Integral Abutment-Backfill Behavior on Sand Soil—Pushover

Analysis Approach
Murat Dicleli, M.ASCE1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: This paper presents a study on the behavior of the abutment-backfill system under positive thermal variation in integral bridges
built on sand. A structural model of a typical integral bridge is built, considering the nonlinear behavior of the piles and soil-bridge
interaction effects. Static pushover analyses of the bridge are conducted to study the effect of various geometric, structural, and geotech-
nical parameters on the performance of the abutment-backfill system under positive thermal variations. The shape and intensity of the
backfill pressure are found to be affected by the height of the abutment. Furthermore, the internal forces in the abutments are found to be
functions of the thermal-induced longitudinal movement of the abutment, the properties of the pile, and the density of the sand around the
piles. Using the pushover analysis results, design equations are formulated to determine the maximum forces in the abutments and the
maximum length of integral bridges based on the strength of the abutments. Integral bridges with piles encased in loose sand and oriented
to bend about their weak axis, abutment heights less than 4 m, and noncompacted backfill are recommended to limit the magnitude of the
forces in the abutments.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1084-0702共2005兲10:3共354兲
CE Database subject headings: Bridge abutments; Inelastic action; Thermal analysis; Backfills; Soils.

Introduction
Expansion joints on bridges have caused considerable mainte-
nance problems for transportation agencies 共Wolde-Tinsae et al.
1988a, b; Burke 1988, 1990a; Steiger 1993兲. Therefore, in many
parts of North America, the overall economy of jointless con-
struction is made applicable to bridges with multiple spans
共Wolde-Tinsae et al. 1988b; Burke 1990b, 1994; Soltani and
Kukreti 1992兲. Multiple-span bridges with abutments that are cast
integral with the deck and supported on a single row of steel
H-piles are now considered as an alternative to traditional bridges
with expansion joints. A typical multiple-span integral bridge is
illustrated in Fig. 1.
In such bridges, the abutment-backfill system 共Lehane et al.
1999兲 and the piles supporting the abutments 共Dicleli and Alb-
haisi 2004兲 may be influenced considerably by the thermal-
induced longitudinal displacements of the continuous bridge
deck. The magnitude of the deck displacements is a function of
the level of thermal variation, the type of superstructure material,
and the length of the bridge. As the length of integral bridges
increases, thermal-induced displacements and the forces in the
bridge components may increase, as well. Since many transporta-
tion departments tend to push up the length limits of integral
bridges 共Burdette et al. 2002兲 to eliminate the maintenance prob-
lems concerned with the expansion joints, the abutments of such
long bridges may be subjected to large internal forces in excess of
their ultimate shear or flexural capacity. These internal forces are
generated by the passive backfill 共granular material兲 pressure and
restraining effects of the pile-soil 共sand兲 system as the abutments
are pushed toward the backfill because of positive thermal varia-
tions. The internal forces generated in the abutments are therefore
functions of the shape and intensity of the backfill pressure and
the magnitude of the forces imposed by the pile-soil system on
the abutment. A reasonable estimation of the internal forces gen-
erated in the abutments is necessary in the design to ensure sat-
isfactory performance of the integral bridge throughout its service
life. This estimation requires a careful study of the behavior of the
abutment-backfill and soil-pile system under thermal variations.
At present, design guidelines for determining the forces in
integral bridge abutments considering the effect of thermal in-
duced displacements on the shape and intensity of the backfill
pressure 共Clough and Duncan 1991; England and Tseng 2001兲
and the effect of the pile-soil system do not exist in LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications 共AASHTO 1998兲. In general, for designing
the abutments, transportation agencies use simple in-house speci-
fications that ignore many of the previously mentioned effects
共Husain and Bagnariol 1996; IDOT 1997; Dicleli 2000兲. There-
fore, a rational method for the design of integral bridge abutments
is required. Such a method may also be useful in determining the

1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering and Construction,
Bradley Univ., Peoria, IL 61625. E-mail: mdicleli@bradley.edu
Note. Discussion open until October 1, 2005. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on December 8, 2003; approved on May 17, 2004. This
paper is part of the Journal of Bridge Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 3, May
1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISSN 1084-0702/2005/3-354–364/$25.00. Fig. 1. Multiple-span integral bridge used in the study

354 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.

 maximum length limits of integral bridges on the based on the Table 1. List of Parameters Used in Study
ultimate strength of the abutments. Parameter Case
To address the previously mentioned problems, a structural
model of a typical integral bridge is first built, considering the Pile size HP250⫻ 85, HP310⫻ 110
nonlinear behavior of the piles and the soil-bridge interaction ef- Pile orientation Strong and weak axis bending
fects. Static pushover analysis of the bridge is then conducted to Sand density Loose, medium, medium-dense, dense
study the effect of various geometric, structural, and geotechnical Abutment height 2–5 m
parameters on the performance of the abutment-backfill system Abutment thickness 1,000, 1,500 mm
under positive thermal variations. Using the results of the push- Backfill Compacted, noncompacted
over analysis, design equations are formulated to determine the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

