[American Society of Civil Engineers Geo-Congress 2013 - San Diego, California, United States (March 3-7, 2013)] Sound Geotechnical Research to Practice - Use of EPS Geofoam for Support

Use of EPS Geofoam For Support Of A Bridge

Armin W. Stuedlein1 and Dawit Negussey2 1

Assistant Professor and Loosley Faculty Fellow, School of Civil and Construction Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, [email protected]

2 Professor and Director, Geofoam Research Center, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York.

13244, [email protected]

ABSTRACT In much of reported geofoam applications in roadway construction, innovative uses featured approach fills and light weight embankments below rigid or flexible pavement structures. This paper describes a bridge construction that represents a marked departure from conventional practice. EPS geofoam was used to support pre-stressed concrete box beams and composite concrete deck of a single span bridge. The bridge is a replacement of a shorter, steel-girder single-span bridge on spread footings across Oatka Creek in Warsaw, NY. Criteria for the new bridge included a larger span and increased load and hydraulic capacities. Soil borings showed very weak strata extend to large depths, initially suggesting the need for deep foundations to support the new bridge. As an alternative to piles, excavation and replacement of the underlying soil with EPS geofoam was selected to provide a compensated foundation system. This paper describes the construction and post-construction performance monitoring of the bridge. The instrumentation included stress cells, settlement plates, and piezometers. Heat dissipation in the thick early strength concrete of the abutment slabs was monitored, and was inferred as the source of thermally-induced creep. Periodic surveys of the roadway profile were also taken. Subsequent to completion, the bridge and the approaches were inundated during a period of intense rainfall, and successfully withstood the uplift due to buoyancy. Following 10 years of service, the bridge continues to be rated with the highest NYSDOT bridge performance ranking in 2012. INTRODUCTION

Construction on soft ground challenges the effort and creativity of civil engineers due to compressibility and low shear strength of foundation soils. Use of conventional methods may require planned staging and field observation to control the rate of construction, limit settlements to tolerable magnitudes, and maintain global stability. The use of lightweight fill for mitigation of settlement and potential instability has become increasingly popular for soft ground construction with increased reporting of successful applications. Historical lightweight materials have included wood chips, shredded tires, fly-ash, slag and

334

Sound Geotechnical Research to Practice

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

EPS geofoam (Table 1). For settlement and stability performance, super-lightweight EPS geofoam allows the greatest flexibility but at a relatively higher cost.

The first use of EPS geofoam for settlement control was in 1972 for the approach to Flom Bridge in Norway (Frydenlund, 1991). Subsurface conditions included a 3 m thick layer of peat over 10 m of sensitive marine clay. The bridge was supported on piles, however, the approach fills experienced settlements ranging from 20 to 30 cm annually, requiring constant grade maintenance. Replacement of conventional fill with 1 m of EPS geofoam blocks successfully halted further settlement. EPS geofoam blocks were first used to transfer bridge superstructure loads to the subsurface for a temporary bridge in Norway (Frydenlund and AabØe, 2001). The subsurface consisted of deep deposits of quick clays of low undrained shear strength and high compressibility. Three density grades of EPS geofoam fills of up to 5 m thickness were used to support the bridge and approach roadway. The highest density geofoam (cs = 240 kPa) was placed near the top of the embankment in direct contact with the superstructure. The inter-m mediate density geofoam (cs = 180 kPa) was placed in the embankment mid-height. The lowest density geofoam (cs = 100 kPa) was used for the bottom half of the fill. Total EPS strains of 1.3% were observed over 12 years as the bridge continued to be in service beyond the planned 3 to 5 year service life. A more detailed review of the use of EPS geofoam for settlement and stability issues is provided in Stuedlein (2003).This paper describes the use of EPS geofoam for the foundation of Buffalo Road Bridge over Oatka Creek in Warsaw, NY. The bridge was constructed in 2001 and remains the only one of a kind to date. Sensors were

TABLE 1. Range in densities of typical lightweight fills (after Elias, et al.; 1999)

Fill Type Range in Density

(kg/m3)

EPS Geofoam 12 to 35 Foamed Concrete 355 to 770 Wood Fiber 550 to 960 Shredded Tires 600 to 900 Expanded Shale and Clay 600 to 1040 Fly-ash 1120 to 1440 Boiler Slag 1000 to 1750 Air-Cooled Slag 1100 to 1500

FIG 1. Project location of the Buffalo Road Crossing of Oatka Creek, Warsaw, NY.

