REPORT HYSDOT-ERD-7S-RR 30

A Design Method for

Horizontally Curved

Plate Girder Bridges

DAVID B. BEAL
JOHN G. RUBY

RESEARCH REPORT 30
ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUREAU
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Hugh L. Carey, Governor/Raymond T. Schuler, Commissioner

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

STATE OF NEW YORK
Hugh L. Carey, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Raymond T. Schuler, Commissioner
William C. Hennessy, Assistant Commissioner for Transportation Operations
Malcolm D. Graham, Chief Engineer
William P. Hofmann, Deputy Chief Engineer (Research)
William C. Burnett, Director, Engineering Research and Development Bureau

The Engineering Research and Development Bureau conducts and administers the engineering research program of
the New York State Department of Transportation in cooperation with the U. S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, which provides financial assistance for research activities. This publication was
prepared in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration; its contents do not necessarily reflect the official
views or policiesof the State of New York or the Federal Highway Administration, nor does it constitute a standard,
specification, or regulation.

ENGINEERING RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS

A. D. Emerich, Editor
Richard P, Inglis, Anthony J. Datri, Ruth DuBois, Technical Graphics and Production
Theresa Geary, Copy Preparation

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

A DESIGN METHOD FOR HORIZONTALLY CURVED PLATE GIRDER BRIDGES

David B. Beal, Associate Civil Engineer (Research)

John G. Ruby, Associate Civil Engineer (Structures)

Fifth Interim Report on Research Project 42-1

Conducted in Cooperation With
The U. S, Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration

Research Report 30
July 1975

ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BUREAU

New York State Department of Transportation
State Campus, Albany, New York 12232

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 ABSTRACT

A procedure is presented for design of single-span horizontally curved plate

girder bridges, suitable for structures consisting of three to eight girders
with span lengths from 50 to 200 ft. Radii are restricted to 150 through 2000
ft, with central angles permitted in the range of 0.05 to 0.50 rad. The pro-
cedure has been integrated into a beam design program requiring only fundamen-
tal geometric and load information to produce the design of all girders of the
curved system. A planar grid analysis routine previously verified by field
test results was used to analyze completed designs. It is concluded that pre-
liminary designs of structures with central angles less than 0.2 rad can be
used as final designs without analysis. Designs for structures with central
angles exceeding 0.2 rad are adequate for strength, but should be analyzed for
deflection and shear.

iii

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1

I. DEVELOPMENT OF A DESIGN METHOD 3

A. Dead Load 4
6. Superimposed Dead Load 6
C. Live Load 6
D. Lateral Flange Bending 7

II. DISCUSSION 9

A. Design for Stress 9

B. Design for Deflection and Reaction 12

CONCLUSIONS 15

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 17

REFERENCES 19

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 INTRODUCTION

When a bridge must accommodate a curved highway alignment, horizontally curved

steel girders are often the preferred solution. Since curved girders allow the
designer to employ continuity in his design, shallower main members are permit-
ted and fewer piers required than in conventional designs using straight girders
supporting a curved deck. The uniform deck overhang resulting from use of cur-
ved girders requires simpler, more uniform formwork and creates a free-flowing
appearance. However, since exact analysis and design of these girders is com—
a design procedure such as that outlined in this report is necessary to
make their use more widespread.

A procedure for quick, efficient sizing of main girder elements in horizontally

curved bridges is desirable for two reasons:

All existing analytical methods require that member properties be spec-

ified explicitly. Since the distribution of dead-load bending moment
in horizontally curved girder bridges is highly dependent on the dis-
tribution and magnitude of the flexural and torsional stiffness proper-
ties of the members, several expensive computer runs are generally re-
quired before an appropriate design is achieved.

2. For many structures, more sophisticated analysis can be eliminated and

results of the preliminary procedure taken as the final design.

The basic objective of this study was to devise empirical expressions for the
transverse distribution of in-plane bending effects in composite horizontally
curved bridges. It was clear that the structure's behavior should be described,
if possible, in terms of the basic geometry available to the designer at the
earliest stages.

The approach used parallels that of Heins and Siminou (1) in their paper on
live-load distribution factors for horizontally curved structures. Factors
have been derived that relate the behavior of a curved system to that of a sin-
gle straight member. With this procedure, design of the horizontally curved
girder system is reduced to the familiar, comparatively simple design of indi-
vidual straight girders.

