Precast Piles for Route 40 Bridge

in Virginia Using Concrete Filled

FRP Tubes
Amir Fam, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
Queens University
Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Miguel Pando, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Puerto Rico
Mayaguez Campus
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico

George Filz, Ph.D., P.E.

Associate Professor
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University
Blacksburg, Virginia

Sami Rizkalla, Ph.D.

Distinguished Professor of Civil
Engineering and Construction
and
Director of the Constructed Facilities
Laboratory
Civil Engineering Department
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, North Carolina
2

This paper summarizes the construction details

and findings of laboratory and field tests of a new
generation of precast composite piles used for the
first time in the construction of the Route 40
highway bridge over the Nottoway River in
Virginia. The piles consisted of 24.6 in. (625 mm)
diameter concrete-filled glass fiber reinforced
polymer (GFRP) circular tubes, with a 0.21 in. (5.3
mm) wall thickness. The composite piles extended
above the ground level and were directly
embedded into the reinforced concrete cap beam
supporting the superstructure. Laboratory tests
included two full-scale composite piles loaded to
failure using four-point bending configuration.
Field testing included a full-scale precast
composite pile and a conventional 20 in. (508
mm) square concrete pile prestressed with
fourteen 1/2 in. (12.7 mm) diameter strands. This
paper presents details of the construction and
driving of the piles, comparisons between the
behavior of the composite and prestressed
concrete piles under axial and lateral loading, the
observed failure modes, and the details of the
connection between the piles and the reinforced
concrete cap beam.

iles used for bridge foundations are typically produced using traditional materials such as concrete,
steel, and timber. In recent years, high repair and replacement costs have led North American highway agencies and researchers to investigate the feasibility of using
fiber-composite materials for transportation and civil engineering infrastructure, including pile foundations for

PCI JOURNAL

Fig. 1. Location of
the Route 40 Bridge
(Structure No. 1006)
in Sussex County,
Virginia.

bridges in corrosive environments.1,2

For most projects, high quality conventional precast, prestressed concrete
piles will continue to be the preferred
solution for deep bridge foundations;
but for piling exposed to high-corrosive environments, the precast FRP
composite piles described in this paper
may provide better durability.
A number of commercial products
known as composite piles have recently become available for structural
applications. The term composite
piles refers to piles composed of fiber
reinforced polymers (FRP), recycled
plastics, or hybrid materials. This
paper focuses on precast concretefilled tubular FRP piles, where the
FRP tube serves as permanent
lightweight non-corrosive formwork
and a reinforcement element for concrete.
The FRP tube is composed of several layers of fibers embedded in a
polymeric resin. The layers of fibers
are oriented in different directions
with respect to the longitudinal axis of
the tube in order to provide strength
and stiffness in both the axial and circumferential directions. The circumferential stiffness and strength of the
FRP tube provides confinement to the
concrete core under axial stresses,
which increases the strength and ductility of the pile, while the strength and
stiffness of the tube in the axial direction contributes to the flexural strength
of the pile.
During the relatively brief history of
composite pile use, applications have
been limited mainly to marine fender
piles, loadbearing piles for light strucMay-June 2003

Fig. 2. The old Route 40 Bridge over the Nottoway River in Virginia.

tures, and demonstration projects. 2

Composite piles have not yet gained
wide acceptance in practice primarily
because of the lack of a long track
record of performance and higher initial cost. However, appropriately designed precast FRP composite piles
can result in longer service life, significantly improved durability in harsh
environments, and substantially reduced life-cycle costs.
The short-term structural behavior of
concrete-filled tubular FRP piles, under
axial and flexural loading, has been
studied by several researchers.3-6 The
geotechnical behavior of these piles has
also been investigated.7-9 While these
structural and geotechnical studies have
advanced the state of knowledge about
the behavior of composite piles, field
applications of composite piles in
bridges are limited. This paper describes the application of composite

piles in the new Route 40 Bridge in

Virginia, which is the first bridge
known to the authors to utilize composite piles in its foundation pier.

BACKGROUND AND
BRIDGE DESCRIPTION
The following sections provide a detailed description of the old Route 40
Bridge in Virginia as well as the new
bridge. Details of the prestressed concrete piles as well as the new composite piles used in the new bridge are
also provided.
The Old Bridge
In 1998, the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) decided to replace the existing Route 40 Bridge
(Structure No. 1006) over the Nottoway River in Sussex County, Vir3

Map cracking in beams

Vertical cracks in columns

Spalling and cracking of

bearing seats

Fig. 3. Deterioration of the substructure of the old Route 40 Bridge.

