Mitigation of Cracking in Cast-In-Place Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts in Alabama 
 
by 
 
Layton Wilson Minton 
 
 
 
 
A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of 
Auburn University 
in partial fulfillment of the 
requirements for the Degree of 
Master of Science 
 
Auburn, Alabama 
December 8, 2012 
 
 
 
 
Keywords: thermal stresses, joints, temperature and shrinkage reinforcement 
 
 
Copyright 2012 by Layton Wilson Minton 
 
 
Approved by 
 
Anton K. Schindler, Chair, Professor of Civil Engineering 
Robert W. Barnes, James J. Mallett Associate Professor of Civil Engineering 
James S. Davidson, Professor of Civil Engineering
ii 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Abstract 
 
 
Significant cracking was observed in Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) 
cast-in-place (CIP) reinforced concrete box culverts in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) project 
in Anniston, AL.  Numerous wide, transverse cracks were observed inside the culvert barrels, 
and cracking was also observed in the culvert wingwalls. 
Because of the cracking problems in the AEB project, crack condition surveys were done 
of other CIP reinforced concrete box culverts throughout Alabama to investigate the distress.  An 
instrumentation and testing plan was also developed for a CIP reinforced concrete box culvert 
under construction in order to evaluate the stress, strain, and temperature development as well as 
other properties.  The amount of temperature and shrinkage reinforcement required to produce 
acceptable average crack widths in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts was investigated as 
well. 
It was concluded that the transverse cracking was most likely a result of restrained 
thermal and drying shrinkage deformations in the concrete.  Transverse contraction joints in the 
culvert barrel and vertical wingwall joints were proposed to control the occurrence of these 
cracks.  The amount of longitudinal temperature and shrinkage reinforcement was also 
recommended to be increased to control the crack widths to 0.012 in. (0.30 mm). 
iii 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Acknowledgements 
 
 
I would first like to thank Dr. Anton Schindler for the guidance and instruction he 
provided throughout this research project and my time as a graduate student.  I also thank Dr. 
Robert Barnes and Dr. James Davidson for their contributions to this thesis.  Billy Wilson, Ryan 
Whaley, Dr. Junsuk Kang, Adam Wilkinson, and Stephen Swindall also deserve thanks.  This 
project would not have been completed without their help.  Finally, I must thank my parents, Bill 
and Lesa Minton, and my brother Carson.  None of this would have been possible without their 
love and support. 
I also must thank Rodney McCain, Russell Taylor, Eric Robbins, Curtis Lowe, Leonard 
Hope, Terence Williamson, Sharon Fuller and Sergio Garcia of the Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT).  Their help in obtaining culvert plans, and coordinating culvert visits 
was invaluable to the research effort.  I would also like to thank ALDOT for funding this 
research project. 
iv 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 
 
 
Abstract ?????????????????????????????????..? ii 
. 
Acknowledgements ????????? ????????????????????.. iii 
. 
List of Tables ???????????????????????????????.. xv 
. 
List of Figures ???????????????????????????????. xvi 
. 
Chapter 1    Introduction ??????????????...????????????..... 1 
. 
1.1 Background ?????????????????????????................ 1 
. 
1.1.1 Box Culverts ????????????????????????......? 1 
.. 
1.1.2 Culvert Cracking in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) ?????????..? 3 
.. 
1.2 Objectives ???????????????????????.??................. 7 
. 
1.3 Research Approach ????????????????????????........ 7 
. 
1.4 Definitions and Terminology ???????????????????...??.. 8  
. 
1.4.1 Culvert Terminology ???????????????????.????. 8 
. 
1.4.2 Definitions ???????????????????????????.. 9 
. 
1.4.3 Joint Terminology ????????????????????.. ??..? 11 
.. 
1.5 Thesis Outline ?????????????????????????.......... 12 
. 
Chapter 2    Literature Review ????????????????????????.? 14 
. 
2.1 Introduction ??????????????????????????.......... 14 
. 
2.2 Early-Age Cracking Mechanisms ??????????????????...?. 15 
. 
v 
 
2.2.1 Thermal Stresses ????????????????...?????..?? 15 
. 
2.2.2 Plastic Shrinkage ???????????????????? ??.......... 21 
. 
2.2.3 Autogenous and Chemical Shrinkage ??????????????.......... 22 
. 
2.2.4 Drying Shrinkage ???????????????????????? 24 
. 
2.3 Long-Term Durability ??????????????????????.......... 27 
. 
2.3.1 Corrosion ?????????????????????????.......... 27 
. 
2.4 Other Causes of Concrete Distress ??????????????????...? 30 
. 
2.4.1 Inadequate Curing ??????????????????????...?. 30 
. 
2.5 Crack Control ??????????????????????????...? 31 
. 
2.5.1 Reinforcement ??????????????????????.............. 31 
. 
2.5.2 Joints ????????????????????????????? 34 
. 
2.5.2.1 Construction Joints ????????????????..?........... 35 
. 
2.5.2.2 Contraction Joints ????????????????????? 37 
. 
2.5.2.3 Expansion Joints ???????????????????.......... 43 
. 
2.5.2.4 Joint Sealants, Joint Fillers, and Waterstops ?????... ????.? 45 
. 
2.6 Crack Repair ?????????????????????????.??? 49 
. 
2.6.1 Epoxy Injection ?????????????????????...???. 50 
. 
2.6.2 Routing and Sealing ?????????????????????.?? 51 
. 
2.7 AASHTO Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Construction and Design Practices ...? 53  
. 
2.7.1 Wall Height Construction Limitations ???????...?????.............. 53  
. 
2.7.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ????????..?? 53 
. 
2.7.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ???????????? 53 
. 
2.7.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Condition ???????????? 54  
. 
vi 
 
2.7.3 Joints ????????????????????????????? 54 
. 
2.7.3.1 Construction Joints ????????????? ??????..? 54 
. 
2.7.3.2 Contraction Joints ????????????????????? 5 5 
. 
2.7.3.3 Expansion Joints ???????????????????..?? 55 
. 
2.7.3.4 Waterstops ???????????????????????? 56 
. 
2.7.3.5 Concrete Culvert Joint Sealants ??????????????...? 56 
. 
2.7.4 Reinforcement ????????????????????????...... 5 7 
. 
2.8 Box Culvert Construction Practices of SASHTO States ?????????.......... 58  
. 
2.8.1 Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD)????.? 58 
. 
2.8.1.1 General Construction ????????????????...??? 58 
. 
2.8.1.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ????????????.? 58 
. 
2.8.1.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ?????.......... 5 9 
. 
2.8.1.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ????????.......... 5 9 
. 
2.8.1.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????????? 5 9 
. 
2.8.1.4 Joints ?????????????????????????? 59 
. 
2.8.1.4.1 Joint Waterproofing ????????... ?????????? 59 
. 
2.8.1.4.2 Joint Filler ????????????????????.......... 59 
. 
2.8.1.4.3 Joint Sealant ??????????????????...??? 59 
. 
2.8.2 Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) ?????????...??? 60 
. 
2.8.2.1 General Construction ??????????????????...? 60 
. 
2.8.2.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ??????????.??? 62 
. 
2.8.2.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ...??????... 62  
. 
2.8.2.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions??...???????? 62 
. 
vii 
 
2.8.2.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????????? 62 
. 
2.8.2.4 Joints ?????????????????????????? 63 
. 
2.8.2.4.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????? 63 
. 
2.8.2.4.2 Joint Waterproofing ????????????????........... 63 
. 
2.8.2.4.3 Joint Filler ??????????????????...?........... 63 
. 
2.8.2.4.4 Joint Sealant ????????????????...????? 64 
. 
2.8.3 Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) ???????????? 64 
. 
2.8.3.1 General Construction ????????????????...??? 64 
. 
2.8.3.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ?????......... 65 
. 
2.8.3.2.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????????? 65 
. 
2.8.3.3 Joints ?????????????????????????? 6 5 
. 
2.8.3.3.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????.... 6 5 
. 
2.8.3.3.2 Joint Waterproofing ...?????????????????? 66 
. 
2.8.3.3.3 Joint Filler ???????????????????..?........ 66 
. 
2.8.3.3.4 Joint Sealant ???????????????????...?? 66 
. 
2.8.4 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) ?????????????? 67 
. 
2.8.4.1 General Construction ??????????????...????? 67 
. 
2.8.4.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ????????????.... 68 
. 
2.8.4.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ???................. 69 
. 
2.8.4.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ????...?..????. 69 
. 
2.8.4.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????.????.. 69 
. 
2.8.4.4 Joints ???????? ?????????????????... 69 
. 
2.8.4.4.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????? 69 
. 
viii 
 
2.8.4.4.2 Contraction Joints ???????...???????????.. 70  
.. 
2.8.4.4.3 Expansion Joints ??????.????????????.?. 70 
. 
2.8.4.4.4 Joint Filler ????????????????????.?? 71 
. 
2.8.4.4.5 Joint Sealant ??????????.??????????.? 71 
. 
2.8.5 Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LA DOTD)?.  .?. 72 
. 
2.8.5.1 General Construction ??????????????.???.?? 72 
. 
2.8.5.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ????????................? 74 
. 
2.8.5.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ?????.?.... 74 
. 
2.8.5.3.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ???..????.?? 74 
. 
2.8.5.4 Joints ??????????????????..?????.?? 74 
. 
2.8.5.4.1 Construction Joints ????????.????????.??. 75 
. 
2.8.5.4.2 Expansion Joints ?????????????????.??.. 76 
. 
2.8.5.4.3 Joint Waterproofing ????????????????.??. 78 
. 
2.8.5.4.4 Joint Filler ??????? ????????????.??? 78 
. 
2.8.5.4.5 Joint Sealant ??????...????????????.??.. 78 
. 
2.8.6 Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) ?...??????.??.. 78 
. 
2.8.7 North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) ?????.??..... 78 
. 
2.8.7.1 General Construction ?????????????????.??. 78 
. 
2.8.7.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ????..?????.???. 79 
. 
2.8.7.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ??...?.???. 79 
. 
2.8.7.3.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ????.??.???. 80 
. 
2.8.7.4 Joints ???????????????????????.??.. 80 
. 
2.8.7.4.1 Construction Joints ??????.??? ???????.??.. 80 
. 
ix 
 
2.8.7.4.2 Expansion Joints ???????????.??????.??. 81 
. 
2.8.7.4.3 Joint Filler ??????????????..?????.??.. 81 
. 
2.8.7.4.4 Joint Sealant ?????????????...????.???.. 82 
. 
2.8.8 South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) ?????.??..? 82 
. 
2.8.8.1 General Construction ???????????? ?????.??. 82 
. 
2.8.8.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ????.??? 82 
. 
2.8.8.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ????..???.??.. 82 
. 
2.8.8.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ????.???.??. 83 
. 
2.8.8.3 Joints ????????????????.??????.??.?. 83 
. 
2.8.8.3.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????? 83 
. 
2.8.8.3.2 Joint Waterproofing ????????????????...?? 84 
. 
2.8.8.3.3 Joint Filler ?????????????????..????? 84 
. 
2.8.9 Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) ???????????.. 84 
. 
2.8.9.1 General Construction ??????????????????..? 84 
. 
2.8.9.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations ??????????.??? 85 
. 
2.8.9.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ?????.??. 85 
. 
2.8.9.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ????????..?? 85 
. 
2.8.9.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????..????.. 86 
. 
2.8.9.4 Joints ?????????????????????????? 86 
. 
2.8.9.4.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????? 86 
. 
2.8.9.4.2 Contraction Joints ?????????????????......... 90 
. 
2.8.9.4.3 Expansion Joints ???????????????????? 93 
. 
2.8.9.4.4 Joint Waterproofing ????????????????..?? 94 
. 
x 
 
2.8.9.4.5 Joint Filler ?????????????????????..? 94 
. 
2.8.9.4.6 Joint Sealant ????????????????? ??...?? 94 
. 
2.8.10 Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) ???????????? 95 
. 
2.8.10.1 General Construction ??????????????????..? 95 
. 
2.8.10.2 Joints ???????????????????????..??. 96 
. 
2.8.10.2.1 Construction Joints ??????????????????? 96 
. 
2.8.10.2.2 Joint Waterproofing ????????????????..?? 96 
. 
2.8.10.2.3 Joint Filler ?????????????????????.? 96 
. 
2.8.10.2.4 Joint Sealant ????????????????????...? 96 
. 
2.8.11 West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT) ??????..??. 97 
. 
2.8.11.1 General Construction ???????????????..???? 97 
. 
2.8.11.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions ??? ??..?? 97 
. 
2.8.11.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions ???????..??? 97 
. 
2.8.11.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions ?????????? 98 
. 
2.8.11.3 Joints ?????????????????????????? 98 
. 
2.8.11.3.1 Joint Waterproofing ?????????????????..? 98 
. 
2.8.11.3.2 Joint Filler ?????????????????????..... 98 
. 
2.8.11.3.3 Joint Sealant ??????????????????...??? 99 
. 
Chapter 3    Box Culvert Crack Condition Surveys ????????..??????.?? 100 
. 
3.1 Introduction ???????????????????..??????..?? 100 
. 
3.2 Survey Procedure ???..??????????????...??????..? 100 
. 
3.3 Culverts Visited ???????????.?? ????????????? 101 
. 
3.3.1 Anniston East Bypass (AEB) ??????????????????? 103 
. 
xi 
 
3.3.1.1 AEB Culvert at 149+60 (Culvert C) ???????????..?? 104 
. 
3.3.1.2 AEB Culvert at 162+90 (Culvert D) ?????????..???? 106 
. 
3.3.1.3 AEB Culvert at 175+70 (Culvert E) ???????????..?? 108 
. 
3.3.1.4 AEB Culvert at 240+37 (Culvert J) ??????????...??? 110 
. 
3.3.1.5 AEB Culvert at 257+69 (Culvert I) ????????????...? 112 
. 
3.3.2 Centreville ???????????????????????..??? 115 
. 
3.3.2.1 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 ????.??????????? 115 
. 
3.3.3 Corridor X ??????????????????????????. 118 
. 
3.3.3.1 Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 ???????????..???? 118 
. 
3.3.3.2 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 ????????????..??? 122 
. 
3.3.3.3 Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 ??..????????..????? 126 
. 
3.3.4 Dadeville ??????????????????????????? 128 
. 
3.3.4.1 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 ??????????????...? 128 
. 
3.3.5 Dutton ???????????????????????????? 131 
. 
3.3.5.1 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 ????????????????..? 131 
. 
3.3.6 Montgomery ??????????????????????...??? 13 5 
. 
3.3.6.1 Prattville Culvert on US-82 ?????????????...??? 13 5 
. 
3.3.6.2 I-85 North Culvert ?????..?..???????????..?? 13 8 
. 
3.3.6.3 I-85 South Culvert ???????????????????..? 13 9 
. 
3.4 Evaluation of Culvert Condition Survey Data ?????????.????..? 140 
. 
3.4.1 Crack Widths and Crack Spacings ??????????...???..??? 140 
. 
3.4.1.1 Procedure ?????????????????????..?? 140 
. 
3.4.1.2 Results and Discussion ??????????????????.. 141 
. 
xii 
 
3.5 Summary and Conclusions ?????????????????????? 15 4 
.. 
Chapter 4    Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement ??????????..???? 15 6 
. 
4.1 Introduction ???????????????????????????? 15 6 
. 
4.2 Direct Tension Cracking ??????????????????????? 156  
. 
4.2.1 First Cracking in Fully Restrained Concrete ?????????.???? 157  
. 
4.2.2 Final Cracking in Fully Restrained Concrete ?????????.???? 159  
. 
4.3 Minimum Reinforcement Ratio Recommendations ???????????..?. 160  
. 
4.4 Approach Proposed for Partially Restrained Concrete Subjected to Thermal and Drying 
Shrinkage ? ???????????????????????????? 162  
. 
4.4.1 Notation ??????????????????????????.? 163  
. 
4.4.2 Thermal Shrinkage ??????????????????????? 165  
. 
4.4.3 Accounting for Movement at Contraction Joints ??...????????? 167  
. 
4.4.4 First Cracking ????????????????????????? 1 70 
. 
4.4.5 Final Cracking ????????????????????????? 17 3 
. 
4.5 Results and Discussion ????????????????????..??? 17 5 
. 
4.6 Summary and Conclusions ?????????????????????? 1 81 
. 
Chapter 5    Instrumentation Plan to Determine Field Behavior of Box Culverts ??.....?? 18 3 
. 
5.1 Introduction ???????????????????????????? 18 3 
. 
5.2 Instrumentation Plan and Test Procedures ???????????????? 18 4 
. 
5.2.1 Concrete Stress, Strain, and Temperature ???????????..??? 18 4 
. 
5.2.2 Crack Detection ???????????????????????? 18 7 
. 
5.2.3 Crack Width Development ???????????????????? 1 87 
. 
5.2.4 Creep Testing ????????????...???????????..? 1 90 
. 
xiii 
 
5.2.5 Drying Shrinkage ???????????????????..??.?? 19 3 
. 
5.2.6 Tensile Strength, Modulus of Elasticity, and Compressive Strength 
Development ?. ????????????????????????. 19 4 
. 
5.2.7 Maturity ??????????????????????????.? 1 98 
. 
5.2.8 Concrete Setting Times ?????????????????????. 19 8 
. 
5.2.9 Quality Control Testing ????????????????????? 19 8 
. 
5.2.10 Early-Age Restrained Stress Development ?????????????? 19 8 
. 
Chapter 6    Recommendations to Mitigate Culvert Cracking ?????????...??? 200 
. 
6.1 Introduction ???????????????????????????? 200 
. 
6.2 Recommendations ???????????????????..?????? 200 
. 
6.2.1 Use of Transverse Contraction Joints ?????..??..???????? 200 
. 
6.2.1.1 Transverse Contraction Joint Spacing ????...???????? 201 
. 
6.2.1.2 Transverse Contraction Joint Design ????? ???.????? 20 3 
. 
6.2.2 Wingwall Joints ???????????????????????? 20 6 
. 
6.2.2.1 Expansion Joint ????????????????????.? 20 7 
. 
6.2.2.2 Wing Tab Joint ???????????????????..?? 2 10 
. 
6.2.2.3 Contraction Joint ????????????????????? 2 11 
. 
6.3 Summary ????????????????????????????? 2 11 
. 
Chapter 7    Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations ????????????? 21 3 
. 
7.1 Summary ????????????????????????????? 21 3 
. 
7.2 Conclusions and Recommendations ???????????????...??? 21 5 
. 
7.2.1 Cracking in Alabama Box Culverts ??????...?????????? 21 5 
. 
7.2.2 Causes of Cracking ??????????? ??????.??...??? 21 5 
. 
xiv 
 
7.2.3 Mitigation of Cracking ??????????????...??????? 21 6 
. 
7.3 Recommendations for Future Work ??????????????...???? 21 7 
. 
References ???????????????????????????..???..?.. 21 9 
. 
Appendix A    Box Culvert Crack Condition Survey Data and Data Sheet ?????.??. 22 6 
. 
Appendix B    Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Results ??????.????. 25 6 
.
xv 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
List of Tables 
 
 
Table 2-1 Minimum Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement for Environmental 
Structures (ACI 350 2001) ?............................. ............................................?.. 33 
. 
Table 2-2 Recommended Contraction Joint Spacing (ACI 224 1995) ?????............ 42 
. 
Table 2-3 Recommended Spacing (in Feet) for Contraction Joints in Slabs-on-Grade 
 (Kosmatka et al. 2002) ?????????... ?..??????????? 43 
. 
Table 2-4 Recommended Expansion Joint Spacing (ACI 224 1995) ??.......................... 45 
. 
Table 3-1 Surveyed Culvert Information ?????????..?????????. 103 
. 
Table 4-1  Minimum Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement Ratios ?????..?  162 
. 
Table 4-2 AEB Culvert at 240+37 Concrete Properties, Creep Coefficient, and Final Total 
 Shrinkage ?????????????..????????????.? 17 7 
.  
Table 4-3 Section Lengths, Contraction Joint Movement Values, Reinforcement Ratios, and 
Estimated Crack Widths for AEB Culvert at 240+37 ????????.?... 17 7 
?.  
Table 6-1 Transverse Joint Spacing for SASHTO States ???.???????...?.. 202 
. 
Table B-1 Results for Joint Movement Calculations ????????????.??. 25 8 
. 
Table B-2 Results for Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Analysis ? ?? ? ?. 26 3 
. 
Table B-3 Results for Figure 4-7 ???????????????...??????. 26 4 
.
xvi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
List of Figures 
 
 
Figure 1-1 Transverse Crack in the AEB Project (Crack Width ? 0.08 in. [2 mm]) ? ........ 4  
. 
Figure 1-2 Transverse Base Crack in the AEB Project (Crack Width > 0.06 in. [2 mm) .... 4
 .  
Figure 1-3 Vee Joint Detail (ALDOT 2010) ?????????..????????.? 6
 .  
Figure 1-4 Culvert Components (ALDOT 2011) ?.....?????????????.?.. 9
 .  . .  
Figure 1-5 Longitudinal and Transverse Crack Illustration in a Box Culvert ???.......? 1 1 
. 
Figure 1-6 ALDOT Vee Joint (ALDOT 2010) ??????..?????????.. ?.. 11 
. 
Figure 1-7 Contraction Joint from the AEB Project (ALDOT 2001) ??????..?..? 1 2 
. 
Figure 2-1 Through Crack in a Culvert in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) Project 
 (149+60)???????????????????????. ??.......? 16 
. 
Figure 2-2 Development of Early-Age Thermal Stresses (Schindler 2002) ?????..? 18 
. 
Figure 2-3 Concrete Thermal Deformation Temperature Change (Schindler 2002) ?...?. 18 
. 
Figure 2-4 Effect of Placement Season on Crack Width (Suh et al. 1992) ????..??. 20 
. 
Figure 2-5 Temperature Variations for Different Placement Times (SH 6 Summer) (Suh et 
 al. 1992) ?????????????????????????..??. 20 
. 
Figure 2-6 Plastic Shrinkage Crack in the Anniston East Bypass Project (175+70) ??.? 21 
. 
Figure 2-7 Relationship between Autogenous Shrinkage and Chemical Shrinkage of Cement 
 Paste at Early Ages (Hammer 1999) ??????? ?????????? 23 
. 
Figure 2-8 Influence of Relative Humidity on Ultimate Drying Shrinkage (Hansen and 
 Almudaiheem 1987) ?????.?????????????????? 25 
. 
Figure 2-9 Drying Shrinkage Cracking Illustration (ACI 224 2001) ?????...??..... 26 
. 
xvii 
 
Figure 2-10 Alligator or Craze Cracking (ACI 201 1992) ????????...????... 27 
. 
Figure 2-11 Reinforcement Corrosion Process (PCA n.d.) ????????????..... 28 
. 
Figure 2-12 Corrosion Damage (ACI 201 1992) ??????????...??????.. 30 
. 
Figure 2-13 Effect of Steel Percentage on Crack Spacing (McCullough and Dossey 1999) .. 31 
. 
Figure 2-14 Effect of Longitudinal Steel Design on Crack Width (Suh et al. 1992) ???.. 32 
.. 
Figure 2-15 Effect of Reinforcement Bar Size on Crack Spacing (McCullough and Dossey 
 1999) ???????????????????????????? .... 34 
. 
Figure 2-16 Construction Joint with continuous Reinforcement (ALDOT 2010) ????.. 36 
. 
Figure 2-17 Illustrations of a: (A) Butt Construction Joint and (B) Butt Construction Joint with 
 Dowel Bars (Kosmatka et al. 2002) ?????????..???????... 36 
. 
Figure 2-18 Possible Longitudinal Construction Joint Locations in an ALDOT Box Culvert 
 Culvert ????... ?????????.??????????????.. 37 
. 
Figure 2-19 Contraction Joint Concept (ACI 224 1995) ??????????...???.. 38 
. 
Figure 2-20 Illustrations of a: (A) Saw Cut Contraction Joint, (B) Contraction Joint with a 
Premolded Insert, and (C) Contraction Joint in a Thick Slab (ACI 224 1995) ... 39 
. 
Figure 2-21 Keyed Tongue-and-Groove Contraction Joint (ACI 224 1995) ?????...... 40 
. 
Figure 2-22 Doweled Contraction Joint (ACI 224 1995) ?????????...???..... 41 
. 
Figure 2-23 Typical Expansion/Isolation Joint (ACI 224 1995) ??????????.? 44 
. 
Figure 2-24 How Bond Breakers and Backup Material Work (ACI 504 1990) ?????.. 49 
. 
Figure 2-25 Epoxy Resin Crack Injection (FHWA 2005) ?? ??????????..?. 5 0 
. 
Figure 2-26 Routing and Sealing (Johnson 1965) ????????????????... 5 1 
. 
Figure 2-27 Typical FDOT Double Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (FDOT 
 2010a) ???????????????????????????..? 61 
. 
Figure 2-28 GDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section Example (GDOT 
 2001a) ???????????????????????????...... 65 
. 
 
 
xviii 
 
Figure 2-29 Typical KYTC Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (KYTC 
 2005) ???????????????????????????...?. 68 
. . 
Figure 2-30 KYTC Wall Contraction Joint Detail (KYTC 2005) ?????????...? 70 
.. 
Figure 2-31 KYTC Wall Expansion Joint Detail (KYTC 2005) ???????............?. 71 
. 
Figure 2-32 Typical La DOTD Double Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (La 
 DOTD 1978) ???????????????????? ?????? 73 
. 
Figure 2-33 La DOTD Box Culvert Section Showing the Rear Side of a Wingwall and 
 Expansion and Construction Joint Locations (La DOTD 2008) ????..?? 75 
. 
Figure 2-34 La DOTD Longitudinal Construction Joint between Base and Wall (La DOTD 
 2008) ? ??????????.?.?????????????...??.. 75  
. 
Figure 2-35 La DOTD Culvert Barrel Elevation View and Transverse Expansion Joint 
 Location (La DOTD 2008) ?????..??????????????? 76 
. 
Figure 2-36 La DOTD Transverse Expansion Joint Details for Culvert Barrels (La DOTD 
 2008) ???????????????..?????????????.. 77 
. 
Figure 2-37 La DOTD Wingwall Expansion Joint Detail (La DOTD 2008) ???..??? 77 
. 
Figure 2-38 NCDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section Example 
 (NCDOT 2007) ???????????????????????..?.. 79 
. 
Figure 2-39 NCDOT Wingwall Expansion Joint Location (NCDOT 2007) ?????...? 81 
. 
Figure 2-40 SCDOT Longitudinal Construction Joint Detail for Wall to Base Connections 
 (SCDOT 2009) ????????????????????????..... 84 
. 
Figure 2-41 Typical TDOT Cast-in-Place Box Bridge Cross Section (TDOT 2000c) ??... 85 
. 
Figure 2-42 TDOT Box Culvert Stage Construction Joint (TDOT 2000b) ??????..... 87 
. 
Figure 2-43 TDOT Construction Joints between Slabs and Exterior Walls (TDOT 2000c) ... 88  
. 
Figure 2-44 TDOT Construction Joints between Slabs and Interior Walls (TDOT 2000c) .... 89 
. 
Figure 2-45 TDOT Interior Construction Joints between Walls and Slabs when the Fill is 
 Greater than 10 Feet (3.0 m) (TDOT 2000c) ?????????... ???? 90 
. 
Figure 2-46 TDOT Wingwall Elevation View (TDOT 2000d) ????????.???.. 92 
. 
xix 
 
Figure 2-47 TDOT Vertical Wingwall Contraction Joint (TDOT 2000d) ???????.. 93 
. 
Figure 2-48 TDOT Vertical Wingwall Expansion Joint (TDOD 2000d) ???????.... 94  
 
Figure 2-49 Typical VDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (VDOT 
2008) ??????????????...??...????????.??.? 95 
. 
Figure 3-1 Culvert Survey Locations (ALDOT 2011a) ????????????..? 102 
. 
Figure 3-2 AEB Culvert at 149+60 Cross Section (ALDOT 1986) ????????? 104 
. 
Figure 3-3 AEB Culvert at 149+60 Entrance ...................................................................... 105 
. 
Figure 3-4 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) Wide Transverse Crack in AEB Culvert at 149+60 at Station 
 308 ft 0 in. in the North Wall ??????????????????.... 106 
. 
Figure 3-5 Inside of AEB Culvert at 162+90 ???????????????..?? 107 
. 
Figure 3-6 1/4 in. (3.2 mm) Wide Transverse Base Crack at Station 179 ft 0 in. in AEB 
 Culvert at 162+90 ????????????????????..........? 107 
. 
Figure 3-7 AEB Culvert at 175+70 Cross Section (ALDOT n.d.b) ????????.... 108 
. 
Figure 3-8 AEB Culvert at 175+70 Entrance ????????????????..? 109 
. 
Figure 3-9 Transverse Wall and Base Crack in AEB Culvert at 175+70 that is greater than 
 0.08 in. (2 mm) wide ????????? ? ????.??????..? 109 . 
Figure 3-10 AEB Culvert at 240+37 Cross Section (ALDOT n.d.a) ?????..??..? 110 
. 
Figure 3-11 Base Crack from AEB Culvert at 240+37 ??????????.............? 111 
. 
Figure 3-12 Wingwall Cracks in AEB Culvert at 240+37 ??????..?????..? 111 
. 
Figure 3-13 AEB Culvert at 257+69 Cross Section (ALDOT 2001) ????..???..? 112 
. 
Figure 3-14 AEB Culvert at 257+69 Entrance ???????????????..?? 113 
. 
Figure 3-15 Transverse Contraction Joint Used in AEB Culvert at 257+69 
(ALDOT 2001) ????????????. ????????????. 114 
.. 
Figure 3-16 (a) Contraction Joint and Sealant in AEB Culvert at 257+69; (b) Wood Strip in a 
 Contraction Joint in AEB Culvert at 257+69 ??????.?????....? 114 
. 
Figure 3-17 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Cross Section (ALDOT 2007) ????....? 115 
. 
xx 
 
Figure 3-18 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Entrance ???? ???????..??? 116 
. 
Figure 3-19 East Barrel Wall Crack Covered with Mortar in Centreville Culvert at 
 1808+98 ?????????????? ????????????..... 117 
. 
Figure 3-20 Crack at Wingwall and Culvert Intersection in Centreville Culvert at 
1808+98 ?????????????? ?????? ???????. 117 
.. 
Figure 3-21 Ceiling Crack on the Outside of Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 ??.............. 118  
. 
Figure 3-22 Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Cross Section (ALDOT 2000a) ????....... 119 
. 
Figure 3-23 Transverse Contraction Joint Used in Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 (ALDOT 
 2000a) ................................................................................................................ 121 
... 
Figure 3-24 Transverse Contraction Joint in the Base of Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 at 
 Station 151 ft 8 in. ?????...?????????????????.. 121 
. 
Figure 3-25 Transverse Contraction Joint in the Exterior Wall of Corridor X Culvert at 
 4877+13 at Station 341 ft 3 in. ????????????????.?.? 122 
. 
Figure 3-26 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Cross Section (ALDOT 2000b) ???...?... 123 
. 
Figure 3-27 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Entrance and Wingwall Crack ?????? 124 
. 
Figure 3-28 Transverse Contraction Joint used in Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 (ALDOT 
 2000b) ???????????????????????????.... 125 
.. 
Figure 3-29 Joint Opening Located in the wall of Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 ?......? 125 
. 
Figure 3-30 Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Southern Entrance ??????????...... 126 
. 
Figure 3-31 Transverse Wall Crack in Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 ???????..? 127 
. 
Figure 3-32 Transverse Construction Joint in Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 (Joint Patched 
  with Mortar)???????????????????????....?? 128 
. 
Figure 3-33 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Half-Typical Cross Section (ALDOT 1983) .... 129 
. 
Figure 3-34 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Entrance ???????????...?.?? 129 
. 
Figure 3-35 Transverse Wall Crack in Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 ?????.........? 130 
. 
Figure 3-36 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Wingwall and Culvert Connection ??...?? 131 
. 
xxi 
 
Figure 3-37 Transverse Vee Joint Used in Dutton Culvert at 548+23 (ALDOT 1980) ?? 13 3 
. 
Figure 3-38 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Entrance ?..???????????????. 133 
. 
Figure 3-39 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Cross Section (ALDOT 1988) ??????.....? 13 4 
. 
Figure 3-40 Transverse Crack in South Wall at Station 110 ft 11 in. of Dutton Culvert at 
 548+23 that is Greater than 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) Wide ????? ? ???...? 134 
. 
Figure 3-41 Entrance to Prattville Culvert on US-82 ?????????...????.? 135 
. 
Figure 3-42 Settlement of Prattville Culvert on US-82 ?????????. ..????.. 13 6 
. 
Figure 3-43 Base Deterioration in Prattville Culvert on US-82 ??..?...?????...? 13 7 
. 
Figure 3-44 Wingwall Connection to the Culvert in Prattville Culvert on US-82 ??........ 137 
. 
Figure 3-45 Entrance to I-85 North Culvert ????????????????? ..? 138 
. 
Figure 3-46 Entrance to I-85 South Culvert ?????????????????..? 139 
. 
Figure 3-47 Crack in the Vee Joint in the Wall in I-85 South Culvert ???????..? 140 
. 
Figure 3-48a Culvert Average Crack Widths ??????????????????.. 142 
. 
Figure 3-48b Culvert Average Crack Widths ??????????????????.. 142 
. 
Figure 3-48c Culvert Average Crack Widths ??????????????????.. 143 
. 
Figure 3-49a Culvert Average Crack Spacing ??????????????...???.. 143 
. 
Figure 3-49b Culvert Average Crack Spacing ????????..????????...? 1 44 
. 
Figure 3-49c Culvert Average Crack Spacing ???????..????????...?? 144 
. 
Figure 3-50a Culvert 90th percentile Crack Widths ??????????????.....? 145 
. 
Figure 3-50b Culvert 90th percentile Crack Widths ????..??????????...? 145 
. 
Figure 3-50c Culvert 90th percentile Crack Widths ???????..???????...? 146 
. 
Figure 3-51 Expected Locations of Longitudinal Cracks in Box Culverts ?...????? 150 
. 
Figure 3-52 Cracking at the Wingwall and Culvert Intersection Illustration ????..?.. 15 3 
. 
xxii 
 
Figure 3-53 Wingwall Foundation Settlement Cracking Illustrations ???????...? 15 3 
. 
Figure 4-1 First Cracking Illustration (Gilbert 1992) ??????????????.. 15 8 
. 
Figure 4-2 Final Cracking Illustration (Gilbert 1992) ????????..???...?? 15 9 
. 
Figure 4-3 Free-Body Diagrams for Displacement Calculations ?????..???..? 16 7 
. 
Figure 4-4 Bar Element with a Uniformly Distributed Load: (a) Reaction Forces; (b) 
Equivalent Forces (Sennett 1994) ??????????????..??? 16 8 
. 
Figure 4-5 Average Concrete Stress (Gilbert 1992) ???????????..??..? 17 4 
. 
Figure 4-6 Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Ratio versus Section Length between 
Joints to Keep the Average Crack Width of AEB Culvert at 240+37 at 0.012 in. 
(0.30 mm) ??......................?...??? ?.. ??????????...?....... 
178 . 
Figure 4-7 Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Ratio to Keep the Average Crack 
Width at 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) versus Percentage of Contraction Joint Movement 
for  
a Joint Spacing of 3H in AEB Culvert at 240+37 ???????????.. 17 9 
. 
Figure 5-1 VWS Gauge Wall Locations ???????????? ...??..????. 18 6 
. 
Figure 5-2 VWS Gauge Attachment Illustration (Geokon 2010) ?????..????.. 18 7 
. 
Figure 5-3 DEMEC Gauge (Kavanaugh 2008)..............................................................?...18 8 
. 
Figure 5-4 Stainless Steel DEMEC Stud?????????? ???..??????.18 8 
. 
Figure 5-5 DEMEC Stud Installed in Concrete???????????????.??18 9 
. 
Figure 5-6 DEMEC Stud Wall Layout (Top Row ? Construction Joint Configuration; Bottom 
 Row ? Crack Configuration)???????????????????....1 90 
. 
Figure 5-7 Elevation View of a Creep Frame (Kavanaugh 2008)???....??????.1 91 
. 
Figure 5-8 A Concrete Cylinder with DEMEC Points (Kavanaugh 2008)??????...1 92 
. 
Figure 5-9 A Concrete Cylinder in an Aligning Jig (ASTM C 496 2004)?...?????.19 4 
. 
Figure 5-10 Forney FX600 Compressive Testing Machine ???????????..? 19 5 
. 
Figure 5-11 Concrete Cylinder in a Compressometer (ASTM C 469 2002)??????...19 7 
. 
xxiii 
 
Figure 5-12 Rigid Cracking Frame at Auburn University ????????????.? 19 9 
. 
Figure 6-1 Recommended Contraction Joint Spacing and Box Culvert Clear Height ?.... 202 
. 
Figure 6-2 Transverse/Wingwall Contraction Joint (Not to Scale)???.......................... 20 4 
. 
Figure 6-3 Wingwall Elevation View (Not to Scale)???????....?????...? 20 7 
. 
Figure 6-4 Wingwall Expansion Joint (Not to Scale)????????? ?...???? 20 8 
. 
Figure 6-5 Wing Tab Joint (ALDOT 2011b)?????????.????????. 2 10 
. 
Figure A-1 AEB Culvert at 175+70 Crack Width Histogram ???????????.. 22 6 
. 
Figure A-2  AEB Culvert at 162+90 Crack Width Histogram ???????????.. 22 7 
. 
Figure A-3 AEB Culvert at 149+60 Crack Width Histogram ???????..???? 22 7 
. 
Figure A-4 AEB Culvert at 257+69 Crack Width Histogram ?????????.??. 22 8 
. 
Figure A-5 AEB Culvert at 240+37 Crack Width Histogram ???????.????. 22 8 
. 
Figure A-6 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 East Barrel Crack Width Histogram ??.?.. 2 29 
. 
Figure A-7 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Center Barrel Crack Width Histogram ??... 2 29 
. 
Figure A-8 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 West Barrel Crack Width Histogram ???.. 2 30 
. 
Figure A-9 Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Crack Width Histogram ????????.. 2 30 
. 
Figure A-10 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Crack Width Histogram ???????.?. 2 31 
. 
Figure A-11 Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Crack Width Histogram ????????.? 2 31 
. 
Figure A-12 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Crack Width Histogram ????????... 2 32 
. 
Figure A-13 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Crack Width Histogram ??????????... 2 32 
. 
Figure A-14 Prattville Culvert on US-82 Crack Width Histogram ???...?????.? 23 3 
. 
Figure A-15 I-85 North Culvert Crack Width Histogram ?????????????.. 23 3 
. 
Figure A-16 I-85 South Culvert Crack Width Histogram ????????????.?. 23 4 
. 
Figure A-17 AEB Culvert at 175+70 Crack Spacing Histogram ??????????... 23 4 
. 
xxiv 
 
Figure A-18  AEB Culvert at 162+90 Crack Spacing Histogram ?????????...? 23 5 
. 
Figure A-19 AEB Culvert at 149+60 Crack Spacing Histogram ?????????..?. 23 5 
. 
Figure A-20 AEB Culvert at 257+69 Crack Spacing Histogram ????????.......? 23 6 
. 
Figure A-21 AEB Culvert at 240+37 Crack Spacing Histogram ??????????... 23 6 
. 
Figure A-22 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 East Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram ?...?. 23 7 
. 
Figure A-23 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Center Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram ?..... 23 7 
. 
Figure A-24 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 West Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram ?..?. 238  
. 
Figure A-25 Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Crack Spacing Histogram ?.??????.. 238  
. 
Figure A-26 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Crack Spacing Histogram ????..???. 23 9  
. 
Figure A-27 Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Crack Spacing Histogram ????????.. 23 9 
. 
Figure A-28 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Crack Spacing Histogram ??????..?.. 2 40 
. 
Figure A-29 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Crack Spacing Histogram ????????..?.. 2 40 
. 
Figure A-30 Prattville Culvert on US-82 Crack Spacing Histogram ?????...?.??. 2 41 
. 
Figure A-31 I-85 Culvert North Crack Spacing Histogram ??????????..??. 2 41 
. 
Figure A-32 I-85 South Culvert Crack Spacing Histogram ??????????.??.. 2 42 
. 
Figure B-1 ConcreteWorks Temperature Data ????????????????? 25 7 
.
1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 1 
 
Introduction 
 
1.1 Background 
 
 
1.1.1 Box Culverts 
Box culverts are essential structures as they help shield the bases, ditches, and banks of 
roads from erosion and other detrimental effects by channeling the runoff water into roadside 
ditches.  They allow existing streams to flow under roadways, and keep the road sub-bases dry.  
Installing culverts at strategically chosen locations allows for control of runoff water flow 
velocity and for the prevention of roadway flooding by maintaining the design flow capacity of 
the ditches. All of this helps to achieve the overall goal of reducing road maintenance and 
upkeep. (Choctawhatchee 2000) 
Along with being a hydraulic structure, box culverts must also be designed to withstand 
various types of loads.  They must be able to support lateral loads from earth pressure as well as 
vertical loads from earth and vehicle pressures. (WisDOT 2011) 
While most culverts generally fulfill the same purpose, they can be classified differently.  
The Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) and Florida Department of transportation 
(FDOT) classify box culverts with spans less than 20 feet as culverts, and box culverts with 
spans longer than 20 feet are classified as bridge culverts (ALDOT 2008; FDOT 2011). 
2 
 
Culverts can be made out of different materials.  They are typically made of concrete, 
corrugated metal, or plastic.  The Florida Department of Transportation (2011) states that 
concrete culverts are generally preferred over corrugated metal and plastic when life-cycle costs 
are considered.  They are initially more expensive, but their resistance to environmental 
conditions, corrosion resistance, hydraulic efficiency, and long service life make them attractive 
(FDOT 2011). 
Reinforced concrete box culverts can be precast or cast-in-place (CIP).  Using precast 
structures allows for concrete structures to be mass produced at a plant and delivered to the site 
(FDOT 2011; KYTC 2011).  It also allows for the reduction of issues associated with 
construction time, site constraint, traffic management, and stream diversion.  However, using 
precast culverts only allows for certain sizes and skews to be used, as a result of transportation 
and handling concerns.  In addition, the cost of transportation to the job site can be high, and can 
overcome its advantages. (FDOT 2011)  CIP reinforced concrete box culverts are built at the 
construction site (KYTC 2011).  They are typically built when ready-mix concrete can be 
obtained and when it is desired to keep the number of transverse joints to a minimum.  An 
advantage of using the CIP method is that the culverts can be specifically designed to meet the 
unique needs of the site. (ConnDOT 2000) 
Culvert wingwalls can be described as retaining walls attached to the ends of culverts to 
retain fill material and to direct flow.  CIP wingwalls are preferred, but precast wingwalls can be 
used in certain cases. (FDOT 2011)  Wingwalls are to be used, along with headwalls, as a 
retaining wall for the roadway embankment (VDOT 2002).  They serve the following purposes: 
to limit seepage, make the culvert ends structurally sound, retain fill material, improve hydraulic 
3 
 
features, reduce erosion, and enhance aesthetics. Wingwalls may or may not be attached to the 
headwall.  (KYTC 2011) 
Box culverts can be constructed with more than one barrel.  Multiple-barrel, CIP culverts 
are usually built with all barrels having a uniform size.  This is so that standard details can be 
used. (VDOT 2002)  However, using multiple-barrel culverts may produce problems.  They can 
generate a build-up of debris over time, which can cause blockage.  Erosion problems can also 
arise due to the presence of multiple barrels.  Single barrel openings are preferred unless life-
cycle analysis shows that the savings from the costs of construction will be greater than the cost 
of maintenance. (TDOT 2010) 
1.1.2 Culvert Cracking in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) 
Multiple CIP reinforced concrete box culverts were built on the Anniston East Bypass 
(AEB) in Anniston, Alabama by the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT).  Within 
two years after construction, these culverts showed excessive transverse cracking. Cracks wider 
than 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) are considered a hazard to the culvert?s durability (ACI 224 2001), and 
many of the observed AEB culvert cracks were wider than 0.04 in. (1 mm).  Illustrations of some 
cracks found in the AEB project are shown in Figures 1-1 and 1-2. 
4 
 
 
Figure 1-1: Transverse Crack in the AEB Project (Crack Width ? 0.08 in. [2 mm]) 
 
 
 Figure 1-2: Transverse Base Crack in the AEB Project (Crack Width > 0.06 in. [2 mm]) 
 
5 
 
In a preliminary crack survey of AEB Culvert at 240+37 (Culvert J), performed by 
ALDOT on March 11, 2009, many wide transverse cracks in the concrete between construction 
joints were observed.  A majority of the cracks were located in the top slab and walls.  Some 
cracks were observed in the walls only.  Efflorescence was found around a majority of the cracks 
indicating that the cracks had not happened recently and that they ran completely through the top 
slab.  Water was leaking through many of the cracks.  Longitudinal cracks were also observed at 
the bottom of the chamfer between the top slab and walls, and in the center of the top slab.  The 
chamfer cracks appeared to run the length of the entire culvert.  The longitudinal cracks in the 
center of the top slab occurred between the french drains within the first 200 feet (60.1 m) of the 
south end of the culvert.  Cracks in the headwall and the wingwalls of the culvert were also 
observed. 
Follow up crack surveys were performed by an Auburn University research team and 
similar observations were made.  Most of the transverse cracks found were in the walls.  Few 
transverse base cracks were found, but they tended to be very wide (the widest crack found was 
greater than 0.10 in. [2.5 mm]).  Tight longitudinal chamfer cracks (less than 0.01 in. [0.3 mm]) 
were observed at the ends of the culvert too.  Vertical cracks in the wingwalls and diagonal 
cracks in the headwall were observed.  Efflorescence and very limited signs of corrosion were 
found at some of the cracks. 
AEB Culvert at 257+69 (Culvert I) and AEB Culvert at 149+60 (Culvert C) were also 
surveyed by the Auburn University research team.  AEB Culvert at 149+60 was surveyed 
because it had the same barrel size and construction joint detail as the AEB Culvert at 240+37.  
Wall and ceiling cracks in excess of 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) were found, as well as openings in the 
construction joints. 
6 
 
The transverse construction joints in culverts AEB Culvert at 240+37 and AEB Culvert at 
149+60 were specified to be ?? Vee Joints with the reinforcement running continuously through 
them.  See Figure 1-3 for an illustration of the vee joint.  This joint was meant to keep any 
movement other than cracking from occurring at the joint.   
 
 
Figure 1-3: Vee Joint Detail (ALDOT 2010) 
 
 
 
7 
 
1.2 Objectives 
This research project is sponsored by the Alabama Department of Transportation, and it 
is in response to the discovery of severe cracking in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) culverts.  
The objectives of the researched performed are 
? Determine the extent of cracking in other cast-in-place reinforced concrete box 
culverts in Alabama, 
? Develop an instrumentation plan to assess the development of stresses in newly 
constructed culverts, 
? Determine the mechanisms that cause significant cracking in cast-in-place reinforced 
concrete box culverts, and 
? Develop recommendations for ALDOT to mitigate the occurrence of cracking in cast-
in-place reinforced concrete box culverts. 
1.3 Research Approach 
To achieve the objectives stated in Section 1.2, culvert crack condition surveys were 
conducted of existing CIP reinforced concrete box culverts throughout Alabama.  The culvert 
crack condition surveys consisted of documenting the width and location of all of the transverse 
cracks observed.  The locations of any other signs of distress were also documented. 
The instrumentation and testing plan for a future CIP reinforced concrete box culvert 
under construction was developed.  This plan included monitoring the concrete stress, strain, and 
temperature development in the culvert walls.  A system to document the crack width 
progression of transverse cracks in the culvert was also outlined.  The tests outlined in the 
instrumentation and testing plan included assessments of creep, drying shrinkage, tensile strength 
development, modulus of elasticity development, compressive strength development, maturity, 
8 
 
setting time, and early-age restrained stress development.  Quality control testing was also 
outlined. 
The amount of temperature and shrinkage reinforcement required in a CIP box culvert to 
keep the average crack width at or below 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) was examined.  An analysis 
procedure developed by Gilbert (1992), which was modified to include joint movement and 
thermal shrinkage, was used to determine the amount of temperature and shrinkage steel 
necessary.  The analysis results were compared to other temperature and shrinkage 
recommendations from various sources. 
The culvert construction and design practices of the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and states that have similar climates to 
Alabama were researched in order to develop cracking mitigation methods.  Information from 
this research was used to develop a design for contraction and expansion joints to be used in the 
culvert barrels and in the wingwalls. 
1.4 Definitions and Terminology 
 
 
1.4.1 Culvert Terminology 
When the terms ceiling, interior wall, exterior wall, base, wingwall, footing/foundation, 
and culvert barrel are used in this report, they refer to the elements shown in Figure 1-4 below.  
9 
 
 
Figure 1-4: Culvert Components (ALDOT 2011) 
 
1.4.2 Definitions 
The following terms used in this thesis are defined as follows by the American Concrete 
Institute (2010):  
? Cast-in-Place Concrete ? concrete that is deposited and allowed to harden in the 
place where it is required to be in the completed structure, as opposed to precast 
concrete. 
? Construction Joint ? the surface where two successive placements of concrete 
meet, across which it may be desirable to achieve bond and through which 
reinforcement may be continuous. 
? Contraction Joint ? a formed, sawed, or tooled groove in a concrete structure to 
create a weakened plane to regulate the location of cracking resulting from the 
dimensional change of different parts of the structure. 
10 
 
? Diagonal Crack ? in a flexural member, an inclined crack caused by shear stress, 
usually at about 45 degrees to the axis; or a crack in a slab, not parallel to either the 
lateral or longitudinal directions. 
? Dowel ? (1) a steel pin, commonly a plain or coated round steel bar that extends into 
adjoining portions of a concrete construction, as at an expansion or contraction joint 
in a pavement slab, so as to transfer shear loads; or  (2) a deformed reinforcing bar 
intended to transmit tension, compression, or shear through a construction joint. 
? Hairline Crack ? a concrete surface crack with a width so small as to be barely 
perceptible. 
? Joint Filler ? compressible material used to fill a joint to prevent the infiltration of 
debris and provide support for sealants applied to the exposed surface. 
? Joint Sealant ? compressible material used to exclude water and solid foreign 
materials from joints. 
? Longitudinal Crack ? a crack that develops parallel to the length of a member. 
? Longitudinal Joint ? a joint parallel to the length of a structure or pavement. 
? Precast Concrete ? concrete cast elsewhere than its final position. 
? Plastic-Shrinkage Crack ? surface crack that occurs in concrete prior to initial set. 
? Transverse Crack ? a crack that crosses the longer dimension of the member. 
? Transverse Joint ? a joint normal to the longitudinal dimension of a structural 
element, assembly of elements, slab, or structure. 
? Waterstop ?  a thin sheet of metal, rubber, plastic, or other material inserted across 
a joint to obstruct the seepage of water through the joint. 
11 
 
An illustration of longitudinal and transverse cracks in a box culvert, to go along with the 
terminology above, is shown in Figure 1-5. 
 
Figure 1-5: Longitudinal and Transverse Crack Illustration in a Box Culvert 
 
1.4.3 Joint Terminology 
The ALDOT term ?vee joint? is used to refer to construction joints that are not designed 
to allow movement.  Figure 1-6 is an illustration of a vee joint.  The vee joints in ALDOT 
culverts may not always have the ? in. indention shown in Figure 1-3, but they have continuous 
reinforcement. 
 
Figure 1-6: ALDOT Vee Joint (ALDOT 2010) 
 
12 
 
Joints where movement is allowed are referred to as contraction or expansion joints.  
These joints may also serve the purpose of construction joints. A contraction joint used in the 
AEB project is shown in Figure 1-7. 
 
Figure 1-7: Contraction Joint from the AEB Project (ALDOT 2001) 
 
1.5 Thesis Outline 
A review of literature on relevant topics is included in Chapter 2 of this thesis.  Topics 
reviewed include thermal stresses, plastic shrinkage, autogenous and chemical shrinkage, drying 
shrinkage, corrosion, inadequate curing, crack control, crack repair, American Association of 
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) construction and design practices, and 
culvert construction and design practices of states that are members of the Southeastern 
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (SASHTO). 
13 
 
A summary of the CIP reinforced concrete box culverts visited in Alabama is included in 
Chapter 3.  The procedure used during the crack surveys, the sites visited, the data collected, and 
conclusions are covered in this chapter. 
In Chapter 4, the amount of temperature and shrinkage reinforcement required to keep the 
average crack widths at or below the ACI 224 (2001) limit of 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) in a CIP 
reinforced concrete box culvert is investigated.  The analysis procedure that is used to calculate 
average crack widths is presented, along with recommendations for the ratio of temperature and 
shrinkage reinforcement that should be used in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts. 
The instrumentation plan developed to gather data from a CIP reinforced concrete box 
culvert in the field, and the test procedures for testing the concrete from the culvert are presented 
in Chapter 5.  The instrumentation for gathering stress, strain, and temperature data as well as the 
instrumentation for detecting cracks and monitoring crack widths is described.  The test 
procedures used in obtaining creep, drying shrinkage, compressive strength, tensile strength, 
modulus of elasticity, maturity, setting times, quality control, and early-age restrained stress 
development data are also described. 
Recommendations for transverse contraction joints and wingwall joints are proposed in 
Chapter 6. 
A general summary of the research findings, conclusions, and recommendations given is 
included in Chapter 7. 
14 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 2 
 
Literature Review 
 
2.1 Introduction 
Tensile stresses rise due to the restraint of concrete volume change effects and cause the 
concrete to crack when the tensile stress exceeds the tensile strength of the concrete (ACI 224 
1995).  Because of this, it is generally accepted that most reinforced concrete structures will 
crack even when they are well designed (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  Humidity and thermal 
cycles cause concrete volume changes that make cracking inevitable (Mehta and Monteiro 2006; 
ACI 224 1995).  These cracks can be an indication of the total magnitude of the distress, or they 
can be indications of more significant problems.  The implications are dependent on the type of 
cracking and the function of the affected structure.  For example, cracks that are not a problem in 
buildings could be detrimental to a structure that must retain water. (ACI 224 2007) 
Concrete culverts are no exception to this.  They typically experience longitudinal and 
transverse cracks between joints.  Wide cracks can have the same effect as an open joint in a 
culvert.  They can result in damage to the culvert by allowing the backfill material around the 
culvert to erode away.   This can lead to alignment problems between the connecting barrels and 
to problems due to differential settlement. (AASHTO 2010a)  Because of the problems that 
cracks can cause culverts, it is important to understand the causes of cracking, what can be done 
to prevent it, and how they can be repaired. 
15 
 
2.2 Early-Age Cracking Mechanisms 
2.2.1 Thermal Stresses 
Objects in the solid phase tend to contract when they are cooled, and expand when they 
are heated.  The amount of expansion or contraction (strain) is a function of the coefficient of 
thermal expansion of a material and the temperature change. (Mehta and Monteiro 2006)   
Cracking can occur when restrained concrete goes through these temperature-related expansion 
and contraction phases (Bernander 1998). 
The expansion comes from the heat produced by cement hydration (Mehta and Monteiro 
2006).  These cracks generally occur within one to a few days after the concrete has been poured 
and are usually only surface cracks.  They also tend to close after the concrete has cooled and 
contracted. (Bernander 1998) 
The shrinkage strain that occurs due to the concrete cooling (and contracting) tends to be 
significant (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  Shrinkage strains can lead to tensile stresses that usually 
cause through cracks if the contraction is at least partially restrained (Mehta and Monteiro 2006; 
Bernander 1998).  They can form as soon as a few weeks after the concrete has been poured, or 
they can occur as late as years later.  The through cracks usually remain permanently open, and 
can affect durability. (Bernander 1998)  Figure 2-1 illustrates a through crack in a culvert. 
16 
 
 
Figure 2-1: Through Crack in a Culvert in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) Project (149+60) 
 
The tensile stresses that can result from thermal shrinkage strains are a function of the 
degree of restraint, modulus of elasticity, the stress relaxation due to creep, coefficient of thermal 
expansion, and the temperature change.  If the thermal shrinkage strain is restrained, tensile 
stresses develop.  However, if the shrinkage is unrestrained, stresses do not develop.  Also, if the 
modulus of elasticity of the concrete is low, the tensile stress in the concrete will be lower.  
Stress relaxation due to creep also works to decrease the amount of stress experienced. Concrete 
that creeps more will have more stress relaxation. (Mehta and Monteiro 2006) 
The coefficient of thermal expansion defines how one degree of temperature change 
affects the change in a unit length of unrestrained concrete (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  
Research from Suh et al. (1992) showed that using limestone aggregate (low coefficient of 
thermal expansion) in concrete reduced the widths of the cracks in reinforced concrete 
17 
 
pavements when compared to pavements that used siliceous river gravel (high coefficient of 
thermal expansion).  Therefore, using aggregate with a low coefficient of thermal expansion can 
help to reduce the tensile stresses experienced (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  The temperature 
change for thermal deformations is defined as follows by Schindler (2002): 
m inTTT s tr es sz er o ??? ?                               Equation 2-1 
where, 
T?   = concrete temperature change (?F), 
minT  = minimum concrete temperature (?F), and 
stresszeroT ?  = concrete zero-stress temperature (?F). 
 
Schindler (2002) also found that stresszeroT ?  was between 92% and 94% of maxT , and concluded 
that it should be approximated as follows: 
max93.0 TT stresszero ??                               Equation 2-2 
where, 
maxT  = maximum concrete temperature (?F). 
 
stresszeroT ?  is used instead of maxT  because, as Figure 2-2 illustrates, the concrete is in compression 
after final setting has occurred until the zero-stress state is reached.  After the zero-stress state is 
reached, the concrete then first develops tensile stresses.  Therefore, the maximum temperature 
that corresponds to the rise in tensile stresses that induce cracking is stresszeroT ? .  The lowest 
concrete temperature that will be experienced by the member could occur years after the concrete 
is cast, as presented in Figure 2-3. (Schindler 2002) 
18 
 
 
Figure 2-2: Development of Early-Age Thermal Stresses (Schindler 2002) 
 
 
Figure 2-3: Concrete Thermal Deformation Temperature Change (Schindler 2002) 
19 
 
Research from Suh et al. (1992) also showed that the ambient temperature at the time of 
concrete placement had an effect on early-age cracking.  They found that continuously reinforced 
concrete (CRC) pavement sections placed in the summer had wider crack widths than did 
pavement sections placed in the winter.  This finding is illustrated in Figure 2-4.  This was due to 
the high ambient temperatures in the summer increasing the rate of concrete hydration.  When 
concrete hydrates at a higher rate, the temperature rise accelerates, which increases the zero-
stress temperature.  A large temperature differential then results when the ambient and concrete 
temperatures drop during the night after placement.  In contrast, the temperature differential is 
smaller during winter construction due to retarded concrete hydration.  They also found similar 
temperature differential results when comparing the time of day that CRC pavement sections 
were placed during the summer.  The maximum concrete temperature from cement hydration, 
which typically occurs hours after placement, was greatly affected by the ambient temperature 
that coincided with it.  The time of peak concrete temperature for concrete placed on a summer 
morning usually coincides with the peak ambient temperatures of the day.  If placement occurs 
during a summer afternoon or night, the peak concrete temperature coincides with the lower 
ambient temperatures of the evening or night. As presented in Figure 2-5, it was found that 
placing the concrete in the morning increased the temperature rise (and therefore also the 
temperature differential) in the concrete, and it was found that it was preferable to place concrete 
in the afternoon or night during the summer.  The time of concrete placement was found to have 
little effect during winter concrete placement. (Suh et al. 1992) 
 
20 
 
 
Figure 2-4: Effect of Placement Season on Crack Width (Suh et al. 1992) 
 
 
Figure 2-5: Temperature Variations for Different Placement Times (SH 6 Summer) (Suh et al. 
1992) 
 
 
 
21 
 
2.2.2 Plastic Shrinkage 
Plastic shrinkage is a problem in concrete before setting occurs.  It is a concern in hot, 
windy areas and usually associated with concrete slabs (Folliard et al. 2009; Mehta and Monteiro 
2006).  Plastic shrinkage happens as a result of water evaporating from the surface of fresh 
concrete quicker than bleedwater can replenish it.  The underlying concrete acts as a restraint for 
the surface layer and causes tensile stresses to develop in the contracting surface. (ACI 224 
2007)  The tensile strength of the concrete in its plastic state is negligible.  Therefore the tensile 
stresses experienced exceed the tensile strength and plastic shrinkage cracking occurs. (Folliard 
et al. 2009)  The cracks formed are generally shallow but can become much deeper with time 
(ACI 224 2007).  An example of a plastic shrinkage crack is shown in Figure 2-6.  They typically 
are only 1 to 2 in. (25 to 50 mm) deep and 1 to 6.5 ft (0.3 to 2.0 m) apart (Mehta and Monteiro 
2006). Also, plastic shrinkage cracks can run parallel to each other or follow a polygonal pattern.  
They can be relatively wide (up to 1/8 inch [3.2 mm]), and vary in length. (ACI 224 2007) 
 
Figure 2-6: Plastic Shrinkage Crack in the Anniston East Bypass Project (175+70) 
22 
 
Concrete that has a low tendency to bleed (such as concrete with silica fume) has an 
increased susceptibility to plastic shrinkage cracking (ACI 224 2007).  This is because the 
required evaporation rate for plastic shrinkage to occur is much lower than it is for concrete with 
a greater tendency to bleed (Folliard et al. 2009; ACI 224 2007).  
The rate of evaporation of moisture in fresh concrete is key to the occurrence of plastic 
shrinkage.   It is a function of concrete temperature, air temperature, wind velocity, and relative 
humidity.  High concrete temperatures, high air temperatures, high wind velocities, and low 
relative humidity all increase the evaporation rate and plastic shrinkage. (ACI 224 2007)  When 
the evaporation rate exceeds 0.2 lb/ft2 per hour (1 kg/m2 per hour), plastic shrinkage can become 
a problem and precautionary actions should be taken (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  
2.2.3 Autogenous and Chemical Shrinkage 
Chemical shrinkage is due to the products of cement hydration taking up less volume 
than the initial water and cement did (Jensen and Hansen 2001).  After the concrete has initially 
set, the concrete paste cannot change shape as much as it could before.  As a result, hydration, 
and therefore chemical shrinkage, continues by forming voids in the microstructure of the paste.  
Most chemical shrinkage happens internally and is not visible in the external geometry of the 
concrete.  (Kosmatka et al. 2002) 
The American Concrete Institute (2010) defines autogenous shrinkage as ?a change in 
volume produced by continued hydration of cement, exclusive of effects of applied load and 
change in either thermal condition or moisture content.? It is often too small to measure in 
normal strength concrete, because the concrete generally has enough water for the concrete to 
fully hydrate (Holt 2001).  However in high-performance concrete (HPC), the autogenous 
shrinkage can be significant due to its low water-cement ratio and high cement content (Holt 
23 
 
2001; Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  These conditions can cause autogenous shrinkage in the form 
of self-dessication to occur when there is not enough water available to hydrate all of the cement 
(Holt 2001; Folliard et al. 2009).  Self-desiccation is when the concrete takes water from its own 
pore cavities for hydration purposes.  It is a form of internal drying, and it lowers the internal 
relative humidity of the concrete. (Holt 2001)  Typical magnitudes of autogenous and chemical 
shrinkage are illustrated in Figure 2-7. 
 
Figure 2-7: Relationship between Autogenous Shrinkage and Chemical Shrinkage of Cement 
Paste at Early Ages (Hammer 1999) 
 
Cracking due to autogenous shrinkage is also due to the concrete being restrained when 
shrinkage occurs.  Microcracks can form and connect to form a continuous crack network.  This 
can greatly diminish concrete?s strength and durability resistance, as well as causing aesthetic 
problems. (Jensen and Hansen 2001) 
 
24 
 
2.2.4 Drying Shrinkage 
The catalyst for drying shrinkage is the same as for plastic shrinkage: loss of internal 
moisture from the cement paste (ACI 224 2007).  However, in the case of drying shrinkage, the 
water lost was absorbed in the hydrated cement paste (Mehta and Monteiro 2006).  The major 
difference is that drying shrinkage occurs in hardened concrete and plastic shrinkage occurs in 
fresh concrete.  Moisture is lost first from the largest pores where it is most loosely held, and it is 
then lost from smaller and smaller pores.  Water lost from pores that are smaller than 50 
nanometers is responsible for drying shrinkage. (Folliard et al. 2009)  Water in pores larger than 
50 nanometers is considered free water and is not considered responsible for any drying 
shrinkage (Mehta and Monteiro 2006). 
The magnitude of drying shrinkage is affected by the aggregate used, the cement and 
water contents of the cement paste, the geometry of the concrete member, humidity, and time 
(ACI 224 2007; Mehta and Monteiro 2006). Research performed by Pickett (1956) showed that 
increasing the aggregate content will reduce the amount of drying shrinkage experienced.  
Increasing the water-cement ratio (when the concrete has a fixed cement content) increases the 
amount of drying shrinkage, as does increasing the cement content at a fixed water-cement ratio. 
Concrete members that are smaller, (or have a shorter path for water to leave the concrete) tend 
to experience drying shrinkage quicker. (Mehta and Monteiro 2006)  Research by Hansen and 
Almudaiheem (1987), see Figure 2-8, showed that no drying shrinkage occurs when the relative 
humidity is at 100%, and that the amount of drying shrinkage experienced increased as the 
relative humidity decreased.  This is because more moisture is lost from the concrete as the 
relative humidity lowers (Mehta and Monteiro 2006). 
25 
 
 
Figure 2-8: Influence of Relative Humidity on Ultimate Drying Shrinkage (Hansen and 
Almudaiheem 1987) 
 
Drying shrinkage by itself does not cause cracking.  The restraint of the concrete during 
its shrinkage-induced volume change causes the tensile stresses that cause cracking.  Figure 2-9 
illustrates this concept.  The size of the tensile stresses experienced are a function of the degree 
of restraint, amount of shrinkage, rate of shrinkage, the modulus of elasticity, and the magnitude 
of creep. (ACI 224 2007)  The modulus of elasticity and creep (through stress relaxation) affect 
drying shrinkage tensile stresses in the same way that they affect thermal tensile stresses (Mehta 
and Monteiro 2006).  In mass concrete pours, tensile stresses arise when the amount of shrinkage 
on the exterior is greater than in the interior.  This causes cracks on the surface that can 
propagate deeper into the concrete as time passes. (ACI 224 2007) 
26 
 
 
Figure 2-9: Drying Shrinkage Cracking Illustration (ACI 224 2001) 
 
Alligator (or craze) cracking located on slabs or walls is an example of drying shrinkage 
cracking (ACI 224 2007).  Alligator cracking is defined as irregular fine cracks on the exterior of 
concrete, and it is a result of the surface portion of concrete having a higher water-cement ratio 
than its inner portion (ACI 201 1992; ACI 224 2007).  An example of alligator cracking is shown 
in Figure 2-10. 
 
27 
 
 
Figure 2-10: Alligator or Craze Cracking (ACI 201 1992) 
 
2.3 Long-Term Durability 
2.3.1 Corrosion 
The causes of reinforcement corrosion can be attributed to different things. An electrical 
current is necessary for it to occur.  The electrical current can happen because of potential 
differences between an anode and a cathode in reinforcing steel.  The positively charged iron 
(Fe2+) ions from the steel move from the anode to the cathode where they react with negatively 
charged hydroxide ions (OH-) (from water and oxygen) to form iron oxide or rust. (Pincheira et 
al. 2008)  This process is illustrated in Figure 2-11. 
28 
 
 
Figure 2-11: Reinforcement Corrosion Process (PCA n.d.) 
 
The presence of chlorides, which are present in deicing salts and seawater, is the major 
contributor to corrosion problems.  Bridge decks provide a good example of this.  Negatively 
charged chlorides penetrate concrete and concentrate around the reinforcement to form 
negatively charged (anodic) sections.  The other sections are thus more positive (cathodic) by 
comparison.  This produces the electrical current necessary for corrosion to occur. (Pincheira et 
al. 2008)  Another way to explain how chlorides aid in corrosion is the fact that steel 
reinforcement has an initial oxide film over it from when it was produced.  This oxide film is 
stabilized in the alkaline environment of concrete.  This film protects the rebar from corrosion.  
Liquids containing chlorides permeate the concrete and they help to wear away this protective 
film. (Kuennen 2010)  
Carbonation is yet another way that reinforcement can be attacked.  This occurs when 
carbon dioxide in the air reacts with calcium hydroxide in concrete to form carbonic acid.  The 
acid reduces the pH of concrete and produces a less alkaline environment.  Because of the 
reduction in alkalinity, the protective film around the reinforcement becomes unstable and breaks 
29 
 
away. (Mathew 2006)  This increases the susceptibility of the reinforcement to corrosion 
(Kuennen 2010). 
Concrete cracking is a dangerous side effect of reinforcement corrosion.  The hydroxides 
and iron oxides produced from corrosion reactions take up more space than the uncorroded steel 
did (Pincheira et al. 2008).  This increases the stresses in concrete around the reinforcement bars 
and can lead to localized cracking around the corroded section (ACI 224 2007).  The localized 
cracks can propagate into long longitudinal cracks (cracks running parallel to the reinforcing 
bars) and can result in delamination (when a surface layer of concrete separates from the 
reinforcement) (ACI 224 2007; Mathew 2006).  The longitudinal cracks also make it easier for 
corrosive agents (moisture, oxygen, and chlorides) to reach the reinforcement, thus allowing the 
corrosion effects to get worse.  Therefore, wider cracks lead to greater corrosion because more of 
the bar is exposed to the corrosive agents. (ACI 224 2007)  Cracks with a width greater than 
0.006 in. (0.2 mm) are considered to be a problem in when concrete under service loads is 
exposed to seawater, and cracks greater than 0.007 in. (0.2 mm) are a problem when exposed to 
deicing chemicals (ACI 224 2001).  Cracks that are transverse to the reinforcing steel generally 
do not enhance the effects of corrosion if the concrete has a low permeability (ACI 224 2007).  
An example of corrosion damage is shown in Figure 2-12. 
30 
 
                          
Figure 2-12: Corrosion Damage (ACI 201 1992) 
 
2.4 Other Causes of Concrete Distress 
2.4.1 Inadequate Curing 
Inadequate curing can greatly increase the amount of cracking in a structure.  If concrete 
is not allowed to cure long enough, the amount of shrinkage experienced will increase, and it will 
happen at a point when the concrete is low in strength.  Inadequate curing will also lead to 
decreased durability and long-term strength. (ACI 224 2007)  Because of this, it is important that 
concrete be cured in a way so that it is protected from low temperatures and conditions that could 
cause early drying. These conditions could cause cracking if they are not taken into account.  It is 
also necessary to make sure the concrete is cured in a way so that it has adequate strength.  (ACI 
224 2001) 
31 
 
Allowing concrete to cure longer can mitigate cracking.  Stress relaxation (through creep) 
and the concrete being allowed to adjust to the restrained stresses over the curing period make 
this possible.  A wet curing period of at least 7 days is recommended. (ACI 224 2001)   
2.5 Crack Control 
2.5.1 Reinforcement 
The percentage of steel in reinforced concrete can also have an effect on the crack width 
and spacing.  Research by McCullough and Dossey (1999) showed that increasing the 
reinforcement percentage in CRC pavements decreased the crack spacing.  See Figure 2-13 for 
their findings.  Research from Suh et al. (1992) showed that increasing the reinforcement 
percentage in CRC pavements decreased the crack widths experienced.   Their findings are 
presented in Figure 2-14. 
 
Figure 2-13: Effect of Steel Percentage on Crack Spacing (McCullough and Dossey 1999) 
 
32 
 
 
Figure 2-14: Effect of Longitudinal Steel Design on Crack Width (Suh et al. 1992) 
 
Examining the extreme case of unreinforced and reinforced concrete further confirms the 
effect of reinforcement percentage on cracking spacing.  Unreinforced concrete tends to have 
cracks spaced at larger intervals than reinforced concrete.  This is because the steel provides 
restraint when the concrete expands or contracts.  The steel percentage can be altered to achieve 
the desired crack spacing. (McCullough and Dossey 1999) 
ACI 350 (2001) recommends that a minimum temperature and shrinkage reinforcement 
percentage of between 0.0030 and 0.0050 be used for environmental structures depending on the 
length between joints in a structure.  Table 2-1 summarizes their recommendations.  ACI 224 
(2001) recommends that a reinforcement ratio of at least 0.0060 be used to control shrinkage 
cracking, and that the minimum reinforcement ratio of 0.0018 for structural slabs and 0.0020 for 
walls specified by ACI 318 (2011) is insufficient in members with a high degree of restraint.  
Increasing the reinforcement percentage in slabs that are significantly restrained is supported in 
33 
 
Section R7.12.1.2 of the commentary of ACI 318 (2011), which states, ?Where structural walls 
or columns provide significant restraint to shrinkage and temperature movements?, it may be 
necessary to increase the amount of slab reinforcement required.? 
 
Table 2-1: Minimum Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Ratios for Environmental 
Structures (ACI 350 2001) 
 
 
The size of the reinforcement bars also has an effect on crack spacing.  When the steel 
percentage was kept constant in CRC pavements, McCullough and Dossey (1999) found that 
larger bar sizes led to increased crack spacing.  Figure 2-15 illustrates their research.  This 
occurred because larger reinforcement bars have a larger bond area between the concrete and 
reinforcement (McCullough and Dossey 1999). 
34 
 
 
Figure 2-15: Effect of Reinforcement Bar Size on Crack Spacing (McCullough and Dossey 
1999) 
 
2.5.2 Joints 
Jointing is an important aspect of crack control and construction (Kosmatka et al. 2002).  
Joints allow for concrete to be placed in sections instead of continuously and can be used to 
relieve stresses due to concrete volume changes.  Also, joints are viewed as intentional cracks by 
some engineers and can be used as weakened planes to ensure that cracks occur in places that are 
of minor importance. (ACI 224 1995) 
Joints serve a specific purpose when used in culverts (or tunnels), slabs-on-grade, or 
walls.  Transverse joints in cast-in-place (CIP) tunnels, and therefore in culverts, serve the 
purpose of reducing shrinkage cracking and simplifying construction.  Longitudinal tunnel joints 
segment the cross section of a CIP tunnel into sections.  Their location depends on the cross 
section and the order of concrete placement.  Joints in slabs-on-grade serve the purpose of 
allowing the slab to move.  They also make sure that the slab is aesthetically pleasing by 
providing a relatively crack-free slab.  The joints cause the cracks to form along designated 
35 
 
planes.  In walls, the base slab acts as restraint for walls that crack when the wall deforms and 
exceeds its tensile strength.   Therefore, joints in walls serve the same purpose as they do in 
slabs-on-grade by allowing movement and by controlling cracking.  Construction joints can also 
allow for the wall to be placed in sections. (ACI 224 1995) 
The three types of joints that will be reviewed are construction joints, contraction joints, 
and expansion joints.  Joint sealants, joint filler, and waterstops used in these joints will also be 
evaluated. 
2.5.2.1 Construction Joints 
Construction joints separate areas of concrete that have been placed at different times 
(Kosmatka et al. 2002).  These joints may also serve the purpose of a construction or expansion 
joint, where it allows the concrete to expand or contract.  Construction joints can also allow no 
movement at all by being bonded to a previously placed section. (Kosmatka et al. 2002)  If 
construction joints are placed at points of high stress, the joints can open (ACI 224 2007).  
Construction joints should be put in places that affect structural integrity the least and that are 
consistent with the structure?s appearance (ACI 224 1995). 
Bonded and butt joints are two typical transverse construction joints.  Bonded joints 
should be used if the concrete will have time to harden before the next placement.  Tie bars may 
be used in bonded construction joints to restrain movement.  Continuous reinforcement, which is 
typical in walls that must maintain flexural and shear continuity, may also be used in bonded 
joints.  Figure 2-16 illustrates a bonded construction joint with continuous reinforcement. 
Butt joints are typically used in thin slabs-on-grade that will not carry heavy loads.  
However, they can be used in thick slabs-on-grade that will carry heavy loads, but keys or dowel 
bars will be needed to transfer load from one placement to the next.  (ACI 224 1995)  These 
36 
 
plain, keyed, or dowelled butt joints may also be used as contraction joints (Kosmatka et al. 
2002).  Figure 2-17A illustrates a butt joint and Figure 2-17B illustrates a butt joint with a dowel 
bar. 
 
Figure 2-16: Construction Joint with Continuous Reinforcement (ALDOT 2010) 
 
Figure 2-17: Illustrations of a: (A) Butt Construction Joint and (B) Butt Construction Joint with 
Dowel Bars (Kosmatka et al. 2002) 
 
Longitudinal construction joints may also be used in box culverts and similar structures 
(such as tunnels).  These joints segment the cross section of the culvert or tunnel into different 
37 
 
parts.  These construction joints may be sealed by the bond between the adjoining concrete 
members (e.g. top slab and wall or wall and base slab).  Also, a waterstop may be used in the 
joint if a watertight seal is necessary. (ACI 224 1995)  The possible locations of longitudinal 
construction joints in an ALDOT culvert are shown in Figure 2-18. 
 
Figure 2-18: Possible Longitudinal Construction Joint Locations in an ALDOT Box Culvert 
 
2.5.2.2 Contraction Joints 
Contraction joints serve the purpose of allowing the concrete to move and allow for 
controlled cracking due to shrinkage and thermal stresses to occur (Kosmatka et al. 2002).  They 
also allow for these stresses to be relieved (ACI 224 1995).  Figure 2-19 illustrates how tensile 
38 
 
stresses in a wall from restrained shrinkage can cause cracking and how a contraction joint can 
alleviate those stresses. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 2-19: Contraction Joint Concept (ACI 224 1995) 
 
Contraction joints are formed by saw cutting, hand tooling, by preformed inserts, or 
between adjacent concrete placements.  Joints in slabs-on-grade are formed using all of these 
methods while joints in walls are typically only formed by using premolded inserts.  Saw cutting 
involves cutting a groove into hardened concrete with a saw.  The groove should be cut soon 
after the concrete has hardened. (ACI 224 1995)  Figure 2-20a illustrates a saw-cut contraction 
joint.  Creating hand-tooled contraction joints involve creating a groove using a hand tool 
(Kosmatka et al. 2002).  Preformed joints are formed by putting wood, rubber, metal, or plastic 
strips into concrete before it is finished to create grooves.  The grooves for all methods of 
forming contraction joints should be at least ? of the concrete thickness in order to create a 
sufficient plane of weakness.  Figure 2-20b illustrates a contraction joint formed with a 
preformed strip.  If slabs-on-grade are so thick that hand-tooling or inserting a preformed strip is 
troublesome, a premolded strip can also be put in the bottom part of the sla.  The combined depth 
39 
 
of the inserts should be greater than ? of the slab thickness.  This type of joint is illustrated in 
Figure 2-20c.  A similar method is used in walls for providing grooves on the interior and 
exterior faces. (ACI 224 1995) 
      
(A)                                                                  (B) 
 
(C) 
Figure 2-20: Illustrations of a: (A) Saw Cut Contraction Joint, (B) Contraction Joint with a 
Premolded Insert, and (C) Contraction Joint in a Thick Slab (ACI 224 1995) 
 
When load transfer is required across a joint, keys may need to be formed for contraction 
joints.  This can be done by placing a full-depth preformed key in the slab when it is placed.  
Beveled wood strips or metal forms can also be used to form the key.  (ACI 224 1995) 
Contraction joints in slabs-on-grade subdivide the full slab into smaller segments.  
Because of this, joints must be able to transfer vertical loads to the adjacent slab segments.  This 
can be achieved through aggregate interlock, keys, or by the use of dowel bars. (ACI 224 1995)   
40 
 
Aggregate interlock can be effective if the loads experienced are light (joints in slabs-on-
grade have performed well with loads of up to 5,000 lb [22 kN]).  However, if the loads are 
repetitive the joint can deteriorate.  The type of subgrade the slab is built on can also determine 
the effectiveness of aggregate interlock.  Sandy soils tend to provide more support than some silt 
and clay soils.  The type of aggregate used in the concrete affects aggregate interlock too.  
Crushed aggregate transfers loads better than natural gravel does, and coarse aggregate works 
better than fine aggregate does. Crack widths should be smaller than 0.035 in. (0.89 mm) for 
aggregate interlock to work effectively. (ACI 224 1995) 
Keyed joints are also effectively transfer loads.  The keys are formed so that there will be 
a tongue-and-groove at the joint.  Figure 2-21 shows an illustration of a keyed tongue-and-
groove contraction joint.  Due to the joint being beveled, load transfer depends on there being 
little movement at the joint. (ACI 224 1995)  ACI 302 (2004) does not recommend that keyed 
joints be used in slabs-on-grade when heavy loads are transferred.  Their reasoning is that the 
key and keyway do not remain in contact when the slab shrinks, which leads to the deterioration 
of the concrete joint edges (ACI 302 2004). 
 
Figure 2-21: Keyed Tongue-and-Groove Contraction Joint (ACI 224 1995) 
 
Heavy loads may be too much for aggregate interlock and keys to be effective.  Dowel 
bars can be used at joints in slabs that have heavy loads that need to be transmitted across the 
41 
 
joint.  Figure 2-22 shows an example of a contraction joint with a dowel bar.  The dowel bars 
should be parallel to each other and level.  Also, they should be located at mid-height of the joint 
in the slab.  The dowel should not be bonded to the concrete on at least one side of the joint to 
allow for slab contraction/expansion.  Bonding can be prevented using greased dowels or 
wrapping bond-breaking plastic around the dowels.  The dowel bars should be smooth. Dowel 
bars are also used in wall contraction joints. (ACI 224 1995) 
 
Figure 2-22: Doweled Contraction Joint (ACI 224 1995) 
 
Sealants are sometimes necessary in contraction joints.  Weather-resistant polyurethane 
or silicone can be used as sealants for contraction joints in walls.  A waterstop may also be used 
to keep water from leaking through the joint. (ACI 224 1995) 
There are different reinforcement options at contraction joints.  Reinforcement can stop 
and not be continuous through the joint, some of the reinforcement can continue through the 
joint, or all reinforcement can continue through the joint.  All of the reinforcement should 
continue through the joint only when it is necessary to maintain structural stability. (ACI 224 
1995) 
There are many different recommendations for contraction joint spacing.  AASHTO 
(2010b) recommends that contraction joints be used throughout the length of a tunnel spaced 
approximately at 30 ft (9.1 m).  Other recommendations compiled by ACI 224 (1995) for 
42 
 
contraction joint spacing are shown in Table 2-2.  The ACI 224-92 spacing recommendation is 
one times the wall height for high walls (typically higher than 12 ft [3.7 m]) and three times the 
wall height for short walls (typically smaller than 8 ft [2 m]) (ACI 224 1995).  Recommendations 
for contraction joint spacing in slabs-on-grade compiled by Kosmatka et al. (2002) are shown in 
Table 2-3. 
 
Table 2-2: Recommended Contraction Joint Spacing (ACI 224 1995) 
Author Spacing 
Merrill (1943) 
20 ft (6 m) for walls with frequent openings, 25 ft 
(7.5 m) in solid walls. 
Fintel (1974) 
15 to 20 ft (4.5 to 6 m) for walls and slabs on grade.  
Recommends joint placement at abrupt changes in 
plan and at changes in building height to account 
for potential stress concentrations. 
Wood (1981) 20 to 30 ft (6 to 9 m) for walls. 
PCA (1982) 
20 to 25 ft (6 to 7.5 m) for walls depending on 
number of openings. 
ACI 302.1R 
15 to 20 ft (4.5 to 6 m) recommended until 302.1R-
89, then changed to 34 to 36 times slab thickness 
ACI 350R-83 30 ft (9m) in sanitary structures. 
ACI 350R 
Joint spacing varies with amount and grade of 
shrinkage and temperature reinforcement. 
ACI 224R-92 
One to three times the height of the wall in solid 
walls. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
43 
 
Table 2-3: Recommended Spacing (in Feet) for Contraction Joints in Slabs-on-grade (Kosmatka 
et al. 2002) 
 
 
2.5.2.3 Expansion Joints 
Expansion joints are designed to allow concrete to expand without crushing and 
distorting the adjacent concrete (ACI 504 1990).  They are also referred to as isolation joints.  
Expansion joints in walls are usually vertical joints that extend through the concrete between 
walls.  They separate adjacent concrete and allow each to move freely.  The movements at 
expansion joints could be due to the concrete expanding, applied loads, or differential movement.  
Temperature change is a major part of the expansion experienced in walls.  Expansion joints can 
also be put in slabs-on-grade.  However, expansion in slabs-on-grade is typically smaller than the 
initial shrinkage that the slab undergoes.  Because of this, expansion joints are seldom needed.  
(ACI 224 1995) 
44 
 
The space or opening between concrete placements in expansion joints is created by joint 
filler.  Compressible, elastic, and nonextruding joint filler, such as premolded mastic or cork, is 
typically used.  The joint should extend the full height or width of the cross section.  Figure 2-23 
illustrates a typical expansion joint. (ACI 224 1995) 
 
Figure 2-23: Typical Expansion/Isolation Joint (ACI 302 2004) 
 
Lateral displacements at expansion joints sometimes need to be limited.  This can be 
achieved by using dowel bars, steps, or keys. (ACI 504 1990) 
There are many different recommendations for the appropriate expansion joint spacing.  
Typical expansion joint spacing in walls is from 200 to 300 ft (61.0 to 91.4 m).  Also, expansion 
joints should be located at places where walls change direction, or where multiple walls come 
together from different directions. (ACI 224 1995)  More contraction joint spacing 
recommendations compiled by ACI 224 (1995) are shown in Table 2-4. 
 
 
 
 
45 
 
Table 2-4: Recommended Expansion Joint Spacing (ACI 224 1995) 
Author Spacing 
Lewerenz (1907) 75 ft (23 m) for walls. 
Hunter (1953) 
80 ft (25 m) for walls and insulated roofs, 30 to 40 
ft (9 to 12 m) for uninsulated roofs. 
Billig (1960) 
100 ft (30 m) maximum building length without 
joints.  Recommends joint placement at abrupt 
changes in plan and at changes in building height to 
account for potential stress concentrations. 
Wood (1981) 100 to 120 ft (30 to 35 m) for walls. 
Indian Standards 
Institution (1964) 
45 m (? 148 ft) maximum building length between 
joints. 
PCA (1982) 
200 ft (60 m) maximum building length without 
joints. 
ACI 350R-83 
120 ft (36 m) in sanitary structures partially filled 
with liquid (closer spacings required when no liquid 
present. 
 
 
2.5.2.4 Joint Sealants, Joint Fillers, and Waterstops 
Joints can either be filled, sealed, or left open.  Some contraction joints in floors used for 
industrial and commercial applications can be left open. This is because little movement will 
occur at these joints.  However, a joint must be filled if it is exposed to moisture, must meet 
hygienic and dust-control specifications, or is subjected to small, hard-wheel vehicle traffic. 
(Kosmatka et al. 2002) 
Fillers and sealants differ in that fillers are stiffer than sealants and they give support to 
the edges of the joint.  If traffic loads are light, a sealant may be sufficient, but if a joint is 
subjected to heavier loads, support for joint edges may be needed.  Spalling can occur at the 
edges of saw-cut joints if they are not supported. (Kosmatka et al. 2002)  Also, filler is used in 
expansion joints to form the joint and to allow for room between the joint faces when the 
concrete expands (ACI 504 1990). 
46 
 
Sealants serve the primary purpose of protecting the concrete by preventing liquids, 
solids, and gases from passing through the joint.  They also keep unwanted material from 
collecting in the groove of the joint.  The sealant must perform these functions while remaining 
intact and allowing joint movement.  Sealants can be divided into two main categories.  The first 
category is field-molded sealants, which are placed while the sealant is in liquid form.  The 
second category is preformed sealants.  These sealants are typically preshaped by the 
manufacturer.  Waterstops are a type of preformed sealant that keeps water in or out of the 
structure. (ACI 504 1990) 
Field-molded sealants can be divided into mastics, hot applied, cold applied, chemically 
curing, and solvent release.  Mastics are usually used in structures with small joint movements 
and where initial costs outweigh the maintenance costs.  They do not harden or set after they are 
applied, but they form a skin layer over the surface.  Hot-applied sealants soften when they are 
heated and harden when they cool.  They tend to be inexpensive but they also tend have a shorter 
life than other sealants.  Cold-applied sealants set when they are exposed to a solvent or when 
emulsions break upon air exposure.  These are also typically used in joints that have small 
movements.  Chemically curing sealants are placed while they are in the liquid phase and cure to 
a hardened state by chemical reactions.  They consist of either one- or two-component systems.  
Also, chemically curing sealants can be used for a wide range of purposes.  They resist 
weathering, are flexible and resilient at hot and cold temperatures, do not readily react with a 
wide range of chemicals, and have an above-average resistance to abrasion and indentation.  In 
summary, they are considered to be able to withstand greater movements and last longer than 
other field-molded sealants.  Solvent-release sealants cure when a solvent is released.  They are 
similar to cold-applied sealants, but they are affected less by changes in temperature after they 
47 
 
have set.  Also, solvent-release sealants are typically considered to have an adequate service life.  
Suitable field-molded joint sealers for water retaining or excluding structures include low 
melting point asphalt mastic, hot-applied rubber asphalt, hot-applied PVC coal tar, cold-applied 
rubber asphalt, chemically curing polysulfide, chemically curing polysulfide coal tar, chemically 
curing polyurethane, and chemically curing silicone.  It should be noted that hot-applied rubber 
asphalts should only be used in horizontal joints because they have been known to fall out of 
vertical joints when exposed to warm temperatures. (ACI 504 1990)  
Preformed sealants can be classified as flexible or rigid waterstops, gaskets and 
miscellaneous seals, strip (gland) seals, compression seals, impregnated or nonimpregnated 
flexible foam, and tension-compression seal systems.  Rigid waterstops are usually made of steel 
or copper.  Steel waterstops are very stiff and can lead to cracking in the concrete around it.  
They are typically used in heavy construction projects, such as dams.  Copper waterstops are 
corrosion resistant and are used in dams as well as general construction projects.  They also must 
be handled carefully so that damage does not occur.  Because of this and cost issues, flexible 
waterstops are often used.  Flexible waterstops can be made of butyl, neoprene, natural rubbers, 
and PVC.  PVC is the most widely used waterstop material because it can be spliced on site and 
special configurations can be made for joint intersections.  However, rubber waterstops are more 
elastic.  Gaskets are widely used in precast pipe joints.  The seal is obtained because the gasket is 
compressed between the faces of the joint.  Strip (gland) seals are typically used in bridge 
expansion joints.  They are basically exposed, flexible waterstops that allow the joint to open or 
close as needed.  Compression seals, as the name entails, must always be in compression.  This 
ensures constant contact between the seal and the joint face even when the joint moves.  They 
perform well in almost all applications and in a wide temperature range.  Impregnated flexible 
48 
 
foam is a form of compression seal used in buildings and bridges.  It does not recover well at 
cold temperatures, and it does not follow joint movement well.  The foam sealant is typically 
bonded to the faces of the joint.  Nonimpregnated flexible foam joint filler resist chemicals well.  
It can also be custom cut to accommodate any joint size or shape.  An adhesive is used to bond 
the sealant to the faces of the joint.  Tension-compression seals are made of molded blocks of 
elastomeric material.  The seal is attached to the faces of the joint and allows movement through 
grooves and the shear deformation of the elastomeric material.  (ACI 504 1990) 
If joint sealants are only exposed on one face, the back face of the sealant that is not 
exposed should not be bonded to the joint.  This is so that the sealant can keep the desired shape.  
A bond breaker is used to achieve this.  Polyethylene tape, coated papers, and metal foils can be 
used as bond breakers.  Backup material is also needed in order to keep the sealant from being 
displaced and to limit the depth of the sealant.  Some backup materials do not bond to the sealant 
and therefore act as a bond breaker.  Joint filler can be used as backup material in expansion 
joints. Neoprene or butyl sponge tubes are used as backup material in large joints, and neoprene 
or butyl sponge rods are used as backup material in narrow joints (such as contraction joints).  
Expanded polyethylene, polyurethane, and polyvinylchloride polypropylene flexible foams, 
metal, plastic, glass fiber, and mineral wool are used as backup material in expansion joints.  
(ACI 504 1990)  Figure 2-24 illustrates how a bond breaker and backup material work.  
49 
 
 
Figure 2-24: How Bond Breakers and Backup Material Work (ACI 504 1990) 
 
2.6 Crack Repair 
Before a cracked structure can be repaired, it must be inspected and evaluated to 
determine the cause and the extent of the cracking.  The objective of the crack repair should also 
be determined.  The objectives of crack repair could include restoring or increasing the strength 
of the structure, restoring or increasing the stiffness of the structure, improving the performance 
of the structure, making the structure watertight, making the structure aesthetically pleasing, 
improving the structure?s durability, and preventing reinforcement corrosion.  (ACI 224 2007) 
According to AASHTO (2010b) Section 16.5 cracks, that are a result of thermal effects 
should not be repaired because the cracks will reopen.  However, cracks that are caused by 
structural movement (e.g. settlement) and that will not open up any wider should be repaired 
(AASHTO 2010b). 
 
50 
 
2.6.1 Epoxy Injection                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          
Epoxy injection involves creating closely spaced entry and venting ports along the crack.  
The exposed surface of the crack is then sealed to prevent the epoxy from leaking before it has 
hardened. After sealing, the epoxy is injected into the crack with a hydraulic pump, paint 
pressure pots, or an air-actuated caulking gun. (ACI 224 2007)  Figure 2-25 illustrates epoxy 
resin crack injection. 
 
Figure 2-25: Epoxy Resin Crack Injection (FHWA 2005) 
 
Cracks as small as small as 0.005 in. (0.01 mm) can be repaired using epoxy injection.  It 
is typically used to restore the tensile strength of the structural element.  Special considerations 
should be taken if the epoxy will be exposed to high temperatures.  Epoxies tend to lose bond 
51 
 
strength when they are exposed to high temperatures over a period of time. (ACI 546 2004)  It is 
an effective crack repair method unless the cause of cracking has not been fixed.  New cracks are 
likely to occur next to the original crack in this case.  Also, if the crack is continuously leaking, 
epoxy injection may not be a good option unless a moisture-tolerant epoxy is used. (ACI 224 
2007) 
In tunnels, cracks can be repaired by injecting epoxy resin into the crack.  There are three 
types of resin used for this application: vinyl ester resin, amine resin, and polyester resin.  Vinyl 
ester resin is generally not usable in tunnels because it will not bond to hardened concrete that is 
wet.  Polyester and amine resins work better for tunnel applications.  Their ability to bond to 
concrete is not affected by the presence of moisture. (AASHTO 2010b) 
2.6.2 Routing and Sealing 
Routing and sealing of the concrete surface can be used when the crack repair is not a 
structural repair.  It consists of further opening up the crack by sawing or grinding a ? in. to 1 in. 
(6.4 mm to 25 mm) deep groove at the crack location. The groove is cleared of debris and then 
filled with sealant and allowed to cure.  Sealant materials that may be used include epoxies, 
urethanes, silicones, polysulfides, asphalts, and polymer materials. (ACI 224 2007)  An 
illustration of routing and sealing is shown in Figure 2-26. 
 
Figure 2-26: Routing and Sealing (Johnson 1965) 
52 
 
Routing and sealing is a method suitable for sealing wide and narrow cracks.  Flat 
horizontal faces are most suitable for routing and sealing, but using it on vertical and round 
surfaces is also possible.  It is also effective for waterproofing surfaces that are subjected to 
hydraulic pressure or standing water.  Active cracks can also be sealed using routing and sealing.  
A bond breaker between the back of the sealant and the groove must be used in this case to allow 
the sealant to move with the crack. (ACI 224 2007) 
 
53 
 
2.7 AASHTO Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Construction and Design Practice  
 
The requirements for the concrete box culverts as required by the AASHTO LRFD Bridge 
Construction Specifications (2010a) and the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 
(2007) are reviewed in this section. 
2.7.1 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
Section 8.7.2.4 (AASHTO 2010a) states that the bottom slab or footing should be the first 
part of the CIP box culvert placed, and it should be allowed to set before the walls and the top 
slab are placed.  If the heights of the walls are 5 ft (2 m) or shorter, the top slab and the walls can 
be placed as a monolith (AASHTO 2010a). 
Section 8.7.2.1 (AASHTO 2010a) states that if the culvert walls are taller than 15 ft (4.6 
m), they should be permitted to set for at least 12 hours before casting the top slab.   If the 
culvert walls are 15 ft (4.6 m) high or smaller but greater than 5 ft (2 m) high, the walls should 
be allowed to set for at least 30 minutes.  These setting times are to allow for the concrete to 
settle after losing water due to bleeding. (AASHTO 2010a) 
2.7.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
Section 8.6.1 (AASHTO 2010a) states that the concrete temperature must be between 50 
and 90 oF (10 and 32 oC) prior to it being placed. 
2.7.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
Section 8.6.3 (AASHTO 2010a) states that if the ambient temperature is greater than 90 
oF (32.2 oC), objects that the fresh concrete will be placed against (forms, reinforcement, etc.) 
must be cooled to a temperature that is less than 90 oF (32 oC).  This can be done by spraying the 
items with water.  The temperature of the concrete must be controlled also.  This can be done by 
54 
 
keeping the concrete materials and the mixing equipment in the shade, splashing the aggregate 
with water, keeping the aggregate in a refrigerated area, replacing a portion of or all of the 
mixing water with crushed ice, or by adding liquid nitrogen to the concrete mix. (AASHTO 
2010a) 
2.7.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
Section 8.6.4 (AASHTO 2010a) states that if the temperature of the air is lower than 35 
oF (2 oC), the concrete should be kept at a temperature greater than or equal to 45 oF (7 oC) for 
the first 6 days after it has been placed.  If supplementary cementing materials (SCM) are used, 
longer periods of time may be required unless 65 percent of the concrete?s specified compressive 
strength has been reached at 6 days.  When the concrete is being placed, the concrete temperature 
shall be at least 60 oF (16 oC) for members that are smaller than 12 in. (300 mm) thick.  To get 
concrete that is within the specified temperature range, the aggregate or the mix water may be 
heated. (AASHTO 2010a) 
2.7.3 Joints 
2.7.3.1 Construction Joints 
Section 8.8.1 (AASHTO 2010a) requires that construction joints, unless otherwise 
approved, only be put at places where indicated on the plans, or where the concrete placement 
schedule calls for them.  All planned reinforcement should be continuous through the joint at 
these locations (AASHTO 2010a). 
For bonding purposes, Section 8.8.2 (AASHTO 2010a) requires that vertical joints must 
be constructed with keys, but horizontal construction joints may be constructed with or without 
55 
 
keys.  The keys should be formed by making depressions in the concrete that take up 
approximately one-third of the contact surface (AASHTO 2010a). 
2.7.3.2 Contraction Joints 
Section 8.9.1 (AASHTO 2010a) requires that contraction joints be put at places indicated 
on the construction plans and should be constructed as specified.  The joints may be open joints, 
filled joints, sealed joints, reinforced joints, or joints with a combination of these features 
(AASHTO 2010 a). 
Section 11.6.1.5.2 (AASHTO 2007) requires that contraction joints be placed at a spacing 
of no more than 30 ft (9.1 m) in wingwalls.  
Section 8.9.2.3 (AASHTO 2010a) states that materials put inside of a contraction joint 
should be a bond breaking material such as asphalt-saturated felt paper.  When joint sealant is 
required in contraction joints, Section 8.9.2.4 (AASHTO 2010a) requires that the sealants used 
must be either a hot-poured sealant that conforms to AASHTO M 282 (ASTM D3406), a silicon 
cold-poured sealant that follows Federal Specification TT-S-1543 Class A, or an impervious, 
commercial quality polyethylene foam strip. 
2.7.3.3 Expansion Joints 
Section 8.9.1 (AASHTO 2010a) requires expansion joints be placed at locations indicated 
on the construction plans and be constructed as specified.  The joints may be open joints, filled 
joints, sealed joints, reinforced joints, or joints with a combination of these features (AASHTO 
2010a). 
Section 11.6.1.5.2 (AASHTO 2007) requires that expansion joints be placed at a spacing 
of no more than 90 ft (27 m) in wingwalls.  
56 
 
When joint filler is required in expansion joints, Section 8.9.2.1 (AASHTO 2010a) 
requires that the preformed joint fillers for concrete pavements and structural construction should 
conform to AASHTO M 213 (ASTM D1751), preformed sponge rubber and cork joint fillers 
should conform to AASHTO M 153 (ASTM D1752), and preformed joint fillers for concrete 
should conform to AASHTO M 33 (ASTM D994).  Section 8.9.2.2 (AASHTO 2010a) states that 
polystyrene board filler made of expanded polystyrene may also be used. 
When joint sealant is required in expansion joints, Section 8.9.2.4 (AASHTO 2010a) 
requires that the sealants used must be either a hot-poured sealant that conforms to AASHTO M 
282 (ASTM D3406), a silicon cold-poured sealant that conforms to Federal Specification TT-S-
1543 Class A, or an impervious, commercial quality polyethylene foam strip. 
2.7.3.4 Waterstops 
Section 8.9.2.6 (AASHTO 2010a) requires waterstops be made of polyvinyl chloride 
(PVC), copper or rubber.  They should also be uniform throughout, dense, and without 
imperfections (AASHTO 2010a).  
Also, Section 8.9.3.4 (AASHTO 2010a) requires that when waterstops are placed at a 
joint that is free to move (i.e. contraction joint), they shall allow the joint to move without being 
damaged themselves. They shall be placed in the joint so that a continuous waterproof seal is 
formed (AASHTO 2010a). 
2.7.3.5 Concrete Culvert Joint Sealants 
Section 27.4.2 (AASHTO 2010a) requires culvert joints be sealed so as to keep outside 
water and soil from entering the culvert.  Section 27.3.3 (AASHTO 2010a) states that the sealant 
can be made of cement mortar, flexible watertight gaskets, conforming to AASHTO M 198 
57 
 
(ASTM C990) or AASHTO M 315 (ASTM C433), or other materials that are approved by the 
engineer. 
2.7.4 Reinforcement 
Section 5.10.8 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2007) states that 
shrinkage and temperature reinforcement in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts components 
should be governed by the two following equations: 
ys fhb
bhA )(2 30.1 ??                     Equation 2-3 
where, 
sA   = area of temperature and shrinkage reinforcement per length of culvert 
  component (in.2/ft), 
b  = smallest height/width of the culvert component section (in.), 
h  = smallest thickness of the culvert component section (in.), and 
yf  = yield strength of the reinforcement ? 75 ksi (ksi). 
 
0.11 in.2/ft ? As ? 0.60 in.2/ft                            Equation 2-4 
The temperature and shrinkage reinforcement from these equations should be distributed 
uniformly around the perimeter of the culvert component.  Equation 2-3 was derived so that the 
temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio would be 0.0018 for Grade 60 reinforcement, the 
value specified by ACI 318 (2011). (AASHTO 2007)  
For a culvert wall with a height of 8 ft (2 m), a thickness of 12 in. (305 mm), and an 
assumed reinforcement yield strength of 60 ksi (414 MPa), the temperature and shrinkage 
58 
 
reinforcement area would be 0.116 in.2/ft (245 mm2/m).  If the same wall was 30 in. (762 mm) 
thick, the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement area would be 0.248 in.2/ft (525 mm2/m). 
2.8 Box Culvert Construction Practices of SASHTO States 
States that are members of the Southeastern Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (SASHTO) have climates that are similar to Alabama.  Therefore these 
states may have similarities in requirements in requirements for reinforced concrete. CIP, box 
culvert design and construction methods when compared to ALDOT.  Puerto Rico was excluded 
because it is not a U.S. State. 
Information was difficult to find for most states; therefore, some states may have 
significantly less information than others. 
2.8.1 Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD) 
2.8.1.1 General Construction 
The AHTD uses both precast and CIP reinforced concrete box culverts.  When precast 
box culverts are used, they must conform to AASHTO M 259 or M 273. (AHTD 2003) 
2.8.1.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
For CIP box culverts that are 6 ft (2 m) in height or smaller, the top slab and walls can be 
built monolithically.  If they are built in separate sections, the top slab will be bonded to the 
walls, and the walls will be bonded to the bottom slab by roughened longitudinal keys. Also, the 
top slab and walls should be cast 24 hours or more after the previous placement has set. (AHTD 
2003) 
 
59 
 
2.8.1.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.1.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
The temperature of the concrete mix when it is placed should not be greater than 95 oF 
(35 oC) (AHTD 2003). 
2.8.1.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
Concrete should not be placed when the air temperature is below 36 oF (2 oC).  An 
exception is when the concrete will be enclosed, and the mix ingredients and the enclosed space 
will be heated.  Concrete should not be placed unless the concrete mix temperature is 50 oF (10 
oC) or above. (AHTD 2003) 
2.8.1.4 Joints 
2.8.1.4.1 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops should be made of copper, rubber, or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and they 
should be uniform throughout, dense, and have no porosity (AHTD 2003). 
AHTD Standard Drawing RCB-1 (2006) states that construction joints in the side walls 
and top slab of box culverts should have membrane waterproofing (AHTD 2006). 
2.8.1.4.2 Joint Filler 
Expansion joint filler can be preformed sponge rubber complying with AASHTO M 153 
Type I or a mixture of one part asphalt and four parts sawdust (AHTD 2003). 
2.8.1.4.3 Joint Sealant 
Sealants that can be used for contraction joints include cold-applied silicone, hot-poured 
elastomeric joint sealant, synthetic polymer joint sealant, or hot-poured elastic type sealant.  A 
60 
 
backer rod can be used with the cold-applied silicone sealants that either need a primer to bond 
with concrete or that do not need one.  It can also be used with hot-poured elastomeric joint 
sealants. (AHTD 2003) 
2.8.2 Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) 
2.8.2.1 General Construction 
The FDOT uses both CIP and precast box culverts. It is the contractor?s choice unless 
there is a plan note forbidding the use of precast culverts. (FDOT 2010c)  A typical double barrel 
CIP box culvert cross section used by the FDOT is shown in Figure 2-26. 
For CIP culverts, the base slab (or footing) should be placed first and allowed to set 
before construction is continued.  The bottom slab, footing, and apron walls should be built as a 
monolith if possible.  (FDOT 2010c) 
The wingwalls are recommended to be placed as monoliths.  When this is not possible, 
the construction joints should be horizontal and not visible. (FDOT 2010c) A typical double 
barrel culvert cross section used by the FDOT is shown in Figure 2-27. 
61 
 
 
Figure 2-27: Typical FDOT Double Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (FDOT 
2010a)               
62 
 
2.8.2.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
If the walls of the culvert are 6 ft (2 m) or shorter, the top slab and side walls may be 
poured as a monolith.  It is also allowable for the side walls to be poured first, and then have the 
top slab poured after the walls have set.  If the walls of the culvert are taller than 6 ft (2 m), the 
sidewalls should be placed first and allowed to set for twelve hours before placing the top slab. 
(FDOT 2010c) 
The smallest allowable CIP box culvert is 4 ft by 4ft (1 m by 1 m), and the smallest 
allowable precast box culvert is 3 ft by 3 ft (0.9 m by 0.9 m) (FDOT 2010b). 
2.8.2.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.2.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
The FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (2010c) defines 
hot weather concreting as ?the production, placing and curing of concrete when the concrete 
temperature at placing exceeds 85 oF (29 oC) but is less than 100 oF (37 oC).?  All concrete that 
has a temperature greater than 100 oF (37 oC) should be refused.  If hot weather concrete 
measures are not in effect, all concrete with a temperature greater than 85 oF (29 oC) should be 
refused.  If the temperature of the placed concrete is greater than 75 oF (23 oC), a water reducing 
admixture or a water-reducing and retarding admixture should be added to the concrete mix.  
Also, forms and reinforcement shall be sprayed with cold water before concrete is placed in hot 
weather conditions. (FDOT 2010c) 
2.8.2.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
No concrete should be placed when the temperature of the concrete is below 45 oF (7 oC).  
Also, concrete should not be mixed when the temperature of the air is below 45 oF (7 oC) and 
63 
 
dropping.  However, concrete may be mixed and placed if the air temperature reading taken is in 
the shade and is at least 40 oF (4 oC) and rising.  If the fresh concrete is not heat cured, it should 
be protected from freezing until its compressive strength is at least 1,500 psi (10 MPa). (FDOT 
2010c)  
2.8.2.4 Joints 
2.8.2.4.1 Construction Joints 
When building the walls and the top slab as a monolith, any essential construction joints 
should be vertical and have beveled keys.  Transverse construction joints should be 
perpendicular to the culvert barrel.  Proper provisions for longitudinal and transverse keys at 
joints should be made.  The keys should be beveled and not more than 1.5 in. (38 mm) from the 
edge of the concrete.  Also, transverse construction joints should be vertical and have continuous 
reinforcement through them.  In long concrete box culverts, vertical construction joints have a 
minimum spacing of 30 ft (9.1 m).  (FDOT 2010c) 
2.8.2.4.2 Joint Waterproofing 
When a dry environment is desired in the culvert, an external sealing band (in compliance 
with ASTM C87) should be used to waterproof the culvert joints.  It should be centered on the 
joint and be placed from the bottom of one sidewall to the top slab, on the top slab, and then 
from the top slab to the bottom of the other sidewall.  The band should be placed at individual 
precast section joints or at CIP construction joints. (FDOT 2011) 
2.8.2.4.3 Joint Filler 
Joint fillers should meet AASHTO M-153 or AASHTO M-213.  If the filler is made of 
cellulose fiber it should meet AASHTO M-213 requirements (excluding the asphalt content 
64 
 
requirement) if it contains at least 0.2% zinc borate and 1.5% waterproofing wax.  Type I, Type 
II, or Type III AASHTO M-153 joint sealers may be used unless otherwise specified. (FDOT 
2010c) 
2.8.2.4.4 Joint Sealant 
Joint sealants can be made of many different materials, but they will typically be a 
mixture of bituminous based materials.  The material will melt when it is heated and then adhere 
to the concrete to form a seal when it cools.  A low modulus silicone sealant may also be used as 
a joint sealant.  Acetic acid cure sealants should not be used. (FDOT 2010c) 
A bond breaker rod made of expanded polyethylene foam may be used.  The rod should 
not react with or bond to the sealant. (FDOT 2010c) 
2.8.3 Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) 
2.8.3.1 General Construction 
The GDOT allows for the use of precast and CIP reinforced concrete box culverts 
(GDOT 1985).  GDOT also recommends that one foot be the smallest fill height allowed for a 
reinforced concrete box culvert (GDOT 2010).  An example of a single barrel CIP box culvert 
cross section used by the GDOT is shown in Figure 2-28. 
65 
 
 
Figure 2-28: GDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section Example (GDOT 
2001a) 
 
2.8.3.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.3.2.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
The concrete temperature should be kept above 50 oF (10 oC) for 72 hours after it has 
been placed, and it also should be kept above freezing temperature for 6 days after it has been 
placed.  This can be achieved by using heated enclosures, commercial blankets, or batt insulation 
if the expected 48-hour temperature is below 25 oF (-4 oC).  If the expected 48 hour temperature 
is at or above 25 oF (-4 oC), heavy-duty polyethylene sheets can be used.  (GDOT 2001b) 
2.8.3.3 Joints 
2.8.3.3.1 Construction Joints 
Transverse construction joints should be perpendicular to the culvert barrel.  They should 
be at all locations where the design changes and at places shown on the plans.  Construction 
66 
 
joints should not be located in the culvert section directly under the width of the pavement.  
However, if construction joints must be presented directly under the pavement width then the 
reinforcement should be continuous through the joint and no bond breaking measures should be 
taken.  Reinforcement should also be continuous when the joint is within 15 ft (4.6 m) of the end 
of the culvert or when it is located directly under a roadway. (GDOT 1996)  All other 
construction joints should not have continuous reinforcement through the joint.  The maximum 
joint spacing is 30 ft (9.1 m) (GDOT 2010). 
2.8.3.3.2 Joint Waterproofing 
Coal-tar pitch is used for waterproofing in culverts (GDOT 2001b). 
2.8.3.3.3 Joint Filler 
Preformed joint filler, preformed foam joint filler, elastomeric polymer type joint 
compound, or water-blown urethane can be used as joint filler.  Preformed joint filler should 
meet AASHTO M 153 or AASHTO M 213 specifications. (GDOT 2001b) 
2.8.3.3.4 Joint Sealant 
Hot-poured joint sealer, preformed elastic joint sealer, or silicone sealant with a bond 
breaker can all be used as joint sealants.  A backer rod should be used for the bond breaker. 
(GDOT 2001b) 
 
 
 
67 
 
2.8.4 Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) 
2.8.4.1 General Construction 
The KYTC recommends that a minimum fill height of 1 ft (0.3 m) should be for culverts 
used unless the top slab is designed to be the driving surface (KYTC 2005).  The KYTC also 
allows the use of precast or CIP reinforced concrete box culverts (KYTC 2008). 
The base slab and footings of a box culvert should be poured and allowed to cure before 
placing the walls and top slab.  Also, the base slab and footings should be poured as a monolith 
when it is possible.  When necessary, construction joints should be perpendicular to the culvert 
barrel. (KYTC 2008) 
Wingwalls should be poured as a monolith if possible.  However, if that is not possible, 
horizontal or vertical joints may be used. (KYTC 2008) 
The top slab should have a minimum thickness of 7 in. (178 mm). The bottom slab 
should have the same effective depth as the top slab but it should have a total depth that is 1 in. 
(25 mm) greater for single barrel culverts and 2 in. (51 mm) greater for multiple barrel culverts.  
Culvert sidewalls should have a minimum thickness of 1/12th of the clear height or 10 in. (254 
mm).  Interior culvert wall should have a minimum thickness of 10 in. (254 mm). (KYTC 2005)   
A typical CIP cross section of a single barrel culvert used by the KYTC from Exhibit 510 
of the KYTC Division of Structural Design Guidance Manual (2005) is shown in Figure 2-29. 
 
68 
 
 
Figure 2-29: Typical KYTC Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (KYTC 
2005) 
 
2.8.4.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
If the clear height of a culvert is less than 5 ft (2 m), the walls and top slab of a box 
culvert can be placed as a monolith if it is desired.  The construction joints in this case should be 
vertical and perpendicular to the axis of the culvert.  If the clear height is 5 ft (2 m) or greater, 
the side walls should be placed before the top slab. (KYTC 2008) 
The minimum size for a CIP concrete box culvert is 4 ft x 4 ft (1 m x 1 m) (height x 
span).  The maximum size is 16 ft x 20 ft (4.9 m x 6.1 m). (KYTC 2011) 
 
 
69 
 
2.8.4.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
The concrete temperature just before a box culvert is placed should be between 50 and 90 
oF (10 and 32 oC) (KYTC 2008). 
2.8.4.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
If the ambient air temperature is above 90 oF (32 oC), all surfaces that will touch the 
placed concrete should be cooled to below 90 oF (32 oC).  If the ambient air temperature is 
greater than 100 oF (38 oC), concrete for box culverts should not be placed. (KYTC 2008) 
2.8.4.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
Freshly placed concrete should be kept at a temperature no lower than 45 oF (7 oC) for the 
first 3 days after it has been placed, and it should be kept at a temperature no lower than 40 oF (4 
oC) for another 4-days after that.  Concrete should not be placed when temperatures are expected 
to drop below these limits unless measures have been taken to sustain acceptable concrete 
temperatures.  In order to keep the concrete at an acceptable temperature, the water and 
aggregates should be heated.  Also, freshly placed concrete should not come into contact with 
objects (forms, etc.) covered with frost or that are at a temperature at or below 32 oF (0 oC).  
(KYTC 2008) 
2.8.4.4 Joints 
2.8.4.4.1 Construction Joints 
Wood strips that have been saturated should be used to form keys in construction joints.  
Steel dowels may also be used as an alternative to shear keys. (KYTC 2008)  Construction joints 
between the walls and top slab should have keys.  The keys should be turned down, as shown in 
Figure 2-31. (KYTC 2005) 
70 
 
2.8.4.4.2 Contraction Joints 
Contraction joints can be used in culvert wingwalls if it is approved by the division of 
structural design (KYTC 2005). 
A contraction joint detail for walls, which appears applicable to culverts, from Exhibit 
516 of the KYTC Division of Structural Design Guidance Manual (2005) is shown in Figure 2-
30. 
 
Figure 2-30: KYTC Wall Contraction Joint Detail (KYTC 2005) 
 
2.8.4.4.3 Expansion Joints 
Expansion joints can be used in culvert wingwalls if it is approved by the division of 
structural design (KYTC 2005). 
An expansion joint detail for walls, which appears applicable to culverts, from Exhibit 
516 of the KYTC Division of Structural Design Guidance Manual (2005) is shown in Figure 2-
31. 
 
71 
 
 
Figure 2-31: KYTC Wall Expansion Joint Detail (KYTC 2005) 
 
2.8.4.4.4 Joint Filler 
Preformed filler should be made of a single piece unless otherwise specified.  Preformed 
sponge rubber, preformed cork, or preformed asphalt may be used for expansion joints. (KYTC 
2008) 
2.8.4.4.5 Joint Sealant 
Hot-poured elastic sealant, silicone rubber, and preformed expansion and compression 
joint sealers can be used as joint sealants.  The hot-poured sealant should meet ASTM D 6690 
Type II requirements, the preformed expansion joint sealant should meet ASTM D 5973, and the 
preformed compression joint sealant should meet ASTM D 2628. (KYTC 2008) 
 
 
72 
 
2.8.5 Lousiana Department of Transportation and Development (La DOTD) 
2.8.5.1 General Construction 
The La DOTD allows the use of CIP or precast reinforced concrete box culverts.  When 
using CIP culverts, the footings or base slab should be placed and allowed to set before 
proceeding further with construction. (La DOTD 2006) 
Wingwalls should be built as a monolith when possible.  Otherwise, horizontal 
construction joints that are not visible should be used.  (La DOTD 2006) 
Figure 2-32 shows the cross section of a typical La DOTD double barrel CIP box culvert. 
73 
 
 
Figure 2-32: Typical La DOTD Double Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (La 
DOTD 1978) 
74 
 
2.8.5.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
When a culvert is 4 ft (1 m) high or less, the top slab and walls can be built as a monolith.  
When this is done, the construction joints should be normal to the axis of the culvert and vertical.  
When a culvert is larger than 4 ft (1 m) high, the walls shall be placed first and allowed to cure 
before the top slab can be placed. (La DOTD 2006)  The location of construction joints in these 
cases is shown in Figure 2-34. 
The minimum size for a reinforced concrete box culvert is 4 ft by 4 ft (1 m by 1 m) (La 
DOTD 1987). 
2.8.5.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.5.3.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
When air temperature in the shade is dropping and it reaches 40 oF (4 oC), all concrete 
operations should be stopped.  They can resume when the air temperature in the shade is rising, 
is at least 35 oF (2 oC), and the forecasted high temperature is above 40 oF (4 oC). (La DOTD 
2006) 
The aggregate can be heated to allow for the concrete to be placed when the temperature 
is less than 35 oF (2 oC) and the procedure is approved in writing.  The placed concrete must then 
be protected using insulating materials, additional covering, or by other approved methods. (La 
DOTD 2006) 
2.8.5.4 Joints 
The locations of longitudinal construction joints and the wingwall expansion joint for La 
DOTD box culverts are shown in Figure 2-33. 
75 
 
 
Figure 2-33: La DOTD Box Culvert Section Showing the Rear Side of a Wingwall and 
Expansion and Construction Joint Locations (La DOTD 2008) 
 
2.8.5.4.1 Construction Joints 
The longitudinal construction joints between walls and base slabs should be keyed and 
located at points shown in Figure 2-33 (La DOTD 2008).  A detail of the La DOTD construction 
joint is shown in Figure 2-34. 
 
Figure 2-34: La DOTD Longitudinal Construction Joint between Base and Wall (La DOTD 
2008) 
76 
 
2.8.5.4.2 Expansion Joints 
Transverse expansion joints in culvert barrels should be spaced at 200 ft (61.0 m) and 
should be keyed.  No reinforcement should run through these joints.  The expansion joint filler 
material should be a preformed resilient bituminous type, and geotextile should be placed around 
the outside of the culvert barrel at the expansion joint. (La DOTD 2008)  The location of the 
transverse expansion joint is shown in Figure 2-35.  Note the concrete block located under the 
base of the culvert at the expansion joint.  A typical transverse expansion joint used in culvert 
barrels by the La DOTD is shown in Figure 2-36.  
 
Figure 2-35: La DOTD Culvert Barrel Elevation View and Transverse Expansion Joint Location 
(La DOTD 2008) 
 
77 
 
 
Figure: 2-36: La DOTD Transverse Expansion Joint Details for Culvert Barrels (La DOTD 
2008) 
 
Expansion joints in wingwalls should be keyed vertical joints and should be dowelled.  
The expansion joint filler material should be preformed resilient bituminous type.  A 1-foot (0.3 
m) wide strip of geotextile fabric should be put on the back side of the wingwall expansion joint, 
as shown in Figure 2-33.  (La DOTD 2008)  The expansion joint should be located as shown in 
Figure 2-33.  A detail of a wingwall expansion joint is shown in Figure 2-37. 
 
Figure 2-37: La DOTD Wingwall Expansion Joint Detail (La DOTD 2008) 
 
78 
 
2.8.5.4.3 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops can be made of plastic, rubber, or metal.  They should also allow for the joint 
to move without being damaged themselves. (La DOTD 2006) 
2.8.5.4.4 Joint Filler 
Joint fillers can be preformed.  They can be bituminous, wood, asphalt ribbon, closed cell 
polyethylene, or rubber. (La DOTD 2006) 
2.8.5.4.5 Joint Sealant 
Joint sealers can be hot-poured rubberized asphaltic type, polyurethane, or silicone.  A 
backer material should be used along with the sealant. (La DOTD 2006) 
2.8.6 Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT) 
The minimum size for a reinforced concrete box culvert is 4 ft by 4 ft (1 m by 1 m) 
(MDOT 2011). 
2.8.7 North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) 
2.8.7.1 General Construction 
The NCDOT uses CIP reinforced concrete box culverts with an option of using precast 
culverts.  Precast box culverts are not allowed if the maximum design fill on top of the culvert is 
exceeded (10 ft [3.0 m] in some areas of North Carolina and 15 ft [4.6 m] in others). (NCDOT 
2007)  
An example of a CIP box culvert cross section is shown in Figure 2-38, which is from 
Figure 9-4 of the NCDOT Structure Design Unit Design Manual (2007). 
 
79 
 
 
Figure 2-38: NCDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section Example (NCDOT 
2007) 
 
2.8.7.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
Culverts with a vertical clearance of 4 ft (1 m) or smaller must be poured as monoliths.  
Culverts with a vertical clearance of 4 ft (1 m) through 8 ft (2 m) can have longitudinal 
construction joints below fillets in the top slab, but it is not required.  Culverts with a vertical 
clearance of 9 ft (3 m) or larger must have longitudinal construction joints below the fillets in the 
top slab. (NCDOT 2007) 
2.8.7.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
The temperature of the concrete should be no less than 50 oF (10 oC) and no higher than 
95 oF (35 oC) when it is placed in the forms.  Exceptions to this can be made when placing 
concrete in cold-weather conditions. (NCDOT 2006) 
80 
 
2.8.7.3.1 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
Concrete should not be placed when the temperature in the shade is less than 35 oF (2 oC) 
without permission.  If permission is given, the water and/or aggregate should be heated to a 
temperature at or below 150 oF (66 oC).  The concrete can then be placed when its temperature is 
less than or equal to 80 oF (27 oC) and greater than or equal 55 oF (13 oC). (NCDOT 2006) 
Aggregate that is frozen or has ice on it should not be used in mixing concrete.  Also, 
concrete should not be placed on a foundation that is frozen. (NCDOT 2006) 
Concrete should be protected by insulation or by heated enclosures when the air 
temperature in the shade at the time of placement is lower than 35 oF (2 oC), or when the air 
temperature in the shade is lower than 35 oF (2 oC) and the fresh concrete is less than 72 hours 
old. (NCDOT 2006) 
2.8.7.4 Joints 
2.8.7.4.1 Construction Joints 
Transverse construction joints shall be placed in culverts that are longer than 70 ft (21 m).  
These joints should be oriented parallel to the main reinforcement in the slabs.  The maximum 
allowable spacing for transverse construction joints is also 70 ft (21 m). (NCDOT 2007) 
It is permissible for the bottom slab of a multiple barrel culvert to have longitudinal 
construction joints located 1 ft (305 mm) from the interior wall(s).  The slab reinforcement can 
be spliced at these construction joints if the contractor desires. (NCDOT 2007) 
 
 
81 
 
2.8.7.4.2 Expansion Joints 
All CIP culverts should have a 1 in. (25 mm) expansion joint in their wings.  Filter fabric 
should be placed on the soil side of the joint to keep material from coming through. (NCDOT 
2007)  An example of an elevation view of a wingwall and the location of the expansion joint is 
shown in Figure 2-39, which is from Figure 9-6 of the Structure Design Unit Design Manual 
(2007). 
 
Figure 2-39: NCDOT Wingwall Expansion Joint Location (NCDOT 2007) 
 
2.8.7.4.3 Joint Filler 
Nonbituminous or bituminous joint filler can be used.  The nonbituminous joint filler 
should meet AASHTO M 153 Type I, II, or III, and the bituminous joint filler should meet 
AASHTO M 213. (NCDOT 2006) 
 
82 
 
2.8.7.4.4 Joint Sealant 
Hot-applied joint sealer and low modulus silicone sealant are the types of joint sealers 
that can be used. The hot-applied sealer should meet ASTM D 6690 specifications.  The silicone 
sealant should meet ASTM D 5893 specifications.  All expansion joints should be sealed with 
low modulus silicone sealant.  Backer rods made of polyethylene foam or polyolefin foam 
should be used with the silicone sealant. (NCDOT 2006) 
2.8.8 South Carolina Department of Transportation (SCDOT) 
2.8.8.1 General Construction 
Both precast and CIP reinforced concrete box culverts are used by the SCDOT (SCDOT 
2007). 
2.8.8.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.8.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
A Hot Weather Batching and Mixing Plan should be developed to ensure that the 
temperature of the concrete is not greater than 90 oF (32 oC) when it is placed.  This could 
include sprinkling aggregate with cool water, using Type II cement, and using cold water or 
shaved ice for mixing.  The plan should meet the requirements set in ACI 305R. (SCDOT 2007) 
A Placing and Curing Plan should also be implemented to achieve the same goal.  It may 
include (SCDOT 2007): 
? Spraying the forms and reinforcement with cool water, 
? Scheduling concrete placement so that delays will be kept to a minimum, 
? Pre-wetting the forms or subgrade to keep them from absorbing water from the 
concrete, 
83 
 
? Building windbreakers  to keep the exposed concrete surfaces from drying, 
? Screeding, floating, and starting the concrete curing process as soon as the concrete is 
placed, and 
? Providing evaporative cooling by using water-curing techniques. 
2.8.8.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
When the temperature is below 35 oF (2 oC), a Cold Weather Batching and Mixing Plan 
should be developed.  At a minimum it should include:  
? Uniformly heating the aggregate using steam or dry heat, 
? The mixing water can also be heated but it should not be above 170 oF (77 oC) when 
it is poured into the mixer, 
? Ensuring that the concrete temperature is at least 50 oF (10 oC) when it is placed, and 
? Avoiding using aggregates with frozen particles. 
A Placing and Curing Plan should also be implemented to make sure that the air temperature 
around the concrete is not lower than 50 oF (10 oC). (SCDOT 2007) 
2.8.8.3 Joints 
2.8.8.3.1 Construction Joints 
Longitudinal construction joints between the base of the culvert and the walls should be 
keyed as shown in Figure 2-40.  Joints in interior walls or midwall joints should also be similar 
to Figure 2-40 if possible. (SCDOT 2009) 
 
 
84 
 
 
Figure 2-40: SCDOT Longitudinal Construction Joint Detail for Wall to Base Connections 
(SCDOT 2009) 
 
2.8.8.3.2 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops made of flexible polyvinyl chloride should be used in expansion joints 
(SCDOT 2007). 
2.8.8.3.3 Joint Filler 
Joint filler for expansion joints can be preformed, hot-poured elastic, or a cold-applied 
sealant.  The preformed filler should meet AASHTO M 213 or ASTM D 6690 Type I 
requirements.  The hot-poured filler should meet ASTM D 6690 Type I requirements.  The cold-
applied filler should meet ASTM C 920 requirements.  A polyethylene backer rod should be used 
with the cold-applied sealant.  (SCDOT 2007) 
2.8.9 Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) 
2.8.9.1 General Construction 
The TDOT uses both precast and CIP reinforced concrete box culverts (TDOT 2006). 
A typical cross section of a double barrel CIP box culvert used by the TDOT is shown in 
Figure 2-41. 
85 
 
 
Figure 2-41: Typical TDOT Cast-in-Place Box Bridge Cross Section (TDOT 2000c) 
 
2.8.9.2 Wall Height Construction Limitations 
For CIP culverts 6 ft (2 m) high or less, the top slab and side walls can be built as a 
monolith.  When this is done, construction joints should be normal to the culvert?s axis and 
upright.  For culverts that are greater than 6 ft (2 m) high, the side walls should be placed first 
and then let set for a minimum of 4 hours before placing the top slab.  When this is done, there 
should be keys in the side walls for the purpose of anchoring the top slab. (TDOT 2006) 
2.8.9.3 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
2.8.9.3.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
When conditions consist of high temperature, low humidity, and/or high winds, the fresh 
concrete should be protected to prevent drying shrinkage cracking from occurring.  As a rule, no 
concrete will be placed when the evaporation rate is greater than 0.2 lb/ft2/hr (1 kg/m2/hr). 
(TDOT 2006) 
86 
 
2.8.9.3.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
If the ambient temperature is below 35 oF (2 oC) after the concrete has been placed, the 
air temperature around the concrete should be kept at or above 45 oF (7 oC).  Also, the concrete 
temperature should not be greater than 80 oF (27 oC).  These conditions should be kept until 120 
hours after the concrete is placed. (TDOT 2006) 
2.8.9.4 Joints 
2.8.9.4.1 Construction Joints 
For stage construction joints where the fill is not greater than 3.5 ft (1.1 m) high, TDOT 
drawing STD-15-2 (2000a) states, ?When a box or slab bridge must be stage constructed such 
that the construction joint is not perpendicular to the bridge, the stage construction joint shall be 
a plain butt joint, and no reinforcement shall extend across the joint.?  Dowel bars should also be 
used as shown in Figure 2-42.  These joints should not be located underneath a traffic lane.  
(TDOT 2000a) 
  
87 
 
 
Figure 2-42: TDOT Box Culvert Stage Construction Joint (TDOT 2000b) 
88 
 
The construction joints between the top and bottom slabs and the exterior walls are 
shown in Figure 2-43.  The construction joints between the top and bottom slabs and the interior 
walls are shown in Figure 2-44.  The construction joints between the top and bottom slabs and 
the interior walls that should be used when the fill height is greater than 10 ft (3.0 m) are shown 
in Figure 2-45.  The steel is continuous through the joint in each of these cases (TDOT 2000c). 
 
Figure 2-43: TDOT Construction Joints between Slabs and Exterior Walls (TDOT 2000c) 
89 
 
                                     
 
Figure 2-44: TDOT Construction Joints between Slabs and Interior Walls (TDOT 2000c) 
 
90 
 
 
Figure 2-45: TDOT Interior Construction Joints between Walls and Slabs when the Fill is 
Greater than 10 Feet (3.0 m) (TDOT 2000c) 
 
2.8.9.4.2 Contraction Joints 
Transverse contraction joints shall be used as transverse stage construction joints in box 
culverts when the fill height is more than 3.5 ft (1.1 m) (TDOT 2000a).  The contraction joints 
used in box culverts should be plain butt joints.  Reinforcement should not be continuous through 
these joints. These joints should be spaced at 30 to 40 ft (9.1 to 12 m), and should be placed at 
points where the box section changes, when possible.  The contraction joints should run parallel 
to the main reinforcement in the slab, but not necessarily normal to the axis of the culvert. 
(TDOT 2006)  When the top slab of the box culvert is going to be used as riding surface for 
traffic, no contraction joint should be used.  (TDOT 2000a). 
91 
 
Vertical contraction joints are also located in the wingwall of the culvert.  They are 
located at mid-length of the wingwall when it is longer than 30 ft (9.1 m). (TDOT 2000d)  The 
location of the contraction joint on the wingwall is shown in Figure 2-46, and a detail of a 
wingwall contraction joint is shown in Figure 2-47.   
 
 
 
92 
 
 
Figure 2-46: TDOT Wingwall Elevation View (TDOT 2000d) 
93 
 
 
                                    
Figure 2-47: TDOT Wingwall Vertical Contraction Joint (TDOT 2000d) 
 
2.8.9.4.3 Expansion Joints 
Note 1 in Figure 2-46 states that vertical expansion joints are required when the wingwall 
is longer than 15 ft (4.6 m).  The joint should be only in the wing wall and not in the footing.  
They are located at the junction between the outer culvert wall and the wingwall.  Reinforcing 
bars shall not be continuous through the expansion joint.  One of the ends of the dowel bars used 
in the joint should be covered with tarpaper and also have a tar-paper end cap.  (TDOT 2000d)  
The location of the expansion joint on a wingwall is shown in Figure 2-46, and a detail for a 
wingwall expansion joint is shown in Figure 2-48. 
94 
 
 
Figure 2-48: TDOT Vertical Wingwall Expansion Joint (TDOD 2000d) 
 
2.8.9.4.4 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops can be made from copper, natural rubber, synthetic rubber, or polyvinyl 
chloride (PVC).  They should be uniform throughout, dense, and without imperfections.  (TDOT 
2006)  See Figures 2-46 and 2-47 for waterstop illustrations. 
2.8.9.4.5 Joint Filler 
Preformed nonbituminous or bituminous joint filler can be used.  The nonbituminous 
joint filler should meet AASHTO M 153 Type I, II, or III specifications, and the bituminous joint 
filler should meet AASHTO M 213 specifications. (TDOT 2006) 
2.8.9.4.6 Joint Sealant 
Longitudinal and transverse joints may be sealed using a silicone sealant or a hot-poured 
elastic type sealant that meets ASTM D 3405 specifications.  The hot-poured sealant must be 
made of virgin synthetic and/or reclaimed rubber combined with tacifiers, plasticizers, and 
95 
 
asphalt.   A backer rod may also be used along with the sealant.  The sealant and backer rod shall 
not be allowed to bond together.  (TDOT 2006) 
2.8.10 Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) 
2.8.10.1 General Construction 
The VDOT allows contractors to use CIP and precast reinforced concrete box culverts 
(VDOT 2007).  A typical single barrel CIP box culvert used by the VDOT is shown in Figure 2-
49. 
Each wingwall should be built as a monolith if possible. If it is not possible, the 
construction joints should be horizontal. (VDOT 2007) 
                                       
Figure 2-49: Typical VDOT Single Barrel Cast-in-Place Box Culvert Cross Section (VDOT 
2008) 
 
96 
 
2.8.10.2 Joints 
2.8.10.2.1 Construction Joints 
Box culverts more than 35 ft (11 m) long shall have construction joints spaced at no more 
than 25 ft (7.6 m) and located no more than 30 ft (9.1 m) from the ends (VDOT 2008). 
If consecutive courses need to be bonded, keys should be formed.  They should be 
formed by inserting beveled wood strips that have been saturated with water.  Dowel bars may 
be used instead of keys if the engineer chooses. (VDOT 2007) 
2.8.10.2.2 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops can be made of copper, neoprene, or polyvinyl chloride (PVC) (VDOT 2007).  
A 6 x 3/8in. (152 x 76 mm) Dumbbell PVC waterstop should be used in the joints between the 
culvert and the wingwall (VDOT 2008). 
2.8.10.2.3 Joint Filler 
Joint fillers can be preformed, expanded rubber, PVC, PE, or sponge rubber.  The 
preformed filler should meet AASHTO M213 requirements, the expanded rubber filler should 
meet ASTM D 1056 requirements, the preformed neoprene filler should meet ASTM D 1056 
Grade 2BS requirements, the PVC and PE filler should meet ASTM D 1667, and the sponge-
rubber filler should meet AASHTO M 153 requirements. (VDOT 2007) 
2.8.10.2.4 Joint Sealant 
Joint sealants can be hot-poured, silicone, or preformed elastomeric joint sealants.  The 
hot-poured sealant can be an asphalt sealer, meeting ASTM D 6690 Type II specifications, or an 
elastomeric joint sealer meeting ASTM D3406 specifications.  The elastomeric joint sealer 
should only be used for longitudinal joints.  Bond breakers should be used with the silicone 
97 
 
sealant.  The bond breaker can be a backer rod (made of closed-cell expanded polyethylene foam 
or closed cell expanded polyolefin foam) or bond-breaking tape (made from extruded 
polyethylene). (VDOT 2007) 
2.8.11 West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT) 
2.8.11.1 General Construction 
The WVDOT uses box culverts that can be designed as CIP or precast (WVDOT 2004). 
Culverts with a clear span of 16 ft (4.9 m) or less are typically used.  Single barrel 
culverts should be used whenever it is possible, and triple barrel culverts should generally be 
avoided due to high construction and maintenance costs associated with them. (WVDOT 2004) 
2.8.11.2 Concrete Protection from Environmental Conditions 
The concrete temperature should be no lower than 50 oF (10 oC) and no greater than 85 oF 
(29 oC) when it is placed (WVDOT 2000). 
2.8.11.2.1 Protection from Hot-Weather Conditions 
When the air temperature in the shade reaches 85 oF (29 oC) the concrete temperature 
should be monitored, and when the concrete temperature reaches 85 oF (29 oC) the concrete 
should be poured within an hour of the mixing water being introduced.    If the concrete 
temperature rises to 90 oF (32 oC) the mixing water and/or aggregate should be cooled to lower 
the concrete temperature.  Crushed or flaked ice may be used also.  Concrete should never be 
placed when the temperature at the end of mixing exceeds 90 oF (32 oC). (WVDOT 2000) 
It is also important to make sure that the surface of the concrete is kept wet during the 
curing process to prevent shrinkage cracking (WVDOT 2002). 
98 
 
2.8.11.2.2 Protection from Cold-Weather Conditions 
Cold weather provisions go into effect when the plastic concrete has a temperature less 
than 55 oF (13 oC).  To keep the concrete at acceptable temperatures, the aggregate and/or the 
mixing water may be heated.  The aggregate or water should not have a temperature higher than 
150 oF (66 oC) when it is poured into the mixture.  Any materials that are frozen should not be 
used in the concrete mixture.  (WVDOT 2000) 
When the concrete is curing, the surface of the concrete must be kept at a temperature 
above 35 oF (2 oC).  However, days when the concrete surface temperature is below 50 oF (10 
oC) cannot be counted as curing days. (WVDOT 2002)  Insulated forms may be used to protect 
the concrete during this period (WVDOT 2000).  Cold weather protection should be taken off in 
a way to prevent concrete surface temperature from dropping more than 20 oF (-7 oC) in a 24-
hour period (WVDOT 2002). 
2.8.11.3 Joints 
2.8.11.3.1 Joint Waterproofing 
Waterstops can be made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or rubber, and they should be free 
from imperfections, dense, and the same throughout (WVDOT 2000). 
2.8.11.3.2 Joint Filler 
Joint fillers for the expansion joint can be preformed.  They should be non-extruding and 
either resilient no bituminous or resilient bituminous types.  The non-bituminous type should 
meet AASHTO M 513 requirements and the bituminous type should meet AASHTO M 213 
requirements. (WVDOT 2000) 
 
99 
 
2.8.11.3.3 Joint Sealant 
Joint sealants can be hot-poured, silicone, or a mortar.  The hot-poured sealant should 
meet ASTM D 3405 requirements, and the silicone sealant should have a back-up material that 
prevents the sealant from moving to the bottom of the joint. (WVDOT 2000) 
100 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 3 
 
Box Culvert Crack Condition Survey 
 
3.1 Introduction 
As stated in Section 1.2, one of the objectives of this project was to examine if transverse 
cracking similar to that found in the Anniston Eastern Bypass (AEB) project was experienced in 
other cast-in-place (CIP) reinforced concrete box culverts in Alabama.  This was achieved by 
doing culvert crack condition surveys of several CIP reinforced concrete box culverts throughout 
Alabama.  The surveys consisted of a team walking through culverts and documenting the 
location and width of every visually observable transverse crack.  Culverts were visited in five 
ALDOT divisions.  Construction documents that contained the time of placement and 
environmental conditions during the placement of each section were also gathered from ALDOT 
for each of the surveyed culverts if they were available. 
3.2 Survey Procedure 
In the culvert crack condition surveys, crack comparators were used to measure crack 
widths, a measuring wheel was used to measure the distance from the beginning of the culvert to 
the crack location, and construction crayons were used to trace the crack and to write the crack 
width next to the crack.  A crack culvert survey documentation sheet was also prepared for each 
culvert survey visits, which is shown in Appendix A. 
101 
 
When the box culvert crack condition surveys were begun, the end of the culvert (north, 
south, east, or west) that was entered was determined first.  Then the wall on which the 
measuring wheel would be used was decided.  The measuring wheel was always zeroed at the 
beginning of the culvert.  The width and station of every transverse crack and transverse joint in 
the box culvert were then documented.  In addition, the location in the cross section of the 
culvert (walls, ceiling, or base) that the crack occurred was also documented.  The crack widths 
were recorded in 10-3 in. for simplicity (e.g. a 0.012 in. wide crack was reported as 12 x 10-3 in.).  
The cracks widths were measured at the location of the crack that was the widest.  Openings in 
all joints were recorded.  If a joint experienced no movement or opening, it was designated as 
closed or tight.  Also, if a joint or crack was patched, sealed, or covered in some way it was 
designated as ?CM?, or could not measure.  Longitudinal cracks and plastic shrinkage cracks 
were also documented, as well as any corrosion stains, efflorescence, exposed reinforcement, 
spalls, popouts, scaling, or previous repairs to the concrete. 
3.3 Culverts Visited 
Minor distress, such as corrosion and efflorescence, were seen in almost all of the 
culverts surveyed, as well as some minor longitudinal and plastic shrinkage cracks.  However, 
only major distress signs, transverse cracks, or conditions unique to each culvert will be 
mentioned in this chapter.  For full crack condition survey results see Appendix A.  The locations 
of the culverts visited, as well as the ALDOT division locations are shown in Figure 3-1.  The 
geometry, length, and fill height for all of the culverts surveyed can be seen in Table 3-1. 
102 
 
  
Figure 3-1: Culvert Survey Locations (ALDOT 2011a) 
 
Dutton  
Anniston 
East Bypass 
(AEB) 
Dadeville 
Montgomery 
Corridor X  
Centreville  
103 
 
Table 3-1: Surveyed Culvert Information 
Surveyed Culvert Information 
Culvert ID 
Size (No. 
Barrels x 
Width x 
Height) 
Length 
Maximum    
Fill 
Height 
Ceiling 
Thickness 
Interior    
Wall 
Thickness 
Exterior 
Wall 
Thickness 
AEB 
149+60 (C) 1x8'x8' 1,005' 56? 17?  -- 14? 
AEB 
162+90 (D) 1x6'x6' 355' 36? 13.5? -- 11.5?  
AEB 
175+70 (E) 1x8'x6' 508' 52? 16.5?  -- 10.5? 
AEB 
240+37 (J) 2x8'x8' 892' 59' 18.5" 9" 15" 
AEB 
257+69 (I) 1x6'x6' 625' 78' 18" -- 13" 
Centreville 
1808+98 3x12'x7' 286' 12' 14" 6" 10.5" 
Corridor X 
4877+13 3x8'x10' 901' 124' 2'-10" 12" 2'-11" 
Corridor X 
4959+43 3x8'x10' 945' 110' 2'-8" 12" 2'-10" 
Corridor X 
Exit 85 3x6?x6? > 900? N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Dadeville 
45+31.55 3x10'x10' 305' 32' 16.5" 7" 12" 
Dutton 
548+23 1x8'x8' 929' 114?-120? 24? N/A 19.5? 
I-85 North 2x10?x7? 122? N/A  N/A   N/A   N/A  
I-85 South 2x12?x7? 287? N/A N/A N/A N/A 
 
3.3.1 Anniston East Bypass (AEB) 
The culverts surveyed were located in Anniston in ALDOT?s Fourth Division.  The 
culvert sites were under the section of the Anniston East Bypass that was 700 ft (213 m) north of 
Choccolocco Road and 1,500 ft (457 m) south of Lake Yahou. 
104 
 
3.3.1.1 AEB Culvert  at 149+60 (Culvert C) 
The condition survey of AEB Culvert at 149+60, also known as Culvert C, was 
performed on July 12, 2010.  This culvert was built with transverse construction joints that 
contained continuous longitudinal reinforcement and not contraction joints.  The average joint 
spacing used was 48 ft (15 m).  The vee joint in Figure 1-3 was specified in the plans.  The 
measuring wheel was zeroed on the north wall and the end of entry was the west end.  The cross 
section of AEB Culvert at 149+60 can be seen in Figure 3-2, and the entrance to the culvert is 
shown in Figure 3-3. 
 
Figure 3-2: AEB Culvert at 149+60 Cross Section (ALDOT 1986) 
105 
 
 
Figure 3-3: AEB Culvert at 149+60 Entrance 
  
The widest crack observed was 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) in the north wall at stations 308 ft 0 in. 
and 314 ft 0 in., and the widest construction joint opening was 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) at station 293 ft 3 
in. in the base.  See Figure 3-4 for the wall crack at station 308 ft 0 in.  Several of the 
construction joints were patched with mortar.  At station 293 ft 3 in. the base of the construction 
joint had an opening of 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) and water was running through this crack into the 
supporting base. The survey was stopped at the top of the slope at station 1,003 ft 0 in. because 
the rest of the culvert was under water.  Longitudinal chamfer cracks were observed on both 
sides of the culvert barrel. 
 
106 
 
 
Figure 3-4: 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) Wide Transverse Crack in AEB Culvert at 149+60 at Station 308 ft 
0 in. in the North Wall 
 
3.3.1.2 AEB Culvert at 162+90 (Culvert D) 
The condition survey of AEB Culvert at 162+90, also known as Culvert D, was 
performed on July 12, 2010.  This culvert was built with transverse construction joints that 
contained continuous longitudinal reinforcement and not contraction joints.  The average joint 
spacing used was 53 ft (16 m).  The measuring wheel was started on the north wall and the end 
of entry was the east end.  The inside of the barrel of this culvert can be seen in Figure 3-5.  The 
plans for this culvert could not be obtained. 
The widest crack observed was 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) at multiple locations in the base and both 
walls.  See Figure 3-6 for one of these cracks found at station 179 ft 0 in. in the base.  The widest 
107 
 
construction joint opening was at station 153 ft 6 in., which had an opening greater than 0.08 in. 
(2 mm).  Longitudinal chamfer cracks were observed on both sides of the culvert barrel. 
 
Figure 3-5: Inside of AEB Culvert at 162+90 
 
Figure 3-6: 1/4 in. (3.2 mm) Wide Transverse Base Crack at Station 179 ft 0 in. in AEB Culvert 
at 162+90 
108 
 
3.3.1.3 AEB Culvert at 175+70 (Culvert  E) 
The condition survey of AEB Culvert at 175+70, also known as Culvert E, was 
performed on July 12, 2010.  This culvert was built with transverse construction joints that 
contained continuous longitudinal reinforcement and not contraction joints.  The average joint 
spacing used was 52 ft (16 m).  The vee joint in Figure 1-3 was specified in the plans.  The 
measuring wheel was started on the north wall and the end of entry was the east end.  The cross 
section of AEB Culvert at 175+70 can be seen in Figure 3-7, and the entrance is shown in Figure 
3-8. 
The widest crack observed was 3/16 in. (4.8 mm) wide at station 148 ft 7 in. in both walls 
and the ceiling.  One of the wider transverse cracks can be seen in Figure 3-9.  A vertical 
reinforcement bar was visible through a wide transverse crack on the north wall at station 148 ft 
7 in.  The widest construction joint opening was 0.08 in. (2 mm) wide in the base and north wall 
at station 112 ft 3 in.  Longitudinal chamfer cracks were observed in this culvert.  The chamfer 
cracks ranged from hairline to 0.016 in. (0.41 mm) wide. 
 
Figure 3-7: AEB Culvert at 175+70 Cross-Section (ALDOT n.d.b) 
109 
 
 
Figure 3-8: AEB Culvert at 175+70 Entrance 
 
 
Figure 3-9: Transverse Wall and Base Crack in AEB Culvert at 175+70 that is greater than 0.08 
in. (2 mm) wide 
 
110 
 
3.3.1.4 AEB Culvert at 240+37 (Culvert J) 
The condition survey of AEB Culvert at 240+37, also known as Culvert J, was performed 
on November 9, 2010.  This culvert was built with transverse construction joints that contained 
continuous longitudinal reinforcement and not contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used 
was 50 ft (15 m).  The vee joint in Figure 1-3 was specified in the plans.  The measuring wheel 
was started on the north wall, the end of entry was the east end, and the north barrel was 
surveyed.  The north wall was an exterior wall and the south wall was an interior wall.  The cross 
section of AEB Culvert at 240+37 is shown in Figure 3-10. 
 