maximum forces in the abutments and the maximum length of

integral bridges based on the strength of the abutments as a func- sents integral bridges with stub abutments. The effect of the abut-
tion of the thermal-induced displacements in the bridge deck and ment thickness is also studied by repeating the analysis for a
the properties of the backfill and pile-soil system. 1,500-mm-thick abutment. In addition, the level of the compac-
tion of the backfill is believed to have a significant effect on the
internal forces in the abutment. Therefore, compacted and non-
Objective and Scope of Present Study compacted backfills are included in the analyses. The parameters
used in this study are summarized in Table 1.
The main objective of the present study is to develop rational
design equations for determining the maximum forces in the abut-
ments and the maximum length of integral bridges based on the Nonlinear Structural Modeling of Integral Bridge
strength of the abutments. The study is limited to symmetrical,
nonskewed integral bridges with expansion bearings on interme- A nonlinear structural model of the bridge is built and analyzed
diate supports. The abutments are supported by steel H-piles by using the finite-element–based software SAP2000 共1998兲 to
driven in sand. A fixed connection is assumed between the piles study the effect of temperature-induced displacements on the per-
and the abutment, based on the current state of practice 共Husain formance of the abutment-backfill system. Only half of the bridge
and Bagnariol 1996; IDOT 1997兲. The piles are assumed to ac- is modeled, because of its symmetrical configuration, the sym-
commodate large plastic lateral deformations without global in- metrical nature of the thermal effects, and assumption of identical
stability 共Ingram et al. 2003兲. Furthermore, in the static pushover soil properties at both ends of the bridge. The structural model of
analyses, the abutments are assumed to sustain the effects of the the bridge is illustrated in Fig. 2. The thermal loading on the
internal forces produced by thermal variations until the piles bridge is applied as a longitudinal static pushover load on the
reach their plastic curvature limit 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2004兲. half-model of the bridge. This load displaces the bridge toward
This enabled the examination of the abutment-backfill behavior the backfill, as in the case of uniform positive temperature varia-
under a large range of thermal-induced displacements 共e.g., tion where the bridge elongates and moves toward the backfill.
2 inches for bridges with stub abutments兲. The restraining effect A two-dimensional 共2D兲 frame model is built for the bridge,
of the approach slab to the longitudinal movements of the bridge considering a single interior girder. The tributary width of the slab
is found to be negligible and is not included in the analysis. and abutment is set equal to 2,400 mm spacing of the girders. Full
composite action between the slab and the girders is assumed in
the model for the negative and positive moment regions. The
Integral Bridge and Parameters Used in Present composite slab-girder deck is modeled using elastic beam ele-
Study ments. The longitudinal stiffness of the elastomeric bearings
共1,000– 2,000 kN/ m兲 over the piers is negligible compared with
The multiple-span integral bridge used in this study is shown in that of the other bridge components 共⬎100,000 kN/ m兲. The bear-
Fig. 1. It has six 20-m-long spans supported on elastomeric bear- ings are therefore modeled as simple roller supports. The abut-
ings over the piers. The bridge deck is composed of a
190-mm-thick reinforced concrete slab supported by W760
⫻ 173 steel girders spaced at 2,400 mm. The abutment thickness
is 1,000 mm. The strength of the concrete used for the deck and
the substructures is 30 MPa.
The density of the sand and size of the piles are anticipated to
affect the behavior of the abutment-backfill system under thermal
variations. Thus, four different sand densities and two different
pile sizes, HP250⫻ 85 and HP310⫻ 125, are included in the
study. The selected piles cover a wide range of HP sections used
in bridge construction in North America. Additionally, they have a
superior displacement capacity under monotonic loading 共Dicleli
and Albhaisi 2004兲. Orientation of the piles for bending about
their strong and weak axes is also considered in the parametric
study. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the intensity and shape of
the backfill pressure, as well as the internal forces generated in
the abutments and the piles, are functions of the abutment height.
Accordingly, the abutment height is varied between 2 and 5 m in
the parametric study. The case with the 2-m-tall abutment repre- Fig. 2. Structural model of bridge

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005 / 355

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 3. Nonlinear modeling procedure for steel H-piles: 共a兲 actual
and idealized quadrilinear moment-curvature relationship; 共b兲
equivalent cantilever concept; 共c兲 linear moment and corresponding
curvature distributions; and 共d兲 moment-rotation relationship
ment is modeled with elastic beam elements using an effective
modulus of elasticity and considering the cracked properties of
the reinforced concrete section as the cracking moment of the
abutment is reached at a very small longitudinal displacement.
The deck-abutment joint is modeled by using a horizontal and a
vertical rigid elastic beam element. In the structural model, the
length of the pile that is effective in responding to the lateral
thermal-induced displacements is taken as 30 times the pile
width. The portion of the pile below this length is believed to
have a negligible effect on the pile-soil interaction behavior, since
the lateral movements of the piles at such depths are insignificant
共FHWA 1986兲. A roller support is introduced at the end of the pile
element to provide vertical stability. A detailed description of the
nonlinear modeling of the piles, as well as abutment-backfill and
soil-pile interaction modeling, is presented in the following sub-
sections.
Nonlinear Structural Modeling of Pile
The pile is modeled using 2D beam elements and the “nonlinear
frame-hinge” option in the SAP2000 program 共1998兲 to simulate
its inelastic behavior under thermal-induced longitudinal dis-
placements 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2004兲. The pile is first divided
into a number of segments, and a plastic hinge is introduced at the
top of each segment. The nonlinear behavior of the pile is then
simulated by defining an idealized quadrilinear moment rotation
relationship as the property of the plastic hinges.
An iterative analysis procedure is followed to obtain the ide-
alized quadrilinear moment-rotation relationship of the pile used
in the structural model. First the actual moment-curvature rela-
tionship of the pile is obtained for a typical axial load equal to
30% of the yield axial capacity of the pile 共Dicleli and Albhaisi
2004兲. The obtained moment-curvature relationship is then ideal-
ized by a quadrilinear curve, as illustrated in Fig. 3共a兲. In the
figure, ⌴Y and ⌽Y are the yield moment and yield curvature,
respectively; and ⌴ P and ⌽ P are the plastic moment and
the plastic curvature limit of the pile, respectively 共Dicleli and
Albhaisi 2004兲. The moment-curvature pairs 共⌴1 , ⌽1兲 and
共⌴2 , ⌽2兲 are intermediate points to closely simulate the actual
356 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005
J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.
moment-curvature relationship of the pile. Next, the pile is ideal-
ized as a cantilever with an equivalent length, Le, as illustrated in
Fig. 3共b兲. Then an iterative analysis procedure is followed, as
outlined below, to obtain the idealized moment-rotation relation-
ship of the pile that is used in the final pushover analysis of the
bridge at the end of the iterations.
1. Assume an equivalent length, Le, for the pile and a linear
moment distribution along the equivalent length of the pile,
with maximum amplitudes equal to ⌴Y , ⌴1, ⌴2 and ⌴ P, as
shown in Fig. 3共c兲.
2. Plot the curvature distributions corresponding to the four lin-
ear moment distributions along the equivalent length of the
pile, using the idealized quadrilinear moment-curvature rela-
tionship of the pile, as shown in Fig. 3共c兲.
3. Calculate the area under each curvature distribution to obtain
the pile top rotations, ␪Y , ␪1, ␪2, and ␪ P, corresponding to
moments ⌴Y , ⌴1, ⌴2, and ⌴ P, respectively.
4. Define the idealized quadrilinear moment-rotation curve of
the pile demonstrated in Fig. 3共d兲 to the program by using
the calculated moment-rotation pairs.
5. Apply the static pushover load on the structural model, and
conduct pushover analysis to obtain the moment and rotation
at the pile top.
6. Also, obtain the rotation corresponding to the moment at the
pile top from the idealized quadrilinear moment-rotation
curve shown in Fig. 3共d兲.
7. Compare the pile top rotation obtained from the pushover
analysis with the one obtained from the idealized quadrilin-
ear moment-rotation curve in Fig. 3共d兲. If the difference is
smaller than a tolerable limit, stop the iteration. Otherwise,
adjust the effective length of the pile to obtain the same
rotation as calculated by the pushover analysis.
8. Repeat Steps 1–7 until the moment and rotation at the pile
top obtained from the static pushover analysis falls on the
idealized moment-rotation curve shown in Fig. 3共d兲.
Sand-Pile Interaction Modeling
The sand-pile interaction for a particular point along the pile is
defined by a nonlinear load 共P兲-deformation 共Y兲 curve or P-Y
curve, where P is the lateral resistance of sand per unit length of
pile and Y is the lateral deflection. The computation of the lateral
force-displacement response of a pile driven in sand involves con-
structing a full set of P-Y curves along the pile to model the
force-deformation response of the sand. In this study, the actual
nonlinear P-Y curves of the sand are simply modeled by using an
elastoplastic curve relating the ultimate resistance of the sand per
unit length, Pu, to the lateral displacement of the sand, Y. For
sand, Pu is expressed as 共Haliburton 1971兲
Pu = kad p共␥x + q兲共tan8 ␩ − 1兲 + kod p共␥x + q兲tan4 ␩ tan ␾ 共1兲
where ka and ko⫽active and at-rest earth pressure coefficients,
respectively, for sand; ␥ = unit weight of the sand; ␾ = angle of
internal friction of the sand in degrees; d p = pile width; x = depth
below the ground surface; q = surcharge pressure; and ␩ is ex-
pressed as
冉
␩ = 45 +
␾
2
冊 共2兲
The elastic portion of the elastoplastic P-Y curve is defined
with a slope equal to the initial soil modulus, Es, for sand, as
follows 共Haliburton 1971兲:
 Es = kx 共3兲
where k = subgrade reaction modulus of sand.
For loose, medium, medium-dense, and dense sand, corre-
sponding values of k = 2,000, 6,000, 12,000, and 18,000 kN/ m3;
␥ = 16, 18, 19, and 20 kN/ m3; and ␾ = 30, 35, 37.5, and 40° are
used in the parametric study 共Bowles 1996兲.
Horizontal truss elements with plastic axial hinges at their
ends are attached at each node along the pile to model the non-
linear force-deformation behavior of the sand, as shown in Fig. 2.
The truss elements are spaced at 0.1 m at the upper 2 m portion
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of the pile element to ensure the accuracy of soil-pile interaction