In contrast to a procedure for live-load distribution, the interaction between

individual girders under dead load requires that the relative magnitude and dis-
tribution of flexural and torsional stiffness be considered in preliminary de-
sign procedures. Under live load, the stiffening effect of the slab forces the
girders to act as a unit, minimizing the effects of transverse variation of gir-
der stiffness. This behavior has been observed experimentally (2,3).

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

2 Design Method

Because of the influence of member stiffness on dead-load behavior, a direct

solution for in-plane bending effects is not possible and an iterative proce-
dure must be used. It has been found that, at most, four iterations are re-
quired to achieve a satisfactory design. These iterations are performed auto-
matically by a modified version of a straight-beam design program (4).

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 I. DEVELOPMENT OF A DESIGN METHOD

A curved girder analysis program (CUGAR I), developed at the University of Rhode
Island, was used in developing a preliminary design method. This program (5),
idealizes the structure as a planar grid and uses the stiffness method of analy-
sis to evaluate member deformations and internal forces. Full-scale field tests
performed by New York State (.2,_3,6) have shown that this analysis can be used
reliably to predict the response of simple- and continuous-span curved girder
systems under dead loads.

The first phase of design method development consisted of analysis of a large

number of structures to determine the influence of parameters believed to have
an important influence on transverse distribution of dead load. From the re-
sults of this work, tentative empirical expressions were derived that could ac-
count for the observed behavior and be integrated into a design procedure.

Several cycles of bridge design, analysis, and refinement were required to pro-
duce the final relationships presented here. Although initially the relation-
ships derived were dimensionally correct and had some theoretical basis, the
final expressions are entirely empirical and cannot individually be given any
physical meaning. Although the equations used are awkward, they reliably pre-
dict the behavior of curved girder bridges over a broad range of practical de-
sign parameters.

The method has been tested for a wide range of bridge geometries and has pro-
duced designs differing from the analytical solution by less than 3 percent.
Variables included and the practical range of each are as follows:

number of girders = 3 to 8,

centerline arc length = 50 to 200 ft,

centerline radius of curvature = 150 to 2000 ft,

central angle (L/R) = 0.05 to 0.50 rad, and

girder spacing - 6 to 10 ft.

The method is currently limited to single-span structures with radial supports.

As fully as possible, the general approach maintains the familiar procedures

for straight-beam design. Thus, the design factors are basically multipliers
relating forces in a member of a curved system to forces in a single straight
member of equal length. (Length as used here always refers to the developed

3
From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.
4 Design Method

length of the curved girder.) The basic factors are used to predict behavior
of the fascia girder on the outside of the curve. Factors for the other gir-
ders are obtained by apportioning the basic factors relative to the position
of the girder in question in the curved system.

A. Dead Load

The design moment in Girder n due to dead load is given by

F (1)
^ DL ^ ^LS

Where tLTc is the dead-load design moment of the equivalent straight girder
having a length equal to the developed length of the curved girder, and

(2)

Equation 2 is a combination of a maximum amplification factor and a trans-

verse distribution factor given by

(3)

where

c = 4(1 - a)
(N - I)2

and

The amplification factor is

(4)

where

(5a)

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

Development 5

K2 = 0.93 + (0.53 + 0.014 L ) (1.08 - 0.01S) (5b)

c
R

K3 = 1 + 9300(Lc)0-9(Rc) 2 9
- (5c)

(N - I)2 £
1 +
2(N + 1) R
Ki+ = (5d)
1 + *!
3 R

In these expressions,

L = developed length of longest girder, ft

= centerline length of bridge, ft

R = radius of curvature of longest girder, ft

R^ = bridge centerline radius of curvature, ft

N = number of girders,

n = girder number with Girder 1 at the longest radius,

S = girder spacing, ft

= total weight (steel and concrete) of longest curved girder, and

W = total weight of a straight girder with length equal to the de-

veloped length of bridge centerline.

Note'that when n = 1,

f (6)
dl(1) f
dl

Thus, is evaluated in the design of the first girder and remains constant
for all subsequent girders of a particular structure. Because is dependent
on the weight of Girder 1, some iteration is required. Equation 2 defines a
parabola with a maximum value of at the longest girder and a minimum value
of 2 - at the shortest girder. The centerline value [n = (N + l)/2] is
equal to a.