Figure 3-10: AEB Culvert at 240+37 Cross-Section (ALDOT n.d.a) 
 
Many of the cracks in Culvert J had been repaired when the research team visited the 
culvert site, and the crack widths could not be measured; however some of these repaired cracks 
111 
 
had already started to reopen.  Because of this, a previous ALDOT crack survey was used for all 
of the data.  The ALDOT survey is included in Appendix A. 
The widest crack observed was 3/16 in. (4.8 mm) wide at station 595 ft 0 in. in the 
ceiling, both walls, and the base.  The widest joint opening was also 3/16 in. (4.8 mm) at station 
69 ft 0 in. in the celling, both walls, and the base.  A picture of a base crack found in the culvert 
can be seen in Figure 3-11.  Cracks were also observed in the wingwalll of the culvert, as shown 
in Figure 3-12.  Longitudinal cracs 
 
Figure 3-11: Base Crack from AEB Culvert at 240+37 
 
Figure 3-12: Wingwall Cracks in AEB Culvert at 240+37 
112 
 
3.3.1.5 AEB Culvert at 257+69 (Culvert I) 
The condition survey of AEB Culvert at 257+69, also known as Culvert I, was performed 
on July 12, 2010.  The measuring wheel was started on the north wall and the end of entry was 
the east end.  The cross section of AEB Culvert at 257+69 is shown in Figure 3-13, and the 
entrance can be seen in Figure 3-14. 
  
Figure 3-13: AEB Culvert at 257+69 Cross-Section (ALDOT 2001) 
113 
 
 
Figure 3-14: AEB Culvert at 257+69 Entrance 
 
This culvert had contraction joints as detailed in Figure 3-15.  The average joint spacing 
used was 49 ft (15 m).  This was the only culvert in the AEB project detailed with a contraction 
joint and a shear key.  Sealant was used in the base and walls at most of these contraction joints 
(see Figure 3-16a).  However, the base was patched at stations 149 ft 3 in., 246 ft 10 in., and 440 
ft 10 in., and wood was in the joint at the base at stations 99 ft 3 in. and 295 ft 7 in. (see Figure 3-
16b).  Stations 344 ft 8 in. and 392 ft 3 in. had construction joints instead of contraction joints. 
114 
 
 
Figure 3-15: Transverse Contraction Joint Used in AEB Culvert at 257+69 (ALDOT 2001) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3-16: (a) Contraction Joint and Sealant in AEB Culvert at 257+69; 
             (b) Wood Strip in a Contraction Joint in AEB Culvert at 257+69 
          (a)                                                            (b) 
115 
 
The widest crack observed was 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) wide in the base at station 510 ft 9 in., 
and the widest construction joint opening was 3/16 in. (4.8 mm) at station 440 ft 10 in. in the 
ceiling.   
3.3.2 Centreville 
3.3.2.1 Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 
This condition survey was performed on October 6, 2011.  Centreville Culvert at 
1808+98 was built with transverse construction joints that contained continuous longitudinal 
reinforcement and not contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used was 51 ft (16 m).  The 
vee joint in Figure 1-3 was specified in the plans.  It is located east of County Road 20 on US 
Highway 82 in Centreville.  Each barrel of this culvert was surveyed.  The measuring wheel was 
zeroed on the east wall and the end of entry was the south end for each barrel.  The cross section 
of this culvert is shown in Figure 3-17, and the entrance can be seen in Figure 3-18. 
 
Figure 3-17: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Cross Section (ALDOT 2007) 
116 
 
 
Figure 3-18: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Entrance 
 
This culvert had experienced cracking before the culvert was even backfilled. The widest 
crack observed in the eastern barrel was 0.02 in. (0.5 mm) wide.  The widest crack observed in 
the center barrel was 0.03 in. (0.8 mm) wide.  The widest crack observed in the western barrel 
was 0.02 in. (0.5 mm) wide.  The widest joint openings were 0.013 in. (0.33 mm) in the center 
barrel were and 0.02 in. (0.5 mm) in the eastern and western barrels.  Many of the wall cracks 
had been covered with mortar since the initial crack survey was performed by ALDOT (see 
Figure 3-19).  The locations of these cracks were documented, and the widths of these cracks 
were taken from a previously performed ALDOT crack survey.  The ALDOT survey is included 
in Appendix A.  Cracking was also observed at the wingwall and culvert wall intersection as 
shown in Figure 3-20.  Through cracks, some wider than 0.03 in. (0.8 mm), were observed on the 
outside of the ceiling of the culvert too as shown in Figure 3-21. 
117 
 
 
Figure 3-19: East Barrel Wall Crack Covered with Mortar in Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 
 
  
Figure 3-20: Crack at Wingwall and Culvert Intersection in Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 
118 
 
 
Figure 3-21: Ceiling Crack on the Outside of Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 
 
3.3.3 Corridor X 
The culverts surveyed were located on Interstate 22 in Jefferson County.  Corridor X 
Culvert at 4877+13 is approximately 0.5 mile (0.8 km) west of County Road 77.  Corridor X 
Culvert at 4959+43 is approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) east of County Road 77.  Corridor X 
Culvert at Exit 85 is located at the Exit 85-1 Mile sign on the westbound highway. 
3.3.3.1 Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 
This crack survey was performed on September 16, 2010.  The cross section of the 
culvert is shown in Figure 3-22.  The southernmost barrel was chosen for the crack survey.  The 
south wall was an exterior wall and the north wall was an interior wall.  The measuring wheel 
was zeroed on the south wall and the end of entry was the east end. 
119 
 
 
Figure 3-22: Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Cross Section (ALDOT 2000a) 
120 
 
Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 was built with transverse contraction joints.  The 
contraction joint detail from the plans is shown in Figure 3-23, and the average joint spacing 
used was 38 ft (12 m).  However, the contraction joints used in the interior walls and ceiling did 
not have sealant in the joint groove as specified.  The exceptions were the contraction joints in 
the interior walls at stations 39 ft 9 in. and 77 ft 0 in., which were built with sealant.  The exterior 
walls and base contraction joints all had sealant, although the joint filler or sealant had come 
loose in many of the contraction joints in the base as shown in Figure 3-24.  An exterior wall 
contraction joint is shown in Figure 3-25.  It should be noted that 8 of the 23 transverse 
contraction joints in the walls had cracks adjacent to the joint, and 6 of the 8 cracks occurred in 
the exterior wall.  These cracks ranged from hairline cracks to cracks as wide as 0.10 in. (2.5 
mm).  These cracks should not form next to a joint that allows movement; therefore, a question 
about whether the contraction joints in this culvert function correctly is raised.  The cracks could 
be a result of the restraint provided by alternate bars being continuous through the contraction 
joint. 
The ceiling of this culvert was too high to measure.  Therefore, the ceiling crack widths 
were estimated relative to the crack widths measured in the walls. Also, the base was muddy and 
cracks were impossible to see.  Because of this, joints in the base at stations 39 ft 9 in. and 77 ft 0 
in. could not be observed.  The widest crack observed was 0.10 in. (2.5 mm) wide and it was 
located at station 680 ft 10 in. in the exterior wall. 
 
121 
 
 
Figure 3-23: Transverse Contraction Joint Used in Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 (ALDOT 
2000a) 
 
 
Figure 3-24: Transverse Contraction Joint in the Base of Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 at 
Station 151 ft 8 in. 
Wall 
Base 
Contraction Joint 
Exposed Backer Rod 
122 
 
 
Figure 3-25: Transverse Contraction Joint in the Exterior Wall of Corridor X Culvert at 
4877+13 at Station 341 ft 3 in. 
 
3.3.3.2 Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 
This crack survey was performed on September 16, 2010.  The cross section of Corridor 
X Culvert at 4959+43 is shown in Figure 3-26, and the entrance to the culvert is shown in Figure 
3-27.  The southernmost barrel was chosen for the crack survey.  The south wall was an exterior 
wall and the north wall was an interior wall.  The measuring wheel was started on the north wall 
and the end of entry was the west end. 
 
 
123 
 
 
Figure 3-26: Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Cross Section (ALDOT 2000b) 
124 
 
 
Figure 3-27: Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Entrance and Wingwall Crack 
 
The ceiling of this culvert was too high to measure.  Therefore, the ceiling crack widths 
were estimated relative to the crack widths measured in the walls. Also, the base was muddy and 
made it difficult to find cracks.  Because of this, joints and cracks in the base could not be 
observed in this culvert.  The widest crack observed was 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) in the ceiling at station 
334 ft 4 in.  Cracks were also observed in the wingwall as seen in the left wingwall in Figure 3-
28. 
The transverse joint that was used in the construction of Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 
does not match the transverse contraction joint in the plans as shown in Figure 3-28.  The 
average joint spacing used was 44 ft (13 m).  The joint used in construction had no sealant, as 
can be seen in Figure 3-29.  Some of the joints were open wide enough where they could be 
looked into with a flashlight.  No reinforcement could be seen through the joint, and a key could 
125 
 
not be seen either.  The joints were still determined to be contraction joints because of the lack of 
continuous reinforcement. 
 
Figure 3-28: Transverse Contraction Joint used in Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 (ALDOT 
2000b) 
 
 
Figure 3-29: Joint Opening Located in the wall of Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 
126 
 
3.3.3.3 Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 
This crack survey was performed on June 12, 2012.  Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 was 
built with transverse construction joints that contained continuous longitudinal reinforcement in 
it and not contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used was 46 ft (14 m).  The entrance to 
Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 is shown in Figure 3-30.  The easternmost barrel was chosen for 
the crack survey.  The east wall was an exterior wall and the west wall was an interior wall.  The 
measuring wheel was zeroed on the east wall and the end of entry was the south end.  The plans 
for this culvert could not be obtained. 
 
Figure 3-30: Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Southern Entrance 
 
Much of the base was under water and hard to see.  Because of this, few joints and cracks 
in the base were observed in this culvert.  The crack survey was stopped at station 965 ft 0 in. 
because of sediment build up in the culvert.  The widest transverse crack observed was 0.05 in. 
(1 mm) wide in the east wall at stations 756 ft 3 in, 844 ft 5 in., and 931 ft 4 in. and also in the 
127 
 
ceiling at station 756 ft 3 in.  A transverse wall crack is shown in Figure 3-31.  The largest joint 
opening was 0.10 in. (2.5 mm) in the east wall at station 775 ft 0 in and at station 822 ft 6 in. in 
the east wall and ceiling. A construction joint is shown in Figure 3-32.  Longitudinal cracking 
was observed in the ceiling and at the chamfer. 
Many of the transverse cracks and some of the construction joints had corrosion stains 
and/or deposits.  The construction joints in the base appeared to be sealed; however, the joints in 
the walls and ceiling were not. 
 
Figure 3-31: Transverse Wall Crack in Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 
128 
 
 
Figure 3-32: Transverse Construction Joint in Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 (Joint Patched with 
Mortar) 
3.3.4 Dadeville 
3.3.4.1 Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 
A crack survey was performed on December 7, 2010.  Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 was 
located south of Dadeville on SR-49 over Sougahatchee Creek, just south of CR-15.  This culvert 
was built with transverse construction joints that contained continuous longitudinal 
reinforcement in it and not contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used was 44 ft (13 m).  
The vee joint in Figure 1-3 was specified in the plans.  The southernmost culvert was surveyed, 
and the end of entry was the west end.  The measuring wheel was kept on the south wall.  The 
interior wall was the north wall and the exterior was the south wall.  The symmetric cross section 
129 
 
of Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 is shown in Figure 3-33, and the entrance is shown in Figure 3-
34. 
 
Figure 3-33: Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Half-Typical Cross Section (ALDOT 1983) 
 
 
Figure 3-34: Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Entrance 
 
130 
 
The base could not be observed until after station 170 ft 0 in. because it was covered with 
mud and water.  Also, the ceiling was too tall to be measured; therefore the crack widths were 
estimated. 
The widest joint opening observed was 0.05 in. (1 mm) wide at station 222 ft 2 in. in the 
ceiling, exterior wall, and interior wall.  The widest transverse crack was also 0.05 in. (1 mm) 
wide, and it was located at station 191 ft 8 in. in the exterior wall.  A transverse crack detected in 
the wall of Culvert Dadeville 45+31.55 is shown in Figure 3-35.  Other observations and 
measurements were also made throughout the survey.  Many of the cracks had been repaired 
with epoxy, but new cracks had developed beside the epoxy-filled crack since that time.  Also, 
there were wide cracks and distress where the wingwall connects to the culvert, as shown in 
Figure 3-36.  
 
  
Figure 3-35: Transverse Wall Crack in Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 
 
131 
 
 
Figure 3-36: Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Wingwall and Culvert Connection 
 
3.3.5 Dutton 
3.3.5.1 Dutton Culvert at 548+23 
A crack survey was performed on August 11, 2010.  Dutton Culvert at 548+23 was built 
with transverse construction joints instead of contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used 
was 46 ft (14 m).  The transverse vee joint was specified in the plans, and it is shown in Figure 3-
37.  The measuring wheel was started in the middle to avoid snakes located on both walls, and it 
was moved to the north wall (oriented parallel to the ground) at station 322 ft 6 in. when the 
water became too deep.  The end of entry was the east end.  The entrance to the culvert can be 
seen in Figure 3-38, and the cross section of the culvert is shown in Figure 3-39. 
132 
 
After station 273 ft 7 in., the base of the culvert base could no longer be observed 
because it was underwater.  Also, the survey was stopped at station 458 ft 5 in. because the water 
became too deep.   
The widest transverse crack observed was 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) wide at station 110 ft 11 in. in 
both walls and the ceiling.  The widest transverse joint opening observed was 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) 
wide at station 458 ft 3 in. in the south wall.  Many of the transverse construction joints surveyed 
were tight or exhibited minimal movement.  The transverse vee joint could be seen in the base at 
stations 90 ft 0 in. and 178 ft 5 in.  Ceiling and wall thickness measurements were also taken 
during the survey.  The ceiling was measured to be 11 in. (279 mm) deep at station 226 ft 7 in., 
15.5 in. (394 mm) at station 410 ft 0 in., and 18.5 in. (470 mm) at station 457 ft 5 in.  The north 
wall was measured to be 10.5 in. (267 mm) thick at station 232 ft 3 in.  Figure 3-40 shows an 
example of a transverse crack observed in Dutton Culvert at 548+23.  Longitudinal cracks that 
were 0.016 in. (0.41 mm) wide were observed in both walls. 
 
 
 
 
 
133 
 
 
A ?? Vee Joint is equivalent to and can be used instead of a Construction Joint for 
culvert construction.  The term Joint shall refer to either and shall be determined by 
the project engineer. 
No joint is required for culverts up to 60 ft long.  Culverts 60 ft to 90 ft long require 
one joint, 90 ft to 135 ft two joints, and 135 to 175 ft three joints. 
For culverts over 170 ft long place joints at approximate equal intervals of not less 
than 40 ft nor more than 55 ft.  The joints shall be normal to the center-line of the 
culvert with longitudinal reinforcing extending through the joint.  Use no key or 
expansion material in joints. 
 
Figure 3-37: Transverse Vee Joint Used in Dutton Culvert at 548+23 (ALDOT 1980)  
 
 
Figure 3-38: Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Entrance 
 
134 
 
 
Figure 3-39: Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Cross Section (ALDOT 1988) 
 
 
Figure 3-40: Transverse Crack in South Wall at Station 110 ft 11 in. of Dutton Culvert at 
548+23 that is Greater than 1/4 in. (6.4 mm) Wide 
135 
 
3.3.6 Montgomery 
3.3.6.1 Prattville Culvert on US-82 
This crack survey was performed on May 5, 2011.  Prattville Culvert on US-82 was 
located in Prattville, Alabama on US Highway 82 just past mile marker 143.  This culvert was 
built with transverse construction joints that contained continuous longitudinal reinforcement and 
not contraction joints.  The average joint spacing used was 30 ft (9.1 m).  The eastern barrel of 
the culvert was surveyed.  The measuring wheel was started on the east wall, and the end of entry 
was the north end.  The entrance is shown in Figure 3-41.  The eastern wall was the exterior wall 
and the western wall was the interior wall.  The plans for this culvert could not be obtained. 
The culvert had a major scour problem under the south half of the culvert.  This caused 
significant settlement to occur, as can be seen in Figure 3-42.  Cracks from station 51 ft 9 in. to 
the end of the culvert were documented but were noted as cracks that possibly could have been 
caused by the settlement.  The widest crack observed was 5/16 in. (7.9 mm) wide at station 26 ft 
10 in. in the exterior and interior wall.  The widest joint opening was 0.25 in. (0.64 mm) wide at 
station 60 ft 0 in. in the ceiling, base, and both walls. 
 
Figure 3-41: Entrance to Prattville Culvert on US-82 
136 
 
 
Figure 3-42: Settlement of Prattville Culvert on US-82 
 
The concrete in the base of the culvert in the half that settled was severely deteriorated. 
This is illustrated below in Figure 3-43.  The connection between the wingwalls and the culvert 
walls also had severely deteriorated.  This is illustrated in Figure 3-44.  Spalling was observed in 
the east wall at station 38 ft 0 in.  Also, the construction joint at station 60 ft 0 in. (the point 
where the settlement started) had no reinforcement through it at all.  A longitudinal crack was 
observed in the base at station 70 ft 4 in.  The construction joints surveyed were open and 
showed movement of 5/16 in. (7.9 mm) at station 26 ft 10 in. and 0.25 in. (6.4 mm) at station 60 
ft 0 in.  Longitudinal cracks were observed in the section that had settled. 
137 
 
 
Figure 3-43: Base Deterioration in Prattville Culvert on US-82 
 
 
Figure 3-44: Wingwall Connection to the Culvert in Prattville Culvert on US-82 
138 
 
3.3.6.2 I-85 North Culvert 
This crack survey was performed on May 5, 2011.  I-85 North Culvert was located on 
Interstate 85 North near exit 9.  The measuring wheel was started on the west wall, and the end 
of entry was the north end.  The entrance is shown in Figure 3-45.  The interior wall was the west 
wall and the exterior wall was the east wall.  Culvert extensions were added on to the original 
culvert at each end.  The plans for this culvert could not be obtained, but transverse vee joints 
with continuous longitudinal reinforcement were found in this culvert.  The average joint spacing 
used was 35 ft (11 m).   
 
Figure 3-45: Entrance to I-85 North Culvert 
 
There were three construction joint locations.  The two outer construction joints were 
skewed and connected the outer culvert extensions to the original culvert.  The middle 
construction joint was the vee joint that is shown in Figure 3-40.  The southernmost construction 
joint was patched with mortar and the openings could not be measured.  The northernmost 
139 
 
construction joint had openings as wide as 0.06 in. (2 mm) and the middle construction joint had 
openings as wide as 0.025 in. (0.64 mm).  The widest crack surveyed was 0.04 in (0.7 mm) wide 
at station 79 ft 6 in. in the exterior wall. 
3.3.6.3 I-85 South Culvert 
This crack survey was performed on May 5, 2011.  I-85 South Culvert is located on 
Interstate 85 South near exit 6.  The measuring wheel was started on the east wall, and the end of 
entry was the south end.  The entrance is shown in Figure 3-46.  The interior wall was the west 
wall and the exterior wall was the east wall.  Culvert extensions were added at each end of the 
culvert.  The plans for this culvert could not be obtained, but transverse vee joints with 
continuous longitudinal reinforcement were found in this culvert.  The average joints spacing 
used was 41 ft (12 m). 
 
Figure 3-46: Entrance to I-85 South culvert 
 
There were three construction joint locations in the culvert.  The two outer construction 
joints were skewed and connected the outer culvert extensions to the original culvert.  The 
middle construction joint was a vee joint, shown in Figure 3-47 below.  The southern most 
140 
 
construction joint had openings as wide as 0.07 in. (2 mm), and the northernmost construction 
joint had openings as wide as 3/16 in. (4.8 mm).  The middle construction joint had openings as 
wide as 0.075 in. (1.9 mm).  The widest crack surveyed was 0.10 in. (2.5 mm) wide and it was 
observed in the east wall at station 75 ft 5 in. 
 
Figure 3-47: Crack in the Vee Joint in the Wall in I-85 South Culvert 
 
3.4 Evaluation of Culvert Condition Survey Data 
3.4.1 Crack Widths and Crack Spacings 
3.4.1.1 Procedure 
The spacing between successive transverse cracks in the surveyed box culverts was 
calculated and documented for each wall, the base, and the ceiling.  These data were used to 
141 
 
make a frequency histogram of the crack spacing.  See Appendix A for the crack width and 
spacing histograms of each culvert.  Hairline cracks, patched cracks, cracks of which the width 
could not be measured, transverse contraction joints, and construction joints with continuous 
longitudinal reinforcement that were not tight were included in calculating the crack spacing.  
Plastic shrinkage cracks were not included because they are not through cracks. 
The crack width data recorded was also used to make a frequency histogram of the crack 
widths for each wall, the base, and the ceiling of each culvert.  Hairline cracks were assigned a 
width of 0.005 in. (0.1 mm).  Construction joints with continuous longitudinal reinforcement that 
were not tight were included in the calculations.  Plastic shrinkage cracks and cracks that could 
not be measured were not included either.  Openings in joints that were meant to allow 
movement, such as contraction joints, were also not included. 
3.4.1.2 Results and Discussion 
The average crack widths and average crack spacing for each culvert surveyed are 
summarized in Figures 3-48 and 3-49.  Prattville Culvert on US-82 was not included in the 
following data due to the distress being related to severe settlement issues.  The settlement cracks 
were very wide and skewed the scale of the graphs.  The dashed line in Figure 3-48 represents 
the ACI 224 (2001) crack width limit of 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) from Section 1.1.2.  The V and C 
designations in Figure 3-51 represent culverts with transverse vee joints (transverse construction 
joints with continuous reinforcement through them) or transverse contraction joints respectively.  
Also, the 90th percentile crack widths for each culvert can be seen in Figure 3-50.  The crack 
widths and spacing in the base of the culverts were not included because of the lack of available 
data. 
 
142 
 
 
Figure 3-48a: Culvert Average Crack Widths 
 
Figure 3-48b: Culvert Average Crack Widths 
143 
 
 
Figure 3-48c: Culvert Average Crack Widths 
 
Figure 3-49a: Culvert Average Crack Spacing 
144 
 
 
Figure 3-49b: Culvert Average Crack Spacing 
 
Figure 3-49c: Culvert Average Crack Spacing 
145 
 
 
Figure 3-50a: Culvert 90th Percentile Crack Widths 
 
Figure 3-50b: Culvert 90th percentile Crack Widths 
146 
 
 
Figure 3-50c: Culvert 90th percentile Crack Widths 
 
From the average crack width data, it can be concluded that the wide transverse cracks 
are not unique to the AEB project.  Six of the eight culverts that were not located in the AEB 
project had a wall or ceiling with an average crack width that was greater than 0.012 in. (0.30 
mm).   
It can also be concluded that using transverse contraction joints in CIP reinforced 
concrete box culverts reduced the crack widths experienced.  AEB Culvert at 257+69 was the 
only culvert in the AEB project that had transverse contraction joints.  This culvert?s average 
wall crack width was 0.006 in. (0.1 mm) as compared to an average of 0.011 in. (0.28 mm) for 
the other culverts surveyed in this project.  Its average ceiling crack width was 0.007 in. (0.1 
mm) as compared to 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) for the other culverts surveyed in this project.  
Therefore, using contraction joints reduced average crack widths by 48% in the walls and 43% in 
147 
 
the ceiling in the AEB project.  Similar results were found when comparing the 90th percentile 
crack widths of the culverts in the AEB project.  The 90th percentile wall crack width of AEB 
Culvert at 257+69 was 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) as compared to 0.063 in. (1.6 mm) for the other 
culverts surveyed in this project.  Its 90th percentile ceiling crack width was 0.041 in. (1.0 mm) 
as compared to 0.061 in. (1.6 mm) for the other culverts surveyed in this project.  Therefore, 
using contraction joints reduced the 90th percentile crack widths by 81% in the walls and 33% in 
the ceiling in the AEB project.  Two of the three culverts from the Corridor X project had 
transverse contraction joints.  These two culverts, Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 and Corridor X 
Culvert at 4959+43, had much smaller average crack widths than the culvert that did not have 
transverse contraction joints, Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85.  The average wall crack width of the 
Corridor X culverts with contraction joints was 0.008 in. (0.2 mm) as compared to an average of 
0.017 in. (0.43 mm) for the other culvert surveyed in this project.  The average ceiling crack 
width was 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) for the culverts with contraction joints and 0.019 in. (0.48 mm) 
for the other culvert surveyed in this project.  Therefore, using contraction joints reduced average 
crack widths by 54% in the walls and 36% in the ceiling in the Corridor X project.  Corridor X 
Culvert at 4877+13 and Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 also had much higher crack spacings 
than did Culvert X Exit 85.  This implies that the culverts with transverse contraction joints had 
fewer, narrower cracks than the culvert without transverse contraction joints did.  Mixed results 
were found when comparing the 90th percentile crack widths of Corridor X culverts.  The two 
culverts with contraction joints had an average 90th percentile wall crack width of 0.012 in. (0.30 
mm) as compared to 0.063 in. (1.6 mm) for the other culvert surveyed.  This means that using 
contraction joints caused a reduction of 81% in the 90th percentile wall crack widths in the 
Corridor X project.   However, when comparing the 90th percentile ceiling crack widths, the two 
148 
 
culverts with contraction joints had an average 90th percentile crack spacing of 0.052 in. (1.3 
mm) as compared to 0.041 in. (1.0 mm) for the other culvert surveyed.  This means that using 
contraction joints caused a 27% increase in the 90th percentile ceiling crack widths in the 
Corridor X project, and makes the effect of contraction joints on the 90th percentile crack spacing 
inconclusive. 
Examining the effects of contraction joints on average crack spacing provided 
inconclusive results.  The culvert in the AEB project with contraction joints had average ceiling 
and wall crack spacings of 6.6 ft (2.0 m) and 19 ft (5.8 m) respectively.  The culverts in the same 
project without contraction joints had average wall and ceiling crack spacings of 7.1 ft (2.2 m) 
and 7.8 ft (2.4 m) respectively.  Therefore, using contraction joints decreased the wall crack 
spacing by 7% and increased the ceiling crack spacing by 144% when compared to the other 
culverts in the AEB project.  In the Corridor X project, the culverts with contraction joints had 
average wall and ceiling crack spacings of 14.3 ft (4.36 m) and 36.4 ft (11.1 m) respectively.  
The culvert in this project without contraction joints had an average wall and ceiling crack 
spacing of 8.7 ft (2.6 m) and 8.8 ft (2.7 m) respectively.  Using contraction joints increased the 
average wall crack spacing by 65% and increased the average ceiling crack spacing by 314% 
when compared to the other culvert in the Corridor X project.  Because of the discrepancy 
between the Corridor X and AEB project findings, there were no conclusive relationships found 
between the average crack spacing and using contraction joints. 
AEB Culvert at 162+90, Centreville Culvert at 1808+98, and Dutton Culvert at 548+23 
were the only culverts with transverse construction joints with continuous longitudinal 
reinforcement through them that did not have a wall or ceiling with an average crack width 
greater than 0.012 in. (0.30 mm).  It is not certain why these culverts performed better than other 
149 
 
culverts with transverse construction joints and continuous reinforcement did not.  It is possible 
that these culverts were primarily constructed during winter months, which would mostly negate 
all thermal stress development.  Dutton Culvert at 548+23 also had a 90th percentile crack width 
that was much greater than the other culverts surveyed.  It had very few cracks and the majority 
of them were narrow; however, it had cracks at two locations that were greater than 1/4 in. (6.4 
mm) wide.  These very wide cracks accompanied with the small number of cracks found are the 
reason for the extreme 90th percentile crack width value. 
The majority of the culverts surveyed had an average ceiling and wall crack spacing less 
than 13 ft (4.0 m).  The only culverts that did not were AEB Culvert at 257+69, Corridor X 
Culvert at 4877+13, Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43, and Dutton Culvert at 548+23.  Corridor X 
Culvert at 4877+13 and Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 are discussed above.  AEB Culvert at 
257+69 is mentioned above as well.  As in the preceding paragraph, the large average crack 
spacings in Dutton Culvert at 548+23 could be explained by the possibility of it being placed in 
the winter. 
While many of the culverts surveyed demonstrated adequate crack performance, all of the 
culverts still had cracks wider than 0.012 in (0.30 mm).  There was still room for the crack 
performance to be improved.  The majority of the culverts had transverse joints spaced at 
approximately 50 ft (15 m).  Decreasing the joint spacing would be a way to improve the crack 
performance. 
The typical distress observed at these sites was transverse through cracks in the walls and 
ceiling.  Few base cracks were observed due to the view of the base usually being obstructed.  
Minor efflorescence and corrosion were observed at many locations during condition surveys, 
but the degree of distress associated with these were minimal. 
150 
 
Some longitudinal cracking was observed between the celling and the wall, but these 
cracks were expected.  Longitudinal cracks are expected in the ceiling and base of CIP box 
culverts at the locations shown in Figure 3-51.  These are the locations of maximum bending 
moment form the downward soil loads on the culvert.  The maximum positive bending moment 
will be located near the middle of the ceiling and base where the tension fiber will be on the 
interior face.  The locations of maximum negative moment will be near the supports where the 
tension fiber will be on the exterior face.  Longitudinal cracks are generally not expected in the 
walls due to the compressive forces negating the bending moments from the horizontal soil 
loads.  The longitudinal chamfer cracks observed can be attributed to stress concentration at a 
change in the geometry of the culvert cross section.  The longitudinal cracks observed ranged for 
hairline to 0.016 in. (0.41 mm) wide.  These cracks were not considered a major concern due to 
the infrequency of their occurrence. 
 
Figure 3-51: Expected Locations of Longitudinal Cracks in Box Culverts 
 
Wingwall cracking was observed in several of the culverts surveyed.  Distress was 
observed at wingwall culvert connections as well as in the wingwall itself.  The distress was 
151 
 
severe enough to where it should be addressed by redesigning the wingwall and culvert 
intersection and by adding joints to alleviate stresses. 
From the culvert crack condition surveys and the data collected, the stress development 
due to the restraint of thermal and drying shrinkage appears to be the main cause of the wide 
transverse cracking observed in the culvert barrels.  Drying shrinkage is inevitable, because the 
culverts are exposed to relative humidity conditions of less than 100% (Hansen and 
Almudaiheem 1987).  The culverts are also exposed to hot summer and cold winter temperatures 
over time that make thermal volume changes unavoidable (Schindler 2002).  The restraint 
provide by the stiff base along with the combined effects of thermal and drying shrinkage cause 
tensile stresses to rise in the wall and ceiling of the culverts.  The tensile stresses rise until the 
tensile strength of the concrete is reached and through cracks form.  Refer to Figure 2-19 for an 
illustration of this cracking mechanism.  These transverse through cracks indicate that the 
distress is caused by restrained thermal shrinkage (Bernander 1998).  Cracks may also form in 
the base, due to the restraint provided by the granular subbase; however, these cracks occur less 
frequently, because the restraint provided by the subbase is much less than the restraint the base 
provides for the walls and ceiling.  The fact that using contraction joints in the AEB and Corridor 
X projects helped to limit these transverse crack width also suggest that restrained thermal and 
drying shrinkage are a major cause.  Refer to Figure 2-19 for an illustration of how contraction 
joints relieve tensile stresses in walls and mitigate cracking.  The generally systematic 
occurrence of cracks throughout the culverts ? on average every 9.5 ft (2.9 m) ? imply that 
settlement is not the cause of the transverse cracks.  There would be localized distress if 
settlement was the cause of the transverse cracking.  The through cracks indicate that plastic 
152 
 
shrinkage is not the main causes of distress, because they tend to be shallow cracks (ACI 224 
2007).   
The main cause of the distress experienced in the wingwalls is also thought to be 
restrained thermal and drying shrinkage of the concrete.  The rigid wingwall footings can 
provide restraint in long wingwalls that cause tensile stresses to rise when the wingwall contracts 
due to thermal and drying shrinkage.  There is no contraction joint in the middle of the wingwalls 
to alleviate the stresses so cracking occurs.  The distress in AEB Culvert at 240+37 (see Figure 
3-12) is an example of this.  Refer to Figure 2-19 for an illustration of this cracking mechanism.  
Distress at the intersection of the culvert and wingwall can also be explained by restrained drying 
shrinkage.  The distress experienced in Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 (see Figure 3-36) is an 
example of this distress.  The concrete volumetric changes in the long culvert are restrained by 
the wingwalls that have rigid footings preventing movement of the wall.  This causes tensile 
stresses to rise, which are magnified by the change in angle where the culvert and wingwall 
interact, and cracking to occur.  This concept is illustrated in Figure 3-52.  However, settlement 
of the wingwall foundation, as suggested by ALDOT, is also a very possible cause.  The 
wingwall distress is localized in some culverts at the intersection of the culvert and wingwall 
(see Figure 3-36).  The cracking there could be a result of the wingwall rotating when one end of 
the wingwall foundation settles.  The cracking in the wingwall itself (see Figure 3-12) could 
possibly be explained by foundation settlement under the middle of the wingwall.  These 
examples of wingwall settlement are illustrated in Figure 3-53. 
 
153 
 
 
Figure 3-52: Cracking at the Wingwall and Culvert Intersection Illustration 
 
 
Figure 3-53: Wingwall Foundation Settlement Cracking Illustrations 
 
 
154 
 
The transverse through cracks found in Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 best illustrate the 
reasoning behind why restrained thermal and drying shrinkage is the most likely cause of distress 
at the culvert and wingwall interaction.  The through cracks occurred before the culvert was even 
backfilled, which indicates that settlement is not a likely cause of cracking.  The wingwall and 
culvert were still exposed to air on all sides, and the transverse vee/construction joints and very 
stiff base provided significant restraint.  The wingwall crack observed (see Figure 3-20) was at a 
point of stress concentration (the change in geometry at intersection of the culvert and wingwall) 
and the stress resulting from restrained concrete volumetric change is a very likely cause of this 
distress. 
3.5 Summary and Conclusions 
In this chapter, the procedure for the box culvert condition surveys is outlined.  The 
location, geometry, length, type of joint used, widest crack, and unique distress experienced are 
presented for each of the 14 culverts surveyed.  The average crack width, average crack spacing, 
and 90th percentile crack width are also presented for the culverts. 
The typical distress observed was transverse through cracking in the walls and ceiling of 
the culverts.  Few transverse base cracks were observed, due to them being covered with mud or 
under water, but they tended to be wider than wall and ceiling cracks on average. Wingwall 
cracking was also observed where culvert and wingwall intersect as well as in the wingwall 
itself.  The distress was severe enough to where wingwall joints should be added to reduce 
stresses, and the intersection of the culvert and wingwall should be redesigned.  
Four key findings were drawn from the data presented in this chapter. The first is that 6 
of the 8 culverts surveyed that were not located in the AEB project had a wall or ceiling with an 
average crack width greater than 0.012 in (0.30 mm).  This is cause for concern and shows that 
155 
 
the distress experienced is not unique to the AEB project.  The second is that using transverse 
contraction joints in the culverts helped in mitigating cracking.  When comparing culverts in the 
AEB and Corridor X projects, the culverts at each location that had transverse contraction joints 
had smaller average crack widths when compared to the culverts in the same location that did not 
have them.  Relationships between contraction joints and the 90th percentile crack width or 
average crack spacing were inconclusive. The third finding is that the combined effect of 
restrained thermal and drying shrinkage is the most likely cause of cracking.  The temperature 
and relative humidity cycles the culverts experienced over time make drying and thermal 
shrinkage inevitable (Hansen and Almudaiheem 1987; Schindler 2002).  The significant restraint 
provided by the base, accompanied by drying and thermal shrinkage, causes tensile stresses to 
rise in the walls and ceiling of the culvert until through cracks form.  Thermal and drying 
shrinkage being the main cause of distress is supported by the contraction joints helping to 
mitigate cracking in the AEB and Corridor X projects, and by the cracking occurring in 
Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 before it was backfilled.  The fourth finding was that the 
wingwall cracking observed is most likely caused by restrained thermal and drying shrinkage 
also.  The cracks found in the wingwall and at the intersection of the wingwall and culvert can be 
explained by the rigid wingwall footings providing restraint to thermal and drying shrinkage 
volume changes in the concrete.  However, as ALDOT suggested, it is reasonable to assume that 
foundation settlement may also be a cause. 
156 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 4 
 
Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement 
 
4.1 Introduction 
Slabs and walls may not have large bending moments at specific locations.  These slabs 
and walls have small (or possibly minimum) amounts of flexural reinforcement at these 
locations, which can lead to very wide cracks due to shrinkage of the concrete if they are 
significantly restrained.  These cracks are referred to as direct tension cracks, because they are 
caused by direct tension stresses in the concrete as opposed to flexural tension stresses.  
Significant amounts of reinforcement can be needed to control direct tension cracking. (Gilbert 
1992)  
The small amount of reinforcement in these structures with low moments is typically 
referred to as temperature and shrinkage reinforcement.  It works by distributing the shrinkage 
strains over the reinforcement so that several small cracks form rather than a few detrimental 
wide cracks.  (ACI 224 2001) 
4.2 Direct Tension Cracking 
The work in this chapter is based on an article from Gilbert (1992), and modifications 
made to Gilbert?s work are clearly documented.  Restraint prevents or resists volumetric changes 
in the concrete when shrinkage occurs.  An axial tensile restraining force N(t) rises in the 
concrete over time due to the member being restrained in some way.  When the stress from N(t) 
157 
 
equals the direct tensile strength of the concrete, ft, direct tension cracking occurs.  Direct tensile 
cracks are through cracks, in that they extend the full depth of the member. (Gilbert 1992) 
After cracking, the crack width and N(t) are mostly a function of the quantity of bonded 
reinforcement across the formed crack.  Other factors that affect the crack width are the spacing 
and size of the reinforcement bars, the quality of the concrete, and the effectiveness of the bond 
between the concrete and the reinforcement. (Gilbert 1992) 
4.2.1 First Cracking in Fully Restrained Concrete 
When restrained, reinforced concrete shrinks, it will remain uncracked until the tensile 
stress in the concrete reaches its tensile strength, ft.  This is illustrated in Figure 4-1a.  N(t) will 
drop to a value of Ncr instantly after the first crack forms.  This concept is illustrated in Figure 4-
1b.  The reinforcement carries all of Ncr at the crack location because the tensile strength of the 
concrete at the crack is zero.  The tensile stress in the concrete adjacent to the crack (referred to 
as Region 2 as shown in Figure 4-1c) changes from zero at the crack until it reaches a constant 
value 1c? , which is less than the tensile strength of the concrete, at a distance so away from the 
crack (referred to as Region 1 as shown in Figure 4-1c).  The reinforcement stress also varies.  At 
the crack, the steel is at its peak tensile stress 2s? , and then it decreases to a constant 
compressive stress 1s?  at a distance so away from the crack.  The steel and concrete stresses in 
Region 2 are assumed to vary according to a parabolic distribution as shown in Figures 4-1c and 
4-1d.  The stress in the steel and concrete in Region 1 are no longer affected by the crack as 
shown in Figures 4-1 c and 4-1d. (Gilbert 1992) 
158 
 
 
Figure 4-1: First Cracking Illustration (Gilbert 1992) 
 
159 
 
4.2.2 Final Cracking in Fully Restrained Concrete 
The concrete is less restrained after initial cracking occurs.  This is because the crack 
width increases as the concrete continues to shrink as shown in Figure 4-2a.  Continued 
shrinkage causes N(t) to once again rise until a second crack forms.  As the concrete continues to 
shrink over time, more cracks may form.  However, the amount of shrinkage required to produce 
a new crack rises due to the member losing stiffness with each new crack.  A final crack pattern 
will eventually be established from this process, and this typically occurs when most of the 
drying shrinkage has occurred. The steel and concrete stresses are still assumed to follow a 
parabolic distribution as shown in Figures 4-2b and 4-2c.  (Gilbert 1992) 
 
Figure 4-2: Final Cracking Illustration (Gilbert 1992) 
160 
 
4.3 Minimum Reinforcement Ratio Recommendations 
Gilbert (1992) examined the following minimum (or temperature and shrinkage) 
reinforcement recommendations to control direct tension cracking.  The equations in Gilbert 
(1992) were in metric units; however, in this section the author included these equations as well 
as adding the equations for U.S. customary units.  Equation 4-1 is a recommendation from 
Campbell-Allen and Hughes (1978).  
y
t
y
t
f
f
f
f
2.1
45.14
min
min
?
?
?
?
                   Equation 4-1 
where, 
tf  = tensile strength of immature concrete (psi [MPa]) = cf'25.0 ), 
cf'  = concrete compressive strength (psi [MPa]), and 
yf  = reinforcement yield strength (psi [MPa]). 
 
