| description abstract | Integral abutment bridges have been gaining popularity among bridge owners as cost-effective alternatives to bridges with conventional joints. They reduce initial construction costs and long-term maintenance expenses, improve seismic resistance, and extend long-term serviceability. New York has been building them since the late 1970s, with a wide variety of details, and they have been performing well. For further improvement of New York's design practice, a comparative survey was undertaken across North America, focusing on design and construction of both substructures and superstructures. In all, 39 states and Canadian provinces responded, including 8 who said they had no experience with these bridges. Responses are analyzed and summarized in this paper. Overall, integral abutment bridges are performing as well as, if not better than, conventional bridges, but no uniform national standards exist for their design. Design practices and assumptions concerning limits of thermal movement, soil pressure, and pile design vary considerably among responding agencies. These decisions are based largely on past experience. Validity of these assumptions needs investigation by testing and analysis to ensure efficient and reliable design. | |
