
Light‐Weight Backfill
Buried Structures and Walls (Light‐Weight Backfill)
Federal Courthouse – Salt Lake City IHC Hospital Murray UtFederal Courthouse Salt Lake City IHC Hospital – Murray, Ut
Casino/Hotel – Reidoso, NM
Rail Embankments
Light Rail Embankments
UTA –Light Rail – Salt Lake City, Utah
Light Rail Embankments
UTA –Light Rail – Salt Lake City, Utah
Light Rail Embankments
UTA –Light Rail – Salt Lake City, Utah
Commuter Rail Embankments
Front Runner – UTA – Corner Canyon – Draper Utah
Slope Stabilization
Slope Stabilization
Pavement Cracking ScarpPavement Cracking Scarp
AL DOT AL DOT
Al b DOTAlabama DOT
Slope Stabilization
Overview of EPS Block Placement Configuration
Alabama DOT
Slope Stabilization
Backfill Placement Behind EPS Completed Road
Alabama DOT
Slope Stabilization
SR264 at 2nd Mesa, Arizona
Topics
• EPS Properties • Design and Construction Considerationsg• Applications for Transportation Projects• Performance Monitoring
Awards
ASCE 2002 Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement (OPAL) Award, Wasatch Constructors I‐15 Reconstruction Design‐Build Team, Salt Lake City,Wasatch Constructors I 15 Reconstruction Design Build Team, Salt Lake City,Utah
ACEC Arizona 2006 Grand Award, Rockfall Containment and Safety, SR 264 at 2nd Mesa, Arizona
ASCE 2010 Local Outstanding Civil Engineering Achievement Awards, /Geotechnical Category – Outstanding Award SR 519 / I‐90 to SR 99,
Intermodal Access I/C Improvements Phase 2 Design Build ProjectSeattle, Washington
Rebuilding America’s Infrastructure Magazine 2012,Best of America’s Infrastructure – Cost Saving Approaches,Geofoam Embankments UTA TRAX line Salt Lake City UtahGeofoam Embankments, UTA TRAX line, Salt Lake, City, Utah
Questions