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 6 Design Method

B. Superimposed Dead Load

The design moment in Girder n due to superimposed dead load is

M
SL (t1) ■ F
SL(n> M
SLS (7)

M
where SLg is the superimposed dead load moment in the equivalent straight gir-
der, and

F
SL(n) F
SL R
LL(n) (8)

in which

F = e (9)
SL

and

2,1
0.005 L
c
P = (10)

The transverse distribution factor is given by

0.012
= 1 - (n - 1) (11)
(N - 1)

where all symbols are as defined previously.

C. Live Load

The design moment in Girder n due to live load is

•V"' - F
LL<n) "LLS (12)

Here is the design live load moment in the equivalent straight girder,
based on the AASHTO transverse distribution factor of S/5.5, and

F
LL^n) F
LL R
LL(n) (13)

where is as previously defined, and

2
0.012 L '
c
f 0.85 + 0.0005 L +
ll c

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

Development 7

D. Lateral Flange Bending

Torsion in plate girders is resisted in part by the resistance to lateral bend-

ing of the flanges. For design purposes, the magnitude of this lateral flange
bending moment may be estimated from a simplified analysis treating the flange
as a horizontal beam continuous over the diaphragms, which act as lateral sup-
ports. The load is taken as the lateral component of the flange force due to
in-plane bending. The bending moment is assumed equal to 80 percent of the
maximum moment in a simple beam with span length equal to the distance between
diaphragms. This analysis is believed to be conservative. In the design pro-
gram, diaphragm spacing and flange width are normally selected to limit the
lateral flange bending stress to less than 10 percent of the total stress.

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 A. DEAD LOAD
1.05

IIHI im . imnr iiMi mnww " #■:<«-» *** mi mi

1.00 I"

0.95
0.0 0.7

B. SUPERIMPOSED DEAD LOAD

1.05

1.00

0.95
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
l
/r
C. LIVE LOAD
0. 10
CEHTCRUNC LE«6T«
♦ 50*
• too'
* 125*
qc ^ i>^>ii.• y.^■■■■».!(MM■ ■ ■ ■ ■ i■ AA "y
— ISO'
f 200'

I QQ | I rrJfcimiliWii L.n.nnnr

- ^ >i|M« i/mi
■
0,95 mm t,>iiiiin"i>Hiii

♦
mm & -
0. 90
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
l
/r

Figure 1. Ratio of analytical to design moment for the longest fascia girder.

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 II. DISCUSSION

A. Design for Stress

The ratio of analytical bending moment from the CUGAR program to the design
moment is shown in Figure 1A. For dead load, this ratio is within 3 percent
of unity in 14 of 21 designs and within 5 percent for 20 of 21. The extreme
value of 92.5 percent (conservative) is for a structure with a length of 100
ft and a radius of 200 ft.

A comparison of analytical and design dead-load values for two designs at the
limits of applicability of the design relationships is shown in Figure 2. Un-
derestimation of bending moment in girders at the inside of the curve is not
critical, because dead load accounts for only about 25 percent of total stress
in this case. The low percentage of dead-load stress results from the design
requirement that all girders in a structure have the same web depth. Because
of the large difference in bending moment between the longest and shortest gir-
ders, the flange size of the latter is reduced in thickness and width. The
result of this reduction in flange size is an increase in magnitude of lateral
flange bending stress. For the results in Figure 2 (L = 125 ft, R = 300 ft),
the lateral flange bending stress in Girder 5 is approximately 8 ksi.

Figure 3 permits a crude estimate of the percent increase in dead-load bending

moment in the longest curved girder, over the moment in the equivalent straight
girder. The relationship is approximate because the weight ratio (Eq. 5a) is
taken as unity and a five-span bridge is assumed. The figure is also useful in
defining the limits of applicability of the design equations.

For superimposed dead load, the ratio of analytical to design bending is with-
in 3 percent of unity for 18 to 20 design (Fig. IB). Its transverse distribu-
tion is shown in Figure 4A. The comparison of analytical and design values is
less satisfactory for live load (Figs. 1C and 4B). Design values are generally
conservative (except L = 50), the deviation being greatest for intermediate
values of central angle. These design values are inherently inexact because
the approximate straight-girder live-load distribution factor (S/5.5) is used
in the design to maintain the consistency of the design procedure.

An alternate relationship for live-load bending moment has been proposed by

AASHTO (J). Although differing superficially from the present equation, the
two relationships give similar results when evaluated over the applicable range
of span lengths and radii. This comparison is shown in Figure 5.

The results shown in Figure 1C imply that the present design factor is too
large, and therefore in comparing live-load amplification factors their rela-

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 Figure 2 (left). Transverse distribution of dead-load
bending moment.

