ROADS & BRIDGES • MAY 2009 • 51
Michael P. Sears, P.E.
FF ollowing a devastating nor’easter in April 2007, resi-
dents and business owners in the townships of Pitts-
grove and Salem County, N.J., found their communi-
ty lake reduced to a vast muddy fi eld. The Rainbow
Lake dam, which carries Rte. 56 over the dam spillway and is
vital to the local economy, had been breached, resulting in an
80-ft-long collapse of the entire roadway embankment.
The collapse not only forced residents and daily commut-
ers to fi nd other east-west travel routes, it depleted the 91-acre
lake, which is part of a state Wildlife Management Area and a
popular recreation spot. The lake is used for fi shing, boating,
swimming and bird watching. It also is a habitat for bald eagles,
which rely on the water’s fi sh population for food.
The owners of the 25 residential lots surrounding the lake
feared that the loss of this environmental and recreational re-
source would diminish the real estate value of their waterfront
properties. The damage also presented a difficult challenge to
community businesses, several of which were still repaying
loans following the destruction from Hurricane Floyd in 1999.
Shops and businesses would potentially see devastating re-
sults if customers were unable to get through to their locations
or if drive-by traffic were reduced.
Rapid recoveryThe New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT)
quickly responded to the situation, working closely with resi-
dents and business owners to address concerns regarding the
effects on local commerce and commuting. The agency as-
sured the local government that it would immediately launch
plans for a fast-track schedule of demolition, design and con-
struction for the dam’s repair.
Having tasked the consulting fi rm of Dewberry with a num-
ber of emergency bridge repair projects in the past, NJDOT
again called on the company’s engineers to design the new
bridge and roadway and to assist with environmental permit-
ting and utility relocation planning.
The team focused on extensive community outreach dur-
ing and after the design process. Meetings with local officials
helped to ensure that the disruption to area businesses would
be minimized during construction. Dewberry also helped to es-
tablish the emergency detour route, addressing business own-
ers’ concerns for a southerly route that would enable drivers to
pass through the commercial area.
At the request of the local government and businesses, the
detour included new signage and the installation of temporary
signalization at three intersections. This issue was particularly
challenging because construction on the Rte. 56 Bridge over
the Maurice River, approximately 2 miles east of the Rainbow
Lake Bridge, was scheduled to begin shortly after the dam
breach occurred. The team’s complex detour route and signage
scheme allowed both projects to proceed concurrently, with
minimal disruption to commuters, businesses and residents.
Water modernizationThe rapid response then focused on the design and rebuild-
ing of the bridge and spillway. The existing structure was a sin-
gle-span bridge with six timber sluice gates. Each of the gates
in the existing structure was approximately 4 ft wide and
controlled by stop logs that had to be inserted
and removed manually. Because of the
relatively small spillway width for the
lake, the water surface elevation
behind the spillway would rise rap-
idly with increased rainfall. The
New Jersey Department of En-
vironmental Protection (NJDEP)
was forced to employ individuals
responsible for adjusting the stop
logs in an often-futile effort to stabi-
lize the lake elevation and prevent the
lake from overtopping the road and dam.
Removal of the existing spillway, bridge
and damaged roadway/dam required close coor-
dination between Dewberry, NJDOT and South State,
the emergency demolition contractor. Working with the tem-
porary diversion and demolition plans, which included interim
soil-erosion and sediment-control measures, the team also in-
teracted almost daily with the NJDEP. South State began its
relocation and demolition work less than three weeks after the
dam breach. The company also installed two 60-in. reinforced
concrete diversion pipes to ensure positive stream fl ow around
the construction zone.
The construction of a new 200-ft-long semicircular spillway,
a 110-ft-long two-span bridge and a restored dam and roadway
enabled NJDOT to resolve the spillway problems and return
the beautiful lake to the community. The longer spillway and
52 • MAY 2009 • ROADS & BRIDGES WWW.ROADSBRIDGES.COM
Emergency repairs restore damaged
bridge ahead of schedule
bridge, constructed by J. Fletcher Creamer & Sons, create a
more stable lake elevation that will ensure that Rainbow Lake
will not overtop the dam and roadway, which had occurred fre-
quently in the past, for storms of 100-year frequency or less.
The project required 650 linear feet of AZ-19 sheeting
around a sealed cofferdam. A total of 118 50-ft-long pipe piles
and 200 ft of straight web sheeting were installed in the 110-ft-
diam. semicircular ogee spillway. Approximately 1,600 cu yd
of concrete were used within the spillway, and 8,000 sq ft of
reinforced concrete apron slabs were used within the arch. The
bridge required 28 prestressed box girders with 650 cu yd of
concrete for the substructure, deck and approaches.