SOUND GEOTECHNICAL RESEARCH TO PRACTICE: HONORING ROBERT D. HOLTZ II 335


Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

placed to monitor the construction and in-service performance of the bridge. The instrumentation used is described, and performance data are presented. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The replaced 19 m single-span Buffalo Road Bridge crossing of Oatka Creek was constructed in 1966. Oatka Creek flows north and drains the large U-shaped Wyoming Valley (Figure 1). The annual average daily traffic (AADT) of Buffalo Road was about 1500 vehicles with about 5 percent truck traffic. Over 35 years of service, continuing settlements reduced the freeboard below the steel girders of the bridge. In the spring of 2001, debris from flooding in Wyoming Valley blocked the flow of Oatka Creek through Buffalo Bridge and caused overtopping of the roadway (Figure 2).

Problems with the Buffalo Road Bridge had been observed prior to the flood event in 2001. The August 1998 Biennial Bridge Inspection Report assigned a New York State General Recommendation of 3 for the structure (scale of 1 to 7, where 1 indicates failure condition, 7 indicates new condition). Major findings of the inspection included overextended bearings, with anchor bolts bent towards abutments, inadequate freeboard, severe deterioration of the approach guide rail posts, raveling of the asphalt concrete wearing surface along the shoulders, loss of section of bridge rail posts, severe corrosion and loss of section of floor framing and lateral bracing system.

Four alternatives were considered to address the deteriorated physical condition. The null (i.e., no action) and rehabilitation alternatives did not satisfy the project objectives of increasing the freeboard and extending the service life for an additional 35 years before major treatment, and were subsequently dismissed. Replacement alternatives included a 25m concrete channel bridge and a 25m concrete box beam bridge. Although the first replacement alternative, the channel bridge, using precast post-tensioned segmental thru-girders, provided a substantially reduced superstructure depth and greater vertical opening, it was not chosen due to cost considerations. The second replacement alternative, the concrete box beam bridge, was selected and was designed to fit on a raised vertical alignment, over the existing centerline. This alternative satisfied cost and hydraulic considerations.

FIG 2. Debris and blockage at the replaced bridge crossing of Oatka Creek, Spring 2001: (a) outflow, north side; (b) inflow, south side.

SOUND GEOTECHNICAL RESEARCH TO PRACTICE: HONORING ROBERT D. HOLTZ II336


Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Much of the Central New York landform was shaped in the recent Pleistocene Epoch. Glaciation at different periods swept through all or portions of New York State, redefining the topography as each occurred. The last period of glaciation, the Wisconsin Stage of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, shaped much of the present landscape of New York State. The Wisconsin ice sheet began to retreat north some 22,000 years ago, forming large lakes as melt waters accumulated in newly dug troughs Allers (1984). The Wyoming Valley geomorphology is similar to the valleys of the Finger Lakes, with deep deposits of glacio-lacustrine silt and clay below Holocene alluvium near-surface soils.

Two borings were advanced approximately 30 meters at the Buffalo Road Bridge site. The upper 6 meters consist of layers of loose to dense, olive brown sandy-silt and silty-sand, with gravel content ranging from 3 to 50 percent. Interbedded stratification of the alluvium indicated numerous periods of flooding and creek meanders. The silty sand and sandy silt deposits were underlain by 3 meters of overconsolidated medium stiff clayey-silt with varves of silty-clay and silt transitioning to normally consolidated, soft, weight-of-rod and weight-of-hammer clayey-silt with varves of silty-clay and silt. A soil profile with SPT blow counts is shown in Figure 3. BRIDGE FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

The soils were too weak to support a shallow foundation, and too deep for cost-effective use of a deep foundation system. The use of a compensated foundation was recommended, with EPS geofoam selected to transfer superstructure loads to the subsurface. Geotechnical recommendations indicated a net zero bearing pressure would limit settlements and provide the required freeboard in the long-term. To mitigate scour and buoyancy of the geofoam fill during flood events, the design called for an enclosed sheet-pile cell and tie back system.

