Daniel K Inouye Highway Route 200 Hawaii

<figure id='attachment_8111' style='max-width:1010px' class='caption aligncenter'><img class="size-full wp-image-8111" src="https://www.geoinstitute.org/sites/default/files/geotech-tools-uploads/…; alt="Photograph of the completed Daniel K. Inouye Highway Underpass." width="1010" height="758" /><figcaption class='caption-text'> Figure 1. Completed Daniel K. Inouye Highway Underpass.</figcaption></figure>Location: Hawaii (Big Island), Hawaii Owner: Federal Highway Administration’s Central Federal Lands Highway Division delivered this project for Hawaii Department of Transportation Year Constructed: 2013 National Bridge Inventory (NBI) Number: n/a Crossing Type: Underpass for Traffic Grade Separation Superstructure Type: Cast-in-place Concrete Structure Span: 45 feet Maximum Wall Height: 20 feet Maximum Wall Width (edge to edge): 200 feet Skew: 18° Facing Type: Concrete Masonry Unit Blocks Average Daily Traffic (when constructed): 1,700 Contract Type: Design-Bid-Build with Design-Build option for GRS-IBS Unique Project Features: Project located on an island and within seismically active zoneBackground: Daniel K. Inouye Highway (Hawaii Route 200) extends 47 miles from Kaumana, above Hilo, to an intersection with Mamalahoa Highway approximately seven miles south of Waimea. It is the shortest and most direct route across the Big Island of Hawaii, linking the main population centers of the island in the east side (Hilo) with the growing west side (Kona), where the economy has flourished due to tourism. This route is the only road serving the Pōhakuloa Training Area (PTA), the Mauna Kea Astronomical Observatory Complex, the Mauna Loa Atmospheric Observatory Complex, the ranching and residential areas of Waikii Ranch and Kaumana City, Mauna Kea State Park, and other recreational areas.<figure id='attachment_8112' style='max-width:691px' class='caption aligncenter'><img class="wp-image-8112 " src="https://www.geoinstitute.org/sites/default/files/geotech-tools-uploads/…; alt="Skectch showing the project location from the State of Hawaii Office of Planning." width="691" height="695" /><figcaption class='caption-text'> Figure 2. Project Location. Source: State of Hawaii Office of Planning, FHWA.</figcaption></figure>Hawaii Route 200 was originally built during World War II by the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) specifically to provide access to PTA and not for public use and hence did not meet State Highway standards. The entire highway length was a narrow, winding, two-lane road with steep grades, sharp curves, poor pavement conditions, substandard drainage, and high accident rates. Despite its poor conditions, the roadway was frequently used to access PTA, Mauna Kea Observatory, and the nearby outdoor recreation areas. Later in 1992, it was decided to rehabilitate and improve the roadway conditions and geometry and realign specific segments away from the PTA boundaries to allow for safe public access. In cooperation with the Hawaii State Department of Transportation (HDOT) and the Army’s Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, the Federal Highway Administration and Central Federal Lands High Divisions (CFL) initiated the Hawaii Route 200 Improvement Project.Under the Hawaii Route 200 Improvement Project, all action alternatives included reconstructing the roadway to a two-lane highway with climbing lanes where appropriate, paved shoulders, and a design speed of 60 miles per hour. Reconstruction was expected to result in increased safety and capacity, improved traffic flow, substantially decreased cross-island travel times, and stimulated economic growth and development. Reconstruction was divided into five segments discussed below: <ul> <li>Segment 1: Milepost (MP) 28 to 35 realignment within PTA, opened to traffic in May 2007.</li> <li>Segment 2: MP 19 and 28, opened to traffic in October 2008.</li> <li>Segment 3: MP 35 to 41 opened to traffic in August 2009. As part of this segment, a new underpass, the focus of this case history, was constructed. The underpass, completed in 2013, provided a grade separator to allow PTA military vehicles to pass under the newly constructed highway without interrupting the traffic flow above, thereby, reducing congestion and improving safety.</li> <li>Segment 4: MP 11 and 19, opened to traffic in 2011.