The spillway is located adjacent to and directly upstream
from the new bridge. The repaired roadway accommodates
one 12-ft lane and one 8-ft shoulder in each direction. To en-
sure that construction could proceed on the expedited sched-
ule, the bridge was designed to accommodate a tangential
alignment located on a curved roadway, resulting in a minimum
eastbound shoulder width of 6 ft 8 in. at the bridge. This repre-
sented a signifi cant improvement to the 4-ft 6-in. shoulder that
was carried in each direction by the existing structure.
The project also included relocating all utilities to the west-
bound side of the road and construction of a new concrete
boat launch owned by NJDEP. The new launch, along with the
removal of surrounding aggradation, has helped to create a
more enjoyable boating, swimming and fi shing experience for
visitors to the lake.
The installation of a mechanical sluice gate on the east side
of the spillway enables NJDEP to regulate the lake level more
closely. A new aluminum fi sh ladder, attached to the western
bridge abutment and west side of the spillway, ensures that
migratory fi sh are able to swim upstream through the bridge
and spillway without harm. The dam and spillway design was
provided by the consulting fi rm of McCormick Taylor.
The entire design process, from kick-off, the assembly of the
team and preliminary demolition planning through fi nal con-
tract plans, specifi cations and estimates were completed in
only four weeks. Several strategies contributed to meeting the
compressed schedule: rapid mobilization (borings, for exam-
ple, were complete within 48 hours of notifi cation to proceed);
constant communication and coordination with all of the key
agencies, including NJDOT, NJDEP and the Federal Highway
Administration; expedited reviews (NJDOT reviewed the fi nal
plans within just four hours); and shop drawings that were typi-
cally processed by Dewberry in just two days rather than the
agreed-upon fi ve-day schedule.
ROADS & BRIDGES • MAY 2009 • 53
Document dashingFrom an administrative perspective, the
team also devised ways to streamline the
contracting and project documentation
processes. For example, the contracting
industry agreed to let NJDOT advertise
the project with concept plans and a proj-
ect description. Final plans and specifi -
cations were provided via an addendum
just 10 days prior to the bid deadline. NJ-
DOT received seven bids, with J. Fletcher
Creamer & Sons’ low bid coming in below
Dewberry’s estimate. The contract also
was advertised with 20 lump-sum items—
the fi rst of its kind for NJDOT. These items
included the abutments, the pier, the spill-
way, the deck and pavement.
“The Dewberry team truly met the chal-
lenge thrust upon them by the NJDOT—
delivering contract documents for adver-
tisement in less than four weeks,” said
Mike Kasbekar, P.E., a project manager
with NJDOT. “Even though the design
was completed on an extremely acceler-
ated basis, the number of issues arising
during construction was minimal.”
Construction of the new bridge and
spillway began in June 2007 and was
substantially completed by the following
October. Traffic resumed on Nov. 2, well
in advance of the originally targeted date
of Dec. 24.
“Dewberry worked closely with us in an
emergency situation to help restore the
quality of life for the town’s residents,” said
Kasbekar. •
Sears is director of water resources in the Bloom-fi eld, N.J., offi ce of Dewberry.
LearnMore! For more information related to this article, go to:
www.roadsbridges.com/lm.cfm/rb050906
Left: The Rainbow Lake dam was breached, resulting in an 80-ft-long collapse of the entire roadway embankment. Above: The bridge was designed to accommodate a tangential alignment located on a curved roadway.
54 • MAY 2009 • ROADS & BRIDGES WWW.ROADSBRIDGES.COM
Roads & Bridges presents
• Case Studies• Executive News Summary
Timely e-newsletters delivering emerging
trends, success stories and industry
developments—right to your inbox.
Sign up now at www.roadsbridges.com.
It’s An Online Work Zone
Future trend and development of leading design concept
Case studies of world class bridges
State-of-the-art report on technology, materials and equipment
Senior experiences in bridge operation and management
Health monitoring, inspection and testing techniques for bridge safety
Practical experience in bridge maintenance and reinforcement
24–25 September, 2009Shanghai, China
Organized By
Media Partners
For more enquires, please contact: Marketing Department, Merisis Consulting, Tel: 86 21 62478608 Email: [email protected] 794
Scott M. Nettleton, P.E.
