ANTEC

THE DEVELOPMENT OF RECYCLED THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE BRIDGES

Manuscript ID:

Wiley - Manuscript type:

Date Submitted by the Author: Complete List of Authors:

r Fo
Journal: Keywords: Abstract:

ANTEC PENG-11-2010-0447.R1 Proceeding 11-Jan-2011

Lynch, Jennifer; Rutgers University, Materials Science and Engineering Nosker, Thomas; Rutgers University, Materials Science and Engineering Composites < Polymers, HDPE < Polymers, Building and Construction < Markets Reinforced thermoplastic composite lumber (RTCL) sourced from recycled materials is an emerging technology available for heavily loaded infrastructure applications. RTCL materials offer a sustainable alternative and many advantages over traditional construction materials, like wood and steel. Research, development, and experimental projects over the past 15 years, have culminated in several RTCL high load capacity military installations. RTCL advantages and high load capacity infrastructure applications are reviewed in this work.

Re

vi

ew

On

ly

Page 1 of 6

ANTEC

THE DEVELOPMENT OF RECYCLED THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE BRIDGES

Jennifer K. Lynch and Thomas J. Nosker, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ Abstract
Reinforced thermoplastic composite lumber (RTCL) sourced from recycled materials is an emerging technology available for heavily loaded infrastructure applications. RTCL materials offer a sustainable alternative and many advantages over traditional construction materials, like wood and steel. Research, development, and experimental projects over the past 15 years, have culminated in several RTCL high load capacity military installations. RTCL advantages and high load capacity infrastructure applications are reviewed in this work. Since 1998, there have been three major bridge projects using these RTCL materials. Each installation provided a learning experience that benefited the next one. The first RTCL bridge that was cost-competitive on a first-cost basis due to its innovative design was built in Wharton State Forest, NJ in 2002 with a maximum load capacity of 36 tons. In 2009, two bridges were built at Fort Bragg, NC with a maximum load capacity of 73 tons for tracked vehicles and 88 tons for wheeled vehicles. In 2010, two railway bridges were built at Fort Eustis, VA with a maximum load capacity of 130 tons. The details of these three bridge projects are presented in this work.

Introduction

High-density polyethylene (HDPE) based recycled plastic lumber (RPL) emerged in the United States marketplace in the early 1990s. This original RPL suffered from low modulus and low creep resistance. Research efforts were made to enhance these properties by reinforcing the HDPE with post-industrial polystyrene (PS) and using immiscible polymer blend (IMPB) concepts.[1][2,3] The optimum properties for this PS/HDPE blend occur when a dual phase, co-continuous structure exists.[4] Further enhancements involved fiberglass reinforcement of polypropylene (PP) followed by melt-blending with HDPE to form fiberglass reinforced PP (FRPP)/HDPE blends.[5] The post-industrial sourced FRPP is automobile bumper scrap. Though these materials displayed engineering-grade properties, they were not time tested and had slow acceptance into the marketplace. The first structural application of PS/HDPE and FRPP/HDPE materials was railroad crossties.[6][7,8] In 1998, the first vehicular bridge at Fort Leonard Wood, MO was built with PS/HDPE components and steel I-beams as sub-structure. The bridge has a 24-foot span and maximum load rating of 30 tons. While the lifetime cost was lower due to the lack of maintenance required, the initial installed cost was higher than for other traditional materials. However, the military determined that after eight years, the low lifetime cost would out-weigh the higher initial costs. After eight years passed, the Fort Leonard Wood bridge looked and behaved as it did in 1998. This was the pivotal bridge and moment in time when the military realized the potential of RTCL materials for heavily loaded infrastructure applications.