FIG 3. Standard Penetration Test (SPT)

resistance and soil profile.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0 10 20 30 40D

epth

(m)

SPT N (blow/0.3 m)

BH-1

BH-2

Silty Sand (SM)

Sandy SILT (ML)

Silty, Gravelly Sand (SM)

OC Varved Clayey SILT (ML)

NC Varved Clayey SILT (ML)



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Following completion of the replacement bridge design, the existing girders and substructure were removed in August of 2001, and the sheet pile cells were installed. The cells, approximately 4 m wide and about 17m long with tapered sides along the creek, were used to enclose the EPS geofoam blocks (Figure 4 and 6). Sheet-pile anchor walls and tie-rods were also installed and connected to the cell to provide additional lateral restraint during construction. The soil within the sheet pile cell enclosures was excavated with dewatering to the required elevation. The subgrade surface was leveled and covered with a geotextile separation fabric. A 300 mm thick clean aggregate bedding layer was then placed over the fabric. The dewatering pumps remained active until the concrete abutment stem had set for 7 days, to provide adequate restraint against hydrostatic uplift.

FIG 4. East sheet-pile cell plan and sensor locations.

In mid-October 2001, the first shipment of EPS 31 (30.5 kg/m3, 1.9 pcf) arrived and was weighed to assure quality. The majority of delivered blocks weighed about 20 percent below the set target for the specified density and two truckloads were rejected. Geofoam density is the main parameter that correlates to compressive strength, flexural strength, Young’s modulus, and creep potential (Negussey 2007). The simple quality assurance procedure was critical in ensuring the proper density geofoam was utilized for the Buffalo Road Bridge project. After a one week delay, new geofoam blocks that met the specified density were

Open Standpipe

Station 10+020.22

Station 10+024.27

South Magnet Extensometer

North Magnet Extensometer

PC1

PC2

PC4 PC3

PZ



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

delivered and placed in the East sheet pile cell. Geofoam blocks were lowered into the cell by backhoe outfitted with nylon construction webbing and attached via a simple dog-leash corkscrew modified from typical hardware store stock. A two-person crew custom trimmed and placed geofoam blocks totaling 180 m3 and 3 m thickness to fit the irregular sheet piles cell cofferdam. Steel workers placed and tied reinforcing steel for the 0.6 m thick load distribution slab (LDS) cap over the geofoam by the end of the following day. Construction continued on the West sheet-pile cell over the following week. Thereafter, the bridge approach was raised and graded to meet design requirements over a one-week period. Placement of the pre-stressed concrete box-beam girders followed and was completed in two days. The bridge deck and guide-rails were placed over the subsequent two weeks. The project was completed by the beginning of November of 2001; two weeks ahead of schedule despite the initial geofoam fill rejection and delay.

INSTRUMENTATION Instrumentation at the East abutment included stress cells, a piezometer, an open standpipe, magnet extensometers, and optical survey points. A thermistor port was installed at the west abutment. Four total stress cells were placed within the geofoam fill system. Two stress cells, labeled PC1 and PC2, were placed at approximately 1/3 and 2/3 of the length of the cell to register vertical pressures as shown in Figure 4. These cells were encased in sand bedding within the gravel blanket underlying the geofoam. Two stress cells were installed in a vertical orientation in gravel fill within the sheet pile corrugation at the mid-height of the EPS fill to register horizontal pressures. The total stress cells were rated to 700 kPa maximum capacity and were of the pneumatic type. Stress cells of lower capacity would have been preferred to monitor an application such as EPS lightweight fills, however, due to the construction schedule; the readily available larger capacity cells were used. Water levels within the sheet pile cofferdam were monitored using an open standpipe and a pneumatic piezometer. Leads for the stress cells and pneumatic piezometer were run vertically up the sheet pile cell and through a 50 mm PVC pipe extension to surface. Both the stress cells and pneumatic piezometers had accuracy and resolution of below +/- 1kPa.