DDuring the late 1990s, the Oregon Department of
Transportation noted deterioration of convention-
ally reinforced concrete bridge structures through-
out the state. Historically, this bridge type has been
widely used on Oregon highways dating to the earliest days of
reinforced concrete technology, with heavy application from the
1930s through the 1950s, after which prestressed concrete be-
came the more prevalent choice.
The deterioration identifi ed on these structures coupled
with an extensive load rating effort being conducted state-
wide led to heavy load restrictions being imposed on many of
these structures.
These load restrictions underscored the widespread nega-
tive economic effect that restricted freight transport has on a
state’s economy. Studies commissioned at the time estimated
the consequences of not repairing the Oregon structures at
$123 billion in lost production and 88,000 in lost jobs over a
25-year span.
In response to this study, the Oregon Legislature in 2003
enacted the third Oregon Transportation Investment Act (OTIA
III), which included $1.3 billion for bridge work on the state
highway system. The goal of ODOT’s OTIA III Program was
and is to repair or replace hundreds of aging bridges on ma-
jor corridors throughout Oregon by 2013 in a timely and cost-
efficient manner.
Numerous projects have been completed since the start of
this program, with contracts let in a variety of manners. While
the majority of projects have been contracted via the traditional
design-bid-build (DBB) method, many projects have been con-
tracted using the more contemporary design-build (DB) con-
tracting method. This has been the method of choice when de-
sign innovation or a quick construction schedule was required
to deliver a project. In the case of the Elk Creek Bridges project
at the Tunnel through, achieving a design to maintain traffic
movement throughout the duration of the project construction
was the primary goal.
This level of investment, contracting method and collabora-
tive climate for innovation resulted in an ideal environment to
explore all available methods for delivering the best bridge
construction avenue for the project.
For the project, the use of rapid replacement techniques
greatly reduced interference with traffic mobility at this rural
location; a very critical issue to the affected communities. And
the team of engineers and builders for these bridges, with the
approval of the agency, developed a highly successful replace-
ment plan that was implemented in only two days.
56 • MAY 2009 • ROADS & BRIDGES WWW.ROADSBRIDGES.COM
Designer opts for accelerated construction to handle rural bridges at Hancock MountainDesigner opts for acceleratteeddddd construction
Double crossingThe two bridge structures identifi ed for replacement were
Elk Creek Crossing No. 3 and Elk Creek Crossing No. 4, which
had the unusual confi guration of an extremely close proximity
to the west and east portals of the historic Elk Creek (Hancock
Mountain) Tunnel. Crossing No. 3 is approximately 150 ft from
the west tunnel portal and Crossing 4 is less than 50 ft from
the east portal.
In both cases, the existing bridge confi guration included a
Howe deck-truss main span and a narrow width of only 24 ft of
roadway from curb to curb. Both of these factors precluded the
use of staged construction by preventing any partial removal of
the existing bridge.
The limited room between Crossing 4 and the east tunnel
portal made the geometry of a detour alignment around the
structure essentially impossible, because it would have re-
quired modifi cation to the tunnel portal and use of single-lane
geometry at a very low level of service.
A detour at Crossing 3 might have been possible; however,
the roadway approaching the west end of the bridge crosses
a very steep side hill resulting in very difficult topography to
modify approaching such a detour. Meeting the challenge of
detour alignments outside the structures was further compli-
cated given the environmental expectations for the project.
The OTIA III replacement program has been successfully
accomplished through the use of an environmental perfor-
mance standard (EPS) document that is the key document
used to permit work under this statewide program. Given this
broad charge, the document is necessarily somewhat more
restrictive on what practices are allowed. Individual permit-
ting is an option for difficult sites; however, such a process
cannot be achieved within the time frames allowed by a
design-build project.
Solution strategyTo meet this challenge, the design team, led by T.Y. Lin Inter-
national (TYLI), crafted a rapid replacement solution. The con-
tract, as let by the state and executed by Slayden Construction,
Stayton, Ore., allowed for a limited full closure of the highway to
facilitate construction and traffic handling modifi cations. Work-
ing within this criterion, TYLI engineers set about to produce
bridge replacement designs that could be installed within the
highway closure time limits.
The length of the existing structures (Crossing 3: three
spans, 320 ft, and Crossing 4: two spans, 222 ft) coupled with
the time frame for replacement measured in hours made what
should have been a very simple construction—using integral
deck elements and rapid assembly of the entire structure—
seemingly impossible.
The fi nal strategy employed for both crossings was the con-
struction of a replacement substructure in and around the ex-
isting bridge, while it remained in service, and then fully con-
structing the bridge superstructure, to one side, on temporary
support structures.
Upon completion of the preliminary assembly, the highway
was fully closed to traffic, the existing bridge was demolished,
Circle 790
“Viewpoint is not only a great management tool, but a great leadership tool as well.”
– Lynn Shireman VP Area Operations, Indianapolis
Milestone Construction
viewpointcs.com | 800.333.3197
By fully integrating Milestone Construction,
Viewpoint V6 Software® turns managers into
leaders by providing the data they need to
efficiently allocate resources on each job,
and see how their decisions directly impact
the company. Get the full story on how our
SQL /.NET-based enterprise construction
software can integrate your company at
viewpointcs.com or call 800.333.3197.
ROADS & BRIDGES • MAY 2009 • 57
and within hours the new superstructure was moved into place
and lowered onto bearings atop the new substructure.
Technical meritTo achieve success with this strategy, a number of technical
challenges needed to be fully met.
Demolition progress needed to be enhanced to speed the
completion of that phase. Substructure designs needed to be
designed around the existing bridge in order to ensure that
the existing structure would remain stable throughout instal-
lation. Jacking schemes to lift the new bridge onto skids and
then lower it onto the new substructure were required to avoid
damage and ensure that a uniform load on bridge bearings
was achieved. Simple clearances during moves needed to be
checked and verifi ed. Detailing to provide adequate seismic
connectivity between the superstructure and substructure
needed to be considered.
During the demolition process, the skidding strategy was ex-
panded to include removal of the existing main truss spans by
skidding them to the side. This required the installation of lifting
points at the fi rst panel point on the truss spans. This is not
a natural support location and therefore complex engineering
was required to design strengthening of the truss at those loca-
tions to support the dead load of the main span.
The installation of a new substructure in and around the ex-
isting substructure was particularly a challenge at Crossing 3
because the skews of the existing and new structures differed.
The different skews resulted in the east abutment being con-
structed under the cap beam of the existing structure at the
extreme southeast corner of the bridge. A signifi cant portion of
the existing Bent 3 of the old bridge needed to be removed to
allow the new cap beam to support the new structure.
For Crossing 4, the structure consisted of four prestressed
concrete beams in the short span and fi ve beams in the long
span, all with individual elastomeric bearing supporting pads
at either end. The stiffness of the support diaphragm created a
potential for uneven bearing on the pads with even a very slight
variation in as-constructed pad elevation.
To resolve this issue, the structure was lowered onto these
pads with a wet grout layer under the bearings. At the point
where the grout had been compressed, the structure was held
on the jacks until the grout set and then the full weight of the
bridge was applied to the bearings.
Dressed for successThis project provided a unique opportunity to use a method
that is becoming more prevalent throughout the country: ac-
celerated bridge construction (ABC).
The communities affected by this project (Drain and Elk-
ton, Ore.) voiced a very strong positive feedback to ODOT,
thereby supporting the concept that a heavy impact, for a
very short duration, is much more palatable to the traveling
public and has a measurable reduction in economic effect to
a given corridor.
Given the success of this method, it is the expectation that
ABC will continue to expand as a viable option for bridge re-
placement projects. As such, today’s design engineers will
have the opportunity to re-think some of the traditional meth-
ods by which a bridge is designed, and with creativity, produce
designs that have superior performance compared with those
built with conventional methods.
For this project, T.Y. Lin engineers were able to design Cross-
ing 3 in a manner that allowed for establishment of a compres-
sive force in the deck once it was placed into its fi nal location.
This was done by elastically deforming the three-span, continu-
ous steel structure by constructing camber in such a way as the
end abutments would settle onto their fi nal support prior to the
interior bents being supported. This created a prestressing ef-
fect through the use of imposed deformation on the structure.
Through the use of creative solutions and a unique design
approach, coupled with an outstanding relationship between
the engineer, owner and contractor, the rapid replacement
structures at Elk Creek Tunnel are currently in service and
standing as a testament to the engineering innovation that can
be used to overcome what might be considered impossible at
fi rst glance. •
Nettleton is with T.Y. Lin Internatioanl, Salem, Ore..
LearnMore! For more information related to this article, go to:
www.roadsbridges.com/lm.cfm/rb050905
58 • MAY 2009 • ROADS & BRIDGES WWW.ROADSBRIDGES.COM
For Crossing 4, the structure consisted of four prestressed concrete beams in the short span and fi ve beams in the long span.
OOften, the joint layout for a concrete pavement is
determined while developing project plans to aid
in bidding procedures. By doing so, the designer
produces bird’s-eye views of the joint layout for the
whole process. Even with such plans, however, it can be diffi-
cult to visualize the entire project layout during construction.
Making this even more of a challenge, an engineer or de-
signer usually develops the joint layout plan without knowledge
of the specifi c contractor, equipment or process that will be
used to place the pavement. For this reason, some agencies
do not provide a pre-developed jointing plan, instead requiring
the contractor to submit a proposed joint plan prior to the initia-
tion of the paving. The contractor then has full fl exibility with the
joint layout, along with the ability to customize the construction
process, phasing and equipment used to optimize construction
and minimize costs.
It is important to make (and allow) fi eld adjustments for
complex projects. Factors such as islands, medians, ramps
and turning lanes complicate joint layout. Those complications
require some forethought before construction, although some
tweaking of the joint layout is typically acceptable in the fi eld,
provided the contractor understands the ramifi cations.
It also is important to consider location changes that will be
necessary for some joints. Planning ensures that joints can
pass through embedded fi xtures, such as manholes and drain-
age inlets. It is common for the actual location of manholes or
drainage inlets to vary from the location shown on the plans.
As such, the construction crew may have to adjust the location
of the joints to coincide with the actual location of any in-pave-
ment object. The designer should consider including a note on
the plan to give the fi eld engineer and contractor the latitude
to make appropriate adjustments in the fi eld for situations like
in-pavement objects.
Understanding joint typesThere are three basic joint types for concrete pavements:
contraction, construction and isolation. Specifi c design require-
ments for each type depend upon orientation to the direction of
the roadway (transverse or longitudinal). The joint types that are
typical to streets, roads and highways are illustrated in Figure 1.
Transverse contraction joints (Type A-1 or A-2)Joints that run transversely to the pavement centerline are
essential to controlling cracking from stresses caused by
shrinkage, thermal contraction and moisture or thermal gra-
dients. Typically, transverse joints are at a right angle to the
pavement centerline and edges, but some agencies do specify
that transverse joints be skewed.
The need for dowels (smooth round bars) in transverse con-
traction joints depends upon the roadway or street classifi ca-
tion. If included, dowels are usually spaced at 12 in. on-center
in doweled transverse joints.
ROADS & BRIDGES • MAY 2009 • 59
Good joint layout can prevent
problems on the grade
Robert Rodden, EIT
Undoweled transverse contraction
joints (Type A-1) typically are sufficient
for light residential, residential or collec-
tor pavements, but if the traffic requires
that the concrete pavement be thicker
than about 7 in., doweled joints might be
required. Industrial and arterial streets
that will carry heavy truck traffic for long
periods almost always require doweled
contraction joints (Type A-2).
Transverse construction joints (Type B-1 or C-1)
Transverse construction joints are
necessary at the end of a paving seg-
ment or at a placement interruption for
a driveway or crossroad. A doweled butt
joint (Type B-1) is preferable and should
be used whenever the construction joint
will correspond to the location of a con-
traction joint or construction joint in an
adjacent lane. Again, dowels are usually
placed at 12 in. on-center.
Sometimes it is not feasible to match
the location of a transverse joint in the
adjacent lane, which necessitates use
of a tied construction joint (Type C-1).
The deformed tie bars in a Type C-1 joint
prevent the joint from opening, causing
sympathy cracking in adjacent lane(s).
Longitudinal contraction jointsLongitudinal contraction joints (Type
A-3 or A-4) also are necessary to control
cracking from stresses caused by con-
crete volume changes and moisture or
thermal gradients. These joints run par-
allel to the pavement centerline and usu-
ally correspond to the edge of a driving
lane. On two-lane and multilane pave-
ments, spacing of 10 to 13 ft, depending
on the concrete pavement thickness and
the subgrade/sub-base type, serves the
dual purpose of crack control and lane
delineation.
The need to tie longitudinal contrac-
tion joints will depend upon the degree
of lateral restraint available to prevent
the joints from opening permanently.
Most longitudinal contraction joints on
roadway sections contain No. 4 or No. 5
deformed reinforcing bars. The deformed
bars are usually about 24-30 in. long and
are spaced at 30-40-in. intervals. Where
there are curbs or a concrete shoulder
on both sides of the pavement, it may not
be necessary to tie the joints unless lo-
cal experience indicates otherwise.