r Fo

Materials
Two HDPE based RTCL materials were used in these infrastructure projects, including PS/HDPE and FRPP/HDPE. Both RTCL materials utilize IMPB technology and are sourced from the post-consumer and post-industrial waste streams. These RTCL materials were developed at Rutgers University and are currently manufactured by Axion International, Inc. Both RTCL materials have a specific gravity of about 0.85 and are one eighth the density of steel, but the resulting specific strength (strength/unit weight) is greater than many steels. Degradation due to natural UV direct sunlight does not exceed a rate of 0.003 inches/year.[9] The PS/HDPE material is an IMPB with a targeted composition ratio of 35/65 % PS/HDPE to achieve dual phase, co-continuity and enhanced mechanical properties at this ratio. During processing, the lower viscosity PS phase receives the majority of the shear forces and, subsequently, orients along the extrusion direction (see Figure 1). Using IMPB concepts as a processing trick, the resulting mechanical properties are at or above the law of mixtures. The (FRPP)/HDPE material capitalizes on the IMPB concepts and goes a step further. The key is to realize that the lower viscosity phase orients during processing. By melt-blending the lower viscosity phase first with fiberglass to form FRPP, followed by melt-blending the FRPP with HDPE, the result is fiberglass self-alignment during processing, as shown in Figure 2. The oriented FRPP/HDPE composite requires 1/3 of the fibers as a randomly oriented fiberglass reinforced polymer to achieve the same properties. This translates to lower costs and less wear on the processing equipment.

Re

vi

ew

On

ly

ANTEC

Page 2 of 6

is almost three times as tough as the standard processed RTCL.

Figure 3. SEM micrograph of PS/HDPE produced by standard processing at 8.57 m scale.

Figure 1. SEM micrograph showing the alignment of PS during processing of 35/65 % PS/HDPE. The PS was leached with toluene and appears black. The remaining gray phase is the HDPE matrix.

Figure 2. SEM micrograph showing self-alignment of fiberglass in the FRPP/HDPE composite. Further processing tricks using advanced polymer processing techniques, has resulted in very fine microstructures that impart enhanced toughness without sacrificing modulus or strength. The following example uses two different processing methods to produce the same RTCL, PS/HDPE. The first method uses standard single screw extrusion followed by injection molding. The second method uses single screw extrusion with axial fluted extensional mixing elements (AFEM) followed by injection molding. The first method produces a coarsegrained structure with approximately 10 m HDPE domains, as seen in Figure 3 and is designated standard processing. The second method produces a very finegrained structure with approximately 1m HDPE domains, as seen in Figure 4 and is designated advanced processing. The PS phase was leached with toluene for better contrast. The corresponding tensile stress-strain curves are presented in Figure 5. The modulus and strength values are similar; however, the % strain at fracture is greatly different. The standard processed specimen fractures at 5 % strain, while the advanced processed specimen fractures at more than 12 % strain. The area under the curves corresponds to the materials toughness. The advanced processing yields a RTCL that

r Fo

Re vi
Figure 4. SEM micrograph of PS/HDPE produced by advanced processing at 8.57 m scale.

ew

Figure 5. Tensile stress-strain curves corresponding to PS/HDPE processed by standard (red) and advanced (blue) methods.

On ly

Page 3 of 6

ANTEC

Project Descriptions
The Wharton State Forest, NJ vehicular bridge built in 2002 is the first bridge to use RTCL I-beams. All bridge components are PS/HDPE, except the wooden pilings that were already in place. The sub-structure is an interlocking I-beam design, as shown in Figure 6. The pile caps are large I-beams with small I-beams nestled in the web of the large I-beam. The top surface of the pile cap also serves as decking. Tongue and groove decking was laid parallel to the pile caps and across the small Ibeams. The completed bridge has a 56-foot span, weighs 30,000 lbs, and has a maximum load capacity of 36 tons and is displayed in Figure 7.

steel sill plate pre-drilled with holes to align girders, Ibeam girders spanning the length of the bridge through bolted to the pile caps and placed edge to edge across the bridge width, smaller I-beams nestled in the web of and perpendicular to the larger I-beam girders, deck boards affixed to the girders with standard deck screws, and curbing and a railing affixed to the edges of the bridge. Refer to Figure 8, Figure 9, and Figure 10. The width of both bridges is 16 feet and 6 inches, and the span of T8518 and T-8519 is 42 feet and 56 feet, respectively. The maximum load capacity of both bridges is 73 tons for tracked vehicles and 88 tons for wheeled vehicles. Sensors were installed at multiple locations on bridge T-8518 to record strain, displacement, and temperature every hour. In addition, the same measurements are recorded whenever a vehicle of sufficient load passes over the bridge. This future monitoring will provide further validation of the RTCL material in high load capacity bridges, and it will provide lessons learned to aid in design and construction improvements.