Figure 3. (below) Percent increase in bending moment

6000 in longest curved girder? over moment in equivalent
straight girder.
CENTERLINE LENGTH = 125 FT
RADIANS
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

DESIGN
ANALYTICAL

2 3 4 5
GIRDER CENTRAL ANGLE

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 A. SUPERIMPOSED DEAD LOAD
I 000

GIRDER

DESIGN
ANALYTICAL

12 3 4 5
GIRDER

Figure 4 (above). Transverse distribu-

tion of bending moment.

Figure 5 (right). Comparison of live-

load amplification factors.
0.80 1 1 1 I 1 I
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
RADIUS, FT

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

12 Design Method

25 —
Ppffipj AASHTO EQUATION GIVES SMALLER VALUES
1:1 PRESENT EQUATION GIVES SMALLER VALUES
0l 1 1 I I I
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
RADIUS, FT

Figure 6. Relative magnitudes of live-load

amplification factors.

tive magnitudes are significant. Figure 6 shows the values of span length and
radius for which one or the other equation gives the smaller value, and thus
with respect to the results shown in Figure 1C, the most suitable design equa-
tion. The present expression is preferable at all radii for spans less than
125 ft. For longer spans, the AASHTO equation seems appropriate at the shorter
radii.

B. Design for Deflections and Reactions

Girder deflection response and support reactions are estimated by means of

Equations 1 through 14 in the same manner as bending moment. Although these
equations were derived for bending, it has been found that deflections and
reactions are also reliably predicted.

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

Discussion 13

The preliminary design procedure underestimates dead load and superimposed

dead load deflection in structures with central angles greater than 0.2 rad.
Thus, a separate analysis for deflection is recommended for these structures
to assure positive camber. For central angles less than 0.2 rad, the design
procedure overestimates these deflections. The magnitude of overestimation
at no point exceeds %-in., which is a reasonable fabrication tolerance for
camber. Live-load deflections do not compare as well, but are considered
satisfactory because in no case is the permissable live-load deflection (L/800)
exceeded.

Dead-load and superimposed dead-load reactions are reliably predicted for all
structures with central angles less than 0.2 rad. In contrast, live-load re-
actions are consistently overestimated but for central angles less than 0.2
rad, these values are also considered acceptable. Therefore, for shear, as
for deflection, a separate analysis is required for structures with central
angles greater than 0.2 rad.

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 CONCLUSION

A series of approximate equations have been presented for evaluating the inter
nal forces, deflections, and support reactions due to dead load, superimposed
dead load, and live load in horizontally curved simple-span bridges. Compari-
sons of design values with analytical results indicate that for structures with
central angles less than 0.2 rad, the preliminary design can be taken as the
final design without further analysis. For those with central angles from 0.2
through 0.5 rad, the preliminary design is adequate for strength, but should
be analyzed for deflection and reaction. When the central angle exceeds 0.5
rad, the preliminary design is an estimate only, and several cycles of analysis
and design may be required to achieve a satisfactory structure.

15

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The study reported here was undertaken cooperatively by the Structures Design
and Construction Subdivision, Robert N. Kamp, Deputy Chief Engineer (Structures),
and the Engineering Research and Development Bureau, William C. Burnett, Direc-
tor. Much of the preliminary work on this design procedure was done by H. Dan-
iel Rogers, Jr., Senior Civil Engineer (Structures). Robert P. Murray, Senior
Engineering Technician, prepared input data for the analysis of trial designs
and tabulated the results of these computations.

17

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 REFERENCES

1. Heins, C. P., Jr., and Simonou, J. "Preliminary Design of Curved Bridges."

Engineering Journal of the American Institute of Steel Construction,
Vol. 7, No. 2 (April 1970), pp. 50-61.

2. Beal, D. B., and Klssane, R. J. Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel

Girder Bridges: Second Interim Report. Research Report 1, Engineer-
ing Research and Development Bureau, New York State Department of
Transportation, October 1971.

3. Klssane, R. J., and Beal, D, B. Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel

Girder Bridges: Third Interim Report. Research Report 8, Engineer-
ing Research and Development Bureau, New York State Department of
Transportation, July 1972.

A. Ruby, J. G. Preliminary Design of Horizontally Curved Girder Bridges; Com-

puter Program. Structures Design and Construction Subdivision, New
York State Department of Transportation, 1974.