Fig. 4. Schematic of the four piers of the new Route 40 Bridge.

ginia, which was built in the early

1930s. Fig. 1 shows the location of the
bridge. The old bridge, which consisted of a steel truss supported by
concrete piers, as shown in Fig. 2, suffered from excessive deterioration in
both the superstructure and substructure.
Deterioration included full height
vertical cracks in the concrete
columns of the piers, spalling and
cracking of the concrete bearing seats,
and map cracking, up to 1/16 in. (1.6
mm) in width, in the abutment bearing
seats (see Fig. 3).
In addition to the deterioration of
4

the substructure, excessive corrosion

with large section losses was observed
in the roller bearing devices of the
truss supports. Additionally, the floor
beams suffered from section losses up
to 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) in both the web and
bottom flanges. The bridge was functionally obsolete with a roadway
clearance of only 24 ft (7.3 m) curbto-curb and was rated as scour critical.
The New Bridge
The new bridge, which is 280 ft
(85.3 m) long and 50 ft (15.2 m) wide,
has a five-span slab-type superstruc-

ture supported by four piers and two

end abutments, as shown in Fig. 4.
Each pier consists of a reinforced concrete beam-type elevated pile cap supported by ten piles. Based on the design requirements, the VDOT
specified a 20 in. (508 mm) prestressed solid square pile, as shown in
Fig. 5(a). The design axial load of
each pile was 150 kips (667 kN).
As a part of an ongoing study sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the VDOT took the
initiative to use an alternative composite pile system, consisting of concretefilled FRP tubes, for the entire group of
piles supporting Pier No. 2 (see Fig. 4).
The objectives of the VDOT initiative were to examine the feasibility of
using composite piles for bridge substructures (particularly their drivability
using conventional pile drivers), performance under axial and lateral loading conditions using full-scale field
tests, and comparison to conventional
prestressed concrete piles. The following sections provide a brief description
of both the conventional prestressed
piles and the precast composite piles.
Prestressed Concrete Piles
Details of the 20 in. (508 mm)
square prestressed concrete piles specified for the superstructure supports
are shown in Fig. 5(a). Each pile is
prestressed using a total of fourteen 1/2
in. (12.7 mm) diameter seven-wire
strands of 270 ksi (1861 MPa) ultiPCI JOURNAL

mate strength, pretensioned to produce

a prestress level of 0.809 ksi (5.6
MPa) in accordance with VDOT standards. The piles are 43 ft (13.1 m)
long. The specified concrete compressive strength at 28 days is 5.8 ksi (40
MPa). The ties consist of No. 5 gauge
spiral wire.
(a) Prestressed concrete pile

Precast Composite Piles

The composite piles used in this
project consist of concrete-filled circular glass FRP (GFRP) tubes. The
GFRP tube is fabricated using the filament-winding technique, where Eglass continuous fiber rovings are impregnated with polyester resin and
wound over a rotating steel mandrel,
following a predetermined winding
pattern. The fiber volume fraction of
the tube is 51 percent. Fig. 5(b) provides details of the composite pile.
The GFRP tube has an outer diameter of 24.6 in. (625 mm) and a total
wall thickness of 0.263 in. (6.68 mm).
The tube has a 0.05 in. (1.27 mm)
thick liner at the inner surface, which
results in a net structural wall thickness of 0.213 in. (5.41 mm).
The wall structure of the tube consists of three layers. The inner and
outer layers are each 0.074 in. (1.88
mm) thick, and they contain layers of
fibers oriented at 34 degrees with respect to the longitudinal axis of the
tube. The middle layer, which is sandwiched between the inner and outer
layers is 0.065 in. (1.65 mm) thick and
contains fibers oriented at 85 degrees
with respect to the longitudinal axis.
The GFRP tubes are filled with a
concrete mix that includes an expansive additive to reduce the effect of
shrinkage and therefore improve the
bond between the concrete and the
GFRP tube. It should be noted, however, that concrete shrinkage in closed
forms is significantly less than conventional concrete members.10 The specified compressive strength of the concrete fill at 28 days is 6 ksi (41.4 MPa).
The mechanical properties of the
GFRP tubes are provided in Table 1.

LABORATORY TESTING OF
THE COMPOSITE PILES
Prior to construction of the bridge, a
comprehensive experimental study was
May-June 2003

(b) Composite pile

Fig. 5. Details of piling: (a) Prestressed concrete pile; (b) Composite pile.

Table 1. Mechanical properties of composite GFRP tube.

Mechanical property
Tensile strength (ksi)
Compressive strength (ksi)
Elastic modulus (ksi)
Poissons ratio

Axial direction
30.0
15.1
2196*
2199
0.32
31.6*

36.2
2404

Hoop direction
51.2
N/A
2567
0.34

* Coupon test.13
Manufacturer.
Lamination theory.
Note: 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa.

Fig. 6. Test setup for laboratory bending tests of the composite piles.

conducted to study the structural behavior of concrete-filled FRP tubes.3-6

The behavior of the composite piles
was investigated using full-scale laboratory testing, in which the flexural
stiffness, strength, and failure mode of
the composite piles were determined.

Test Setup and Instrumentation

Two full-scale specimens with
GFRP tubes identical to those proposed for the composite piles of the
Route 40 Bridge were tested in bending under four-point loads. The tubes
5

about 0.37 in. (9.4 mm). Both laboratory test specimens exhibited flexural
tension failure by rupture of the fibers
on the tension side, as shown in Fig.
8(a). Despite the brittle nature of rupture of the FRP tube, the specimen remained intact and was able to support
the dead weight after failure, as shown
in Fig. 6.
Fig. 8(b) shows the cross section of
the specimen at the failure location
after removal of the FRP shell. The
compression zone of the concrete core
could be distinguished from the
cracked zone of the section by examining the texture of the cross section.
The measured depth of the compression zone was about 6 in. (152 mm).

Fig. 7. Moment-curvature responses of both the composite and prestressed concrete piles.

Compression zone
6 in.

Tension (cracked)
zone

(a) Tension failure by rupture of FRP tube

(b) Cross section at failure location

Fig. 8. Flexural tension failure of the composite pile.

were filled with 4.8 ksi (33 MPa) concrete at Lafarge Canada, in Winnipeg,
Manitoba, using the same procedure
specified for casting the composite
piles for the bridge. The span of the
test specimen was 16.4 ft (5.0 m), and
the distance between the two applied
loads was 4.9 ft (1.5 m).
Fig. 6 shows the test setup of the
specimens in bending. The tests were
conducted using stroke control with a
rate of loading of 0.05 in. per minute
(1.3 mm/min). The specimens were
instrumented to measure the midspan
deflection, the extreme fiber strains at
the tension and compression sides
within the constant moment zone, and
the relative slip between the concrete
core and FRP tube at the ends.
6

Test Results and Failure Mode

The measured moment-curvature
behavior of the composite piles for the
two identical specimens is shown in
Fig. 7. The average ultimate moment
capacity of the composite piles is 370
kip-ft (502 kN-m). The cracking moment, 93 kip-ft (126.1 kN-m), is relatively small compared to the ultimate
moment. Since the composite piles
were tested under stroke control, the
behavior shows vertical drops in the
moment when cracks occurred, and
the behavior after first cracking was
almost linear.
At the end of the test, the total slip
measured between the concrete core
and the FRP tube at each end was

Material Testing
To validate the manufacturers data,
the mechanical properties of the composite tubes were measured using
coupon tests and calculated using classical lamination theory. Strips, 1 in.
wide x 30 in. long (25 x 762 mm),
were cut from the tube in the longitudinal direction.
Since the stress concentration at the
gripping location can severely influence the strength of FRP coupons, the
two ends of the GFRP strip were inserted inside hollow steel tubes, 1 ft
(305 mm) long each, and epoxy resin
was used to fill the steel tubes. The
clear length of the GFRP coupon between the two steel tubes was 6 in.
(152 mm).
After curing of the epoxy, the
coupons were tested in tension, where
the gripping was applied to the steel
tubes. Fig. 9 shows the coupons after
tension failure and a typical stressstrain curve for a GFRP coupon compared to the stress-strain curve obtained from classical lamination
theory11 and the manufacturers data.
Table 1 provides a summary of the mechanical properties of the GFRP tube.
Comparison Between Behavior of
Composite and Prestressed
Concrete Piles
The moment-curvature behavior of
the prestressed concrete piles was predicted analytically using the concept
of equilibrium and strain compatibility. A modified Ramberg-Osgood
PCI JOURNAL

function was used to model the stressstrain relationship of the prestressing

steel strands. A generalized expression, given by Popovics, was used to
model the nonlinear stress-strain relationship of concrete.12 The momentcurvature response based on the analysis of the prestressed concrete pile is
shown in Fig. 7. The response was terminated when the compressive strain
in the concrete reached 0.003.
For the concrete-filled GFRP tube,
the moment-curvature behavior was
also predicted using an equilibrium
and strain compatibility approach. The
cross section was divided into horizontal layers to account for the circular geometry of the concrete and the
GFRP tube, which forms continuous
reinforcement around the concrete. A
linear stress-strain relationship of the
GFRP composite tube, based on the
linear regression of the experimental
results shown in Fig. 9, was used. The
forces in both the concrete and the
FRP tube were obtained by numerical
integration.
The forces were then used to calculate the internal moment resistance at
different strain levels, which were
used to generate the predicted moment-curvature response. Details of
the analytical model can be found
elsewhere.13 Fig. 7 shows that the predicted moment-curvature response of
the composite pile agrees well with
the measured response.
Fig. 7 also shows that the flexural
stiffness of the composite pile before
cracking is very similar to that of the
prestressed concrete pile. However,
after cracking, the stiffness of the
composite pile is significantly reduced. This is attributed to the prestressing effect and the lower elastic
modulus of GFRP in comparison to
that of steel strands.
The cracking moment of the composite piles is 40 percent lower than
the prestressed concrete pile due to the
absence of prestressing. However,
cracking of composite piles should not
cause concerns regarding durability,
since the internal steel reinforcement
has been eliminated from this system.
The maximum moment capacities of
the two piles are very similar, despite
the differences in geometry, size, and
materials.
May-June 2003

(a) Tension
failure

(b) Stress-strain curve in the axial direction

Fig. 9. Failure mode and behavior of longitudinal tension coupons tests of the GFRP tube.
Fig. 10.
Fabrication
and handling
of precast
composite
piles.

(a) Pumping concrete into the upper end

(b) Rear end showing wooden plugs

(c) Handling of the pile using eight-point supports

7

Fig. 12. Instrumentation of test piles.

Fig. 11. Fabrication of prestressed concrete pile.

FIELD TESTING OF
COMPOSITE AND
PRESTRESSED PILES

Prestressed
pile

Composite
pile

Fig. 13(a). Driving of composite test pile.

The predicted axial load capacities

of the prestressed and composite piles
are 2071 and 2812 kips (9212 and
12508 kN), respectively. These values
are based on the specified concrete
8

Fig. 13(b). Driving of prestressed test pile.

compressive strengths of the prestressed and composite piles, respectively, as well as the properties of the
steel strands and the GFRP tube.

Prior to installation of the production piles for the new Route 40

Bridge, a test pile program was completed at the bridge site. Axial and lateral loading tests were performed on
two full-scale, 43 ft (13.1 m) long
piles, one a composite pile and the
other a prestressed concrete pile.
Based on the subsurface conditions at
the bridge site, it was anticipated that
the axial load capacity of the pile
would be governed by the geotechnical capacity, i.e., the soil support capacity rather than the axial structural
capacity of the pile.
Fabrication of the Piles
The GFRP tubes were shipped to the
precast plant and were filled with concrete while they were placed in an inclined position and supported by a
steel beam along the full length of the
tubes, as shown in Fig. 10. Wooden

PCI JOURNAL

end plugs were used to seal both ends

of the tube. The plugs were secured in
position using metal straps connected
to both the plug and the composite
tube in radial directions, as shown in
Fig. 10(b).
Concrete was pumped into the upper
end through a hole in the wooden
plug. The concrete-filled composite
tubes were handled using eight-point
lifting devices along the length of the
pile, as shown in Fig. 10(c). The prestressed concrete piles were fabricated
at the precast plant in accordance with
VDOT standards, as shown in Fig. 11.
After fabrication and curing, the piles
were shipped to the bridge site.

Table 2. Pile driving measurements for prestressed and composite piles.

Pile type
Measurement
Wave speed
Maximum compressive stress
measured during driving
Maximum tensile stresses
measured during driving
Allowable stresses

Pile Driving
Both the composite and prestressed
test piles were driven using a hydraulic impact hammer, Type ICE
Model 160S, which was also used to
drive the production piles for the
bridge. The ram weight was 16,000
lbs (71.2 kN). A 7.5 in. (190 mm)
thick plywood pile cushion was used
May-June 2003

Composite
11,840 ft/s

2.55 ksi

2.78 ksi

0.7 ksi

0.42 ksi

Tension < 1.02 ksi

Compression < 4.5 ksi

No standards
available

Note: 1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa.

Instrumentation
Both the composite and the prestressed concrete test piles were instrumented with strain gauges in the
axial direction at three levels along the
length of the piles. At each level, two
strain gauges were placed near the two
opposite faces of the pile, as shown in
Fig. 12. The strain gauges were
mounted on 36 in. (914 mm) long No.
4 steel reinforcing bars, which were
embedded inside the concrete core.
Each test pile was also instrumented
with eight lateral motion sensors to
measure the lateral displacement profile of the pile during the lateral load
tests. The sensors were placed inside
PVC tubes embedded inside the test
piles. The locations of the lateral motion sensors are shown in Fig. 12.
To measure the axial stresses during
driving, pairs of special strain gauges
and accelerometers were installed on
the concrete surface of the piles at a
distance of 4 ft (1.2 m) from the top.
For the composite pile, this was
achieved by cutting 5 x 5 in. (127 x
127 mm) portions of the FRP shell in
order to attach the instrumentation to
the concrete surface.

Prestressed
12,150 ft/s

Reaction
mass

Pressure
chamber
Load cell

Composite pile

Laser beam device

during pile driving. Both of the test

piles were driven to a depth of about
33.5 ft (10.2 m). The blow count was
six blows per 1 in. (25.4 mm) of pile
penetration for the composite pile and
four blows per 1 in. (25.4 mm) for the
prestressed concrete pile.
Figs. 13(a) and 13(b) show the composite pile during and after driving, as
well as the prestressed pile during
driving. Table 2 provides some of the
measurements obtained during pile
driving. It can be seen that the wave
speeds, maximum compressive
stresses, and maximum tensile stresses
are each similar in the different pile
types. The measured stress levels are

Fig. 14. Axial load

test using Statnamic
test setup.

lower than the allowable stresses recommended for prestressed piles.14 No

standards are available yet for driving
precast composite piles.
Axial Load Tests
The composite and prestressed piles
were both subjected to axial loads
using the Statnamic Testing System,
as shown in Fig. 14. This system applies the load to the pile by launching
a heavy reaction mass upwards at
close to 20g (twenty times the gravity
acceleration). When the reaction mass
is launched upwards, an equal and opposite reaction force acts on the test
9

Fig. 15. Variation of pile head displacement with equivalent axial static load.

Fig. 16. Axial load versus axial strain behavior of test piles.

Fig. 17. Variation of axial strain levels along depth of pile.

10

pile. The Statnamic load does not have

the impact nature of the hammer blow,
but rather a more gradually increasing
force with a typical duration of 0.2 to
0.3 seconds.
During the Statnamic test, several
measurements are taken, including the
applied load, the pile head displacement using a laser beam device shown
in Fig. 14, and strains. A detailed description of the Statnamic technique
can be found in Brown. 15 Each test
pile was subjected to three loading cycles with increasing the magnitude of
the applied load. The equivalent axial
static load is determined by subtracting the inertia and damping forces
from the total measured force using
the Unloading Point Method (UPM).16
The equivalent static load versus
pile head axial displacement for the
prestressed concrete and composite
piles is shown in Fig. 15 for the three
cycles. The behavior during the last
cycle in both piles shows that the
geotechnical capacity of the piles was
fully mobilized, as evident from the
rapid increase of the pile displacement
near the end of the test. The ultimate
equivalent static loads of the prestressed concrete and composite piles
at failure were 942 and 980 kips (4190
and 4359 kN), respectively. Both piles
exhibited similar axial capacities, even
though their shaft and end areas were
slightly different.
Fig. 16 shows the equivalent axial
static load versus axial strain behavior
of both the composite and prestressed
piles based on the peak load and corresponding strain during each of the
three load cycles. The axial strain is
based on the average strain of the two
uppermost strain gauges (closest to the
loading end), since they measured the
maximum axial strain induced in the
pile.
Fig. 16 shows that the behavior of
the two piles is relatively similar, with
the composite pile being slightly stiffer
than the prestressed pile. The figure
also shows the design load of the piles,
150 kips (667 kN), which is significantly lower than the ultimate load.
The variation of the axial strains
along the length of both the prestressed and composite piles is shown
in Fig. 17. It can be seen that the measured strains along the depth are simiPCI JOURNAL