</li> <li>Segment 5: MP 6 to MP 11, currently under construction as of this writing. </li></ul>Deployment: The Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS) concept was selected by the contractor to construct the underpass because of its geometry, accelerated construction, and reduced cost in comparison to other alternatives. Additionally, a nearby rock quarry of high-strength basalt aggregate appropriate for use as the reinforced fill composite within the GRS abutments was available to the contractor. The 42-foot long, 55-foot wide bridge is bearing on 20-foot high GRS abutment constructed with well-graded fill with reinforcement’s spaced at 8-inches (4-inches spacing at the top five layers beneath the bearing bed) and confined with CMU blocks. The bridge is located in a seismic zone 4 according to ASSHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and was designed for a peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.58g.Project Challenges and Solutions: Like any project in which new technology is implemented, the Daniel K. Inouye Highway GRS-IBS underpass faced unique construction challenges. Documented below, overcoming and finding solutions to these challenges was extremely important to the success of completing this project.<figure id='attachment_8113' style='max-width:747px' class='caption aligncenter'><img class="size-full wp-image-8113" src="https://www.geoinstitute.org/sites/default/files/geotech-tools-uploads/…; alt="Photograph of the completed Daniel K. Inouye Highway underpass." width="747" height="552" /><figcaption class='caption-text'> Figure 3. Daniel K. Inouye Highway above completed underpass.</figcaption></figure>Seismically active location (AASHTO Seismic Zone 4) The Daniel K. Inouye Highway underpass was the first to be designed for a relatively high PGA (0.58g). Neither AASHTO nor the “Design and Construction Guidelines for GRS-IBS” provided specific guidance for seismic design of the GRS abutments subjected to Extreme Event I. Thus, these procedures had to be developed by the design team. The GRS abutments were designed for axial and lateral loads in addition to the seismic loads imposed by Extreme Event I.Building on volcanic ash The materials at the bridge foundation level consisted of very dry volcanic ash. Dry volcanic ash has a relatively low angle of internal friction and poor water retention which makes it difficult to compact. To improve the friction and bearing capabilities for the GRS-IBS underpass the materials beneath the reinforced soil foundation (RSF) were scarified and embedded with three-feet of large angular rock from a nearby quarry. This concept showed that the GRS-IBS technology can be successfully adapted to poor soil conditions when combined with ground improvement.Design-build project delivery Per contract documents, two underpass construction options were available for the contractor: pre-cast or cast-in-place (CIP) concrete box culvert and GRS-IBS. The contract package included complete design with plans and specifications for the culvert option only. The GRS-IBS option, on the other hand, required the contractor to provide a design that would have to be approved by the owner’s team, comprised of representatives from the A&E, CFL, and HDOT design teams. The winning bidder had just completed a GRS-IBS bridge on the neighboring island of Maui. Having first-hand knowledge of the GRS-IBS advantages, including potential cost savings, allowed the contractor to see the challenge of providing original design as an opportunity to outbid the competitors. The winning bid at $972,000 was about $400,000 below the lowest CIP culvert bid and about $2 million less than the best precast culvert option submitted. When compared to the owner’s engineer estimate of the CIP option, the successful bid was lower by nearly $300,000.Multiple design iterations As with any project, the Daniel K. Inouye Highway GRS-IBS underpass underwent several design iterations before finalizing a solution. All design iterations involved both the substructure and superstructure.<figure id='attachment_8114' style='max-width:678px' class='caption aligncenter'><img class="size-full wp-image-8114" src="https://www.geoinstitute.org/sites/default/files/geotech-tools-uploads/…; alt="Photograph showing the cast-in-place concrete superstructure construction." width="678" height="537" /><figcaption class='caption-text'> Figure 4. Cast-in-place concrete superstructure construction.