Longitudinal construction joints (Type B-2 or C-2)
Longitudinal construction joints join
pavement lanes that are paved at differ-
ent times.
If the longitudinal construction joint
does not include a keyway then it must
be tied; if a keyway is used, however, the
tie bar may be optional. A keyed longi-
tudinal construction joint can be difficult
to construct correctly in thin pavements.
Therefore, some agencies avoid placing
keyways in slabs less than 10 in. thick.
Keyway shear failures can occur in thin
slabs when keyways are too large or too
close to the slab surface, causing some
agencies to avoid the use of keyways
altogether. Regardless, some contrac-
Construction:
Contraction:
Isolation:
T
Undoweled – Transverse (Type A-1)
T/4–T/31 in. (25 mm) max.
T
Untied – Longitudinal (Type A-3)
1/8 – 3/8 in.(3 – 9 mm) typ .
T/3
T
Doweled – Transverse (Type A-2)
T/2
Smooth dowel
T
T
Tied – Longitudinal (Type A-4)
T/2
Deformed tie bar
Tied – Transverse (Type C-1)(Keyway optional)
T/2
Deformed tie bar
T
Keyed – Longitudinal (Type C-2)(Deformed tie bar optional)
T/2
Deformed tie bar
T
Smooth dowelExpansion cap
T/2
Doweled – Transverse (Type D-2)
Fixture orStructure
1/2 – 1 in.(12 – 25 mm) max.
Undoweled – Longitudinal (Type D-4)
TT
8 in.(200 mm)
Sleeper slab – Transverse (Type D-3)
Bond breaker
6 ft (2 m) typ.
T
1/8 – 1/4 in.(3 – 6 mm) typ.
Doweled butt – Transverse (Type B-1)
T/2
Smooth dowel1/8 – 3/8 in.
(3 – 9 mm) typ .
T
Tied butt – Longitudinal (Type B-2)
T/2
Deformed tie bar
T
4.5 ft.
1in. (25 mm)max.
1.2TFiller
Thickened edge – Transverse (Type D-1)
Figure 1. Joint types that are typical to streets, roads and highways.
60 • MAY 2009 • ROADS & BRIDGES WWW.ROADSBRIDGES.COM
tors report that half-round keyways are
easier to construct than trapezoidal key-
ways, and fi eld performance shows that
they are less prone to long-term prob-
lems as well.
Isolation joints (Type D-1, D-2, D-3 or D-4)
Isolation joints are needed where
the pavement abuts certain manholes,
drainage fi xtures, sidewalks, aprons or
other structures. Certain agencies and
contractors also prefer to use isolation
joints at crossroad intersections. Where
used, the isolation joint will allow inde-
pendent movement of the pavement and
the structure, without any connection
that could cause damage.
The thickened-edge (Type D-1) and
sleeper-slab (Type D-3) designs each
provide improved support to compen-
sate for the absence of dowel bars. For a
thickened-edge joint, the abutting edges
of the concrete slabs should be 20%
thicker at the joint and then taper back
to the nominal thickness over at least 4.5
ft. Rather than providing a means of load
transfer across a joint as is done with
dowels or the sleeper slab, the thickened
edge provides increased fatigue capac-
ity. Doweled isolation joints (Type D-2)
might be used where two sections of
pavement need to be isolated but load
transfer is still essential, and undoweled
longitudinal isolation joints (Type D-4)
might be used where a pavement abuts
a building and little traffic is expected to
traverse the edge of the pavement.
Understanding the basics of joint de-
sign is not only a key to accurate bid-
ding, but also can prevent problems on
the grade. This basic understanding can
save time and money for agencies and
contractors alike.
For more information about joint design
and layout, as well as other important
pre-paving considerations, check out the
ACPA publication “Concrete Pavement
Field Reference: Pre-Paving” (EB237P).
To order a copy, please visit www .pave
ment .com (and select the bookstore tab
to search for the publication by name
or literature number). Copies also may
be ordered by contacting the American
Concrete Pavement Association/PCA
Order Processing Department, 5420 Old
Orchard Road, Skokie, IL 60077-1059, or
call 800/868-6733; fax 847/966-9666. •
Rodden is director of technical services at the American Concrete Pavement Association, Skokie, Ill.
LearnMore! For more information related to this article, go to:
www.roadsbridges.com/lm.cfm/rb050904
Understanding the basics of joint design is not only a key to accurate bidding, but also can prevent problems on the grade.
ROADS & BRIDGES • MAY 2009 • 61
Circle 793