Composite pile

Reaction
mass

Pressure
chamber
Fig. 18. Lateral load test using Statnamic test setup.

lar in both piles. The figure also shows

that the strain level is reduced as the
depth is increased. This is attributed to
the gradual transfer of axial load from
the pile to the soil through skin friction along the pile shaft.
Lateral Load Tests
Following the axial load tests, lateral load tests were conducted on both
the composite and prestressed piles,
using the Statnamic Testing System
shown in Fig. 18. The loading system
is similar to that used for the axial
load test; however, the setup was
placed horizontally in order to produce
a lateral load. During the Statnamic
test, several measurements were taken,
including the applied load and the lateral displacement of the pile at different depths. Each test pile was subjected to four loading cycles by
increasing the magnitude of load.
The equivalent lateral static load versus the lateral deflection behavior of
the two piles at the loading points is
shown in Fig. 19. The figure shows
that the behavior has a similar momentcurvature response as shown in Fig. 7,
for both the prestressed concrete and
composite piles. For the composite
pile, the sudden change in stiffness at a
lateral load of 11 kips (48.9 kN) reflects the cracking point. For the prestressed pile, the initial stiffness is high
due to the prestressing effect and the
higher elastic modulus of steel.
May-June 2003

Fig. 19. Lateral load versus displacement response of piles using Statnamic test.

Fig. 20. Lateral deflection distribution along length of pile.

11

Fig. 21. Precast composite piles for Pier No. 2 after driving.

Fig. 22. Details of

pile head
showing bars
used to connect
pile to cap beam.

Fig. 20 shows the lateral deflection

distribution along the length of the
pile at the peak load for each of the
four loading cycles, for both the composite and prestressed concrete piles.
The figure indicates that lateral deflections become insignificant at a certain
depth between 15 and 20 ft (4.5 and
6.1 m) measured from the loading
point. The figure also indicates that,
for the last two load cycles, the deflection profile along the depth of the
piles is almost bilinear, with a sudden
12

change in slope occurring at a depth of

about 16 ft (4.8 m), measured from the
loading point. This suggests that, during the last two cycles, failure may
have been initiated in both piles at the
location of the change in slope.

CONSTRUCTION OF THE
NEW ROUTE 40 BRIDGE
Based on the results of the field and
laboratory testing of the composite
and prestressed concrete piles, the

VDOT decided to use the composite

piles in the construction of Pier No. 2
(see Fig. 4) of the new Route 40
Bridge. The pier consists of a reinforced concrete cap beam supported
by ten composite piles.
The composite production piles are
identical to the composite test pile in
terms of size, laminate structure of the
tube, and the methods of construction
and driving. Fig. 10 shows the composite piles during casting and handling, while Fig. 13 shows the pile
driving process. The installed composite piles of Pier No. 2 are shown in
Fig. 21.
After all the piles were driven, and
prior to casting the cap beams, special
preparation of the pile heads was necessary to facilitate connecting the piles
to the cap beams. Eight, 1 in. (25.4
mm) diameter holes were drilled
through the top flat surface of each
pile, using a regular rock drill. The
holes were 18 in. (457 mm) deep, parallel to the longitudinal direction of
the piles.
In the prestressed concrete piles, the
holes were equally spaced in a 13 in.
(330 mm) square pattern, whereas in
the composite pile, the holes were
equally spaced in a 17.6 in. (447 mm)
diameter circular pattern as shown in
Fig. 22. These arrangements allow for
a 3 in. (76 mm) concrete cover for
each hole. Eight, 48 in. (1219 mm)
long, No. 7 steel reinforcing bars were
inserted in the holes, and epoxy resin
was used to secure the bars inside the
concrete. Fig. 22 shows the details of
the pile head and the steel dowels in
both pile types.
The formwork arrangement of the
cap beams were placed such that the
bottom surface of the cap beam is 6 in.
(152 mm) below the upper surfaces of
the piles to allow for embedment of
the piles inside the cap beam. Fig. 23
shows details of Pier No. 2. Fig. 23(b)
shows the No. 7 steel bars, which are
embedded 30 in. (762 mm) inside the
cap beam.
Fig. 24 shows close-up views of Pier
No. 2 and the connection between the
composite pile and cap beam. A general view of the new completed bridge
is shown in Fig. 25. The bridge has
been in operation for over two years.