behavior. The force-deformation 共P-Y兲 behavior of the sand is
defined by the yield force, Fty, of the plastic axial hinge intro-
duced at the end of each truss element and the elastic stiffness, Kt,
of the truss element. The yield force, Fty, is calculated by multi-
plying the ultimate soil resistance per unit length, Pu, by the tribu-
tary length, ht, between the nodes along the pile. Similarly, the
elastic stiffness of the truss element, Kt, is calculated by multiply-
ing the initial soil modulus, Es, by the tributary length, ht, be-
tween the nodes along the pile.
Fig. 4. Quadrilinear approximation for relationship between
abutment movement and passive earth pressure coefficient
It is noteworthy that when there is no abutment movement,
at-rest backfill pressure conditions exist and the force in each
truss element is equal to 共Ko␥bxthtS兲. This phenomenon is simu-
lated in the model by assigning a very large initial slope to the
K-⌬/H curve of Fig. 4.

Abutment-Backfill Interaction Modeling

The intensity and shape of the backfill pressure is a function of
the displacement or rotation of the abutment 共Clough and Duncan
1991; England and Tseng 2001兲. When the bridge elongates be-
cause of an increase in temperature, the actual earth pressure dis-
tribution and the backfill pressure coefficient, K, may change be-
tween at-rest, Ko, and passive, K p, depending on the amount of
displacement toward the backfill soil. In the structural model, the
backfill pressure at the abutments is therefore considered in cor-
relation with the magnitude of the displacement toward the back-
fill soil.
Clough and Duncan 共1991兲 obtained the variation of the back-
fill pressure coefficient, K, as a function of the abutment displace-
ment from experimental data and finite element analysis. This
relationship is implemented in the structural model to simulate the
abutment-backfill interaction effects under positive thermal varia-
tion.
Horizontal truss elements with nonlinear axial hinges at their
ends are attached at each node along the abutment to model the
nonlinear force-deformation behavior of the backfill under posi-
tive thermal variation, as illustrated in Fig. 2. The properties of
the nonlinear axial hinges are calculated based on Clough and
Duncan’s 共1991兲 backfill pressure coefficient-displacement rela-
tionship. This nonlinear relationship is simulated in the program
by using a quadrilinear relationship for the earth pressure coeffi-
cient, K, versus ⌬ / H 共abutment displacement/abutment height兲,
as illustrated in Fig. 4 for compacted and noncompacted backfill.
By using the coefficient of earth pressure, K, obtained from
Clough and Duncan’s 共1991兲 model, the passive earth pressure,
P p, at the location of each truss element is calculated as
Analysis Results on Shape and Intensity of Backfill
Pressure
Effect of Sand Density
The effect of the density or subgrade reaction modulus of sand on
the shape and intensity of the backfill pressure is demonstrated in
Fig. 5 for two different abutment-top-displacement-to-abutment-
height ratios 共⌬ / H兲, 0.009 and 0.025. As shown in the figure, the
shape of the backfill pressure is a function of the displacement of
the abutment toward the backfill. The pressure assumes a classical
triangular shape as the displacement of the abutment increases.
However, as shown in the same figure, the effect of the sand
density or subgrade reaction modulus on the shape of the backfill
pressure is negligible.
As anticipated, the intensity of the backfill pressure increases
as the displacement of the abutment toward the backfill increases.
At small abutment displacements 共⌬ / H = 0.009兲, the intensity of
the backfill pressure is slightly smaller for denser sands. This
outcome results from the larger restraining effects of the stiffer
pile-soil system, where the movement of the bottom portion of the
abutment toward the backfill is reduced. However, at larger abut-
ment displacements, the sand density or subgrade reaction modu-
lus does not influence the intensity of the backfill pressure notice-

P p = K␥bxt 共4兲
where ␥b = unit weight of backfill; and xt = distance from top of the
abutment. The calculated backfill-pressure is then multiplied by
the tributary area for each truss element to obtain the force, Ft,
exerted by the backfill, as follows:

Ft = K␥bxthtS 共5兲 Fig. 5. Shape and intensity of backfill pressure along 3-m-tall
where ht = tributary length between nodes along the abutment; and abutment for various abutment displacements and subgrade reaction
S = spacing of girders. modulus for sand

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005 / 357

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 6. Shape and intensity of backfill pressure along 3-m-tall
abutment for various abutment displacements and pile sizes
ably. The sand and the pile exceed their elastic limit at large
displacements, so the sand stiffness is rendered ineffective and
results in free movement of the bottom portion of the abutment
under increasing displacements. Consequently, at large displace-
ments 共⌬ / H = 0.025兲, comparable backfill pressure intensities are
produced for various sand densities or subgrade reaction modulus.
In general, the density or subgrade reaction modulus of sand is
found to have a negligible effect on the intensity of the backfill
pressure.
Effect of Pile Size and Orientation
The effect of the pile size and orientation on the shape and inten-
sity of the backfill pressure is displayed in Figs. 6 and 7, respec-
tively, for two different ⌬ / H ratios, 0.009 and 0.025. As indicated
in the figures, the pile size and orientation have only a negligible
effect on the shape of the backfill pressure.
At small abutment displacements 共⌬ / H = 0.009兲 the maximum
intensity of the backfill pressure is slightly smaller for larger piles
or piles oriented to bend about their strong axis. This outcome
again results from the larger restraining effects of the stiffer piles
where the movement of the bottom portion of the abutment to-
ward the backfill is reduced. However, at larger abutment dis-
placements, the pile size and orientation do not influence the in-
tensity of the backfill pressure noticeably. In general, the pile size
and orientation are found to have only a negligible effect on the
shape of the abutment backfill pressure and its intensity.
Effect of Abutment Size
The abutment height or flexibility is found to have a notable
effect on the shape of the backfill pressure, as indicated in Fig. 8.
Fig. 7. Shape and intensity of backfill pressure along 3-m-tall
abutment for various abutment displacements and pile orientations
358 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005
J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.
Fig. 8. Shape and intensity of backfill pressure for 3-m- and 5-m-tall
abutments and various displacements
The shape of the backfill pressure for the 3-m-tall abutment re-
sembles a classical triangular distribution, where the maximum
pressure intensity occurs at the bottom of the abutment. However,
for the 5-m-tall abutment, the shape of the backfill pressure is
parabolic where the maximum pressure intensity occurs at ap-
proximately 1 m above the abutment bottom. The bottom of the
taller and more flexible abutment is restrained more effectively by
the pile-soil system as the top of the abutment at the deck level is
pushed toward the backfill because of the elongation of the deck
under positive thermal variation. Much larger displacements are
produced at the abutment top relative to the displacements at the
abutment bottom for the taller, more flexible abutment, as indi-
cated in Fig. 9. This result explains the difference between the
shape of the backfill pressure for the 3-m- and 5-m-tall abut-
ments.
The backfill pressure intensity at any point along the abutment
height is equal to the product of the abutment displacement and
the backfill stiffness at that point. The rate of change of the back-
fill stiffness is constant along the abutment height, regardless of
the height of the abutment. However for the taller, more flexible
abutment, the rate of change of the displacement along the abut-
ment height is larger than that of the shorter abutment. Therefore,
for the taller abutment, the product of the abutment displacement
and the backfill stiffness produces larger backfill pressure inten-
sities away from the abutment bottom and produces smaller back-
fill pressure intensities closer to the abutment bottom, where the
displacements are much smaller. Nevertheless, the classical trian-
gular distribution may be considered as a reasonable conservative
estimate for design purposes.
As expected, the abutment height is found to have a remark-
able effect on the intensity of the backfill pressure. Fig. 8 indi-
cates that for ⌬ / H = 0.025, the maximum pressure intensity in-
creases 30% when the abutment height is increased from
Fig. 9. Relative displacement profile for 3-m- and 5-m-tall
abutments
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 10. Shape and intensity of backfill pressure along 3-m-tall
abutment for various abutment displacements and compacted and
noncompacted backfill
3 to 5 m. The increase in the maximum intensity of the backfill
pressure is not proportional to the abutment height, as in the case
of classical triangular pressure distribution. This result is again
attributed to the smaller displacements produced at the bottom of
the taller abutment because of the restraining effect of the pile-
soil system.
To study the effect of the abutment thickness on the shape and
intensity of the backfill pressure, the pushover analysis of the
bridge with 5-m-tall abutment is repeated, assuming abutment
thicknesses of 1.0 and 1.5 m. The analysis results reveal that an
increase in the abutment thickness within a practical range of
dimensional limits has a negligible effect on the shape and inten-
sity of the backfill pressure.
Effect of Backfill Compaction Level
The effect of the backfill compaction on the shape and intensity of
backfill pressure is illustrated in Fig. 10 for a 3-m-tall abutment.
Compacting the backfill results in very large backfill pressure
intensities. A 79 and 103% increase in the maximum backfill pres-
sure intensity is observed for ⌬ / H = 0.009 and 0.025, respectively,
when the backfill is compacted. The remarkable difference be-
tween the compacted and noncompacted backfill pressure inten-
sities may be explained using the K versus ⌬ / H relationship il-
lustrated in Fig. 4. For a relatively small value of ⌬ / H, the
coefficient of earth pressure for the compacted backfill is about
twice that for noncompacted backfill. This large difference in the
coefficient of earth pressure doubles the backfill pressure intensity
at small displacements where the backfill pressure has not reached
full passive state of failure. Consequently, it is recommended that
noncompacted backfill be used behind integral abutments to re-
duce the resistance of the backfill to the movement of the bridge
because of positive thermal variations. In some cases, closed-cell
foam material 共Geofoam兲 may be used behind the abutments to
alleviate the intensities of the backfill pressure 共Horvath 2000兲.
Analysis Results on Abutment’s Internal Forces
Effect of Sand Density
Fig. 11 displays the variation of the abutment’s maximum bend-
ing moment as a function of ⌬ / H for various sand subgrade re-
action moduli. As the sand density or subgrade reaction modulus
increases, the abutment’s bending moment also increases. For the
3 m abutment and ⌬ / H = 0.04, the abutment’s maximum bending
moment increases from 1,080 kN· m to 1,275 kN· m when the
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005 / 359
J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.
Fig. 11. Variation of abutment’s bending moment as function of
abutment displacement for various abutment heights and subgrade
reaction moduli for sand
subgrade reaction modulus of sand is increased from
6,000 kN/ m3 for medium-density sand to 18,000 kN/ m3 for
dense sand. This 18% increase in the abutment’s bending moment
is mainly caused by the larger lateral resistance of the pile-soil
system that restrains the bottom of the abutment as its top moves
with the deck because of positive thermal variations. This obvi-
ously produces larger shear and bending moment in the abutment.
Effect of Pile Size and Orientation
The effect of the pile size and orientation on the abutment’s maxi-
mum bending moment is illustrated in Fig. 12. At small abutment
displacements where the backfill and the foundation soil remain
within the elastic limits, the size and orientation of the piles do
not have a remarkable effect on the magnitude of the abutment’s
bending moment and shear force. However, at larger abutment
displacements, as the size of the pile increases, the abutment’s
maximum bending moment and the shear force increase, as well.
For example, for an abutment’s top displacement of ⌬ = 0.08 m,
the abutment’s maximum bending moment increases by 12%
when the pile size changes from HP250⫻ 85 to HP310⫻ 125.
Similarly, an 18% increase in the abutment’s maximum bending
moment is observed when the pile is rotated to bend about its
strong axis. This outcome is again caused by the larger lateral
resistance of the stiffer pile-soil system that restrains the bottom
of the abutment as its top moves with the deck because of positive
thermal variations. This obviously produces larger shear forces
and bending moments in the abutment.
Fig. 12. Variation of bending moment in the 3-m-tall abutment for
various pile sizes and orientations
 Derivation of Equations—Internal Forces
of Abutment