Two magnet extensometer arrays, termed the North and South Array, were

installed within the East abutment using low profile settlement plates (Figure 4) to observe geofoam displacements within the sheet pile cell. Conventional magnet plates, such as those used to monitor geofoam fills at the Interstate-15 Reconstruction Project, were 305 mm square with a thickness of 13 mm. Negussey, et al. (2001) and Stuedlein (2003) described the performance of conventional magnet plates, which may have contributed to exaggerated settlements observed at several geofoam fill installations. Modified low profile metal plates of 3 mm thickness (Figure 5), had proven successful in another EPS fill application (Stuedlein et al., 2004). These improved settlement plates were installed at the Buffalo Road Bridge to moderate stress concentrations and initial deformations at the magnet plate-geofoam block interface due to the reduced thickness. Magnet plates were placed at Level 0, between the gravel blanket drain and the first layer of geofoam, at Level 1, between the first and second geofoam blocks, and Levels 2, and 3 (Figure 6). A double casing system consisting of a



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

100 mm PVC riser pipe and a monitoring well casing was used to raise the PVC riser pipe to the grade of the LDS while protecting the geofoam fill from potential exposure to deleterious liquids. The manufacturer of the magnet-reed probe indicated that readings should be repeatable to +/- 3 to 5 mm (+/- 0.1 to 0.2 in).

Survey points were

established along a profile spanning the length of the construction area on the wearing surface of the Buffalo Road crossing to monitor long term settlements. Readings were taken with a digital auto-level, with an accuracy and resolution of 1.5 mm on 1 km and 0.1 mm, respectively.

Upon observing the geofoam settlement at the East abutment following placement of the LDS, heat was detected from within the access pipe. In previous geofoam applications, such as approach filling or embankment widening, the LDS used above the geofoam fill was in the range of 100 to 150 mm in height, where heat generated from hydration of the lime within the concrete could dissipate readily. The 0.6 m thick LDS used at this project, however, was not able to shed heat quickly. Elevated temperatures were noted up to 36 hours following pouring of the concrete bearing pad over the geofoam fill. Subsequently, a thermistor port was formed through the steel reinforcement of the LDS at the West abutment to observe temperature changes. Temperature measurements were taken with a digital thermocouple probe to 0.1° Celsius resolution.

FIG 5. Low profile magnet settlement plates (adapted from Stuedlein et al., 2004).

FIG 6. Cross-section of east abutment indicating magnet extensometer location within the sheet-pile cell.

Elev. 294

Channel BottomElev. 295.75

Elev. 297.6

Geofoam

Bearing Pad

Magnet Plate

Permanent Sheet Piling

Anchorage Tendon

Anchor Wall (Sheet Piling)

Waler Waler

Select FillBorrow Fill

Sub-base

Appraoch Slab SuperPave HMA

Super Structure

Access PortFooting

Q10 Elev. 298.36

Mean Elev. 297



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

PERFORMANCE OF GEOFOAM FOUNDATION

Total Stresses below the Geofoam Fill

Stress cells PC1 and PC2 registered vertical pressures. Little if any stress was noted with placement of the EPS fill (Figure 7). Upon pouring of the LDS, PC1 under-registered and PC2 over-registered pressures. After dewatering operations stopped, the stress cells registered only hydrostatic pressures. PC2 was in close proximity to the piezometer and standpipe, and good agreement is noted between the three. Lateral stresses are not shown in the figure for clarity; however, the lateral stresses correspond to the hydrostatic pressure at mid-height.

Displacements within the Geofoam Fill

Baseline displacement readings were taken on September 18th, 2001, with no load on the geofoam fill. The following day, the 0.6 m LDS was poured directly on the geofoam surface. Displacements of 9 and 14 mm were observed at the top of the geofoam fill for the South and North Array, respectively (Figure 8). At the South Array, a displacement of 12 mm in the second layer was noted, greater than that at the top but within the margin of error of the measurement. The addition of the stem abutment resulted in cumulative displacements of 12 and 10 mm for the South and North Array, respectively. Dewatering operations stopped at the Northern portion of the cofferdam three days earlier while continuing at the Southern portion. This appears to be reflected in the upward movement observed at the North Array. Dewatering operations at the East abutment ceased the following day. The next load additions consisted of the placement of the box-beam girders. Five were placed at the northern portion on October 9th, followed by the remaining five girders on October 10th. Small vertical displacement (2 mm) upwards and downwards is noted during the placement of the girders. No

FIG 6. Vertical and hydrostatic pressures at base of sheet pile cells.