PCI JOURNAL

Fig. 23. Connection of composite piles to cap beam at Pier No. 2.

Reinforced concrete
cap beam

Fig. 24. Pier No. 2 showing composite piles and reinforced concrete cap beam.

Cost Comparison
The cost of the composite piles including the costs of the GFRP tube,
concrete, casting, and shipping was
$95 per ft. The cost of driving the
composite piles was $20 per ft. This
resulted in a total cost of $115 per ft
for the installed composite pile, in
comparison to a total cost of $65 per ft
for the installed square prestressed
concrete pile. Therefore, the initial
cost comparison indicates about 77
percent higher unit cost for the composite pile. Part of this higher cost
may be due to the fact that composite
piles are not currently produced on a
large-scale basis. Further, current production of composite piles is mostly in

May-June 2003

Precast composite
piles

Fig. 25. The new Route 40 Bridge over the Nottoway River in Virginia.
13

smaller sizes for marine fendering applications.

The higher costs may also be associated with a lack of contractor experience in handling and lifting composite
piles, which require special arrangements and equipment. Nevertheless,
precast composite piles may gain
wider acceptance in the construction
industry when life-cycle costs are considered because annualized maintenance and replacement costs for the
non-corroding composite piles are expected to be less than for conventional
prestressed concrete piles in corrosive
environments.

CONCLUSIONS
Based on the testing and construction experience gathered so far, the
following conclusions can be drawn:
1. The use of concrete-filled FRP
tubes as piling for bridge piers is practical and feasible. The FRP tube
serves as permanent formwork and reinforcement at the same time, eliminating the need for internal reinforcement and temporary formwork.
2. The flexural strength of the 24.6
in. (625 mm) diameter composite pile
with a 0.213 in. (5.4 mm) thick GFRP
tube is similar to the flexural strength
of the 20 in. (508 mm) square concrete
pile prestressed with fourteen, 0.5 in.
(12.7 mm) diameter strands. However,
the stiffness of the composite pile after
first cracking was lower.
3. The composite pile failed in
bending by fracture of the GFRP tube
on the tension side, whereas the prestressed concrete pile failed by yielding of the strands in tension, followed
by crushing of the concrete in compression.
4. Both the composite and prestressed concrete piles performed sim-

14

ilarly during pile driving, as evident

from the measured wave speed generated by the driving hammer and the
measured compressive and tensile
strains.
5. Both the composite and prestressed concrete piles performed similarly under the axial load tests. Full
geotechnical capacity was mobilized
in both cases before structural failure
of the piles. The axial load at failure
was significantly higher than the design pile load.
6. The lateral load field tests on both
the composite and prestressed piles
showed a similar behavior to that obtained from the laboratory flexural test
and analysis.
7. Similar pile-to-cap beam connections were used for the composite and
prestressed concrete piles, including
eight No. 7 steel dowels embedded 18
in. (457 mm) inside the piles from one
end and extending 30 in. (762 mm)
into the cap beam. The piles themselves were embedded 6 in. (152 mm)
inside the cap beam.
8. An initial cost comparison
showed a unit cost for the installed
composite piles 77 percent higher than
for the installed prestressed piles.
However, as production volume increases, and by considering life-cycle
costs of the low-maintenance composite piles, the cost comparison may
shift in favor of composite piles in
corrosive environments.
9. To date, no indications of unsatisfactory performance of the composite
piles of the Route 40 Bridge have
been reported.
Further research is still needed to
examine the following aspects of composite piles:
1. Behavior under combined loading.
2. Methods of improving the bond