5. Lavelle, F. H. Curved Girder Analysis: Computer Program. Structures De-

sign and Construction Subdivision, New York State Department of
Transportation, 1969.

6. Beal, D. B., and Klssane, R. J. Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel

Girder Bridges: First Interim Report. Research Report 69-11, Engi-
neering Research and Development Bureau, New York State Department
of Transportation, April 1971.

7. AASHO Committee on Bridges and Structures. Tentative Design Specifications

for Horizontally Curved Highway Bridges, Part I: Curved Steel I-Gir-
der Bridges, February 28, 1973. (Referenced copy stamped "Prelimi-
nary" on cover.)

19

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

 PUBLICATIONS Engineering Research and Development Bureau
IN PRINT New York State Department of Transportation

AVAILABLE FROM THE ENGINEERING LITERATURE SERVICE, ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND

DEVELOPMENT BUREAU, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE CAMPUS,
ALBANY, NEW YORK 12232
RESEARCH REPORTS (New Series)
1. Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Bridges: Second Interim Report
2. The Catskill-Cairo Experimental Rigid Pavement: Construction and Materials Testing
3. Field Study of A Predeflected Steel-Concrete Composite Bridge: Interim Report
4. Sealers for Longitudinal Joints
5. Flexible Pavement Performance In New York State
6. Flexible Pavement Density; Three Studies
7. Acceptance Criteria for Preformed Transverse Joint Sealers
8. Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Bridges: Third Interim Report
9. Thick-Lift Flexible Paving
10. Quality Assurance for Portland Cement Concrete
11. Techniques for Measuring Air Void Characteristics of Concrete
12. Performance of Transverse Joint Supports in Rigid Pavements
13. Effectiveness of Glare Screens
14. Audible Roadway Delineators
15. Transverse Joint Construction Methods Related to Performance
16. Construction Control of Rigid Pavement Roughness: Final Report
17. The Catskill-Cairo Experimental Rigid Pavement: A Five-Year Progress Report
18. Acceptance Sampling of Steel Reinforcing Bars
19. Live-Load Stresses in a Straight Box-Girder Bridge
20. Transverse Joint Construction and Sealing Practices: 1968-72
21. Lensed Rail Lights for Pavement Illumination
22. Laboratory and Field Evaluation of Plastic-Coated Dowel Bars
23. Field Study of A Predeflected Steel-Concrete Composite Bridge: Final Report
24. Surface Icing of Insulated Pavements
25. High-Strength Steel as Reinforcement For Concrete Bridges: Final Report
26. Field Evaluation Of A Recharge Basin
SPECIAL REPORTS
3. Analysis for Stress and Deformation of a Horizontally Curved Girder Bridge Through a Geometric
Structural Model
6. Development of Specifications for Skid-Resistant Asphalt Concrete
9. Soil Compaction Evaluation with Strain Measurements
10. Study of Noise Pollution Aspects of Various Roadway Configurations
11. A Condition Survey of Monolithic Bridge Decks in New York State
12. Asphalt Concrete Admixtures
13. Crushed Gravel Coarse Aggregate in Asphalt Concrete Pavements
15. Applicability of Control Charts to Concrete Production and Inspection
16. Reflection Cracking of Bituminous Overlays on Rigid Pavements
17. Hardened Portland Cement Pastes of Low Porosity
18. The Use of Low Porosity Cement Paste in Mortar and Concrete
19. Applying Microcomputer Technology to Problems in Traffic Signalization
21. Strengthened Support Angles for Box-Beam Guiderail
26. Development of a Specification To Control Rigid Pavement Roughness
27. New York's Experience With Plastic-Coated Dowels
28. Depth of Concrete Cover Over Bridge Deck Reinforcement
29. Effects of the Clary Screed And Tube Float on Rigid Pavement Construction
RESEARCH REPORTS (Old Series)
59-1 Stone Quarries: Location and Geologic Characteristics
59-2 Effectiveness of Concrete Paving Mixers
60-4 New York State Concrete Test Roads: Review and Evaluation
61-4 Cationic Asphalt Emulsion for Surface Treatment
61-5 Continuous-Strip Photography of Pavement Surfaces
61-6 Directional Paint Applicator: Development and Evaluation
62-1 An Evaluation of a Concrete Pavement Containing Portland Blast-Furnace Slag Cement
62-2 Epoxy Bonding Compounds as Shear Connectors in Composite Beams

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.