7/22/2001 10/30/2001 2/7/2002 5/18/2002 8/26/2002 12/4/2002 3/14/2003

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

-50 50 150 250 350 450 550

Str

es

s (k

Pa)

Time (days)

PC 1 PC 2 PZ Open Standpipe

1) 0.6 m LDS2) Abutment Stem3) Compacted Sub-base4) First 5 Box-beam Girders5) Last 5 Box-beam Girders6) Bridge Deck and Detailing

12

34

5

6



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

displacement was noted with the pouring of the concrete bridge deck and placement of the guide-rails. Total fill disp-lacement over the post-construction period slightly increased to 16 mm at the South Array, whereas the observations at the North Array indicated no additional movement. Internal shifts in movement within the geo-foam fill are attributed to seasonal fluct-uations in temp-erature and groundwater level. The final displacements of 13 to 15 mm at the top of the geofoam of the North and South Arrays are comparable.

FIG 8. Geofoam fill displacements observed at: (a) the South Array,

and (b) the North Array.

Bridge and Approach Fill Settlements

A 100 m profile along the centerline of the road was surveyed to observe approach and bridge settlements (Figure 9). The settlement survey was conducted about 500 days after construction, and spanned the Eastern and Western extent of the construction activity. Settlements on the order of 4 to 10 mm were observed in areas associated with the grade raising, with a decrease in settlement as the

9/10/2001 12/19/2001 3/29/2002 7/7/2002 10/15/2002 1/23/2003 5/3/2003

0

4

8

12

16

20

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Set

tlem

ent

(mm

)

Time (days)

0--1 0--2 0--3

9/10/2001 12/19/2001 3/29/2002 7/7/2002 10/15/2002 1/23/2003 5/3/2003

0

4

8

12

16

20

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Se

ttle

men

t (m

m)

Time (days)

0--1 0--2 0--3(a)

(b)



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

roadway approached the bridge. The upward trend over the bridge may be related to thermal induced movement of the pre-stressed box beam girders.

DISCUSSION OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

Results from the performance monitoring indicated complex interactions within the bridge foundation system. High temperatures resulting from the heat of hydration in the LDS were noted during observation. BASF (1998) reported that the compressive strength of EPS is dependent on temperature, with a general rule of thumb of 7% loss of compressive strength with each 10°C rise in temperature ab-ove 20°C. Figure 10 shows temp-eratures observed within the LDS at depths of 250 and 500 mm. Temp-eratures peak-ed at 22 hours after pour-ing, reach-ing a high of 57°C. Using the rule of thumb recommended by BASF, geofoam in the vicinity of the LDS likely experienced up to 25% loss in compressive strength. A plot of individual geofoam block strain is shown in Figure 11 for the North Array. Extended exposure to elevated temperatures likely induced thermal creep of the uppermost portions of geofoam. The top layer, Layer 3, which is 300 mm in thickness, experienced a strain of 4.3 percent, well above the elastic range of the 31 kg/m3 material in response to 15kPa load. In contrast, the strains in Layers 1 and 2 of below 0.4 percent were sheltered from the sustained temperatures by the good insulation of the Layer 1 geofoam. Thus, depending on the duration of exposure, thermally-induced creep of geofoam would impact only a limited portion of the EPS fill. Pouring the LDS in lifts of 150 mm and waiting 48 hours in between lifts may help to reduce the high temperatures associated with the heat of hydration, if necessary.

In terms of superstructure load transfer, the vertical stresses registered appear to be representative of only hydrostatic pressures. The minimal post construction displacements within the geofoam fill are consistent with the zero effective stress registries of the stress cells. The performance data indicated that the water within the cofferdam forced the geofoam against the LDS, to carry part of the superstructure load buoyantly. With water levels producing on average 30 kPa of hydrostatic uplift, the remaining 20 kPa dead load is carried by the sheet pile cofferdam, a relatively stiff structure with the constructed geometry as shown in Figures 4 and 6. The extra shear load carried by the sheet piles did not result in superstructure settlement, as shown by the survey results. The stiffer layers of sandy-silt and silty-sand have been capable of resisting the load. If the sheet pile

FIG 9. Settlement profile along new approach and bridge.