</figcaption></figure>While several configurations were considered for the GRS abutments, the final design incorporated lab test results for the fill material to provide an additional level of competency. The final design of the superstructure incorporated a cast-in-place (CIP) concrete superstructure (see figure 4). The CIP superstructure proved to be a cost-effective solution since readily available pre-cast concrete bridge elements were not available on the Big Island. Design decisions were made quickly due to close and timely communication within the project team and this was one of the keys to delivering a successful project.Compacted fill false work for the bridge and its effect on GRS abutments A soffit fill was utilized as the primary element to support the false work for the superstructure casting. The soffit fill consisted of a granular backfill placed and compacted between the bridge abutment facing blocks during the erection of the abutments. The fill was then excavated upon curing of the concrete deck. As this concept was the first attempt to incorporate the soffit fill technique in the GRS-IBS construction, the strain compatibility of both systems was cautiously evaluated prior to approval. Upon thorough deliberation, the design team concluded that soffit fill is satisfactory for use to construct the GRS-IBS. Foam boards were required to be placed in front of the CMU walls to protect the blocks from the potential damage during fill excavation. Once the soffit fill was removed, careful deformation measurements were taken to ensure GRS wall stability. Neither CMU damage nor noteworthy wall deformations were observed immediately following the fill removal. Successful implementation of this unconventional bridge construction approach demonstrated the versatility of GRS-IBS technology.Maintaining Straight Concrete Masonry Units (CMU) Wall Assuring block stability and vertical and lateral alignments during placement of the reinforced soil layers and the compaction of the backfill was challenging. The contractor adapted a creative and simple solution involving the placement of a heavy I-beam on top of a row of blocks to restrain them from movement during backfill compaction. This method proved to be successful and significantly increased production rate and produced an abutment facing that is aligned in both vertical and horizontal directions.Conclusion: The project team’s experiences and collaboration with the contractor on the Daniel K. Inouye Highway GRS-IBS underpass provides great insights into how GRS-IBS technology can be used. Constructing a GRS-IBS underpass in a remote and seismically active location using an unconventional soffit fill technique for constructing bridge decks only proves the versatility of this innovation. Additionally, when compared to the other alternatives considered by the contractor, the cost effectiveness of GRS-IBS is evident.The Daniel K. Inouye Highway GRS-IBS underpass is not the only GRS-IBS project successfully completed by the CFL. Other noteworthy projects include the Sand Creek bridges in Crook County, Wyoming and Sand Creek Bridge replacement in Dawes County, Nebraska.Project Contact: Khamis Y. Haramy Lead Geotechnical Engineer Federal Highway Administration, Central Federal Lands Khamis.HARAMY@dot.gov (720) 963-3521Project Technical Paper: A technical paper has not been published for this project.REFERENCES Adams, M. and Nicks, J. E., “Design and Construction Guidelines for Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Abutments and Integrated Bridge Systems DRAFT”, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA, 2017.Alzamora, D. and Nicks, J. E., “National Usage of Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil to Support Bridges”, Geostrata. Pg. 34-40. March/April 2015. Retrieved from: <a href="http://geostrata.geoinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2015/06/Ge…;. Accessed April 18, 2017.Daniel Alzamora, email correspondence with the author of this document, March 12, 2017 and April 17, 2017.“Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS)”, YouTube, 2015. Retrieved from: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NOLcVtAln0">https://www.youtube.com/wa…; (1:23:06). Accessed April 24, 2017.Khamis Haramy, email correspondence with the author of this document, April 18, 2017, May 10, 2017 and May 12, 2017.“Saddle Road on Hawaii’s Big Island”, saddleroad.com. Retrieved from: <a href="http://www.saddleroad.com/archived/index.html">http://www.saddleroad.co…;. Accessed April 12, 2017.“Saddle Road Renamed ‘Daniel K. Inouye Highway,’ Realignment to Mamalahoa Highway Opens”. State of Hawaii Department of Transportation, September 7, 2013. Retrieved from: <a href="http://hidot.hawaii.gov/blog/2013/09/07/saddle-road-renamed-daniel-k-in…;. Accessed April 12, 2017.

Title

Technology

Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall System