SEAL OF APPROVAL
Mark J. Mutziger, Carl B. Osberg
Abstract
Mark J. Mutziger, Carl B. Osberg
Abstract
Expansion joints have always been a major source of problems for bridge owners, whatever type or size the joint, and it is advisable to eliminate them whenever possible. This trend of minimizing the number of expansion joints has led designers of large bridges to concentrate the movements at only a few locations with large movement range demands. For bridge movement ranges greater than 100 mm, the two primary alternative expansion joints are finger joints - also known as tooth joints - and modular bridge expansion joints. This article examines new test standards and specifications that will provide reliable and durable sealed joints for long span bridges.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Expansion joints have always been a major source of problems for bridge owners, whatever type or size the joint, and it is advisable to eliminate them whenever possible. This trend of minimizing the number of expansion joints has led designers of large bridges to concentrate the movements at only a few locations with large movement range demands. For bridge movement ranges greater than 100 mm, the two primary alternative expansion joints are finger joints - also known as tooth joints - and modular bridge expansion joints. This article examines new test standards and specifications that will provide reliable and durable sealed joints for long span bridges.
Key concepts: Expansion joint, Bridge (graph theory), Joint (building), Engineering, Modular design, Seal (emblem), Structural engineering, Forensic engineering