Laboratory Evaluation of Double-Layered Pavement Structures for Long-Span Steel Bridge DecksSource: Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering:;2018:;Volume ( 030 ):;issue: 006DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002291Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
Abstract: The long-span steel bridge has experienced a rapid growth in China during the last two decades. Steel deck surfacing plays an important role in the durability of long-span steel bridges. So far, three types of surfacing materials have been used in China’s experience: epoxy asphalt (EA), Gussasphalt (GA), and stone matrix asphalt (SMA). Four main double-layered surfacing structures have been used via the combination of the three materials, GA-EA (EA on the top), GA-SMA, EA-SMA, and EA-EA. The objective of this study is to identify the best surfacing strategy from the four existing double-layered structures. A comprehensive performance evaluation was conducted to achieve this goal. The rutting resistance, low temperature performance, fatigue performance, and moisture damage resistance were evaluated for the individual surfacing materials, double-layered surfacing structures, and the composite structures consisting of steel deck and surfacing structures. The results showed that EA-EA had the best high-temperature performance, GA-EA had the best low-temperature performance, GA concrete had the lowest moisture susceptibility, and GA-EA possessed the best fatigue performance. In addition, the layer position had an influence on the rutting performance of the double-layered structure. Then, a simple ranking method taking account into the comprehensive performance was used to identify the best surfacing strategy. The GA-EA structure was found to be the best surfacing strategy for long-span steel bridges in China after the comparison.
|
Collections
Show full item record
contributor author | Luo Sang;Qian Zhendong;Yang Xu;Lu Qing | |
date accessioned | 2019-02-26T07:31:13Z | |
date available | 2019-02-26T07:31:13Z | |
date issued | 2018 | |
identifier other | %28ASCE%29MT.1943-5533.0002291.pdf | |
identifier uri | http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4247554 | |
description abstract | The long-span steel bridge has experienced a rapid growth in China during the last two decades. Steel deck surfacing plays an important role in the durability of long-span steel bridges. So far, three types of surfacing materials have been used in China’s experience: epoxy asphalt (EA), Gussasphalt (GA), and stone matrix asphalt (SMA). Four main double-layered surfacing structures have been used via the combination of the three materials, GA-EA (EA on the top), GA-SMA, EA-SMA, and EA-EA. The objective of this study is to identify the best surfacing strategy from the four existing double-layered structures. A comprehensive performance evaluation was conducted to achieve this goal. The rutting resistance, low temperature performance, fatigue performance, and moisture damage resistance were evaluated for the individual surfacing materials, double-layered surfacing structures, and the composite structures consisting of steel deck and surfacing structures. The results showed that EA-EA had the best high-temperature performance, GA-EA had the best low-temperature performance, GA concrete had the lowest moisture susceptibility, and GA-EA possessed the best fatigue performance. In addition, the layer position had an influence on the rutting performance of the double-layered structure. Then, a simple ranking method taking account into the comprehensive performance was used to identify the best surfacing strategy. The GA-EA structure was found to be the best surfacing strategy for long-span steel bridges in China after the comparison. | |
publisher | American Society of Civil Engineers | |
title | Laboratory Evaluation of Double-Layered Pavement Structures for Long-Span Steel Bridge Decks | |
type | Journal Paper | |
journal volume | 30 | |
journal issue | 6 | |
journal title | Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering | |
identifier doi | 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0002291 | |
page | 4018111 | |
tree | Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering:;2018:;Volume ( 030 ):;issue: 006 | |
contenttype | Fulltext |