Equation 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4 are recommendations from the Australian code AS 3600 (1988).  
Equation 4-2 is for fully restrained slabs or slabs where cracks cause aesthetic problems.  
Equation 4-3 is for slabs in which visible cracks do not cause aesthetic problems.  Equation 4-4 
is for slabs that are unrestrained and are allowed to freely expand or contract. 
y
y
f
f
5.2
360
min
min
?
?
?
?
                     Equation 4-2 
(U.S.) 
 
 (metric) 
 
 
(U.S.) 
 
 (metric) 
 
 
161 
 
y
y
f
f
4.1
200
min
min
?
?
?
?
                     Equation 4-3 
 
y
y
f
f
7.0
100
min
min
?
?
?
?
                     Equation 4-4 
 
Table 4-1 summarizes the minimum reinforcement values from the above equations if 
AEB Culvert at 240+37 were considered along with AASHTO and ACI recommendations 
summarized in Sections 2.5.1 and 2.7.4.  It should be noted that Section R7.12.1.2 of the 
commentary of ACI 318 (2011) suggests that the recommendation of 0.0018 and may need to be 
increased when the member is significantly restrained.  The ACI 350R (201) recommendations 
are done by section lengths between joints as seen in Table 2-1.  AEB Culvert at 240+37 used 
Grade 60 reinforcement (414 MPa), had a concrete compressive strength of 5,200 psi (35.9 
MPa), and an immature concrete tensile strength of 18 psi (0.124 MPa). 
 
 
 
 
 
(U.S.) 
 
 (metric) 
 
 
(U.S.) 
 
 (metric) 
 
 
162 
 
Table 4-1: Minimum Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement Ratios 
Minimum Shrinkage and Temperature 
Reinforcement Ratios 
Source Reinforcement Ratio 
 AASHTO (2007) 
and ACI 318 (2011) 0.0018 
ACI 224.1R (2001) 0.0060 
ACI 318 (2011) 0.0020 (longitudinal reinforcement in walls) 
ACI 350R (2001) 
0.0030-0.0050 
(environmental 
structures) 
AS 3600 (1988) 0.0060 (fully restrained) 
AS 3600 (1988) 0.0033 (no aesthetic problems) 
AS 3600 (1988) 0.0017 (unrestrained) 
Campbell-Allen and 
Hughes (1978) 0.0043 
 
 
4.4 Approach Proposed for Partially Restrained Concrete Subjected to Thermal and 
Drying Shrinkage 
 
Gilbert (1992) developed a method to estimate the average crack width, crack spacing, 
concrete stresses, and steel stresses in fully restrained, reinforced concrete members subjected to 
direct tension.  Gilbert assumed that the members are initially fully restrained and that the 
stresses are only due to an axial force caused by drying shrinkage.  However, culverts in the 
AEB and Corridor X that were surveyed had transverse contraction joints.  Since movement will 
occur at the contraction joint, culverts with contraction joints will be partially restrained instead 
of fully restrained.  Thermal shrinkage effects are also thought to be a driving force behind the 
distress experienced; therefore, for the scope of this research, Gilbert?s equations were modified 
to include partially restrained conditions and thermal and drying shrinkage. 
All credit is given to Gilbert (1992) for the initial assumptions used to derive the 
equations in Sections 4.4.4 and 4.4.5. 
163 
 
4.4.1 Notation 
The notation and units used for all variables in Section 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5 are listed here. 
cA  = concrete cross-sectional area (in.
2) 
sA   = reinforcement cross-sectional area (in.
2) 
bd   = reinforcement bar diameter (in.) 
cE   = concrete modulus of elasticity (psi) 
sE   = steel modulus of elasticity (psi) 
*eE  = final effective modulus of concrete (psi) 
BF  = base friction restraint force (lbs) 
shF  = total shrinkage force in the wall and roof components just 
  prior to concrete cracking (lbs) 
Bf  = base friction restraint distributed axial force (lb/in.) 
cf  = compressive strength of concrete (psi) 
tf   = direct tensile strength of concrete (psi) = 3/2)(7.1 cf  
yf   = reinforcement yield strength (psi) 
H  = clear height of the culvert (ft) 
K   = concrete stiffness (lb/in.) 
L   = length of member or the length between joints (in.) 
m   = number of cracks 
crN  = restraining force immediately after initial cracking (lbs) 
???N  = final shrinkage-induced restraining force (lbs) 
164 
 
n  = modular ratio = 
c
sEE  
*n  = final modular ratio =  
*esEE
 
op  = axially distributed load (lb/in.) 
s  = average crack spacing (in.) 
os  = distance from crack over which stresses are affected by cracking (in.) 
maxT  = maximum concrete temperature (?F) 
minT  = minimum concrete temperature (?F) 
zeroT  = concrete zero-stress temperature (?F) 
W  = width of the base slab (in.) 
w   = average crack width (in.) 
t?   =   concrete coefficient of thermal expansion (in./in./?F) 
T?   = concrete temperature change (?F) 
?  = contraction joint displacement of a culvert section (in.) 
cr?   = initial creep strain (in./in.) 
*ds?   = final drying shrinkage strain (in./in.) 
e?   = elastic concrete strain (in./in.) 
*1s?  = final steel strain (in./in.) 
sh?   = initial total shrinkage strain (in./in.) 
*sh?   = final total shrinkage strain (in./in.) 
*th?   = maximum thermal shrinkage strain (in./in.) 
165 
 
*1?   = final concrete strain (in./in.) 
?  = reinforcement ratio 
av?  = average tensile concrete stress away from the crack location (psi) 
1c?   = initial tensile concrete stress away from the crack location (psi) 
*1c?   =   final tensile concrete stress away from the crack location (psi) 
1s?   =   initial compressive steel stress away from the crack location (psi) 
*1s?  = final compressive steel stress away from the crack location (psi) 
2s?  = initial tensile steel stress at the crack location (psi) 
*2s?  = final tensile steel stress at the crack location (psi) 
f?  = base friction restraint factor (psi) 
*?  = creep coefficient 
4.4.2 Thermal Shrinkage 
Gilbert did not include thermal deformations in his total shrinkage term.  For the 
purposes of this thesis, thermal shrinkage was included in the total shrinkage strain to better 
estimate the effects experienced by cast-in-place (CIP) reinforced concrete box culverts. 
Using the concrete temperature change from Equation 2-1 of this thesis, the thermal 
shrinkage strain was calculated using the following equation from Mehta and Monteiro (2006): 
Ttth ????*                                Equation 4-5 
 
The T?  was calculated using modeled concrete temperatures for computed placement 
conditions typical for Alabama using ConcreteWorks software.  The ConcreteWorks temperature 
166 
 
results are shown in Figure B-1 in Appendix B.  The following assumptions were made in 
calculating the maximum and minimum temperatures using ConcreteWorks: 
? The culvert was modeled as a 24 in. thick concrete pavement because it closely 
resembles the base slab of a box culvert, 
? The pavement was placed in Birmingham, Alabama, 
? The maximum concrete temperature was taken from a placement on August 15 at 8 
a.m., and the minimum concrete temperature was taken from a concrete pavement 
placed on February 13 at noon, 
? The pavement was placed on a 12 in. granular subbase, and a clay subgrade, 
? The initial ambient temperature was used as the fresh concrete temperature at 
placement, 
? Wood formwork was used, 
? The formwork was removed at a concrete age of 72 hours, 
? A double coat curing compound was applied 72 hours after placement, 
? A light gray cure method color was used, and 
? The maximum and minimum temperatures found were from the middle of the 
pavement.  
With a thermal shrinkage term defined, Gilbert?s total shrinkage strain term was redefined as 
follows:, where thermal shrinkage ( *th? ) is the new addition: 
*** thdssh ??? ??                    Equation 4-6 
 
 
167 
 
4.4.3 Accounting for Movement at Contraction Joints 
The objective of calculating contraction joint movements is to obtain an estimate to 
integrate into the Gilbert (1992) analysis.  The estimate is of the total contraction joint movement 
in a culvert base section.  The stiffness method and matrix structural analysis were used to 
calculate the contraction joint displacement caused by the partially restrained shrinkage of the 
concrete.  The problem was modeled as a single degree of freedom (SDOF) slab on grade (the 
base slab of the culvert) with a node at each end and restrained at one end.  Modeling as a base 
slab allowed the restraint provided by the subgrade to be taken into account by using a base 
friction coefficient.  The free-body diagram of the slab and the SDOF free-body diagram are 
illustrated in Figure 4-3.  Figure 4-4 illustrates how equivalent forces from the uniformly 
distributed load are distributed to the nodes. 
 
Figure 4-3: Free-Body Diagrams for Displacement Calculations 
 
168 
 
 
 
Figure 4-4: Bar Element with a Uniformly Distributed Load: (a) Reaction Forces; (b) Equivalent 
Forces (Sennett 1994) 
 
In this chapter, the direct tensile strength of the concrete used was estimated using the 
following equation (Raphael 1984): 
3/2)(7.1 ct ff ?         Equation 4-7 
 
Using the tensile strength value from Equation 4-7, the concrete shrinkage force was calculated 
as follows: 
ctsh AfF ?                                Equation 4-8 
 
The shrinkage force Fsh estimate is intended to be an upper bound estimate of the force the base 
needs to carry, which likely corresponds to an upper bound joint movement.  The tensile strength 
ft of the concrete is used because the stress just before cracking is desired in order to calculate an 
upper bound value.  Ac, as it is assumed that the wall and ceiling placement is cast when the base 
(a) 
(b) 
169 
 
is mature, is the area of the culvert cross section above the base.  The distributed force resisting 
the shrinkage of the concrete from friction provided by the subbase was calculated as follows:  
Wf fB ??                                Equation 4-9 
 
The base friction restraint factor was taken from Figure 4 and Table 3 in Rassmussen and 
Rozycki (2001).  A value of 2.0 psi (14 kPa) was used for a granular subbase.  The distributed 
base friction restraint force needed to be converted to an equivalent concentrated force 
distributed equally between the two nodes (See Figure 4-4).  This was accomplished by using 
Sennett?s (1994) equation as shown in Equation 4-10. 
22 LfLpF boB ??                  Equation 4-10 
 
In this chapter, the modulus of elasticity of the concrete was calculated using the ACI 318 (2011) 
equation for normalweight concrete as shown in Equation 4-11. 
cc fE 000,57?                    Equation 4-11 
 
The stiffness of the concrete is calculated using Equation 4-12 for a one-dimensional bar element 
(Sennett 1994). 
?????? ????????? ??? 11 1111 11 LEALAEK cc                         Equation 4-12 
 
The stiffness method proposed by Sennett (1994) was then used to relate the forces, stiffness, 
and displacements of the base slab as shown in Equations 4-13a and 4-13b.  The variables from 
the base slab problem were substituted into this equation in Equation 4-13c. 
170 
 
?
?
?
?
?
?
???
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
??
0
11
11
2
1
2221
1211
2
1
L
EA
FF
F
kk
kk
F
F
KF
cc
Bsh
B
                           Equation 4-13 
 
By applying boundary conditions, which take into account the fixed support at node 1, Equation 
4-13c can be simplified to Equation 4-14.  Equation 4-14 can then be rearranged to solve for the 
displacement at node 2, the overall displacement of the slab, in Equation 4-15. 
? ? ??? LEAFF ccBSH                  Equation 4-14 
? ?
cc
BSH EA LFF ???                   Equation 4-15 
 
Some results for movement at contraction joints are presented in Table B-
1 in Appendix B. 
4.4.4 First cracking 
For the crack width and stresses to be calculated, an approximation for the distance, so, 
over which the crack affects the steel and concrete stresses must first be calculated.  The 
following equation used by Gilbert (1992) was taken from Favre et al. (1983): 
 
?10bo ds ?
                              Equation 4-16 
 
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
171 
 
Refer to Figures 4-1c, 4-1d, 4-2b, and 4-2c for an illustration of so.  Stresses that are within so 
from the crack are referred to as being located in Region 1, and stresses that are outside of so 
from the crack are referred to as being located in Region 2 (Gilbert 1992). 
Reinforcement in a partially restrained member is allowed to elongate or contract, ?.  
Using this concept and Gilbert?s assumptions that steel stress/strain is parabolic in Region 2, the 
following equation can be obtained by integrating the reinforcement strain over the length of the 
member: 
032121 ????????? ??? wsELE os ssss ???                          Equation 4-17 
 
As proposed by Gilbert (1992), neglecting the crack width (w will be much smaller than so), 
Equation 4-17 can be rearranged to get the steel stress in Region 1, as presented in Equation 4-
18. 
o
soss sL Es 23 32 21 ? ???? ??                             Equation 4-18 
 
Gilbert (1992) assumed that the reinforcement carried all of the axial restraining force at the 
crack after first cracking and developed the following equation: 
s
crs AN?2?                             Equation 4-19 
 
By substituting Equation 4-19 into Equation 4-18, the Region 1 steel stress can be defined as a 
function of the restraining force at first cracking, as presented in Equation 4-20. 
172 
 
o
so
s
cr
s sL
EsAN
23
32
1 ?
???
??                            Equation 4-20 
 
Away from the crack, the sum of the reinforcement and concrete forces must equal the 
restraining force, as represented in Equation 4-21 (Gilbert 1992). 
crsscc NAA ?? 11 ??                             Equation 4-21 
 
Using this concept the following equation for concrete stress can be developed by rearranging 
Equation 4-21 (Gilbert 1992): 
c
sscrc A AN 11 ?? ??                                                  Equation 4-22 
The concept of strain compatibility was used to define the relationship between steel and 
concrete strain in Region 1 as follows (Gilbert 1992): 
shcrccss EE ???? ??? 11
                           Equation 4-23 
 
The left side of the equation represents the steel strain and the right side of the equation 
represents the total concrete strain.  The tensile creep and elastic strains are counteracted by the 
contracting shrinkage strain.  Initial cracking occurs when the concrete stress reaches ft.  The 
elastic concrete strain at this instant can be defined as ft/Ec.  These strain concepts are presented 
in Equation 4-24. (Gilbert 1992) 
c
tshcr Ef?????                            Equation 4-24 
 
173 
 
Finally, Equations 4-20, 4-22, and 4-24 were substituted into Equation 4-23 and Ncr  can be 
solved to produce Equation 4-25. 
0)1(232 ]23)1(3[ ???? ????? cosso sctotscr AnsL n AnAs AAnfsnLfnEN ??                   Equation 4-25 
where, 
?  = 
c
sAA  
 
The constraint that Equation 4-25 must be greater than zero was added to prevent the axial 
contraction condition causing crN  to go into compression, which is not representative of the 
behavior sought for this problem (Gilbert 1992). 
4.4.5 Final Cracking 
A creep coefficient was taken into account for final cracking.  It was used to calculate the 
final effective modulus for concrete as defined in Equation 4-26. (Gilbert 1992) 
** 1 ??? ce EE
                            Equation 4-26  
 
The concrete stresses in Region 1 are continually changing.  The stresses increase until 
they reach the direct tensile strength of the concrete and then suddenly decrease back to 1c?  once 
cracking occurs somewhere in this region.  Therefore, the final Region 1 concrete stress after the 
concrete has finished drying can be taken as the average of 1c?  and ft  as shown in Equation 4-27 
(Gilbert 1992).  This concept is illustrated in Figure 4-5. 
21 tcav f????                             Equation 4-27 
174 
 
 
Figure 4-5: Average Concrete Stress (Gilbert 1992) 
 
Knowing the average concrete stress allowed, the number of cracks can be determined by 
solving the following quadratic: 
0)99()4( 222 ????? ?? sssscto AELAELmAfsm                Equation 4-28 
where, 
?  = ?ssoossoct AELssAEsALf 666 ????  and 
?  = ** sh
e
avE ?? ?  
 
It should be noted that so in the above equation is the same value that was used in the first 
cracking equations in Section 4.3.3.   The number of cracks from Equation 4-26 can be rounded 
up to the nearest whole number if desired to obtain the accurate number of cracks in a member.  
Using Equation 4-28, the crack spacing can now be calculated from Equation 4-29 (Gilbert 
1992). 
mLs?                              Equation 4-29 
 
175 
 
Using the number of cracks from Equation 4-28, the final restraining force ???N  and the Region 
1 steel stress can be calculated as presented in Equation 4-30 and 4-31. 
? ? ms msLAEAEN o ossss 2 )23(3 ???????                         Equation 4-30 
msL Ems o ssos 23 32
* 2*
1 ? ???? ??
                          Equation 4-31 
 
Knowing ???N now allows for the concrete stress and the Region 2 steel stress to be calculated 
as follows (Gilbert 1992): 
? ?
ss A
N ??*2?                             Equation 4-32 
? ?
c
ssc A AN *1*1 ?? ???                              Equation 4-33 
The average crack width can be calculated by integrating the concrete strain over the length of 
the member as shown in Equation 4-34. 
m
LmsLE
w she
c ?????
?
*0
*
*1 )
3
2( ??
                          Equation 4-34 
4.5 Results and Discussion 
AEB Culvert at 240+37 (J) was selected for analysis using the equations and approach 
from Section 4.3.  It was chosen because it was the culvert where wide transverse cracking was 
detected as described in Section 1.1.2.  The analysis procedure was used to find the 
reinforcement percentage that kept the average crack width at the ACI 224 (2001) limit of 0.012 
in (0.030 mm) as discussed in Section 1.1.2. 
176 
 
The concrete mixture proportions used for AEB Culvert at 240+37 were used in the 
ConcreteWorks temperature calculations presented in Section 4.3.2.  The exterior wall that is 8 ft 
(2 m) tall and 15 in. (381 mm) thick, with section lengths of 3 through 7 times the culvert clear 
height, H, of 8 feet (2 m) was analyzed.  The concrete properties, creep coefficient, and final 
total shrinkage term used in the analysis are summarized in Table 4-2.  Grade 60 #4 bars were 
used for the longitudinal temperature and shrinkage reinforcement.  The 28-day strength of 5,200 
psi (35.9 Mpa) was obtained as the average from the compressive strength tests performed by 
ALDOT.  The creep coefficient and drying shrinkage quantifications were both calculated using 
the CEB MC90-99 model (CEB 1999).  This model was used because it allowed for a concrete 
loading age of 1 day to be used for moist-cured concrete when calculating the creep coefficient.  
The ACI 209R (1992) model only allowed for a loading age of 7 days to be used for moist-cured 
concrete.  Using a loading age of 1 day better characterized the stress relaxation experienced in 
the concrete due to thermal stresses which occur at these ages.  The drying shrinkage strain from 
the CEB MC90-99 model included the combined effect of drying and autogenous shrinkage.  
The concrete was exposed to drying at a concrete age of 7 days in the drying shrinkage 
calculations.  An average relative humidity of 70% was used as well.  The drying shrinkage 
strain and creep coefficient are from a concrete age of 365 days.  A 28-day compressive strength 
of 4,000 psi (27.6 MPa) was used for both calculations.  The thermal shrinkage assumptions as 
well as the equation used to calculate the total shrinkage strain are outlined in Section 4.4.2. 
Drying shrinkage, thermal shrinkage, and creep coefficient calculations are presented in 
Appendix B.  
The contraction joint movement values calculated, the corresponding section lengths, the 
temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio, and the estimated crack width results are 
177 
 
presented in Table 4-3.  Figure 4-6 summarizes the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement 
ratio results from the analysis.  Example calculations for the contraction joint movement and the 
temperature and shrinkage analysis are presented in Appendix B.  The full contraction joint 
movement results are tabulated in Table B-1.  The full temperature and shrinkage analysis results 
are tabulated in Table B-2.  The sensitivity of the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement to the 
magnitude of the contraction joint movement is shown in Figure 4-7.  The results for Figure 4-7 
are included in Table B-3. 
 
Table 4-2: AEB Culvert at 240+37 Concrete Properties, Creep Coefficient, and Final Total 
Shrinkage 
AEB Culvert at 240+37 Concrete Properties, Creep Coefficicent, and Final 
Total Shrinkage 
yf  (ksi) cf  (psi) cE  (psi) sE  (psi) bd  (in.) *?  *sh?  (in./in.) 
60,000 5,200 4,110,000 29,000,000 0.5 2.11 -594 x 10-6 
 
Table 4-3: Section Lengths, Contraction Joint Movement Values, Reinforcement Ratios, and 
Estimated Crack Widths for AEB Culvert at 240+37 
Section Lengths, Contraction Joint Movement Values, 
Reinforcement Ratios, and Estimated Crack Widths 
for AEB Culvert at 240+37 
Spacing L  (ft) ?  (in.) ? 
Estimated 
Crack Width 
(in.) 
3H 24 0.0352 0.0045 0.012 
4H 32 0.0466 0.0045 0.012 
5H 40 0.0523 0.0048 0.012 
6H 48 0.0580 0.0050 0.012 
7H 56 0.0692 0.0049 0.012 
 
178 
 
 
Figure 4-6: Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Ratio versus Section Length between 
Joints to Keep the Average Crack Width of AEB Culvert at 240+37 at 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) 
179 
 
  
Figure 4-7: Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Ratio to Keep the Average Crack Width 
at 0.012 in. (0.30 mm) versus Percentage of Contraction Joint Movement for a Joint Spacing of 
3H in AEB Culvert at 240+37  
 
The results in Figure 4-6, along with the distress observed in ALDOT CIP reinforced 
concrete box culverts in Chapter 3, suggest the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio of 
0.0021 used in AEB Culvert at 240+37 (other ALDOT reinforced concrete box culverts have 
been found to have a temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio of 0.0018) is not enough to 
control the widths of cracks that may develop.  However, based on the assumed parabolic stress-
strain relationship, the estimated steel stress was greater than the yield strength of the 
reinforcement for each of the section lengths.  The *2s?  value from the analysis is not 
representative of the actual stress that the longitudinal reinforcement in this culvert would 
180 
 
experience, but it still raises questions about the reinforcement percentage recommendations.  
Additional finite element modeling is recommended to quantify the actual steel stresses. 
The results in Figure 4-7 indicate that the magnitude of the contraction joint movement 
has a big effect on the amount of temperature and shrinkage reinforcement needed to keep crack 
widths at or below 0.012 in (0.30 mm).  The analysis was run for a section length of 3 times the 
clear height of Culvert AEB 240+37, and for contraction joint movements of 0%, 25%, 50%, 
75% and 100% of the calculated contraction joint movement (0.0352 in [0.894 mm] for a section 
length of 3H).  The temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio required for the 100% 
contraction joint movement was 0.0045 as compared to 0.0068 for the 0% movement.  This was 
a 34% decrease in the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio.  There was also a 12% 
decrease when comparing the 100% and 75% values, a 10% decrease when comparing the 75% 
and 50% values, a 9% decrease when comparing the 50% and 25% values, and a 9% decrease 
when comparing the 25% and 0% values. 
Comparing the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratios from Table 4-1 also 
suggest that the longitudinal temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio currently used by 
ALDOT should be increased even if contraction joints are added.  These values also suggest that 
the reinforcement ratio of 0.0045 recommended in Figure 4-6 for 3 times the clear height of the 
culvert is reasonable.  It is very close to the Campbell-Allen and Hughes (1978) reinforcement 
ratio of 0.0043, and it is between the range of 0.0030 to 0.0050 recommended by ACI 350R 
(2001).  Their recommendation suggests that the current ALDOT ratio should be increased, too.   
The AASHTO (2007) and ACI 318 (2011) provision, and the ACI 318 (2011) provision for walls 
suggest that the current ALDOT ratio is sufficient.  However, as stated in Section 2.5.1, Section 
R7.12.1.2 of the commentary of ACI 318 (2011) suggests that these recommendations may need 
181 
 
to be increased when the member is significantly restrained.  ACI 224 (2001) recommendations 
suggest that the current ALDOT value should be increased, and that the ratios in Figure 4-6 are 
too low as well.  The Australian code (AS 3600 1988) provision for unrestrained slabs also 
suggests that the current ALDOT ratio should be increased because a culvert at least partially 
restraint.  The Australian code AS 3600 (1988) provision for slabs without aesthetic restrictions 
appears to be applicable to culverts, and it also suggest that the currently-used ALDOT ratio 
should be increased.  The Australian code AS 3600 (1988) provision for fully restrained slabs 
only applies to culverts that have continuous reinforcement through their transverse joints; 
however, the values in Figure 4-6 seem reasonable as they are all less than 0.006.  This suggests 
that the ACI 224 (2001) recommendation is too high for culverts built with transverse 
contraction joints because they are only partially restrained. 
The values from Figure 4-6 are conservative, as a worst case temperature difference and 
drying shrinkage strain are used.  From an economic point of view, a more practical temperature 
and shrinkage reinforcement ratio of 0.0040 should be considered. However, this needs to be 
verified by additional finite element analysis and subsequent verification based on field-
measured behavior. 
4.6 Summary and Conclusions 
In this chapter, an analysis procedure from Gilbert (1992) for calculating average crack 
widths in fully restrained concrete members was modified by the author to account for thermal 
and drying shrinkage and for movement at contraction joints.  The modified analysis procedure 
was used to estimate the temperature and reinforcement percentage required to keep the average 
crack width of the exterior wall of AEB Culvert at 240+37 at or less than 0.012 in (0.30 mm).  
The results from the analysis are presented in this chapter.  Various temperature and shrinkage 
182 
 
reinforcement ratio recommendations were also compared to the current ALDOT ratio of 0.0018 
to 0.0021 and to the results from the analysis procedure. 
There are three key findings from this chapter.  The first is that the temperature and 
shrinkage reinforcement ratio currently used in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts by ALDOT 
is not enough to control crack widths to 0.012 in (0.30 mm) or less.  The distress observed in the 
culvert crack condition surveys in Chapter 3, the analysis results, and the various temperature 
and shrinkage reinforcement recommendations investigated support this conclusion.  The second 
is that the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio results from the analysis are reasonable.  
The ratio of 0.0045 for a section length of 3 times the clear height of the culverts is consistent 
with the Campbell-Allen and Hughes (1978) and ACI 350R (2001) recommendations.  However, 
the steel stresses from the analysis were greater than the yield strength of the reinforcement.  It is 
the authors opinion that these stress are not representative of the actual stresses in the 
temperature and shrinkage reinforcement, but it raised questions about the recommendations 
from the analysis.  The third conclusion is that a temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio 
of 0.0040 for CIP reinforced concrete box culverts should provide adequate crack width control 
and be economical in culverts with contraction joints at three times the culvert clear height; 
however, additional finite element analysis and subsequent verification from field-measured 
behavior is needed to verify this. 
183 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 5 
 
Instrumentation Plan to Determine Field Behavior of Box Culverts 
 
5.1 Introduction 
A research objective of this study was to develop an instrumentation plan to assess the 
development of stresses in newly constructed culverts.  To achieve this objective a plan is 
developed to record the concrete-stress development, strain development, and temperature 
development for a culvert in the field.  The following concrete properties and data will also be 
obtained using the concrete made at the culvert site: creep, drying shrinkage, tensile-strength 
development, modulus-of-elasticity development, compressive-strength development, maturity, 
setting time, total air content, concrete temperature at the time of placement, and the 28-day 
strength of the concrete.  The concrete mixture used at the culvert site will also be reproduced in 
the lab to document the early-age restrained stress development.  This chapter contains the 
procedures that should be used to perform these tests and gather these data. 
Initially it was intended that the author implement this plan for a culvert located in the 
Birmingham Northern Beltline.  However, this project has been delayed, and the data from 
instrumentation and procedures presented in this chapter will not be included in this thesis.  They 
will be included in future research. 
 
 
184 
 
5.2 Instrumentation Plan and Test Procedures 
5.2.1 Concrete Stress, Strain, and Temperature 
The stress, strain, and temperature development in the concrete of panels (walls) A, B, C, 
and D of the box culvert will be documented.  This is done in order to accurately document the 
temperature and stress development that causes cracking.  The location of these panels is shown 
in Figure 5-1.  Panels A and B will be exterior walls of adjacent culvert barrel sections that are at 
least 100 ft (30.5 m) from the culvert openings.  Panels C and D will be adjacent sections that are 
placed at a later date than panels A and B and are at least 100 ft (30.5 m) from the culvert 
openings.  The panels will have the maximum restraint possible in these cases, and therefore the 
worst case stresses.  Culvert sections near the entrance will be less restrained than sections deep 
into the culvert.  The restraint in panels at least 100 ft (30.5 m) into the culvert should be as high 
as it will be anywhere. 
The stress, strain, and temperature development data will be collected using 60 vibrating-
wire strain (VWS) gauges, each with a 60 ft (18 m) long cable.  Fifteen VWS gauges will be 
used in each of the four panels.  The locations of the VWS gauges are illustrated in Figure 5-1.  
Each VWS gauge is to be attached to reinforcement using zip ties as shown in Figure 5-2.  The 
VWS gauges are spaced horizontally at one-fourth the clear height of the culvert because there is 
more movement in walls (panels) closer to the contraction joint.  This is because there is less 
restraint at the contraction joint due to joint movement.  The culvert wall will also be free to 
move more at the top of the wall than it will at the bottom, because there is more restraint at the 
bottom of the wall due to the stiff base; therefore, rows of gauges were put 12 in. (305 mm) from 
the top and bottom on the culvert wall.  The horizontal and vertical spacing of the VWS gauges 
allow for stress, strain, and temperature development to be documented at various degrees of 
185 
 
restraint.  Cracks generally begin bottom or top of the wall; therefore, only one VWS gauge was 
put in the middle of the wall.  Two data collection units will be used to collect the data from the 
VWS Gauges.  A data collection unit can accommodate up to 32 VWS Gauges; therefore, one 
data collection unit will be used at panels A and B, and one at panels C and D.  Measurements 
will be taken in panels A and B at 15-minute intervals for 14 days after the placement of the top 
slab and walls of panel B. Measurements will be taken in Panels C and D at 15-minute intervals 
for 14 days after the placement of the top slab and walls of panel D. 
186 
 
 
Figure 5-1: VWS Gauge Wall Locations 
187 
 
 
Figure 5-2: VWS Gauge Attachment Illustration (Geokon 2010) 
 
5.2.2 Crack Detection 
The occurrence of cracks will be monitored by visual inspection and by evaluating the 
strain data from the VWS gauges.  Each of the panels will be checked for cracks early in the 
morning and in the afternoon.  Visual surveys will also be done throughout the day when the 
team is at the culvert site. 
5.2.3 Crack Width Development 
One-inch (254 mm) long 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) diameter stainless steel threaded studs and a 
demountable mechanical (DEMEC) strain gauge, shown in Figure 5-3, will be used to monitor 
the progression of crack widths and joint movement in Panels A, B, C, and D of the culvert.  The 
studs will be made from a stainless steel threaded rod cut into 1 in. (25 mm) long sections.  A 
grinding wheel will be used to remove sharp edges from the ends of the cut sections and to make 
the end sections as flat as possible.  A centered hole approximately 3/16 in. (4.8 mm) deep will 
be drilled in the top of each stud with a 1/32 in. (0.79 mm) drill bit in order to form an indention 
188 
 
that enables readings to be taken with a DEMEC gauge.  Using cutting oil when drilling these 
holes provides better drilling performance.  Two DEMEC studs are shown in Figure 5-4. 
 
Figure 5-3: DEMEC Gauge (Kavanaugh 2008) 
 
 
Figure 5-4: Stainless Steel DEMEC Stud 
189 
 
At the culvert site, the stainless steel studs will be epoxied into drilled holes in the culvert 
panels as shown in Figure 5-5.  The holes will be drilled 7/8 in. (22 mm) deep into the concrete 
with a hammer drill using a 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) drill bit.  Once the epoxy has dried, a DEMEC 
gauge will used to take the crack width measurements.  The studs will be installed as shown in 
Figure 5-6.  Studs in Figure 5-6 with a crack or joint between them will be used to measure the 
width of the crack or joint opening over time.  Studs in Figure 5-6 without a crack or joint 
between them will be used to measure any concrete volumetric change (thermal effects, etc.) so 
that it can be used to account for temperature effects when determining the crack and joint width.  
There will be two volumetric change studs at joints, one on each side of the joint, because the 
concrete on each side will come from two different concrete pours.  Any movement found from 
the volumetric change studs will be subtracted from the measurement taken from the studs 
around the crack or joint. 
 
Figure 5-5: DEMEC Stud Installed in Concrete 
 
190 
 
Crack width measurements will be taken at the same intervals outlined for drying 
shrinkage prisms in ASTM C 157 (2006).  The difference is that the measurements will start on 
the day that the crack is detected. 
J O IN T / CR A CK
D E M E C  
L O CA T IO N S
 
Figure 5-6: DEMEC Stud Wall Layout (Top Row ? Construction Joint Configuration; Bottom 
Row ? Crack Configuration) 
 
5.2.4 Creep Testing 
Creep testing will be performed on concrete from panels B and D.  The procedure 
described in ASTM C 512 (2002) will be followed, with the exception that the creep specimens 
will be loaded at concrete ages of 3 and 7 days.  Four creep frames will be used in the creep 
testing.  An illustration of a creep frame is shown in Figure 5-7.   
191 
 
 
Figure 5-7: Elevation View of a Creep Frame (Kavanaugh 2008) 
 
Seven 6 in. x 12 in. (152 mm x 305 mm) cylinders will be made for each creep frame (28 
total cylinders) at the construction site.  These cylinders will be transported from the culvert site 
to Auburn University.  The cylinders will be covered and stored in an insulated container to 
prevent evaporation during transportation.  After they are demolded, the cylinders will be moist 
cured until it is time to prepare them for creep testing.  Two of the seven cylinders will be used 
to determine the compressive strength of the concrete, two will be loaded into the creep frame, 
and three will be used for drying shrinkage measurements.  Both ends of the compressive 
strength and creep frame cylinders will be put into a cylinder-grinding machine to make the ends 
flat and perpendicular to the axis of the cylinder.  DEMEC points will be epoxied onto the 
192 
 
surface of the drying shrinkage and creep cylinders at 120o intervals.  Two DEMEC points, 
spaced 8 in. (203 mm) apart, will be placed at each interval section.  This is illustrated in Figure 
5-8. 
 
