With the shortage of money for highway maintenance, the bridge engineer has to consider the most effective use of finance. With bridge deck expansion joints being one of the items which require repair most frequently, the engineer has to decide whether to provide for a movement range of 0-20 mm, a mechanical or nosing type joint at a relatively high initial cost, or a buried joint under continuous surfacing at a lower figure but with a possible greater maintenance commitment for the future. The paper considers the requirements of the technical memoranda issued by the UK department of transport and explains the movements and forces which affect a buried joint, together with its advantages. It gives a design example for the selection of the joint for a four-span motorway overbridge in new construction, the movements of which have been monitored since April, 1975. The south-western rcu buried expansion joint with its neoprene pad and flashing is described. /TRRL/

  • Availability:
  • Corporate Authors:

    Whitehall Technical Press Limited

    Wrotham Place
    Wrotham, Sevenoaks, Kent ME14 1PE,   England 
  • Authors:
    • CLARK, M N
  • Publication Date: 1978-4

Media Info

  • Features: Figures; Photos; References;
  • Pagination: p. 8-14
  • Serial:
    • Highway Engineer
    • Volume: 25
    • Issue Number: 4
    • Publisher: Whitehall Press Limited
    • ISSN: 0306-6452

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00178575
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Source Agency: Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL)
  • Files: ITRD, TRIS
  • Created Date: Sep 27 1978 12:00AM