-5

Set

tlem

ent (

mm

)

0

5 10

9+06

0 9+

070

9+08

0 9+

090

10+

000

10+

010

10+

020

10+

030

10+

040

10+

050

10+

060

Station (m)

3/19/03



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 120 240 360Te

mp

erat

ure

(°C

)Elapsed Time (Hours)

250 mm Depth

500 mm Depth

Onsite Ambient Temperature

-0.01

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Str

ain

Time (days)

0--1 1--2 2--3

cell were to settle, the movement would be halted upon contact of the geofoam fill with the subgrade. Part of the shear load supported by the sheet pile cell would transfer back to the geofoam fill, as intended. In the May 2012 Biennial Bridge Inspection Report, the Buffalo Road Bridge is the only bridge older than two years to receive one of seven highest ratings out of 133 bridges in Wyoming County, NY. The highest rating of seven represents a good-as-new condition with no visual evidence of distress or deterioration of any form. The bridge performance to date has been very good. CONCLUSIONS

EPS geofoam was used to fill the void within a sheet pile cofferdam abutment to support the bridge superstructure. Performance observations indicated that the geofoam fill may not be in contact with the underlying foundation soil. Depending on the water levels within the sheet pile cell, the superstructure is supported in part by buoyancy of the EPS fill and in shear resistance along the cofferdam-soil interface. Thermal creep of the EPS geofoam fill was initiated by the heat of hydration within the thick load distribution slab. Subsequent relaxation with heat dissipation further facilitated load transfer to the sheet pile cell and support by skin friction and buoyancy. The construction stage observations suggest a need to study the effects of compressive strength and creep of EPS geofoam under higher temperatures. Overall, post construction observations over 500 days and subsequent biennial bridge inspection reports to date indicate outstanding performance.

FIG 7. Heat of hydration temperature observations, West abutment following LDS pouring.

FIG 8. Individual layer strains, North Array.



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Buffalo Road replacement bridge performance observation was supported by NYSDOT Transportation Infrastructure Research Consortium (TIRC). Benjamin Beardsley of Erdman Anthony and Associates, Gary Weidman of Wyoming County Highway Department, Geotechnical Engineer Ray Teeter were helpful at various stages of the monitoring project.

REERENCES Frydenlund, T.E. (1991) “Expanded Polystyrene - A Lighter Way Across Soft

Ground,” International Report No. 1502, Norwegian Road Research Laboratory, 12p.

Frydenlund, T. E., and AabØe, R.; 2001, “Long-term Performance and Durability of EPS as a Lightweight Filling Material”, Proceedings of EPS 2001, 3rd International Conference of EPS Geofoam, Salt Lake City, UT.

Stuedlein, A.W. (2003) “Instrumentation, Performance, and Numerical Modeling of Large Geofoam Embankment Structures”, M.S. Thesis, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.

Allers, R. H. (1984) “Pleistocene Geology of Central New York State”, Hamilton College Field Trip Guidebook: Geology of the Black and Mohawk River Valleys, Hamilton College, Clinton, NY.

Negussey, D. (2007) “Design Parameters for EPS Geofoam,” Soils and Foundations, Japanese Geotechnical Society, Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 161 - 170.

Negussey, D., Stuedlein, A.W., Bartlett, S.F., and Farnsworth, C. (2001) “Performance of a Geofoam Embankment at 100 South, I-15 Reconstruction Project, Salt Lake City, UT”, Proceedings of EPS 2001, 3rd International Conference of EPS Geofoam, Salt Lake City, UT.

Stuedlein, A.W., Negussey, D., and Mathioudakis, M. (2004) “A Case History of the Use of Geofoam for Bridge Approach Fills,” Proceedings, 5th International Conference on Case Histories In Geotechnical Engineering, Paper 8.40, New York, NY.

BASF Corporation (1998) “Styropor Foam as a Lightweight Construction Material for Road Base-Courses,” Styropor Technical Information, Ludwigshafen, Germany.



Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

Ond

okuz

May

is U

nive

rsite

si o

n 11

/09/

14. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Documents

[American Society of Civil Engineers Geo-Congress 2013 - San Diego, California, United States (March 3-7, 2013)] Sound Geotechnical Research to Practice - Use of EPS Geofoam for Support