Figure 5-8: A Concrete Cylinder with DEMEC Points (Kavanaugh 2008) 
 
The concrete creep specimens will be loaded with a hydraulic jacking ram to 102% of the 
target creep frame load, which ASTM C 512 (2002) specifies as 40% of the average strength of 
the two compressive strength cylinders.  The applied load will be measured by a load cell that is 
placed on top of the hydraulic jacking ram during loading (refer to Figure 5-7 for an illustration).  
Loading the creep specimens to 102% of the target load takes into account the slight load 
reduction that occurs when the hydraulic jacking ram is removed.  When the target load is 
achieved, the nuts on the Upper Floating Reaction Plate (see Figure 5-7) will be hand tightened, 
193 
 
and the hydraulic jacking ram will be removed.  Strain gauges attached to the steel rods on the 
creep frame (see Figure 5-7) will be used to monitor the load in the creep frame after the 
hydraulic jacking ram has been removed.  Initial strain gauge readings will also be taken before 
the cylinders are loaded.  The strain gauge readings will be used to determine whether or not the 
load in the creep frame is within 2% of the target load, the tolerance specified in ASTM C 512 
(2002).  If it is not, the frame will be reloaded. 
5.2.5 Drying Shrinkage 
Drying shrinkage data from concrete prisms will be obtained for specimens from panels 
B and D.  The procedure detailed in ASTM C 157 (2006) will be followed, with the following 
exceptions:  
? The prisms will be exposed to drying at concrete ages of 3 and 7 days. 
? The prisms will be cured in a lime bath from the time they are demolded until testing 
time.   
? The initial drying shrinkage reading will be taken when a prism is first exposed to 
drying, or taken out of the lime bath. 
The prisms will be exposed to drying at 3 and 7 days in order to have more accurate drying 
shrinkage data that correspond with the creep testing.  A total of 12 drying shrinkage prisms will 
be made at the culvert site (three 3-day panel B prisms, three 7-day panel B prisms, three 3-day 
panel D prisms, and three 7-day panel D prisms).  These prisms will be transported to Auburn 
University while in molds and wrapped in damp burlap cloth.  The prisms will be removed from 
the molds upon arrival. 
 
194 
 
5.2.6 Tensile Strength, Modulus of Elasticity, and Compressive Strength Development 
For this study, 6 in. x 12 in. (152 mm x 305 mm) concrete cylinders from panels B and D 
will be tested at the ages of 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28 days to determine the modulus of elasticity, 
splitting tensile, and compressive strength development of the concrete used in the culvert.  The 
average results from two cylinders will be used for each testing age.  The cylinders will be made 
at the culvert site and transported to Auburn University at the ages of 1 and 3 days for testing.  
They will be cured outside to best resemble in-place conditions.  All of the cylinders will be 
demolded when the forms are stripped from the culvert, except when testing requires that the 
molds be removed earlier.  Twenty cylinders each from panels B and D (40 cylinders total) will 
be required to perform the tests. 
The splitting tensile strength tests will be run first.  The procedure in ASTM C 496 
(2004) will be followed for splitting tensile strength testing.  An aligning jig, shown in Figure   
5-9, will be used in aligning the test setup and in loading.  A diametric load will be applied with 
a Forney FX600 compressive testing machine, shown in Figure 5-10 below, along the length of 
the concrete cylinder until the cylinder fails. 
 
Figure 5-9: A Concrete Cylinder in an Aligning Jig (ASTM C 496 2004) 
195 
 
 
Figure 5-10: Forney FX600 Compressive Testing Machine 
 
Next, the modulus of elasticity tests will be performed.  The procedure from ASTM C 
469 (2002) will be followed for modulus of elasticity testing.  A Forney FX600 compressive 
testing machine will be used to load the cylinder and a compressometer, as shown in Figure 5-11, 
will be used for taking measurements.  Each cylinder will be loaded to 40% of the compressive 
strength, the value specified in ASTM C 469 (2002), for its corresponding age.  However, with 
the compressive strength not known, it will be estimated for the first cylinder from the completed 
splitting tensile strength.  The estimated compressive strength is obtained by rearranging 
Equation 5-1 (ACI 207 1995) into Equation 5-2. 
 
196 
 
cct ff 7.6?                                           Equation 5-1 
2
7.6 ??????? ctc ff
                                          Equation 5-2 
where, 
ctf   = concrete splitting tensile strength (psi) and 
cf  = concrete compressive strength (psi). 
 
Four total loadings will be performed on each cylinder, with the first loading being a test 
loading to check the compressometer gauges.  The three real loadings will consist of the cylinder 
being loaded to 40% of the concrete compressive strength and then being unloaded.  During 
these loadings stress and longitudinal strain that corresponds to 40% of the concrete compressive 
strength, and the stress that corresponds to a longitudinal strain reading of 50 millionths are to be 
recorded.  These values will be used to calculate the modulus of elasticity as defined in Equation 
5-3. (ASTM C 469 2002) 
00005.02 12? ?? ? SSE c
                    Equation 5-3 
where, 
cE   = concrete modulus of elasticity (psi) 
1S   = stress corresponding to 40% of the concrete compressive strength (psi), 
2S   = stress corresponding to a longitudinal strain of 50 millionths (psi), and 
2?   = longitudinal strain corresponding to 2S . 
 
197 
 
The average of the six real readings for the two cylinders will be taken as the modulus of 
elasticity for the panel. 
 
Figure 5-11: Concrete Cylinder in a Compressometer (ASTM C 469 2002) 
 
Finally, the compressive strength tests will be done.  The procedure detailed in ASTM 
C39 (2009) will be followed for compressive strength testing.  The cylinders used in the modulus 
of elasticity tests will be used for the compressive strength tests.  A Forney FX600 compressive 
testing machine will also be used in compressive strength testing to load the cylinders until 
failure.  Before loading a cylinder into the testing machine, it will be placed on a bearing plate 
and powder will be applied to both ends of the cylinder to reduce friction.  The cylinder will then 
be centered in the test machine and loaded.  The target load rate is approximately 1000 lb/s (454 
kg/s) for the 6 in. x 12 in. (152 mm x 305 mm) cylinders (ASTM C39 2009). 
 
198 
 
5.2.7 Maturity 
Maturity testing will be done to account for time and temperature effects on the concrete 
properties in the culvert. Thermocouples will be placed in two concrete cylinders, one cylinder 
from panel B and one from panel D, made at the culvert site to measure and record the concrete 
temperature over time.  The temperature data obtained will then be related to concrete strength 
results obtained from the compressive strength testing (see section 5.2.6).  These data will be 
used to develop a strength-maturity relationship that can be applied to the in-place concrete.  The 
temperature development of the in-place concrete will be measured using data from the VWS 
gauges, and the in-place strength of the concrete will then be estimated using the strength-
maturity relationship. 
5.2.8 Concrete Setting Times 
The time that the concrete takes to set in the field will be documented.  The procedure 
detailed in ASTM C 403 (2006) will be followed for this procedure.  One mortar sample will be 
prepared in the field for panels B and D. 
5.2.9 Quality Control Testing 
Quality Control testing will be performed by ALDOT in order to obtain the total air 
content, the fresh temperature at placement, and the 28-day strength of the concrete. 
 5.2.10 Early-Age Restrained Stress Development 
Raw materials will be used to produce the same concrete mixture in the Auburn 
University structures lab that will be used at the culvert site for panels B and D.  The concrete 
will be placed in two of Auburn University?s rigid cracking frames (one for each panel) to 
monitor and document the development of early-age restrained stress.  See Figure 5-12 for a 
199 
 
rigid cracking frame.  The temperature data in the field from the time of placement of the walls 
and top slab of panel B to 14 days after that point will be recorded.  The same will be done for 
panel D.  The temperatures recorded will then be reproduced in the rigid cracking frames for 
each panel to assess the early-age behavior of the concrete. 
 
Figure 5-12: Rigid Cracking Frame at Auburn University 
200 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 6 
 
 Recommendations to Mitigate Culvert Cracking 
 
6.1 Introduction 
One of the research objectives was to develop methods to mitigate cracking in ALDOT 
cast-in-place (CIP) reinforced concrete box culverts.  This chapter presents practices to meet this 
objective. 
6.2 Recommendations 
After consulting the practices of AASHTO and of SASHTO states, it was determined that 
the jointing practices used in ALDOT CIP reinforced concrete box culverts in Alabama should 
be improved.  The data from the culvert crack condition surveys in Chapter 3 indicated that 
transverse contraction joints should be included in the culvert barrel to alleviate distress.  The 
culvert crack condition surveys also indicated that distress was experienced in the culvert 
wingwalls.  The wingwall jointing practices of SASHTO states indicated that adding expansion 
and contraction joints may be a way to mitigate wingwall cracking. 
6.2.1 Use of Transverse Contraction Joints 
As stated in Section 2.5.2.2, contraction joints are used to control cracking and alleviate 
the stresses due to thermal and drying shrinkage volume change effects (ACI 224 1995).  The 
data gathered from the box culvert condition surveys in Chapter 3 supports that using contraction 
joints controls cracking.  Using contraction joints reduced crack widths in the AEB project by 
201 
 
48% in the walls and 43% in the ceiling when compared to culverts that used vee joints (or 
construction joints with continuous reinforcement).  Using contraction joints also reduced crack 
widths in the Corridor X project by 54% in the walls and 36% in the ceiling.  This information 
suggested that using contraction joints would achieve the objective in stated in Section 6.1, and 
led to a contraction joint being developed.  The proposed transverse contraction joint is designed 
to allow the culvert sections to contract, have a smaller joint spacing than what is currently used 
by ALDOT, be sealed so as to prevent outside material from entering the culvert, and to allow 
adequate load transfer. 
6.2.1.1 Transverse Contraction Joint Spacing 
After investigating numerous contraction joint spacing recommendations, it was 
concluded that the 40 to 55 ft (12 to 17 m) transverse joint spacing used in ALDOT Standard 
Drawing CS-3-1 (2010) was too large; therefore the maximum transverse contraction joint 
spacing in is recommended as defined in Equation 6-1.   
24 ft for H ? 8 ft 
smax =     3H for 8 ft < H <12 ft                           Equation 6-1 
36 ft for H  ? 12 ft    
where, 
smax  =  Maximum contraction joint spacing (ft) and 
H  =  Clear barrel height of the box culvert (ft). 
 
Figure 6-1 illustrates the clear height of a culvert and the transverse contraction joint spacing.  
Three times the clear height of the culvert (or wall height) is the maximum contraction joint 
spacing recommended by ACI 224 (2001).  The lower bound constraint of 24 ft (7.3 m) is 
202 
 
introduced as ALDOT uses culverts with clear barrel heights less than 8 ft (2 m) and a 
contraction joint spacing of less than 24 ft (7.3 m) is deemed uneconomical.  The upper bound 
constraint of 36 ft (11 m) is between the 30 to 40 ft (9.1 to 12 m) spacing recommended by the 
TDOT (2006), and it is divisible by 3. 
 
 
Figure 6-1: Recommended Contraction Joint Spacing and Box Culvert Clear Height 
 
Table 6-1: Transverse Joint Spacing for SASHTO States 
Transverse Joint Spacing of SASHTO States 
State Transverse Joint Spacing Joint Type 
Alabama (ALDOT 2010) 40-55 ft Vee 
Florida (FDOT 2010c) 30 ft minimum Vee 
Georgia (GDOT 2010) 30 ft maximum Construction* 
North Carolina (NCDOT 2007) 70 ft maximum N/A 
Tennessee (TDOT 2006) 30-40 ft Contraction 
Virginia (VDOT 2008) 25 ft maximum N/A 
* The GDOT spacing applies to construction joints with and without continuous 
reinforcement 
203 
 
 
6.2.1.2 Transverse Contraction Joint Design 
The transverse contraction joint, shown in Figure 6-2, is proposed for use in the walls, 
base, and ceiling of ALDOT CIP reinforced concrete box culverts. 
No reinforcement should be continuous through this joint.  This is to reduce restraint 
when volume changes occur, and it is consistent with what is specified by the TDOT (2006).  A 
key shall also be provided at the joint to transfer loads across the joint (ACI 224 1995).  The 
width and depth of the key are consistent with the joint used in the plans for AEB Culvert 
257+69 (ALDOT 2001), and in Corridor X Culverts 4877+13 (ALDOT 2000a) and 4959+43 
(ALDOT 2000b), as shown in Figures 3-15, 3-23, and 3-28.  The key shall be beveled to make 
the joint fit together more easily and minimize the risk of locking-up the joint.  The ? in. bevel 
dimension was the same as used in the La DOTD joints in Figure 2-37 of this thesis (La DOTD 
2008).  The ? in. wide and 1 in. deep groove is consistent with the plans for AEB Culvert 
257+69 (ALDOT 2001) and in Corridor X Culverts 4877+13 (ALDOT 2000a) and 4959+43 
(ALDOT 2000b). 
 
204 
 
 
Figure 6-2: Transverse/Wingwall Contraction Joint (Not to Scale) 
205 
 
The contraction joint should be sealed to prevent outside materials from entering through 
or collecting in the joints of the culvert (ACI 504 1990).  The contraction joint should also be 
sealed to prevent water from eroding the supporting and surrounding soil, which could lead to 
settlement issues.  As recommended in the plans for Culverts AEB 257+69 (ALDOT 2001), 
Corridor X 4877+13 (ALDOT 2000a), and Corridor X 4959+43 (ALDOT 2000b), the sealant 
should be a non-sag sealant that is on ALDOT List III-4 (2012b). A non-sag sealant should be 
used to prevent the sealant from running out of the joint.  The sealant should also be able to 
accommodate the expected joint movements (ACI 504 1990).  The sealant should be used at both 
faces of the joint in interior walls because both faces will be exposed to water.  A backer rod 
should be provided for the sealant, as shown in Figure 6-2, to hold the sealant?s shape and to 
prevent the sealant from bonding with the bottom of the joint (ACI 504 1990).  A 6 x 3/8 in. 
PVC or rubber waterstop shall also be provided.  The waterstop is used to prevent water from 
leaking through the joint (ACI 504 1990).  The dimensions of the waterstop and the PVC option 
are consistent with the plans of Culverts AEB 257+69 (ALDOT 2001), Corridor X 4877+13 
(ALDOT 2000a), and Corridor X 4959+43 (ALDOT 2000b).  The TDOT allowed for PVC or 
rubber water stops to be used in construction or expansion joints (see Figure 2-48 and 2-49 of 
this thesis) (TDOT 2000d).  According to ACI 504 (1990), PVC is the most widely used 
waterstop material (because it can easily be spliced at the work site and special configurations 
can be made for joint intersections), but rubber has the benefit of being more elastic than PVC.  
Both PVC and rubber are flexible waterstop materials, and either may be used as long as they 
form a continuous waterproof seal and allow the joint to move without being damaged (ACI 504 
1990; AASHTO 2010a). 
206 
 
Improper installation of the joint sealant and backer rod was noticed in the Corridor X 
Culvert at 4877+13 as shown in Figure 3-24.  Inspection during construction should be used to 
ensure the correct installation of the backer rod and joint sealant.  Improper joint sealing could 
cause long-term maintenance issues 
A ? in. by 12 in. joint protection board, made of asphalt-impregnated board conforming 
to ASTM D994, should be used at joint faces that are exposed to soil.  This is consistent with 
what is specified in the plans for Culverts AEB 257+69 (ALDOT 2001), Corridor X 4877+13 
(ALDOT 2000a), and Corridor X 4959+43 (ALDOT 2000b).  The joint protection is used to 
keep debris from entering the joint during periods when the joint is open. 
6.2.2 Wingwall Joints 
Due to the distress observed in wingwalls in the box culvert condition surveys, vertical 
joints should be used in CIP reinforced concrete box culvert wingwalls for cracking mitigation 
purposes.  These joints are intended to alleviate the stresses from restrained concrete volume 
change effects and from foundation settlement that may occur. 
Joints at the intersection of the culvert and wingwall, and in the wingwall itself, are 
proposed.  Due to the uncertainty in the cause of the wingwall distress, two proposals are made 
for the vertical joint at the culvert/wingwall intersection.  One option is an expansion joint where 
the wingwall is designed as a free-standing wall.  The other is a wing tab joint that was designed 
by ALDOT.  Both of these options will allow for the culvert to rotate at the culvert/wingwall 
intersection if settlement occurs.   They also allow for concrete volumetric changes to occur.  
The location of the joints is shown in Figure 6-3. 
207 
 
 
Figure 6-3: Wingwall Elevation View (Not to Scale) 
 
6.2.2.1 Expansion Joint 
A wingwall expansion joint was designed to alleviate stresses from the thermal expansion 
of concrete, and to allow for rotation at the culvert/wingwall intersection if foundation settlement 
developed.  The detail of the proposed expansion joint is shown in Figure 6-4. 
208 
 
 
Figure 6-4: Wingwall Expansion Joint (Not to Scale) 
209 
 
The joint protection board and waterstop are consistent with what is proposed for the 
contraction joint in this thesis as shown in Figure 6-2.  The aforementioned features are 
discussed in Section 6.2.1.2.  The expansion joint shall be located 1 ft (305 mm) from the 
beginning of the wingwall, as is specified by the TDOT (2000d).  Refer to Figure 2-47 of this 
thesis for an illustration of a TDOT wingwall.  As is consistent with what the TDOT (2000d) 
specifies, the reinforcement through the expansion joint should not be continuous.  This is done 
to reduce restraint, and to allow the joint to move as needed.  The 1/4?in. expansion joint 
dimension is consistent with what is specified by the LA DOTD (2008) in Figure 2-37.  This 
dimension is used to allow thermal expansion movements to occur between the culvert and 
wingwall. 
The wingwall is to be designed as a free-standing wall; therefore, a key will not be 
included in the expansion joint design, because no load transfer is required at the joint if the wall 
is designed as a free-standing wall.  This will also allow the wingwall to be structurally stable in 
the event that foundation settlement occurs, and causes rotation at the intersection of the culvert 
and wingwall.   
As required in AASHTO (2010a) Section 8.9.2, the expansion joint filler shall be a 
preformed structural or pavement joint filler conforming to AASHTO M 213 (ASTM D1751), a 
preformed sponge rubber or cork joint filler conforming to AASHTO M 153 (ASTM D1752), a 
preformed concrete joint filler conforming to AASHTO M 33 (ASTM D994), or a polystyrene 
board filler. 
As required in AASHTO (2010a) Section 8.9.2.4, The joint sealant used shall be a hot-
poured sealant conforming to AASHTO M282 (ASTM D3406), a silicone cold-poured sealant 
conforming to Federal Specification TT-S-1543 Class A, or an impervious commercial quality 
210 
 
polyethylene foam strip.  No backer rod will be required since the joint filler will act as backup 
material, and a bond breaker may be required if the sealant will bond to the joint filler (ACI 504 
1990). 
The waterstop used is the same as is used in the proposed transverse contraction joint in 
Section 6.2.1.  It is discussed in Section 6.2.1.2 of this thesis.  The use of a waterstop at this 
location is necessary to prevent water from moving through the joint, which may lead to erosion 
of the material behind the wall. 
6.2.2.2 Wing Tab Joint 
The wing tab joint was designed by ALDOT (2011b) for use in the Birmingham Northern 
Beltline Project.  The wing tab joint is shown below in Figure 6-5. 
 
Figure 6-5: Wing Tab Joint (ALDOT 2012a) 
 
211 
 
The wing tab joint, like the proposed expansion joint, is designed to allow free rotation 
and torsion at the culvert/wingwall intersection if foundation settlement occurs.  This joint allows 
for shear transfer between the wingwall and supporting culvert wall as well.  The downside is 
that intricate formwork will be required to construct the wing tabs, which will increase the cost 
of construction. 
6.2.2.3 Contraction Joint 
The wingwall contraction joint shall have the same detail as the transverse contraction 
joint in Figure 6-2.  Contraction joint spacing in wingwalls should follow the same rules as those 
shown in Figure 6-1 for the transverse contraction joints in the rest of the culvert.  If the 
wingwall length is less than the maximum contraction joint spacing, no contraction joint is 
required.  If the wingwall length is greater the maximum contraction joint spacing, contraction 
joints must be placed so that the wingwall is divided into approximately equal sections. 
If the expansion joint proposal is used, all sections of the wingwall, including the ones 
separated by contraction joints, must be built as free-standing walls, and a constant width 
foundation shall be used. 
6.3 Summary 
In this chapter, joint details were proposed with the purpose of mitigating the effects of 
the restrained concrete volume change cracking that has been experienced in ALDOT CIP 
reinforced concrete box culverts.  Transverse contraction joints to be used in the barrel of the 
culvert were proposed in this section, as well as joints to be used in culvert wingwalls. 
A keyed transverse contraction joint was proposed to allow for joint movement between 
culvert barrel sections.  These joints shall be spaced at three time times the clear height of the 
culvert but not greater than 36 ft (11 m) or less than 24 ft (7.3 m). 
212 
 
Two options were proposed to be used at the culvert/wingwall intersection.  This was 
because of the uncertainty of the cause of the wingwall distress observed in Chapter 3.  The first 
proposal was an expansion joint.  This design called for the wingwall to be designed as a free-
standing wall as a load transfer mechanism.  Designing the wall to stand on its own would allow 
for the wingwall to be structurally stable even if rotation at the joint occurred.  This joint 
proposal will be easy to construct and inexpensive.  The second proposal was for a wing tab joint 
to be used.  This joint was designed by ALDOT.  It also allows for load transfer and for rotation 
at the culvert/wingwall intersection if foundation settlement occurs.  However, it requires 
intricate formwork and will be expensive. 
A vertical contraction joint for use in the wingwall was also proposed in this section.  The 
joint design, geometry, and spacing are the same as the proposed transverse contraction joint in 
the rest of the culvert. 
213 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Chapter 7 
 
 Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations 
 
7.1 Summary 
Significant cracking was observed in Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) 
cast-in-place (CIP) reinforced concrete box culverts in the Anniston East Bypass (AEB) project.  
Numerous wide transverse cracks were observed inside the culvert barrels.  Many of these cracks 
were wider than the ACI 224 (2001) limit of 0.012 in. (0.30 mm), above which cracks are 
considered detrimental to the structure. 
Because of the cracking problems in the AEB, it was decided to perform crack condition 
surveys of other CIP reinforced concrete box culverts in Alabama.  The crack condition surveys 
were done to obtain information regarding the distress discovered in culverts throughout the 
state. They were also done to determine if the distress observed in the AEB was unique.  The 
majority of the transverse cracks observed in the crack condition surveys were through cracks 
located in the ceiling and in the walls.  Few transverse cracks were observed in the base, but 
when discovered, they tended to be very wide.  Significant cracking was also observed in the 
wingwalls of the culverts.  Distress was found in the wingwall itself and at the intersection of the 
culvert and wingwall. The majority of the culverts surveyed used transverse contraction joints 
with continuous longitudinal reinforcement; however, one culvert in the AEB project and two in 
the Corridor X project used transverse contraction joints.  From the data gathered in the crack 
214 
 
condition surveys, the average crack width, average crack spacing, and 90th percentile crack 
width were plotted for every culvert surveyed.  This data led to the finding that using contraction 
joints reduced the average crack widths in the AEB and Corridor X projects when compared to 
culverts in the same project locations that used transverse construction joints with continuous 
longitudinal reinforcement. 
An analysis procedure, from Gilbert (1992), was used to determine the amount of 
temperature and shrinkage reinforcement necessary to keep the average crack width of a CIP 
reinforced concrete box culvert wall at or below the ACI 224 (2001) limit of 0.012 in. (0.30 
mm).  The analysis procedure was modified by the author to include movement at contraction 
joints and to include thermal and drying shrinkage. 
An instrumentation and testing plan was developed for a CIP reinforced concrete box 
culvert under construction.  The plan included obtaining concrete stress, strain, and temperature 
data during early ages of the concrete.  It also included monitoring the crack width development 
of transverse cracks in the culvert.  The tests included in the plan consisted of creep testing, 
drying shrinkage testing, tensile strength development, modulus of elasticity development, 
compressive strength development, maturity, setting time, quality control testing, and early-age 
restrained stress development.  The data and results from the instrumentation and testing plan are 
not included in this thesis, and will be included in future research. 
Transverse contraction joints and vertical wingwall joints were also developed and 
proposed with the purpose of mitigating cracking in ALDOT CIP reinforced concrete box 
culverts. 
 
 
215 
 
7.2 Conclusions and Recommendations 
The main objectives of this research were to determine the extent of the distress in other 
CIP reinforced concrete box culverts in Alabama, develop an instrumentation plan to assess the 
stress development in a newly constructed culvert, determine the mechanism that caused 
cracking to occur, and to develop methods for mitigating cracking.  All of these objectives were 
accomplished through this research effort.  The instrumentation plan is mentioned in Section 7.1. 
7.2.1 Cracking in Alabama Box Culverts 
Similar cracking to what was observed in the AEB project was also found in the other 
culverts surveyed.  Six of the eight culverts surveyed that were not in the AEB project had 
average crack widths greater than 0.012 in (0.30 mm) limit.  It was concluded that the distress 
was not unique to the AEB project 
7.2.2 Causes of Cracking 
From the research data, the main cause of the transverse cracking is thought to be 
restrained volumetric changes in the concrete due to the combined effect of thermal and drying 
shrinkage.  Thermal and drying shrinkage are unavoidable in concrete culverts due to 
temperature and thermal cycles (Schindler 2002; Hansen and Almudaiheem 1987).  The very 
stiff base restrains the walls and ceiling of the culvert when it undergoes thermal and drying 
shrinkage.  This causes stresses to rise and cracking to occur.    This conclusion is supported by 
the fact that transverse contraction joints used in AEB and Corridor X culverts mitigated the 
distress experienced.  It is also supported by through cracks indicating that thermal shrinkage is a 
major cause of cracking (Bernander 1998). 
The source of the wingwall cracking was narrowed to two possible causes. It could be 
due to thermal and drying shrinkage effects, or, as suggested by ALDOT, it could be attributed to 
216 
 
foundation settlement.  The rigid wingwall footing provides restraint when the wingwall 
undergoes shrinkage.  This restraint can lead to cracks in the wingwall itself; it can also lead to 
cracking at the intersection of the culvert and wingwall when the wingwall footing restrains the 
long culvert from shrinking.  Foundation settlement can cause the wingwall to rotate and crack 
where the culvert and wingwall interact.  Settlement can also cause a lack of support under the 
middle of the wingwall and cause cracking in the wingwall itself. 
7.2.3 Mitigation of Cracking 
Through the modified Gilbert (1992) analysis, it was determined that the temperature and 
shrinkage reinforcement currently used by ALDOT in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts 
should be increased.  The analysis recommended that a reinforcement ratio of 0.0045 be used for 
culverts with a joint spacing of 3 times the clear height of the culvert.  This value was reasonable 
when compared to other temperature and shrinkage reinforcement recommendations for 
restrained members.  However, the reinforcement stresses in the analysis were higher than the 
yield strength of the reinforcement.  These stress values were not representative of the actual 
stresses in the temperature and shrinkage reinforcement, but it raises questions about the analysis 
results.   A temperature and shrinkage reinforcement ratio of 0.0040 would be economical and 
sufficient; however, additional finite element analysis and subsequent verification based on field 
measured behavior is necessary to verify this recommendation. 
To relieve the thermal stresses in the culverts, it was proposed that transverse contraction 
joints be placed in the culverts at intervals of 3 times the clear height of the culvert, but not 
greater than 36 ft (11 m) or less than 24 ft (7.3 m).  Culverts in the AEB and Corridor X projects 
that had transverse contraction joints had smaller average crack widths when compared to 
217 
 
culverts in the same project location that used construction joints with continuous reinforcement 
through them. 
Vertical joints were also proposed to alleviate the distress experienced in culvert 
wingwalls.  Two proposals were made regarding the joint to be used at the intersection of the 
wingwall and the culvert.  The first proposal was an expansion joint with the wingwall designed 
as a free-standing wall.  Designing the wingwall to be free standing is a load-transfer 
mechanism, but it also allows the wingwall to be structurally stable if foundation settlement 
causes rotation at the intersection off the culvert and wingwall.  This option would be easy to 
construct and relatively inexpensive.  The second option would use a wing tab designed by 
ALDOT.  This joint would also allow for load transfer and it would provide for the rotation of 
the wingwall at the joint if foundation settlement occurs.  However, this joint would require 
intricate formwork and would be somewhat costly.  A vertical contraction joint was also 
proposed for use in wingwalls.  This joint would use the same detail and spacing rules as 
specified for the transverse contraction join in the he rest of the culvert. 
7.3 Recommendations for Future Work 
After completing the requirements for this research effort, there are some 
recommendations to be made for future work.  The implementation and testing plan from 
Chapter 5 of this thesis should be used for a CIP reinforced concrete box culvert that is under 
construction.  There is currently a culvert in the Birmingham Northern Beltline project that is 
designated to be instrumented by Auburn University.  This will increase the knowledge of the 
effects that temperature has on the concrete properties in box culverts and the stress development 
that corresponds to the temperature.  The data from the instrumentation and testing plan will 
allow for other mitigation measures to be taken in culverts.  The effects of the amount of 
218 
 
temperature and shrinkage reinforcement used in CIP reinforced concrete box culverts should 
also be further investigated.  While this topic was referenced in this thesis, finite element 
analysis would provide a more accurate recommendation for the amount of temperature and 
shrinkage reinforcement to be used. 
219 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
References 
 
 
AASHTO. 2007. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Customary U.S. Units. 4th ed. 
Washington D.C.: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 
(AASHTO). 
AASHTO. 2010a. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications. 3rd ed. Washington, 
D.C.: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 
AASHTO. 2010b. Technical Manual for Design and Construction of Road Tunnels-Civil 
Elements. Washington, D.C.: American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials (AASHTO). 
ACI. 2010. ACI Concrete Terminology. American Concrete Institute (ACI). 
http://www.concrete.org/Technical/CCT/ACI_Concrete_Terminology.pdf 
ACI 201. 1992. Guide for Making a Condition Survey of Concrete in Service (ACI 201.1R-92), 
Report by ACI Committee 201, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 207. 1995. Effect of Restraint, Volume Change, and Reinforcement on Cracking of Mass 
Concrete (ACI 207.2R-95), Report by ACI Committee 207, Farmington Hills, MI: 
American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 209. 1992. Prediction of Creep, Shrinkage, and Temperature Effects in Concrete Structures 
(ACI 209R-92), Report by ACI Committee 209, Farmington Hills, MI: American 
Concrete Institute. 
ACI 224. 1995. Joints in Concrete Construction (ACI 224.3R-95), Report by ACI Committee 
224, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 224. 2001. Control of Cracking in Concrete Structures (ACI 224R-01), Report by ACI 
Committee 224, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 224. 2007. Causes, Evaluation, and Repair of Cracks in Concrete Structures (ACI 224.1R-
07), Report by ACI Committee 224, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 302. 2004. Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction (ACI 302.1R-04), Report by 
ACI Committee 302, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
220 
 
ACI 318. 2011. Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and 
Commentary (ACI 318R-11). Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 350. 2001. Code Requirements for Environmental Engineering Concrete Structures (ACI 
350) and Commentary (ACI 350R). Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 504. 1990. Guide to Sealing Joints in Concrete Structures (ACI 504R-90), Report by ACI 
Committee 504, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
ACI 546. 2004. Concrete Repair Guide (ACI 546R-04), Report by ACI Committee 546, 
Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute. 
AHTD. 2003. Standard Specification for Highway Construction. Arkansas State Highway and 
Transportation Department (AHTD). 
AHTD. 2006. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Details. Standard Drawing RCB-1. Arkansas 
State Highway and Transportation Department (AHTD). 
ALDOT. n.d.a. Proj. No. HPP-0192 (6) Anniston East Bypass Station 240+37.00 Calhoun 
County. Double 8?x8? Box Culvert (59? & 77? Fill Height). Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. n.d.b. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Single Opening 8?x6? Fill 0-72? Any Skew. 
Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT 1980. General Notes Culvert Steps and Construction Joints. Standard Drawing CS-3-1. 
Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 1983. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Opening Triple 10?x10?. Standard Drawing 
CT1010. Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 1986. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Single Opening 8?x8? Fill 0-72? Any Skew. 
Standard Drawing CS-88. Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 1988. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Opening Single 8?x 8? Fill 0?-120? Any Skew. 
Standard Drawing CS-88. Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2000a. Project APD ? 471 (37) Corrridor ?X? Culvert at Sta. 4877+13.00 Jefferson 
County. Triple 8?x10? Box Culvert 130? Max. Fill Height. Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2000b. Project APD ? 471 (37) Corrridor ?X? Culvert at Sta. 4959+43.00 Jefferson 
County. Triple 8?x10? Box Culvert 130? Max. Fill Height. Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2001. Proj. No. HPP-0192 (6) Anniston East Bypass Sta. 257+69 Calhoun County. 
Single 6?x6? Box Culv. (78? Fill Max). Alabama Department of Transportation 
(ALDOT). 
221 
 
ALDOT. 2007. Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Triple Opening Single 12?x 7? Fill 0?-36? Any 
Skew. Standard Drawing CT-127. Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2008. Roadway Plans Preparation Manual: Plans Preparation and Assembly. 
Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2010. General Notes and Miscellaneous Details.  Standard Drawing CS-3-1. Alabama 
Department of Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2011a. Alabama Division Map. Map. Alabama Department of Transportation 
(ALDOT), 2011. http://www.dot.state.al.us/ctweb/County Engineers.html (accessed 
February 28, 2012). 
ALDOT. 2011b. Project No. APD-1602 (551) Birmingham Northern Beltline Special High Fill 
Culvert Station 2115+91.34. Jefferson County. Typical Section. Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2012a. Bureau of Research & Development Research Need Problem Statement: 
Culvert Wing Tab Design Loads. Letter. Alabama Department of Transportation 
(ALDOT). 
ALDOT. 2012b. Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Alabama Department of 
Transportation (ALDOT). 
ASTM C39. 2009. ?Standard Test Method for Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete 
Specimens?. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
ASTM C 157. 2006. ?Standard Test Method for Length Change of Hardened Hydraulic-Cement 
Mortar and Concrete?. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
ASTM C 403. 2006. ?Standard Test Method for Time of Setting of Concrete Mixtures by 
Penetration Resistance?. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
ASTM C 469. 2002. ?Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson?s Ratio 
of Concrete in Compression?. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
ASTM C 496. 2004. ?Standard Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical 
Concrete Specimens?. ASTM International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
ASTM C 512. 2002. ?Standard Test Method for Creep of Concrete in Compression.? ASTM 
International. West Conshohocken, PA. 
Australian Standard for Concrete Structures (AS 3600-1988). 1988. Sydney: Standards 
Association of Australia. 
Bernander, S. 1998. ?Practical Measues to Avoiding Early Age Thermal Cracking in Concrete 
Structures?. In RILEM Report 15: Prevention of Thermal Cracking in Concrete at Early 
Ages, ed. R. Springenschmid. London: E & FN Spon, 255-314. 
222 
 
Campbell-Allen, D., and G.W. Hughes.  1978. Reinforcement to Control Thermal and Shrinkage 
Cracking. Research report R334. School of Civil Engineering. University of Sydney. 33 
pages. 
CEB. 1999. Structural Concrete: Textbook on Behaviour, Design, and Performance. Updated 
Knowledge of the CEB/FIP Model Code 1990. Fib Bulletin 2 V. 2, Federation 
Internationale du B?ton, Lausanne, Switzerland. pp. 37-52. 
Choctawhatchee, Pea, and Yellow Rivers Watershed Management Authority. 2000. 
Recommended Practices Manual: A Guideline for Maintenance and Service of Unpaved 
Roads. 
ConnDOT. 2000. Drainage Manual. Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT). 
Favre, R., et al. 1983. Fissurations et Deformations. Manual du Comite Ewo-International de 
Beton (CEB). Lausanne: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne 
FHWA. 2005. Highway and Rail Transit Tunnel Maintenance and Rehabilitation Manual. 
Washington D.C.: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 
FDOT. 2010a. Design Standards for Design, Construction, Maintenance and Utility Operations 
on the State Highway System, 289-2. 
FDOT. 2010b. Drainage Manual. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 
FDOT. 2010c. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Florida Department of 
Transportation (FDOT). 
FDOT. 2011. Plans Preparation Manual. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). 
Folliard, K.J., P. Pesek, L.F. Kallivokas, K.A. Riding, and A.K. Schindler. 2009. Phase 1 Report 
on the Development of Predictive Model for Bridge Deck Cracking and Strength 
Development. Report No. FHWA/TX-09/0-63321-1. Center for Transportation Research. 
The University of Texas at Austin. 60 pages. 
GDOT. 1985. Precast Box Culvert Barrels. 4?x3? thru 10?x10?. Single & Multiple Lines. Georgia 
Standard 2530P. Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT). 
GDOT. 1996. Bridge, Culvert and Retaining Wall Construction Manual. Georgia Department of 
Transportation (GDOT). 
GDOT. 2001a. Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts. Single 7?x4? to Single 9?x10? for Depths of 
Fill Up to 20 Feet. Georgia Standard 2321-2. Georgia Department of Transportation 
(GDOT). 
GDOT. 2001b. Standard Specifications. Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT).  
223 
 
GDOT. 2010. Bridge and Structures Policy Design Manual. Georgia Department of 
Transportation (GDOT). 
Geokon. 2010. Instruction Manual Model 4200/4202/4204/4210 Vibrating Wire Strain Gages. 
Lebanon, New Hampshire: Geokon Inc. 
Gilbert, R. Ian. 1992. Shrinkage Cracking in Fully Restrained Concrete Members. ACI Structural 
Journal 89, no. 2: 141-142. 
Hansen, W. and J.A. Almudaiheem. 1987. Ultimate Drying Shrinkage of Concrete ? Influence 
of Major Parameters. ACI Materials Journal 84, no. 3: 217-223. 
Hammer, T.A. 1999. ?Test Methods for Linear Measurement of Autogenous Shrinkage before 
Setting.? In Autogenous Shrinkage of Concrete, ed. EI-ichi Tazawa. London: E & FN 
Spon, 143 -154. 
Holt, E.E. 2001. Early Age Autogenous Shrinkage of Concrete. Espoo: Technical Research 
Centre of Finland. 
Jensen, O.M. and P.F. Hansen. 2001. Autogenous Deformation and RH-Change in Perspective. 
Cement and Concrete Research 31, no. 12: 1859-1865. 
Johnson, S.M. 1965. Deterioration, Maintenance and Repair of Structures. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Co. 
Kavanaugh, B.P. 2008. Creep Behavior of Self-Consolidating Concrete. Master of Science 
Thesis. Auburn University, AL. 
KYTC. 2005. Division of Structural Design Guidance Manual. Kentucky Transportation Cabinet 
(KYTC). 
KYTC. 2008. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Kentucky 
Transportation Cabinet (KYTC). 
KYTC. 2011. Drainage Manual. Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC). 
Kosmatka, S.H., B. Kerkhoff, and W.C. Panarese. 2002. Design and Control of Concrete 
Mixtures.14th ed. Portland Cement Association. 
Kuennen, T. 2010. Corrosion ? The Enemy Within. Better Roads 80, no. 2: 22-23. 
La DOTD. 1978. Multiple Openings Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts: Straight Wings, 45o 
Crossing, 2:1 Spill Slope Normal to Channel, 10? x 7? to 10? x 9?. Standard Plan CC-S-
M-10-R-45o-1. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (La DOTD). 
La DOTD. 1987. Hydraulics Manual. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development 
(La DOTD). 
224 
 
La DOTD. 2006. Louisiana Standard Specification for Roads and Bridges. Louisiana 
Department of Transportation and Development (La DOTD). 
La DOTD. 2008. Expansion and Construction Joint for Concrete Structures. Standard Plan CM-
49. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (La DOTD). 
Mathew, S. 2006. Concrete Corrosion, Methods to Control this Perennial Problem in the Middle 
East. Cost Engineering 4, no. 4: 13-23. 
McCullough, B.F., and T. Dossey. 1999. Controlling Early-Age Cracking in Continuously 
Reinforced Concrete Pavement: Observations from 12 Years of Monitoring Experimental 
Test Sections in Houston, Texas. Transportation Research Record 1684: 35-43. 
Mehta, P.K., and P.J.M. Monteiro. 2006. Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials. 
3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc. 
MDOT. 2001. Roadway Design Manual. Mississippi Department of Transportation (MDOT). 
NCDOT. 2006. Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures. North Carolina Department of 
Transportation (NCDOT). 
NCDOT. 2007. Structure Design Unit Design Manual. North Carolina Department of 
Transportation (NCDOT). 
PCA. n.d. Corrosion of Embedded Metals. Portland Cement Association (PCA). 
http://www.cement.org/tech/cct_dur_corrosion.asp (accessed May 17, 2011) 
Pickett, G. 1956. Effect of Aggregate on Shrinkage of Concrete and a Hypothesis Concerning 
Shrinkage. ACI Journal Proceedings 52, no. 1: 581-590. 
Pincheira, J.A., A.A. Aramayo, K.S. Kim, and D. Fratta. 2008. ?Corrosion Protection 
Performance of Epoxy-Coated Reinforcing Bars.? http://www.lrrb.org/PDF/200847.pdf 
(accessed June 2010). 
Raphael, J.M. 1984. The Tensile Strength of Concrete. ACI Journal Proceedings 81, no. 17: 158-
165. 
Rasmussen, R.O. and D.K. Rozycki. 2001. Characterization and Modeling of Axial Slab-Support 
Restraint. Transportation Research Record 1778: 26-32. 
Sennett, R.E. 1994. Matrix Analysis of Structures. Long Grove, IL:Waveland Press Inc. 
SCDOT. 2007. Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. South Carolina Department 
of Transportation (SCDOT). 
SCDOT. 2009. Box Culvert Miscellaneous Details. Standard Drawing 722-105-01. South 
Carolina Department of Transportation. 
225 
 
Schindler, Anton K. 2002. Concrete Hydration, Temperature Development, and Setting at Early-
Ages. PhD Dissertation. The University of Texas at Austin.  Austin, Texas. 
 