between the tube and the concrete

core.
3. Methods for increasing the flexural stiffness, such as prestressing.
4. Shear behavior.
5. Behavior under cyclic loads.
Additional case histories and longterm performance data are needed. Detailed life-cycle cost analyses are also
needed to determine the cost effectiveness of these piles.
The VDOT and FHWA are currently engaged in another composite
pile research project associated with
the new Route 351 Bridge over the
Hampton River in Virginia. This project is a continuation of the composite
pile research of VDOT and sponsored
by FHWA to contribute to the scarce
data available on projects with composite piles. This project is different
from the Route 40 Bridge in the
method used for the field test, where
static load tests are performed using
conventional hydraulic jacks instead
of the Statnamic tests.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors want to acknowledge
the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT), the Virginia
Transportation Research Council
(VTRC), and the Network of Centers
of Excellence, ISIS Canada Program,
for supporting and sponsoring the laboratory and field tests.
The authors would also like to acknowledge Lancaster Composite for
providing the composite tubes and
providing valuable guidance during
the construction of the composite
piles.
The authors are also grateful to the
PCI JOURNAL reviewers for their
constructive comments.

PCI JOURNAL

REFERENCES
1. Lampo, R., Federal Interest Gives Recycled Plastic Lumber a
Leg Up, ASTM Standardization News, 1996, pp. 26-31.
2. Iskander, M., and Hassan, M., State of the Practice Review in
FRP Composite Piling, Journal of Composites for Construction, American Society of Civil Engineers, V. 2, No. 3, 1998,
pp. 116-120.
3. Fam, A. Z., Flisak, B., and Rizkalla, S., Experimental and
Analytical Investigations of Beam-Column Behavior of Concrete-Filled FRP Tubes, ACI Structural Journal, 2002.
4. Fam, A. Z., and Rizkalla, S. H., Confinement Model for Axially Loaded Concrete Confined by FRP Tubes, ACI Structural Journal, V. 98, No. 4, July-August 2001, pp. 251-461.
5. Fam, A. Z., and Rizkalla, S. H., Behavior of Axially Loaded
Concrete-Filled Circular Fiber Reinforced Polymer Tubes,
ACI Structural Journal, V. 98, No. 3, May-June 2001, pp. 280289.
6. Fam, A. Z., and Rizkalla, S. H., Flexural Behavior of Concrete-Filled Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Circular Tubes, Journal of Composites for Construction, American Society of Civil
Engineers, V. 6, No. 2, May 2002, pp. 123-132.
7. Pando, M., Filz, G., Hoppe, E., Ealy, C., and Muchard, M.,
Performance of a Composite Pile in a Full Scale Statnamic
Load Testing Program, Proceedings, 53rd Canadian Geotechnical Conference, V. 1, Montreal, Canada, 2000, pp. 909-916.
8. Pando, M., Filz, G., Dove, J., and Hoppe, E., Interface Shear
Tests on FRP Composite Piles, Proceedings, International
Deep Foundations Congress, American Society of Civil Engineers, Orlando, Florida, February 2002, pp. 1486-1500.
9. Mirmiran, A., Shao, Y., and Shahawy, M., Analysis and Field

May-June 2003

10.

11.

12.
13.

14.

15.

16.

Tests on the Performance of Composite Tubes Under Pile

Driving Impact, Composite Structures, V. 55, No. 2, 2002,
pp. 127-135.
Naguib, W., and Mirmiran, A., Time-Dependent Behavior of
Fiber-Reinforced Polymer-Confined Concrete Columns Under
Axial Loads, ACI Structural Journal, V. 99, No. 2, MarchApril, 2002, pp. 142-148.
Daniel, I. M., and Ishai, O., Engineering Mechanics of Composite Materials, Oxford University Press, New York, NY,
1994.
Collins, M. P., and Mitchell, D., Prestressed Concrete Structures, Response Publications, Toronto, Canada, 1997.
Fam, A. Z., Concrete-Filled Fiber Reinforced Polymer Tubes
for Axial and Flexural Structural Members, Ph.D. Thesis, The
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, 2000,
261 pp.
PCI Committee on Prestressed Concrete Piling, Recommended Practice for Design, Manufacture, and Installation of
Prestressed Concrete Piling, PCI JOURNAL, V. 38, No. 2,
March-April 1993, pp. 14-41.
Brown, D. A., Evaluation of Static Capacity of Deep Foundations From Statnamic Testing, Geotechnical Testing Journal,
American Society for Testing and Materials, V. 17, No. 4,
April 1994, pp. 403-414.
Middendrop, P., Berminghammer, P., and Kuiper, B., Statnamic Load Testing of Foundation Piles, Proceedings, Fourth
International Conference of Applications of Stress-Wave Theory to Piles, The Hague, Netherlands, 1992, pp. 581-588.

15