Figure 6. Wharton State Forest, NJ bridge showing interlocking I-beam sub-structure.

Figure 7. Completed Wharton State Forest, NJ bridge. The two bridges built at Fort Bragg, NC in 2009 are composed of the FRPP/HDPE RTCL material and were built with the purpose of supporting M1 Abrams tank loads (71 tons). The bridges are designated as T-8518 and T-8519. The basic construction design includes rows of pilings, with pins holding I-beam pile caps to each row, a

r Fo Re

vi ew
Figure 8. Fort Bragg bridge T-8518 showing three rows of pilings with large I-beam pile caps and steel sill plate affixed atop pile cap. Figure 9. Fort Bragg, NC bridge T-8518 showing I-beam girders spanning the length of the bridge.

On

ly

ANTEC

Page 4 of 6

Figure 10. Completed T-8518 bridge at Fort Bragg, NC. Railway bridges 3 and 7 at Fort Eustis, VA were constructed in 2010 and are composed of the FRPP/HDPE RTCL material. Virtually all bridge components including pilings, pile caps, girders, and crossties are made from the recycled post consumer and industrial plastics that would otherwise be discarded into landfills. These RTCL bridges were designed and built to carry the Cooper E60 load and the 260 kips alternate live load and have a maximum load capacity of 130 tons. The span of bridges 3 and 7 are 40 and 75 feet, respectively. The assembly time was significantly reduced by creating preassembled panels in the factory, as shown in Figure 11. The construction of bridge 3 is detailed in Figure 12, Figure 13, Figure 14, and Figure 15.

Figure 12. Fort Eustis RTCL piles and I-beam pile caps.

Figure 11. Fort Eustis bridges pre-assembled panel components.

r Fo

Re

vi ew
Figure 13. Fort Eustis bridge 3 showing pre-assembled panels on pile caps. Figure 14. Fort Eustis bridge 3 showing RTCL pilings, pile caps, railroad crossties, and installed rails.

On

ly

Page 5 of 6

ANTEC

The Fort Eustis bridges underwent live-load testing and beam deflections were measured. The sources of beam deflection are deformation of elastomeric bearing pad, pile axial deformation, and beam deflection. Bridges 3 and 7 were live-load tested with several railway vehicles and speeds, including an 80-ton switcher and a 120-ton GP 16 locomotive. The live loads passed through both bridges several times back and forth at various speeds ranging from 5 mph to 25 mph. Both bridges were constructed on tangent but the testing speed was limited to 25 mph due to curved tracks nearby. There was no sign of visual distress observed during the live load testing. The live-load test results for bridge 3 are shown in Table 1. Bridge 7 performed similarly to bridge 3. Note that the allowable deflection in the bridge design is 0.75 inches. Figure 15. Completed Fort Eustis bridge 3.

Results and Discussion

The Fort Bragg and Fort Eustis bridges, composed of the FRPP/HDPE RTCL were load tested and performed well. The ultimate tensile strength of this FRPP/HDPE RTCL is 4,500 psi, and the allowable design stress is 600 psi, as determined by the Non Linear Strain Energy Equivalence Theory.[3] This theory is a correlative method in which data from two short-term stress-strain experiments conducted at different strain rates are used to predict longterm creep strain at any stress level. The design stress is only a fraction of the ultimate tensile strength so that stresses in the bridge components are below the stress levels that would cause creep. Potentially, these bridges could be loaded for up to 25 years at a stress below 600 psi and suffer no creep strain upon load removal.