64-2 Optimum Mixing Time For Asphalt Concrete
64-6 Deleterious Properties of Chert: Final Report
65-2 An Investigation of Asphalt Cement Subsealing and Lime-Cement Tacking
65-4 Evaluation of Kinematic Viscosity Grades of Cutback Asphalt
65-6 Density Studies of Asphalt Concrete: Interim Report
65-7 Railing Type Bridge Lighting
65-10 The Influence of Natural Sand Fine Aggregate on Some of the Properties of Hardened
Concrete Mortar
66-1 Wire Mesh Reinforcement of Bituminous Concrete Overlays
66-4 Glass Beads for Traffic Paints
66-6 Quality Control of Central Mix Concrete During Mixing and Transporting: A Review of
the Literature
67-1 New Highway Barriers: The Practical Application of Theoretical Design
67-3 Skid Resistance of Bituminous Surfaces
67-4 Pavement Marking Paints: Interim Report
67-5 Determination of Embankment Density by the Seismic Method
68-1 An Appraisal of Sand Drain Projects Designed and Constructed by the New York State
Department of Transportation
68-2 Density of Asphalt Concrete: Second Interim Report
68-3 Instrumentation and Testing of Concrete Bridges Reinforced with High-Strength Steel
68-4 Development of a Flexible Pavement Performance Equation
68-5 Early Hardening of Asphalt Cement
68-6 Joint Seal Materials: Final Report
68-7 The Influence of Joint Widths and Spacings on Pavement Riding Qualities
68-8 Reduced Mixing Time for Asphalt Concrete: Practical Field Experience
68-9 Hardened Cement Pastes of Low Porosity: Exploratory Studies
68-10 Flexible Pavement Deflection: Three Studies
69-1 Pavement Marking Paints: Two Studies
69-2 Recharge Basins for Disposal of Highway Storm Drainage
69-4 Protective Coatings for Concrete Bridge Decks: Interim Report
69-5 Construction Control of Rigid Pavement Roughness
69-8 Hardened Cement Pastes of Low Porosity: Dimensional Changes
69-10 Computer Simulation for Quality Assurance in Asphaltic Concrete Production
69-11 Field Testing of Horizontally Curved Steel Girder Bridges: First Interim Report
69-12 Sonic and Conventional Measurement of Rigid Pavement Thickness
69-15 Aspahlt Cement Viscosity and Penetration
69-16 Performance of Concrete Bridges Reinforced with High-Strength Steel: First Interim Report
70-1 Computer Simulation for Quality Assurance in Asphaltic Concrete Production: Program and
Technical Considerations
70-5 Binder Course Mix Uniformity Before Automation of Production
70-7 Bulk Density Testing of Asphalt Base Course Material
70-11 Acceptance Sampling Plans for Rigid Pavement Thickness

AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE, SPRINGFIELD,

VIRGINIA 22151. REQUEST REPORTS BY THE "PB" ACCESSION NUMBERS SHOWN;
CHARGES ARE $2.25 FOR MICROFICHE OR VARIABLE FOR HARD COPY DEPENDING
ON LENGTH
PB 208342 Development of an Analytical Approach to Highway Barrier Design and Evaluation
(Report 63-2)
PB 197151 Characteristics of Various Aggregate Producing Bedrock Formations in New York State
(Report 63-3)
PB 197148 Quantitative Cold Differential Thermal Analysis (Report 65-1)
PB 169823 An Investigation of Asphalt Cement Subsealing and Lime-Cement Jacking (Report 65-2)
PB 170426 Evaluation of Kinematic Viscosity Grades of Cutback Asphalt (Report 65-4)
PB 172953 The Influence of Clays on Water and Ice in Rock Pores (Report 65-5)
PB 172445 Asphalt Concrete Mixing Time: Final Report (Report 65-8)
PB 173756 Wire Mesh Reinforcement of Bituminous Concrete Overlays (Report 66-1)
PB 176323 Performance of Transverse Joint Supports in Concrete Pavements (Report 66-2)
PB 174406 Realistic Job-Mix Formula Tolerances for Asphalt Concrete (Report 66-3)
PB 176995 Durability of Corrugated Metal Culverts (Report 66-5)
PB 184015 Pressure Relief Joints for Rigid Pavements (Report 68-12)
NOTE: Prior to agency reorganization in 1967 and 1968, the Engineering Research and
Development Bureau of the New York State Department of Transportation was known
as the Bureau of Physical Research of the New York State Department of Public
Works.
3/1/75

From the Digital Collections of the New York State Library.