|This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information|
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-11-026
Date: January 2011
Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Integrated Bridge System Interim Implementation Guide
APPENDIX A. IN-SERVICE GRADATIONS
At the time of this report, all GRS–IBS projects had selected open–graded gravel due to its relative ease of construction and drainage characteristics. The various counties and agencies that are building GRS–IBS have selected locally available materials for their projects. The gradations and general description are shown in table 11 through table 15.
Table 11. Defiance County, OH, AASHTO No. 89, clean, crushed limestone.
Table 12. Warren County, OH, AASHTO No. 67, clean, crushed rock.
Table 13. King County, WA, WSDOT 1 ¼ inch minus gravel, clean round rock with sand mixture–pit run.
Table 14. St. Lawrence County, NY, NYSDOT No. 1, clean crushed rock.
Table 15. Urbana, IL, Seismic Test Abutment, IDOT CA6 road base, subrounded gravel with sand mix.
Topics: research, infrastructure, structures, design, materials, Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil
Keywords: research, infrastructure, structures, Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS), Integrated Bridge System (IBS), Design, Construction, Performance test, Geosynthetic, material specifications, Quality assurance, Quality control
TRT Terms: research, facilities, infrastructure, geosynthetics