Fort Bragg bridge T-8518 was load tested with a 36-ton dump truck and a 71-ton M1 Abrams tank. The micro strain and stress were 637 and 255 psi for the dump truck and 740 and 296 psi for the tank. The modulus of the FRPP/HDPE RTCL used in design calculations is 350 ksi, while the effective modulus was measured at 450 ksi. The Office of the Secretary of Defense sponsored a series of studies by the Logistics Management Institute (LMI) to determine the cost of corrosion to the DoD. During the bridge dedication ceremony on September 18, 2009 at Fort Bragg, Dr. Roger Hamerlinck, Senior Acquisition Policy Specialist, stated The latest study shows that the DoD spends $22.5 billion annually on equipment and infrastructure as an impact of corrosion. For the Army, this number is approximately $5.8 billion annually. He also noted that, "This bridge is less expensive to build than its alternatives, it provides greater corrosion resistance, and it is practically maintenance free. The Army estimates that we will receive a 34 to 1 return on investment by using this technology.

r Fo

Table 1. Live-load test results for Fort Eustis bridge 3. Speed Deflection Vehicle (mph) (inches) 80-ton switcher 5 0.18 120-ton GP 16 locomotive 5 0.21 120-ton GP 16 locomotive 15 0.2 120-ton GP 16 locomotive 25 0.2 Allowable Design Deflection 0.75

Re

Conclusions

vi

RTCL materials offer a sustainable alternative to traditional materials and have a huge potential in infrastructure applications, regarding structural integrity and cost. The cost and performance of these RTCL bridges over time has shown that it is possible to construct efficient, long lasting structures from materials that are recovered from the post-industrial and post-consumer waste streams. RTCL materials do behave differently over time than traditional materials, and long-term behavior must be accounted for in the design. The construction and installation benefits of RTCL materials include efficient designs that use less material and reduced assembly time General advantages of using RTCL include, corrosion, insect, and degradation resistance; no toxic chemical treatments required to increase service life; environmentally friendly; diversion of waste plastics from landfills; reduction of deforestation, green house gases, and global warming.

ew

[1] T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, D.R. Morrow, Improvements in the properties of commingled plastics by the selective mixing of plastics waste, SPE-RETEC Technical Papers, (1989). [2] T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, D.R. Morrow, K.E. Van Ness, J.J. Donaghy, Properties and morphologies of

On

ly

References

ANTEC

Page 6 of 6

recycled polystyrene/curbside tailings materials, SPEANTEC Technical Papers, 2150-2154 (1991). [3] J.K. Lynch, K. Van Ness, T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, Creep prediction using the non-linear strain energy equivalence theory, SPE-ANTEC Technical Papers, 19271931 (2004). [4] R.W. Renfree, T.J. Nosker, D.R. Morrow, K.E. Van Ness, L.W. Suttner, Dual Phase, Co-Continuous Morphology from Mixtures of Recycled Polystyrene/Curbside Tailings Materials, SPE-ANTEC Technical Papers, (1992). [5] T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, K.E. Van Ness, Fiber orientation and the creation of structural plastic lumber, Plast. Eng., 55, 53-56 (1999). [6] T. Nosker, R. Renfree, Developing a recycled plastic/composite railroad tie, Plast. Eng., 55, 37-39 (1999). [7] T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, M. Lutz, B. Gillespie, R. Lampo, K.E. Van Ness, J.K. Lynch, Performance-based approach to the development of a recycled plastic/composite crosstie, SPE-ANTEC Technical Papers, 2912-2915 (1998). [8] J.K. Lynch, T.J. Nosker, R.W. Renfree, Polystyrene/Polyethylene Composite Structural Materials, The Center of Advanced Materials via Immiscible Polymer Processing, 2002.

[9] Ronald George Nathaniel Forster, The ultraviolet degradation of polyethylene and poly(ethylene carbon mononxide) under simulated environmental conditions, Rutgers University (1994). Key Words: Recycling, thermoplastic, composite, bridge, structural, degradation resistant, green construction

r Fo

Re

vi ew On ly