The external forces acting on the abutment of an integral bridge

subjected to positive thermal variation are the backfill pressure, as
well as shear force and bending moment transferred by the pile to
the abutment, as illustrated in Fig. 14. The gravitational loads are
not included in the determination of the internal forces 共shear
force and bending moment兲 in the abutment, since their effect is
limited by the magnitude of the plastic moment capacity of the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

pile and the corresponding shear force, as demonstrated by the

Fig. 13. Variation of bending moment in the 3-m-tall abutment for
various subgrade reaction moduli for sand and compacted and
noncompacted backfill
Effect of Abutment Size
As anticipated, the abutment height has a noticeable effect on the
abutment’s maximum bending moment, as indicated in Fig. 12.
Taller abutments are obviously subjected to larger shear and
bending moment because of their larger surface area exposed to
backfill pressure as they are pushed toward the backfill under the
effect of positive thermal variation. For instance, the abutment’s
maximum bending moment increases from
2,560 KN· m to 3,600 KN· m when the height of the abutment in-
creases from 3 to 5 m for k = 6,000 kN/ m3 and ⌬ / H = 0.011, rep-
resenting a 140% increase in the abutment’s maximum bending
moment. Limiting the abutment height is one of the most impor-
tant factors to be considered in designing integral bridges. Inte-
gral bridges with stub abutments are therefore extensively used by
many transportation agencies in North America.
To study the effect of the abutment thickness on the magnitude
of the internal forces in the abutment, the pushover analysis of the
bridge with 5-m-tall abutment was repeated, assuming abutment
thicknesses of 1.0 and 1.5 m. The analysis results revealed that an
increase in the abutment thickness within the practical range of
dimensional limits has a negligible effect on the internal forces in
the abutment.
free body diagrams of the abutment presented in Fig. 14. The
plastic moment capacity of the pile may be reached at a small
thermal-induced displacement caused by the combined effects of
superimposed dead load, live load, and temperature expansion.
This assumption is also supported by the field measurements of
an integral abutment bridge near Rochester, New York, where the
measured pile strains at the abutments indicated the onset of
yielding 共Lawyer et al. 2000兲. Therefore, when determining the
maximum shear and bending moment in the abutment, the piles
may conservatively be assumed to have reached their plastic mo-
ment capacity.
On the basis of observations from the static pushover analysis,
the shape of the backfill pressure is conservatively approximated
as triangular for practical purposes. The intensity of the backfill
pressure as a function of the abutment displacement and the shear
and moment transferred from the piles to the abutment are then
formulated in the following subsections. Next, analytical expres-
sions are developed to calculate the maximum shear force and
bending moment in the abutment.

Effect of Level of Backfill Compaction

Static pushover analysis of the bridge has revealed that compact-
ing the backfill results in very large shear forces and bending
moments in the abutment. The effect of the backfill compaction
on the abutment’s maximum bending moment is illustrated in Fig.
13. The figure indicates that compacting the backfill results in a
27% increase in the abutment’s maximum bending moment at a
displacement of ⌬ = 0.04 m and for medium-density sand 共k
= 6,000 kN/ m3兲. However, for dense sand 共k = 18,000 kN/ m3兲,
compacting the backfill results in only an 18% increase in the
abutment’s maximum bending moment for the same displacement
of ⌬ = 0.04 m, as shown in Fig. 13. This result demonstrates that
the increase in the internal forces in the abutment caused by the
compaction of the backfill is smaller for sands with larger density
because the internal forces in the abutment are generated by the
loads exerted by both the backfill pressure and the pile-soil sys-
tem on the abutment. For denser sands, the contribution of the
pile-soil system to the internal forces in the abutment becomes Fig. 14. 共a兲 Forces applied on abutment; 共b兲 free body diagram at
larger. Consequently, the percentage of the contribution of the moment critical section; 共c兲 free body diagram at shear critical
backfill pressure to the internal forces in the abutment is reduced. section

360 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.

 pile, including the effect of the axial gravitational loads, using a
theoretical equivalent pile shear length, lev, as shown in Fig. 15.
Thus,

Mp
Vp = 共8兲
l ev
The equivalent shear length of the pile is expressed as a function
of the pile’s critical length as follows:

lev = ␭lc 共9兲

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where ␭⫽constant to be determined; and lc = critical length of the

