• Geomechanics and Engineering
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.43-61
• /
• 2017

The inverted T-type abutments are generally used in highway bridges constructed in Korea. This type of abutment is used because it has greater stability, with more pile foundations embedded in the bedrock, while simultaneously providing support for lateral earth pressure and vertical loads of superstructures. However, the cross section of inverted T-type abutments is large compared with the piers, which makes them more expensive. In addition, a differential settlement between the abutment and embankment, as well as the expansion joints, causes driving discomfort. This study evaluated the driving comfort of several types of abutments to improve driving comfort on the abutment. To achieve this objective, a traditional T-type abutment and three types of candidate abutments, namely, mechanically stabilized earth wall (MSEW) abutment supported by a shallow foundation (called "true MSEW abutment"), MSEW abutment supported by piles (called "mixed MSEW abutment"), and pile bent and integral abutment with MSEW (called "MIP abutment"), were selected to consider their design and economic feasibility. Finite element analysis was performed using the design section of the candidate abutments. Subsequently, the settlements of each candidate abutment, approach slabs, and paved surfaces of the bridges were reviewed. Finally, the driving comfort on each candidate abutment was evaluated using a vehicle dynamic simulation. The true MSEW abutment demonstrated the most excellent driving comfort. However, this abutment can cause problems with respect to serviceability and maintenance due to excessive settlements. After our overall review, we determined that the mixed MSEW and the MIP abutments are the most appropriate abutment types to improve driving comfort by taking the highway conditions in Korea into consideration.

• Journal of the Korean GEO-environmental Society
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.47-59
• /
• 2008

Application of mechanically stabilized earth wall (MSEW) abutment has been rapidly increasing in United States of America, Pennsylvania since 2002. MSEW is effective for reducing construction cost and period compared to general concrete reinforced wall. In the paper, theoretical background and conventional criterion of MSEW abutment that is widely used abroad are analyzed. Based on the results, application of suitable MSEW abutment to domestic bridge type is examined. For the application of MSEW abutment in Korea, load interacting with upper shoe in domestic bridge types and structural analyses of beam seat and pile are investigated. As a result, all applications are possible except for PSC BOX Bridge that has heavy self-weight of girder. Through two and three dimensional numerical analyses, horizontal behaviour mechanisms between pile and MSEW were analyzed and field tests are also carried out for seven piles behind earth walls. From results of field tests, it is confirmed that an angle of internal friction of backfill material needs to be greater than 34 degree to use H-Pile as foundation of MSEW.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.19 no.5
• /
• pp.263-274
• /
• 2018

In this study, the applicability and external/internal stability of a MSEW abutment with a slab were investigated. Structural analysis of slab bridges between 10 ~ 20.0 m and thicknesses of 0.7 ~ 0.9 m was carried out to calculate the reaction forces due to dead and live loads acting on the bridge supports. The slab bridge with a length of 20.0 m satisfied the allowable contact pressure of 200 kPa for the true MSEW abutment. Because the external stability of the true MSEW abutment was dominated by the geometry of the MSE wall, the change in the factor of safety due to the load of the super-structure is small. Because the stiffness of the foundations is fixed and the load of the super-structure is increased, the factor of safety of the bearing capacity was reduced. As the load of the super-structure was increased, the horizontal earth pressure of the true MSEW abutment increased greatly. As a result, the pullout and fracture of the uppermost reinforcement, which are the factors of safety, did not meet the design criteria. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the pullout resistance and the long-term allowable tensile force of the reinforcement placed on the top of the reinforced soils to ensure efficient design and performance of a true MSEW abutment.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.510-519
• /
• 2019

In this study, the structural analysis was conducted to the comparison of reaction force and contact pressure on the design truck load (DB-24 and KL-510) of slab bridge supported by MSEW abutment. As a result of the structural analysis, the reaction force acting on the abutment at the continuous bridge was reduced rather than the simple span bridge. The reaction force due to the dead load was estimated to be about twice as large as that of the live load, and the influence of the live load on the total reaction force was relatively small. The contact pressure of the MSEW abutment was estimated to be the largest in the simple span bridge. The influence of contact pressure on the type of live load was relatively small. Therefore, it is considered to be more advantageous to apply the MSEW abutment to the continuous bridge than to the simple span bridge because the contact pressure acting on the abutment on the continuous bridge is estimated to be small. Since the reaction force and the load sharing ratio acting on the MSEW abutment depending on various conditions, it is necessary to examine the contact pressure in various types of bridges and specifications.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.594-601
• /
• 2019

A true MSEW abutment is an abutment type that directly supports the load of a superstructure. Metal strips, which are in-extensile reinforcements, should be used to minimize abutment deformation. A study to derive the application conditions of a True MSEW abutment was carried out by Zevogolis(2007). As a result, the pullout factor of safety of the uppermost reinforcement was estimated to be the smallest. Therefore, the pullout factor of safety of the uppermost reinforcement is the most important design factor. Parameter analysis was conducted with the abutment length, abutment heel, and abutment height as variables. The pullout factor of safety increased with increasing abutment length and abutment heel length. This is because the contact area increases and the superstructure is dispersed as the abutment length and abutment heel length increase. The pullout factor of safety converges at an abutment length of 1.2m and an abutment heel length of 0.9m. This is because the effective length of the reinforcement is reduced due to the increase in contact area. On the other hand, the extension of the superstructure will increase if the abutment length and abutment heel length are increased excessively. In addition, earth-volume is increased if the abutment height increases excessively. This acts as an upper load on the MSE wall. Therefore, it needs to be examined carefully.