 
Suh, Y.C., Hankins, K., and McCullough, B.F. 1992. Early-Age Behavior of Continuously 
Reinforced Concrete Pavement and Calibration of the Failure Prediction Model in the 
CRCP-7 Program. Research Report No. 1244-3. Center for Transportation Research. The 
University of Texas at Austin. 158 pages. 
TDOT. 2000a. General Notes. Standard Reinforced Concrete Bridge Box or Slab Type.  
Drawing STD-15-21. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). 
TDOT. 2000b. Stage Construction Joint Detail (Fill Above the Top Slab Not Greater than 3?-8?. 
Standard Reinforced Concrete Bridge Box or Slab Type. Drawing STD-15-21. Tennessee 
Department of Transportation (TDOT). 
TDOT. 2000c. Typical Sections and Details. Standard Reinforced Concrete Bridge Box and Slab 
Type. Drawing STD-15-4. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). 
TDOT. 2000d. Typical Wingwall Details and Notes. Standard Reinforced Concrete Bridge Box 
and Slab Type.  Drawing STD-15-9. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). 
TDOT. 2006. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Tennessee Department 
of Transportation (TDOT). 
TDOT. 2010. Drainage Manual. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). 
VDOT. 2002. Drainage Manual. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 
VDOT. 2007. Road and Bridge Specification. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). 
VDOT. 2008. Road and Bridge Standards. Vol. 2. Virginia Department of Transportation 
(VDOT). 
WisDOT. 2011. Bridge Manual. Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT). 
WVDOT. 2000. Standard Specifications Roads and Bridges. West Virginia Department of 
Transportation (WVDOT). 
WVDOT. 2002. ConstructionManual. West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT). 
WVDOT. 2004. Bridge Design Manual. West Virginia Department of Transportation 
(WVDOT). 
226 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appendix A 
 
Box Culvert Crack Condition Survey Data and Data Sheet 
 
The crack width and crack spacing histograms for each culvert surveyed and the data 
sheet used when performing the culvert crack condition surveys in Chapter 3 is presented in 
Appendix A. 
 
Figure A-1: AEB Culvert at 175+70 Crack Width Histogram 
227 
 
 
Figure A-2: AEB Culvert at 162+90 Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-3: AEB Culvert at 149+60 Crack Width Histogram 
228 
 
 
Figure A-4: AEB Culvert at 257+69 Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-5: AEB Culvert at 240+37 Crack Width Histogram 
229 
 
 
Figure A-6: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 East Barrel Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-7: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Center Barrel Crack Width Histogram 
230 
 
 
Figure A-8: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 West Barrel Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-9: Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Crack Width Histogram 
231 
 
 
Figure A-10: Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-11: Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Crack Width Histogram 
 
232 
 
 
Figure A-12: Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-13: Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Crack Width Histogram 
 
233 
 
 
Figure A-14: Prattville Culvert on US-82 Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-15: I-85 North Culvert Crack Width Histogram 
 
234 
 
 
Figure A-16: I-85 South Culvert Crack Width Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-17: AEB Culvert at 175+70 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
235 
 
 
Figure A-18: AEB Culvert at 162+90 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-19: AEB Culvert at 149+60 Crack Spacing Histogram 
236 
 
 
Figure A-20: AEB Culvert at 257+69 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-21: AEB Culvert at 240+37 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
237 
 
 
Figure A-22: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 East Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-23: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 Center Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
238 
 
 
Figure A-24: Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 West Barrel Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-25: Corridor X Culvert at 4877+13 Crack Spacing Histogram 
239 
 
 
Figure A-26: Corridor X Culvert at 4959+43 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-27: Corridor X Culvert at Exit 85 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
240 
 
 
Figure A-28: Dadeville Culvert at 45+31.55 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-29: Dutton Culvert at 548+23 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
241 
 
 
Figure A-30: Prattville Culvert on US-82 Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
Figure A-31: I-85 North Culvert Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
242 
 
 
Figure A-32: I-85 South Culvert Crack Spacing Histogram 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
243 
 
Concrete Culvert Visual Inspection Survey 
 
General: 
Inspectors: ______________________________________________________________ 
Date of Survey:  __________________________________________________________ 
 
Description of Culvert: 
Culvert Identification:  _____________________________________________________ 
Culvert Station: __________________________________________________________ 
Size: ___________________________________________________________________ 
End of Entry:  ____________________________________________________________ 
 
Environment: 
Temperature:  ____________________________________________________________ 
Cloud Cover: ____________________________________________________________ 
Precipitation: ____________________________________________________________ 
 
Notes:________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________ 
244 
 
Culvert Crack Survey: 
            Station Start: ____________    Description: _______________ 
            Station End:  ___________      Description: _______________ 
Sta. 
(ft) 
Crack 
Type 
Width 
(in./ 1000) 
 
Comments 
Sta. 
(ft) 
Crack 
Type 
Width 
(in./ 1000) 
 
Comments 
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
                
Notes: (L) Leaching, (S) Stalactites, (HL) Hairline, (CJ) Construction Joint, (C) Corrosion,      
(E) Efflorescence, (PS) Plastic Shrinkage, (CM) Cannot Measure, (PR) Previously Repaired, 
(CON) Contraction Joint 
Surface Conditions of Concrete: 
  Scaling Area, Depth   
  Type   
Spalls and Popouts No., Size, Depth     Type   
Stains, Efflorescence   
Exposed Reinforcement: 
Corrosion   
Previous Repairs   
 
245 
 
A E B  C u l ve r t  at  240+ 37 ( J)  -  D i m e n s i on s  -  ( 8' x8' )  -  A L D O T  C on d i t i on  S u r ve y
W I D T H W I D T H
( I N C H E S ) ( x  10
-3
 i n .)
11 1 0.013 13
11 3 13
17 1 0.005 5
17 3 5
21 1 0.013 13
21 3 13
22 3 0.013 13
32 0.005 5
32.5 1 0.020 20
32.5 2 20
32.5 3 20
35 3 0.005 5
36 1 0.005 5
36 3 5
39 2 0.005 5
41 C O N S T . J O I N T 1 0.030 30 G R O U T E D
41 2 30
41 3 30
41 4 30
52 1 0.050 50
52 2 50
52 3 50
53 1 0.040 40
53 2 40
55 1 0.013 13
55 3 13
60 1 0.050 50
60 2 50
60 3 50
62 3 0.005 5
66 1 0.03 30
66 2 30
66 3 30
70 3 0.005 5
71 1 0.030 30
71 3 30
72 1 0.040 40
72 2 40
80 1 0.016 16
78 3 0.005 5
82 3 0.005 5
84.5 2 0.020 20
88 1 0.005 5
88 3 5
S T A S T A L O C A T I O N R E M A R K S
 
246 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
95 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 0 2 0 20 G RO U T E D
95 2 20
95 3 20
95 4 20
33 3 "  CO RE  H O L E  IN  CE N T E R W A L L
98 3 "  CO RE  H O L E  IN  CE N T E R W A L L
100 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
105 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
105 3 5
106 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
108 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
111 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
117 1 0 . 0 1 3 13
117 2 13
117 3 13
117 4 13
123 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
125 1 0 . 0 1 3 13
125 2 13
125 3 13
128 2 0 . 0 1 3 13
135 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
138 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
138 2 16
144 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
1 4 5 . 5 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 0 5 0 50
1 4 5 . 5 2 50
1 4 5 . 5 3 50
1 4 5 . 5 4 50
151 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
154 3 "  CO RE  H O L E  IN  CE N T E R W A L L
154 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
154 3 16
155 2 0 . 0 6 0 60
155 3 60
157 2 0 . 0 5 0 50
1 6 0 . 5 3 0 . 0 1 3 13
161 2 0 . 0 1 6 16
161 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
165 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
165 2 30
165 3 30
167 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
171 2 0 . 0 1 6 16
171 3 16
 
 
247 
 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
177 2 0 . 0 3 0 30
178 0 . 0 0 5 5
1 8 3 . 5 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
1 8 3 . 5 2 30
1 8 3 . 5 3 30
1 8 3 . 5 4 30
189 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
190 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
194 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
194 3 5
196 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 0 3 0 30 G RO U T E D ,  W A T E R L E A V IN G  
196 2 30 A T  F L O O R
196 3 30
196 4 30
197 3 0 . 0 1 6 16
202 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
204 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
204 3 16
207 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 1 / 8 "  H O L E  IN  F L O O R
207 2 125 L O O S IN G  W A T E R
207 3 125
207 4 125
208 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
208 3 16
2 1 0 . 5 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
214 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
214 3 20
216 2 0 . 1 2 5 125 S K E W E D  CRA CK
216 3 125
216 4 125
221 1 0 . 0 7 0 70
221 2 70
221 3 70
221 4 70
227 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
228 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
228 2 30
228 3 30
234 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
234 3 5
239 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
239 2 30
2 3 9 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
241 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
241 3 5
 
248 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
246 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 CM W E L L  G RO U T E D ,  E X CE P T
246 2 CM F A L L IN G  O U T  A T  CE IL IN G
246 3 CM
246 4 CM
247 1 0 . 0 6 0 60 S K E W E D  CRA CK
247 2 60
247 3 60
250 1 0 . 0 7 0 70
250 2 70
250 3 70
252 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
252 3 20
2 5 3 . 5 1 0 . 0 7 0 70
2 5 3 . 5 2 70
2 5 3 . 5 3 70
255 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
2 5 6 . 5 1 0 . 0 6 0 60
2 5 6 . 5 3 60
258 1 0 . 0 8 0 80 G RO U T E D
258 2 80
258 3 80
258 4 80
259 1 0 . 0 6 0 60
259 3 60
262 1 0 . 0 1 6 16 S K E W E D  CRA CK
262 2 16
262 3 16
265 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
265 2 20
265 3 20
272 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
272 2 16
272 3 16
273 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
273 3 5
278 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
278 3 20
282 2 0 . 0 1 3 13
286 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
286 3 5
290 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
2 9 5 . 5 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D ,  W A T E R L E A V IN G  
2 9 5 . 5 2 125 A T  F L O O R
2 9 5 . 5 3 125
2 9 5 . 5 4 125
 
249 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
302 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
302 2 5
302 3 5
308 3 0 . 0 1 3 13
310 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
310 2 5
316 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
316 2 5
316 3 5
319 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
319 2 5
319 3 5
324 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
324 2 30
324 3 30
329 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
329 2 5
329 3 5
331 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
333 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
333 3 16
337 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
337 2 20
340 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 4 0 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
343 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
346 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 CM W E L L  G RO U T E D
346 2 CM
346 3 CM
346 4 CM
3 5 4 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5 1 "  H O L E  BO T T O M  L .  W A L L
3 5 4 . 5 2 5
3 5 4 . 5 3 5
356 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
363 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 6 7 . 5 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 7 0 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
373 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
373 2 30
3 7 4 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
375 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 7 6 . 5 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 8 4 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
3 8 4 . 5 2 5
3 8 4 . 5 3 5
 
 
250 
 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
3 9 5 . 5 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D
3 9 5 . 5 2 125
3 9 5 . 5 3 125
3 9 5 . 5 4 125
407 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
407 2 5
407 3 5
4 1 2 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
4 1 2 . 5 2 5
4 1 2 . 5 3 5
419 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
4 2 1 . 5 1 0 . 0 1 3 13
4 2 1 . 5 3 13
434 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
434 2 5
438 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
438 3 5
445 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D
445 2 125
445 3 125
445 4 125
457 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
465 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
465 3 5
466 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
466 2 5
471 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
4 7 4 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
4 7 4 . 5 2 5
4 7 4 . 5 3 5
484 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
484 3 5
495 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 CM W E L L  G RO U T E D
495 2 CM
495 3 CM
495 4 CM
501 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
510 1 0 . 0 3 0 30
510 2 30
510 3 30
5 1 9 . 5 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
5 1 9 . 5 2 20
5 1 9 . 5 3 20
530 1 0 . 0 2 0 20 S K E W E D  CRA CK
530 2 20
 
251 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
530 3 20
5 3 5 . 5 5 + 3 7 1 0 . 0 1 3 13 S K E W E D  CRA CK ,  H E A V Y
5 3 5 . 5 2 13 S CA L E  IN  CRA CK S
5 3 5 . 5 3 13
540 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
540 3 5
545 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 CM W E L L  G RO U T E D  E X CE P T  F O R
545 2 CM W A T E R L O S S  A T  H O L E  BO T T O M
545 3 CM RIG H T  W A L L
545 4 CM
556 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
556 2 5
556 3 5
564 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
564 3 5
5 7 1 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
5 7 1 . 5 3 5
575 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
581 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
586 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
5 8 7 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
595 1 0 . 1 8 7 187 G RO U T E D ,  H O L E S  IN  F L O O R
595 2 187
595 3 187
595 4 187
608 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
608 2 5
608 3 5
6 1 5 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
6 1 5 . 5 3 5
624 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
624 2 5
624 3 5
6 3 3 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
634 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
634 2 5
634 3 5
645 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D ,  1 / 8 "  CRA CK  IN  F L O O R
645 2 125
645 3 125
645 4 125
655 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
659 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
659 2 5
6 6 3 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
 
 
252 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
6 6 3 . 5 3 5
664 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
664 2 5
681 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
681 2 5
681 3 5
695 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 8 7 187 G RO U T E D ,  W A T E R L E A V IN G  
695 2 187 A T  F L O O R
695 3 187
695 4 187
7 0 5 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
7 0 5 . 5 2 5
7 0 5 . 5 3 5
710 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
710 2 5
7 2 0 . 5 1 0 . 0 2 0 20
7 2 0 . 5 2 20
7 2 0 . 5 3 20
728 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
728 2 5
728 3 5
7 3 8 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
7 3 8 . 5 2 5
7 3 8 . 5 3 5
745 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D ,  W A T E R L E A V IN G  
745 2 125 A T  F L O O R
745 3 125
745 4 125
756 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
756 2 5
756 3 5
768 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
768 2 5
768 3 5
7 7 2 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
7 7 2 . 5 3 5
780 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
780 3 5
783 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
783 2 5
7 8 6 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
7 8 6 . 5 3 5
795 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D ,  1 / 8 "  G A P S  IN  F L O O R
795 2 125
795 3 125
 
 
253 
 
S T A S T A L O CA T IO N W ID T H W ID T H RE M A RK S
795 4 125
8 0 5 . 5 2 0 . 0 0 5 5
8 1 9 . 5 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
8 1 9 . 5 2 5
8 2 7 . 5 1 0 . 0 1 3 13 RU S T  S CA L E  P RE S E N T
8 2 7 . 5 2 13
8 2 7 . 5 3 13
838 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
838 2 5
838 3 5
845 CO N S T .  J O IN T 1 0 . 1 2 5 125 G RO U T E D ,  W A T E R L E A K IN G  IN
845 2 125 A T  CE IL IN G
845 3 125
845 4 125
854 1 0 . 0 1 6 16
854 2 16
854 3 16
858 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
858 2 5
858 3 5
8 6 6 . 5 1 0 . 0 4 40
8 6 6 . 5 2 40
8 6 6 . 5 3 40
8 6 7 . 5 3 0 . 0 0 5 5
873 1 0 . 0 2 20
873 2 20
873 3 20
876 1 0 . 0 1 3 13
876 2 13
878 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
878 3 5
8 8 3 . 5 1 0 . 0 4 40 S K E W E D  CRA CK
8 8 3 . 5 2 40
8 8 3 . 5 3 40
889 2 0 . 0 1 6 16
895 1 0 . 0 0 5 5
897 2 0 . 0 1 3 13 S K E W E D  CRA CK
8 + 2 0 9 + 0 4 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
7 + 9 0 7 + 9 5 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
7 + 7 0 7 + 8 0 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
6 + 8 9 7 + 6 4 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
6 + 6 0 6 + 8 0 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
6 + 1 0 6 + 4 5 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
5 + 3 8 5 + 4 5 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
0 + 1 0 0 + 3 3 R.  W A L L  CH A M F E R
 
254 
 
Centreville Culvert at 1808+98 ALDOT Condition Survey Data: 
 
255 
 
 
256 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appendix B 
 
Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Results 
 
Appendix B contains additional data and example calculations from the temperature and 
shrinkage reinforcement analysis in Chapter 4 of this thesis.  The ConcreteWorks temperature 
data used to calculate the thermal strain is shown in Figure B-1.  Example calculation of the 
thermal shrinkage, drying shrinkage, creep coefficient, and joint movement used in the analysis 
is shown below. An example calculation for the analysis used is shown below as well.  The 
example calculations were done in Microsoft Excel.  The full results of the analysis are shown in 
Table B-1. 
257 
 
\  
Figure B-1: ConcreteWorks Temperature Data 
 
Example Calculations: 
Th e r m a l  S h r i n k a g e
? t  = 6 . 0 0 E -0 6 i n . / i n . / ?F (L i m e s t o n e  Co n c re t e )
T m a x  = 1 2 0 . 5 ?F       ?     T z e r o  =  0 . 9 3 * T m a x  = 1 1 2 . 0 6 5 ?F
T min   = 4 1 . 8 ?F
? T  = T z e r o  -  T min
= 7 0 . 2 6 5 ?F (T z e r o  -  T p l a c e m e n t )
? t h e r m  = ? t* ? T
= -4 . 2 2 E-0 4 i n . / i n . (Co n t ra c t i o n ) 
 
 
 
 
258 
 
 
Contraction Joint Movement 
f' c  = 5 , 2 0 0 p s i
E c  = 5 7 0 0 0 * S Q RT (f' c ) = 4 , 1 1 0 , 3 2 8 p s i
?* c 1 = f t  =  1 . 7 f' c
2/ 3
 = 510 p s i
A c  = Co n c re t e  c ro s s -s e c t i o n  a re a  a b o v e  t h e  b a s e  = 8 , 0 1 8 i n .
2
W  = W i d t h  o f t h e  b a s e  = 1 9 . 2 5 ft              = 231 i n .
? f = Ba s e  fri c t i o n  =  C 2  = 2 . 0 p s i  ?  G ra n u la r s u b b a s e  (Ra s m u s s e n  a n d  Ri z y c k i - T a b le  3 )
F sh  = S h ri n k a g e  fo rc e  =  ? av A c
f b  = D is tri b u te d  b a s e  fri c tio n  F o rc e  =  ? f*W
Q  = F i x e d  e n d  fo rc e  =  Ba s e  re s t ra i n t  fo rc e  =  f b * L / 2
K  = A c E c /L
?  = K
-1
(F R -Q )
 
 
Table B-1: Results for Joint Movement Calculations 
S p a c i n g L  (ft ) F R  (k i p s ) f B  (k / i n . ) Q  (k . ) K  (k / i n . ) ?  (i n .)
3H 24 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 67 1 1 4 , 4 3 3 0 . 0 3 5
4H 32 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 89 8 5 , 8 2 5 0 . 0 4 7
3 6  ft 36 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 100 7 6 , 2 8 8 0 . 0 5 2
5H 40 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 111 6 8 , 6 6 0 0 . 0 5 8
6H 48 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 133 5 7 , 2 1 6 0 . 0 6 9
5 0  ft 50 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 139 5 4 , 9 2 8 0 . 0 7 2
7H 56 4 , 0 9 1 0 . 4 6 2 155 4 9 , 0 4 3 0 . 0 8 0
 
259 
 
D r y i n g  a n d  A u to g e n o u s  S h r i n k a g e (CE B M C9 0 -9 9 )
?
c ds
(t , t
c
) = ?
c ds o
(f
c m 28
)?
RH
(h )?
ds
(t -t
c
) = -1 . 1 4 E-0 4    D r y i n g  S h r i n k a g e
?
c ds o
(f
c m 28
) = [(2 2 0 + 1 1 0 ?
ds 1
)e ^ (
-
?
ds 2
f
c m 28
/f
c m 0
)]1 0
-6
 = 4 . 3 1 E -0 4
?
ds 1
 = 4   A CI 2 0 9 . 2 R T a b l e  A . 1 1
?
ds 2
 = 0 . 1 2   A CI 2 0 9 . 2 R T a b l e  A . 1 1
f
c m o
 = 1 , 4 5 0 p s i       Co n c re t e  S t re n g t h  Co n s t a n t
f
c m 28
 = f'
c
 +  1 , 1 6 0  = 5 , 1 6 0 p s i
f'
c
 = 4 , 0 0 0 p s i
?
RH
(h ) = -1 . 5 5 [1 -(h / h
o
)
3
] fo r 0 .4  ?  h  ?  0 .9 9 ?
s1
-1 . 0 1 8
h  = 0 . 7 0   A v g  RH
h
o
 = 1   RH  Co n s t a n t
?
s1
 = (3 . 5 f
c m o
/f
c m 28
)
0. 1 
?  1 .0   ?  0 . 9 9 8 3 4
0 .9 9 ?
s1
 = 0 . 9 8 8
?
ds
(t -t
c
) = 0 . 2 6 0
V / S  = 7 . 5 i n .       V o l . / S u rfa c e  Ra t i o
(V / S )
o
 = 2 i n .       V o l . / S u rfa c e  Co n s t a n t
t  = 365 d a y s Co n c re t e  A g e
t
c
 = 7 d a y s Co n c re t e  A g e  a t  t h e  S t a rt  o f D ry i n g
(t -t
c
) = 358 d a y s      D u ra t i o n  o f D ry i n g
t
1
 = 1 d a y     T i m e  Co n s t a n t
?
cas
(t ) = ?
c a s o
(f
c m 28
)?
as
(t ) = -5 . 7 9 E-0 5    A u to g e n o u s  S h r i n k a g e
?
c a s o
(f
c m 28
) = -?
as
[(f
c m 28
/f
c m o
)/ (6 + f
c m 28
/f
c m o
)]
2. 5
 x 1 0 -6  = -5 . 9 2 E -0 5
?
as
 = 700   A CI 2 0 9 . 2 R T a b l e  A . 1 1
f
c m o
 = 1 , 4 5 0 p s i       Co n c re t e  S t re n g t h  Co n s t a n t
f
c m 28
 = f'
c
 +  1 , 1 6 0  = 5 , 1 6 0 p s i
f'
c
 = 4 , 0 0 0 p s i
?
as
(t ) = 1 -e x p [-0 . 2 (t / t
1
)
0. 5
] = 0 . 9 7 8
t  = 3 6 5 . 0 0 d a y s    Co n c re t e  A g e
t
1
 = 1 d a y      T i m e  Co n s t a n t
?
sh
(t , t
c
) = ?
cas
(t ) +  ?
c ds
(t , t
c
) = -1 . 7 2 E-0 4
  To ta l  S h r i n k a g e
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
??
?
5.0
1
2
1
/)(])//()/[(350
/)(
tttSVSV
ttt
co
c
 
 
260 
 
C r e e p (CE B M C9 0 -9 9 )
?
28
(t , t
o
) = ?
o
?
c
(t -t
o
) = 2 . 1 0 8
?
o
 = ?
RH
(h )? (f
c m 28
)? (t
o
) = 3 . 0 1 7
?
RH
(h ) = 1 . 4 0 7
h  = 0 . 7 0   A v g  RH
h
o
 = 1   RH  Co n s t a n t
V / S  = 7 . 5 i n .       V o l / S u rfa c e  Ra t i o
(V / S )
o
 = 2 i n .       V o l . / S u rfa c e  Co n s t a n t
?
1
 = (3 . 5 f
c m o
/f
c m 28
)
0. 7
 = 0 . 9 8 8
?
2
 = (3 . 5 f
c m o
/f
c m 28
)
0. 2
 = 0 . 9 9 7
f
c m o
 = 1 , 4 5 0 p s i       Co n c re t e  S t re n g t h  Co n s t a n t
f
c m 28
 = f'
c
 +  1 1 6 0  = 5 , 1 6 0 p s i
f'
c
 = 4 , 0 0 0 p s i
? (f
c m 28
) = 5 . 3 / S Q RT (f
c m 28
/f
c m o
) = 2 . 8 1 0
? (t
o
) = 1 / [0 . 1 + (t
o
/t
1
)
0. 2
] = 0 . 7 6 4
t
1
 = 1 d a y
t
o
 = t
o, T
({ 9 / [2 + (t
o, T
/t
1, T
)
1. 2
]} + 1 )
?
 = 2 . 5 9 0 d a y s
?  = 0   N o rm a l  Co n c re t e
t
o, T
 = 2 . 5 9 d a y
t
1, T
 = 1 d a y
?
c
(t -t
o
) = 0 . 6 9 8 7
t  = 365 d a y s Co n c re t e  A g e
(t -t
o
) = 362 d a y s D u ra t i o n  o f L o a d i n g
? (h ) = 1 5 0 [1 + 1 . 2 h / h
o
)
18
](V / S )/ (V / S )
o
+ 2 5 0 ?
3
? 1 5 0 0 ?
3    
? 8 3 4 . 8 1 9
?
3
 = 0 . 9 9 2
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
? ?
?
21
3
])//()/[(1.0
/1
1 ??
o
SVSV
hoh
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
??
?
3.0
1
1
/)(
/)(
ttt
ttt
oh
o
?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
261 
 
Temperature and Shrinkage Analysis 
M o d i f i e d  G i l b e r t (1 9 9 2 ) A n a l y s i s
I n p u t
f
y
 = 6 0 , 0 0 0 p s i
f'
c
 = 5 , 2 0 0 p s i
f
t
 = 1 . 7 (f' c )
2/ 3
 =
510 p s i
d
b
 = 0 . 5 i n .
L  = 48 ft             = 576 i n .
A
c
 = 1 , 4 4 0 i n .
2
A
s
 = 7 . 1 2 9 i n .
2
(Re i n fo rc e m e n t  a t  b o t h  fa c e s )
?  =  A
c
/A
s
 = 0 . 0 0 5 0
E
c
 = 4 , 1 1 0 , 3 2 8 p s i
E
s
 = 2 9 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 p s i
n  = E
s
/E
c
 = 7 . 0 6
?  = 0 . 0 6 i n .
F i r s t C r a c k i n g
s
o
 = d
b
/ 1 0 ?  = 1 0 . 1 i n .              = 0 . 8 4 ft
N
cr
 = [3 ? E
s
(1 + ? n )-3 L f
t
n + 2 s
o
f
t
n ]A
c
A
s
/ [2 s
o
nA
s
-3 L n A
s
-2 s
o
(1 + ? n )A
c
]
= 8 2 , 1 6 4 l b s
?
s2
 = N
cr
/A
s
 = 1 1 , 5 2 5 p s i
?
s1
 = (-2 ?
s2
s
o
-3 ? E
s
)/ (3 L -2 s
o
) = -3 , 0 9 0 p s i
?
c1
 = (N
cr
/A
c
)-?
s1
?  = 72 p s i
F i n a l  C r a c k i n g
? *  = 2 . 1 1   (Cre e p  Co e ffi c i e n t ) (A CI 2 0 9 )
E*
e
 = E
c
/ (1 + ? ) = 1 , 3 2 2 , 3 6 7 p s i
?*
sh
 = -5 . 9 4 E -0 4 i n . / i n .   (T h e rm .  S h ri n k .  +  A CI 2 0 9  D ry i n g  S h ri n k . )
?
av
 = (?
c1
 +  f
t
)/ 2  = 291 p s i
n *  = E
s
/E*
e
 = 22
[4 s
o
2
f
t
A
c
]m
2
 +  [-6 L f
t
A
c
s
o
+ 6 ? E
s
A
s
s
o
+ 6 L s
o
A
s
E
s
(?
av
/E*
e
+ ? *
sh
)]m  +  [-9 L ? E
s
A
s
-9 L
2
A
s
E
s
(?
av
/E*
e
+ ? *
sh
)]
0  = 3 . 0 0 E + 0 8 m
2
      + -2 . 7 6 E + 1 0 m          + 1 . 6 8 E + 1 1
m  = 8 5 . 5 5 , 6 . 5 7
m  = 6 . 5 7
s  = L / m  = 8 7 . 7 in .         ? 7 . 3 1 ft
N( ?)  = [-3 ? E
s
A
s
-A
s
E
s
(3 L -2 m s
o
)(?
av
/E*
e
+ ? *
sh
)] = 6 5 7 , 5 6 4 l b s
?*
s2
 = N (? )/ A
s
 = 9 2 , 2 3 3 p s i S TE EL  Y I EL D S !!
?*
s1
 = (-2 s
o
m ? *
s2
-3 ? E
s
)/ (3 L -2 s
o
m ) = -1 0 , 8 2 8 p s i
?*
c1
 = [N (? )- ?*
s1
A
s
]/ A
c
 = 510 p s i
w  = { -(? *
c1
/E*
e
)[L -(2 / 3 )m s
o
]-? *
sh
L -? } /m  = 0 . 0 1 2 i n .
 
262 
 
U s e  i f  S te e l  Y i e l d s
N( ?)  = A s f y  = 4 2 7 , 7 6 1 l b s
?* s1  = (n * ?f sy  +  ? * sh E s )/ (1 + n * ? ) = -9 , 6 5 4 p s i
?* s2  = f y  = 6 0 , 0 0 0 p s i
?* c1  = (f y A s  - ?* s1 A s )/ A c  = 345 p s i
w  = [- 3 ? * s1 L -2 (f y -? * s1 )- 3 ? E s ]/ 3 E s  = 0 . 1 2 i n . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
263 
 
Table B-2: Results for Temperature and Shrinkage Reinforcement Analysis 
?
=
-5
.
9
4
E
-4
?
*
=
2
.
1
1
J
o
i
n
t
 
S
p
a
c
i
n
g
A
s
,
r
e
q
d
 
(i
n
.
2
)
?
?
av
(p
s
i
)
?
*
c1
(p
s
i
)
?
*
s2
(p
s
i
)
?
*
s1
(p
s
i
)
?
c1
(p
s
i
)
?
s2
(p
s
i
)
?
s1
(p
s
i
)
C
ra
c
k
 
S
p
a
c
i
n
g
 
(ft
)
C
ra
c
k
 
W
i
d
t
h
 
(i
n
.
)
N
o
.
 
C
ra
c
k
s
?
 
(i
n
.
)
3H
6
.
4
7
0
0
.
0
0
4
5
263
510
1
0
2
,
1
1
4
-1
1
,
4
4
3
16
0
-3
,
6
3
5
8
.
8
8
0
.
0
1
2
2
.
7
0
.
0
3
5
2
4H
6
.
4
8
5
0
.
0
0
4
5
263
510
1
0
1
,
8
6
5
-1
1
,
4
4
4
16
0
-3
,
5
9
1
8
.
8
2
0
.
0
1
2
3
.
6
0
.
0
4
6
6
5H
6
.
8
5
2
0
.
0
0
4
8
277
510
9
6
,
0
9
1
-1
1
,
1
4
6
43
5
,
8
2
1
-3
,
2
9
4
7
.
8
4
0
.
0
1
2
5
.
1
0
.
0
5
2
3
6H
7
.
1
2
9
0
.
0
0
5
0
291
510
9
2
,
2
3
4
-1
0
,
8
2
8
72
1
1
,
5
2
5
-3
,
0
9
0
7
.
3
1
0
.
0
1
2
6
.
6
0
.
0
5
8
0
7H
7
.
0
6
7
0
.
0
0
4
9
289
510
9
3
,
0
9
5
-1
0
,
8
8
2
67
1
0
,
6
1
7
-3
,
1
2
4
7
.
4
5
0
.
0
1
2
7
.
5
0
.
0
6
9
2
f'
c
 
=
 
5
,
2
0
0
 
p
s
i
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
 
J
 
(w
=
0
.
0
1
2
 
i
n
.
)
 
264 
 
Table B-3: Results for Figure 4-7 
 
?
=
-
5
.9
4
E
-
4
?
*
=
2
.1
1
J
o
i
n
t
 Spa
c
i
n
g
A
s
,
r
e
q
d
 (
i
n
.
2
)
?
?
av
(
p
s
i
)
?
*
c1
(
p
s
i
)
?
*
s2
(
p
s
i
)
?
*
s1
(
p
s
i
)
?
c1
(
p
s
i
)
?
s2
(
p
s
i
)
?
s1
(
p
s
i
)
C
r
a
c
k
 Spa
c
i
n
g
 (
f
t
)
C
r
a
c
k
 W
i
d
t
h
 (
i
n
.)
N
o
. 
C
r
a
c
k
s
?
 (
i
n
.)
3H
9
.8
4
0
0
.0
0
6
8
444
510
6
7
,1
8
7
-
7
,4
8
1
378
5
4
,3
2
1
-
9
3
6
4
.0
6
0
.0
1
2
5
.9
0
.0
0
0
0
3H
8
.9
9
9
0
.0
0
6
2
391
510
7
3
,0
0
1
-
8
,6
5
2
271
4
1
,6
5
7
-
1
6
8
9
4
.6
7
0
.0
1
2
5
.1
0
.0
0
8
8
3H
8
.1
6
8
0
.0
0
5
7
341
510
8
0
,2
1
1
-
9
,7
4
0
172
2
7
,8
5
9
-
2
3
8
9
5
.5
3
0
.0
1
2
4
.3
0
.0
1
7
6
3H
7
.3
2
2
0
.0
0
5
1
296
510
8
9
,6
2
0
-
1
0
,7
2
6
82
1
3
,0
3
6
-
3
0
2
4
6
.7
9
0
.0
1
2
3
.5
0
.0
2
6
4
3H
6
.4
7
0
0
.0
0
4
5
263
510
1
0
2
,1
1
4
-
1
1
,4
4
3
16
0
-
3
6
3
5
8
.8
8
0
.0
1
2
2
.7
0
.0
3
5
2
C
U
L
V
E
R
T
 J
 (
w
=
0
.0
1
2
 i
n
.)
f
c
 =
 5
,2
0
0
 p
s
i