Fig. 15. Equivalent shear length of pile
pile. This critical length is defined as the depth below which the
displacements and bending moments at the pile head have little
effect and is calculated by using the following equation 共Girton et
Formulation of Backfill Pressure Intensity as Function
al. 1991兲:
of Abutment Movement
Clough and Duncan’s 共1991兲 model for the variation of the back-
fill pressure coefficient, K, as a function of the abutment displace-
lc = 4 冑
4
E pI p
kh
共10兲
ment is used to calculate the intensity of the backfill pressure.
Accordingly, the earth pressure coefficient, K, as a function of the where E p = modulus of elasticity of the pile; I p = moment of iner-
top displacement, ⌬, of the abutment toward the backfill is ex- tia; and kh = average initial soil modulus calculated using Eq. 共3兲
pressed as follows: by setting x equal to the distance from the pile top to the middle
of the critical length, lc, where the soil stiffness can be averaged
K = Ko + m 冉冊
⌬
H
n
共6兲
共Girton et al. 1991兲. Since lc is not known initially, an iterative
analysis procedure is followed to calculate the value of x. For the
static pushover cases studied, the iterative analysis converged to
where Ko = at-rest earth pressure coefficient; H = height of abut- an x-value expressed as follows:
ment; and m and n⫽constants to be determined. For compacted
and noncompacted backfill, Ko is obtained as 1.0 and 0.40, re- x = H + 8d p 共11兲
spectively from the idealized K versus ⌬ / H curve of Clough and
where H = abutment height.
Duncan 共1991兲, which is illustrated in Fig. 4. To calculate the
To determine the constant ␭, Eq. 共8兲 is first set equal to the
constants m and n for compacted and noncompacted backfill, two
shear force at the top of the pile obtained from the static pushover
pairs of intermediate points 共K , ⌬ / H兲 are picked up from Clough
analysis; and the equivalent shear length, lev, of the pile is calcu-
and Duncan’s 共1991兲 curve. The two pairs of 共K , ⌬ / H兲 are then
lated. Then the equivalent shear length is substituted in Eq. 共9兲 to
substituted in Eq. 共6兲 to obtain two sets of nonlinear equations to
calculate the constant ␭. Table 2 tabulates the values of ␭ for the
calculate the values of m and n. The values of m and n are ob-
strong axis bending of two piles and four subgrade-reaction
tained as 10 and 0.33, respectively, for the compacted backfill and
moduli of sand used in the static pushover analysis. From the data
28 and 0.56, respectively, for the noncompacted backfill. Eq. 共6兲
presented in Table 2, a value of ␭ = 0.28 is found reasonable for
is then used to calculate the intensity, P, of the backfill pressure at
piles bending about their strong axis. Following the same proce-
any distance x from the abutment top as
dure, a value of ␭ = 0.33 is found reasonable for piles bending

冋 冉 冊册
P = Ko + m
⌬
H
n
␥x 共7兲
about their weak axis. Accordingly, an average value of ␭ = 0.30 is
considered appropriate for calculating the shear forces transferred
from the piles to the abutment.
where ␥ = unit weight of backfill.
Formulation of Maximum Internal Forces of Abutment
Formulation of Forces Transferred by Piles
The maximum shear force in the abutment is assumed to take
The shear force, V p, at the abutment-pile connection can be ex- place at a distance, d, below the deck soffit, where d is the effec-
pressed as a function of the plastic moment capacity, M p, of the tive depth of the abutment cross section, as illustrated in Fig. 14.

Table 2. Values of ␭ for Piles Oriented to Bend about Their Strong Axis
Pile 310⫻ 125 Pile 250⫻ 85

H=3 m H=5 m H=3 m H=5 m

k lc lev lc l ev lc l ev lc l ev
共kN/ m3兲 共m兲 共m兲 ␭ 共m兲 共m兲 ␭ 共m兲 共m兲 ␭ 共m兲 共m兲 ␭
2,000 5.96 1.79 0.30 5.51 1.65 0.30 5.01 1.45 0.29 4.61 1.29 0.28
6,000 4.53 1.31 0.29 4.19 1.17 0.28 3.81 1.07 0.28 3.50 0.95 0.27
12,000 3.81 1.03 0.27 3.52 0.95 0.27 3.20 0.90 0.28 2.94 0.82 0.28
18,000 3.44 0.89 0.26 3.18 0.83 0.26 2.61 0.68 0.26 2.66 0.72 0.27

JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005 / 361

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.


Fig. 16. Comparison between the bending moment in abutment
bridges 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2003兲. The focus of this study is to
formulate the maximum length limits of integral bridges on the
basis of the flexural capacity of the abutments and to estimate
practical height limits for the abutments to facilitate the construc-
tion of longer integral bridges.
To estimate the maximum displacement capacity, ⌬max, of in-
tegral bridges on the basis of the abutment’s flexural capacity, first
the bending moment, M a, in Eq. 共15兲 is replaced by the flexural
resistance, M r, of the abutment. From this new equation, the
maximum displacement capacity of the bridge is obtained as

再冉 冊再 冋 冑 册冎
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

obtained from static pushover analyses and Eq. 共15兲

H 1 4
k共H + 8d p兲
⌬max = M r − n pM p 1 + 共H − hD兲
m1/n ␣E␥S

册 冎
2E pI p

冋
On the basis of the free body diagram illustrated in Fig. 14, the 1/n
abutment’s maximum shear force, Va, per girder spacing, is cal- 6
⫻ − Ko 共16兲
culated as 共hD + 2H兲共H − hD兲2

1 The displacement at one end of the bridge 共the abutment’s top

Va = ␣ES␥K关H2 − 共hD + d兲2兴 + n pV p 共12兲 displacement兲 due to positive thermal variation is expressed as
2
where ␣E = load factor for backfill pressure; S = girder spacing: L
⌬ = ␣T⌬T 共17兲
and n p = number of piles per girder spacing. By substituting Eqs. 2
共6兲 and 共8兲, and then Eqs. 共9兲–共11兲 with ␭ = 0.30 into Eq. 共12兲 and where ␣T = load factor for thermal effects, which is specified as
rearranging, Va is expressed as 1.2 by AASHTO 共1998兲; ␣ = coefficient of thermal expansion for
1
冋 冉 冊册
Va = ␣ES␥ Ko + m
2
⌬
H
n
关H2 − 共hD + d兲2兴 + n pM p 冑
4
k共H + 8d p兲
2E pI p
the deck’s material; ⌬T = positive thermal variation; and L = total
length of the bridge. Setting the preceding equation equal to the
maximum displacement capacity, ⌬max, of the bridge and solving
共13兲 for L, the maximum length, Lmax, of integral bridges on sand soil
on the basis of the abutment’s flexural capacity is obtained as

再冉 冊再 冋
The maximum bending moment in the abutment is assumed to
take place just below the deck soffit, as shown in Fig. 14. On the 2H 1
basis of the free body diagram illustrated in Fig. 14, the abut- Lmax = M r − n pM p 1 + 共H − hD兲
␣T⌬Tm1/n ␣E␥S

冑 册冎冋 册 冎
ment’s maximum bending moment, M a, per girder spacing is cal-
1/n
culated as 4
k共H + 8d p兲 6
⫻

冋 册
− Ko
hD共H − hD兲2 共H − hD兲3 2E pI p 共hD + 2H兲共H − hD兲2
M a = ␣ES␥K + + n p关M p + V p共H − hD兲兴 共18兲
2 3
共14兲 AASHTO 共1998兲 specifies minimum and maximum tempera-
tures for the design of bridges under thermal effects. Assuming a
By substituting Eqs. 共6兲 and 共8兲 and then Eqs. 共9兲–共11兲 with ␭ construction temperature of 15° C, and using the maximum tem-
= 0.30 into the Eq. 共14兲 and rearranging, M a is expressed as peratures specified by AASHTO 共1998兲, the positive temperature

冋 冉 冊 册冋
M a = ␣ES␥ Ko + m
⌬
H
n
hD共H − hD兲2 共H − hD兲3
2
+
3
册 ranges for steel and concrete bridges are calculated as 35 and
12° C, respectively, for both moderate and cold climates.

冋 册
Fig. 17 displays the maximum length limits for steel integral

+ n pM p 1 + 共H − hD兲 冑
4
k共H + 8d p兲
2E pI p
共15兲

Fig. 16 displays the abutment’s maximum bending moments

obtained from the static pushover analysis and those obtained
from Eq. 共15兲 as a function of the subgrade reaction modulus of
sand for ␣E = 1.0, ⌬ = 0.045 m, and an abutment height of 3 m.
The figure demonstrates that the results obtained from Eq. 共15兲
are generally in good agreement with those obtained from static
pushover analysis.

Derivation of Equations for Integral Bridge Length

Limits Based on Flexural Capacity of Abutments

The displacement capacity of the piles under thermal loading, as

well as the flexural capacity of the abutment, may govern the
maximum displacement capacity and hence the maximum length Fig. 17. Maximum length limits of integral bridges based on flexural
of integral bridges. The shear capacity of the abutment is found capacity of abutments and displacement capacity of piles under
not to be critical in determining the maximum length of integral thermal loading

362 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005

J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.

 bridges located in moderate climates as a function of the abut-
ment height. In the figure, the maximum length limits, as deter-
mined by both the flexural capacity of the abutments and the
displacement capacities of the piles 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2003,
2004兲, are plotted for a range of pile sizes, assuming noncom-
pacted backfill behind the abutments. The piles are oriented to
bend about their strong axis and are made of steel with a yield
strength of 250 MPa 共A36 steel兲. Generally, in stiff soil condi-
tions, predrilled oversize holes filled with loose sand are provided
along the top portion of the pile to reduce the resistance of the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
surrounding stiff soil to lateral movements of the pile. Accord-
ingly, the bridges are conservatively assumed to be built on
medium-density sand. The practical range of abutment thickness
used by many departments of transportation in North America is
0.8 to 1.2 m. Accordingly, in the calculation of the abutment flex-
ural capacity, the abutment thickness is assumed to be 1.0 m and
the reinforcement is assumed to be #25 bars spaced at 200 mm.
As shown in Fig. 17, the flexural capacity of the abutments
does not govern the maximum length limits of steel integral
bridges when the abutment height is limited to 3.5 m. Similarly,
for concrete integral bridges, the height of the abutments must be
limited to 4.5 m so that the maximum length limit of the bridge is
governed by the failure of the piles under cyclic thermal-induced
loading 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2003兲. Essentially, many transporta-
tion agencies in North America use stub abutments 共abutments
with a cantilever portion of approximately 1.0 m below the deck
soffit兲 to reduce the detrimental effects of thermal-induced move-
ments on the components of the bridge. In such bridges, the flex-
ural capacity of stub abutments is not critical in determining the
maximum length limits of integral bridges 共length limits fall in
the 2,800– 4,200 m range兲 and the limits are determined by the
displacement capacity of the piles supporting the abutments
共length limits range between 80 and 320 m and are based on the
size of the piles, the type of deck material, and the climatic con-
ditions of the bridge 共Dicleli and Albhaisi 2003, 2004兲. Further-
more, orienting the piles to bend about their weak axis results in
smaller forces transferred from the piles to the abutment, as indi-
cated in Fig. 12. Thus, orientation of the piles for bending about
their weak axis allows more room for increasing the abutment
height if necessary. Additionally, a pinned connection detail be-
tween the abutment and the pile head may be used to reduce the
flexural demand on the abutment, since no moment will be trans-
ferred from the pile head to the abutment. It will allow for a larger
abutment height without increasing the thickness of the abutment.
Conclusions
The present study produced the following conclusions:
• The magnitude of the internal forces in the abutments and the
backfill pressure intensities are functions of the thermal-
induced abutment displacements. Therefore, the internal forces
in the abutments need to be calculated in correlation with
thermal-induced displacements of the bridge. For this purpose,
analytical equations are derived to calculate the abutment’s
maximum shear forces and bending moments as a function of
the thermal-induced abutment displacement, the subgrade re-
action modulus of sand, and properties of the steel H-pile.
• In general, the density of the sand and the size and orientation
of the steel H-piles are found to have only negligible effects on
the shape and intensity of the backfill pressure. These negli-
gible effects gradually diminish as the displacement of the
abutment toward the backfill increases.
JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005 / 363
J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.
• The sand density is observed to affect the magnitude of the
internal forces in the abutment. The internal forces in the abut-
ments increase for denser sands. Therefore, the effect of sand
density needs to be considered in the design of integral
bridges.
• At small abutment displacements where the backfill and the
sand around the piles remain within the elastic limits, the size
and orientation of the piles do not have a significant effect on
the magnitude of the abutment’s bending moment and shear
force. However, at larger abutment displacements, as the size
of the pile increases, the maximum bending moment and the
shear force in the abutment increase, as well.
• The abutment height is found to have a noticeable effect on the
shape of the backfill pressure distribution and magnitude of the
shear force and bending moment in the abutment. The pressure
distribution assumes a triangular shape for abutments shorter
than 3 m and a parabolic shape for abutments taller than 5 m.
Nevertheless, the classical triangular distribution may be con-
sidered to be a reasonable conservative estimate for design
purposes. As anticipated, the bending moment and shear force
are larger for taller abutments.
• Variations in the abutment thickness within the practical range
of dimensional limits 共1 – 1.5 m兲 have only a negligible effect
on the shape and intensity of the backfill pressure and on the
internal forces in the abutment.
• Compacting the backfill results in very large backfill pressure
intensities, shear forces, and bending moments in the abut-
ments. Therefore, using noncompacted backfill is strongly rec-
ommended in integral bridges to reduce the abutment shear
and flexural forces and to maximize the length limits of inte-
gral bridges as determined by the flexural capacity of the abut-
ment.
• For abutments taller than 4 m, the flexural capacity of the
abutment may control the maximum length limit of integral
bridges under positive temperature variation. Therefore, stub
abutments are strongly recommended in integral bridge con-
struction.
• The shear capacity of the abutment is not found to be critical
in determining the maximum length limits of integral bridges.
• Generally, the orientation of the piles about their weak axis of
bending is recommended for enhancing the maximum length
limits of integral bridges, as determined by the flexural capac-
ity of the abutment.
• A pinned connection detail between the abutment and the pile
head may be used to reduce the flexural demand on the abut-
ment, since no moment will be transferred from the pile head
to the abutment. It will also help increase the maximum length
limits of integral bridges, as determined by the flexural capac-
ity of the abutment.
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
共AASHTO兲. 共1998兲. LRFD bridge design specifications, 2nd Ed.,
AASHTO, Washington, D.C.
Bowles, J. E. 共1996兲. Foundation analysis and design, 5th Ed., McGraw-
Hill, New York.
Burdette, E. G., Ingram, E. E., Goodpasture, D. W., and Deatherage, J. H.
共2002兲. “Behavior of concrete integral abutments.” Concr. Int., 59–63.
Burke, M. P., Jr. 共1988兲. “Bridge deck joints.” NCHRP Synthesis of High-
way Practice, No. 141, Transportation Research Board, Washington,
D.C.
 Burke, M. P., Jr. 共1990a兲. “Integral bridge design is on the rise.” Modern
Steel Constr., 30共4兲, 9–11.
Burke, M. P., Jr. 共1990b兲. “Integral Bridges.” Transp. Res. Rec., Trans-
portation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Burke, M. P., Jr. 共1994兲. “Semi-integral bridges: Movements and forces.”
Transp. Res. Rec., Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.,
1–7.
Clough, G. M., and Duncan, J. M. 共1991兲. Foundation engineering hand-
book, 2nd Ed., H. Y. Fang, ed., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Dicleli, M. 共2000兲. “A rational design approach for prestressed-concrete-
girder integral bridges.” Eng. Struct., 22共3兲, 230–245.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by KMUTT KING MONGKUT'S UNIV TECH on 10/19/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Dicleli, M., and Albhaisi, S. M. 共2003兲. “Maximum lengths of integral
abutment bridges based on the strength of abutments and the perfor-
mance of steel H-piles under cyclic thermal loading.” BU-CEC-03-01,
Dept. of Civil Engineering and Construction, Bradley Univ., Peoria,
Ill.
Dicleli, M., and Albhaisi, S. M. 共2004兲. “Effect of cyclic thermal loading
on the performance of steel H-piles in integral bridges with stub-
abutments.” J. Constr. Steel Res., 60共2兲, 161–182.
England, G. L., and Tseng, N. C. M. 共2001兲. “Towards the design of soil
loading for integral bridges—Experimental evaluation.” Dept. of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College, London.
Federal Highway Administration 共FHWA兲. 共1986兲. “Seismic design of
highway bridge foundations. II: Design procedures and guidelines.”
Publication No. FHWA-RD-94-052, Federal Highway Administration,
U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Washington, D.C.
Girton, D. D., Hawkinson, T. R., and Greimann, L. F. 共1991兲. “Validation
of design recommendations for integral-abutment piles.” J. Struct.
Eng., 117共7兲, 2117–2134.
Haliburton, T. A. 共1971兲. “Soil structure interaction; Numerical analysis
of beams and beam columns.” Technical Publication No. 14, School
of Civil Engineering, Oklahoma State Univ. Stillwater, Okla.
364 / JOURNAL OF BRIDGE ENGINEERING © ASCE / MAY/JUNE 2005
J. Bridge Eng. 2005.10:354-364.
Horvath, J. S. 共2000兲. “Integral abutment bridges: Problems and innova-
tive solutions using EPS Geofoam and other geosynthetics.” Manhat-
tan College Research Rep. No. CE/GE-00-2, Manhattan College,
School of Engineering, Civil Engineering Dept., Bronx, N.Y.
Husain, I., and Bagnariol, D. 共1996兲. “Integral-abutment bridges.” Rep.
SO-96-01, Ontario Ministry of Transportation, St. Catharines, Ontario,
Canada.
Illinois Department of Transportation 共IDOT兲. 共1997兲. Metric bridge de-
sign manual, IDOT, Springfield, Ill.
Ingram, E. E., Burdette, E. G., Goodpasture, D. W., and Deatherage, J. H.
共2003兲. “Evaluation of applicability of typical column design equa-
tions to steel H-piles supporting integral abutments.” Eng. J., 50–58.
Lawyer, A., French, C., and Shield, C. K. 共2000兲. “Field performance of
integral abutment bridge.” Transp. Res. Rec., National Science Foun-
dation, Washington, D.C., 108–117.
Lehane, B. M., Keogh, D. L., and O’Brien, E. J. 共1999兲. “Simplified
elastic model for restraining effects of backfill soil on integral
bridges.” Comput. Struct., 73, 303–313.
SAP2000. 共1998兲. “Integrated finite element analysis and design of struc-
tures.” Computers and Structures, Berkeley, Calif.
Soltani, A. A., and Kukreti, A. R. 共1992兲. “Performance evaluation of
integral-abutment bridges.” Transp. Res. Rec., Transportation Re-
search Board, Washington, D.C., 17–25.
Steiger, D. J. 共1993兲. “Jointless bridges provide fuel for controversy.”
Roads Bridges, 31共11兲, 48–54.
Wolde-Tinsae, A. M., Klinger, J. E., and Mullangi, R. 共1988a兲. Bridge
deck joint rehabilitation or retrofitting—final report, Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Md.
Wolde-Tinsae, A. M., Klinger, J. E., and White, E. 共1988b兲. “Perfor-
mance of jointless bridges.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 2共2兲, 111–128.