Title:
Load Rating Reinforced Concrete Bridges without Plans: State-of-the-Practice
Author(s):
Rémy D. Lequesne and William N. Collins
Publication:
Symposium Paper
Volume:
342
Issue:
Appears on pages(s):
80-97
Keywords:
load rating, concrete, bridge, bridge with unknown details, NDE
DOI:
10.14359/51725938
Date:
6/1/2020
Abstract:
In response to Federal Highway Administration requirements, several states are in the process of ensuring all bridges within their inventories are load rated. A challenging aspect of this effort is load rating reinforced concrete bridges that have no structural plans when there are thousands of such structures within a state inventory. To inform these efforts, the literature was reviewed to identify existing methodologies and a survey was distributed to engineers
at state departments of transportation throughout the United States to understand how practicing engineers approach this problem. The survey responses show there are numerous bridges in the U.S. without plans; over 25000 bridges without plans are located in the 18 states that provided responses. Concrete structures comprise 70% of such bridges. To load rate concrete bridges without plans, most responding states report primarily using engineering judgement,
which may include reference to performance under existing traffic, era-specific design traffic loads, assumed material properties and reinforcement quantities, or data collected using load tests or non-destructive evaluation. Several methodologies are described and advantages/limitations of each are discussed.
Related References:
1. Lequesne, R. D. and Collins, W. N. (2019). Synthesis of Rating Methodologies for Concrete Bridges without Plans, University of Kansas Center for Research, Lawrence, Kansas.
2. AASHTO (2011, revised 2016). The Manual for Bridge Evaluation, 2nd Edition (with amendments and changes through Interim Amendment 5), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington D.C., 821 pp.
3. Stewart, M. G. and Val, D. V. (1999). Role of Load History in Reliability-Based Decision Analysis of Aging Bridges, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 125(7), 776-783.
4. Wang, N., Ellingwood, B. R., and Zureick, A.-H. (2011). Bridge Rating Using System Reliability Assessment. II: Improvements to Bridge Rating Practices, ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, 16(6), 863-871.
5. Nowak, A. S. (1999). Calibration of LRFD Bridge Design Code, NCHRP Rep. 368, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 218 pp.
6. Akgul, F. and Frangopol, D. M. (2005). Lifetime Performance Analysis of Existing Reinforced Concrete Bridges. I: Theory, ASCE Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 11(2), 122-128.
7. Akgul, F. and Frangopol, D. M. (2005). Lifetime Performance Analysis of Existing Reinforced Concrete Bridges. II: Application, ASCE Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 11(2), 129-141.
8. Vejdirektoratet (2004). Beregningsregler for Palidelighedsbaseret Klassificering for Eksistende Broer (In Danish: Guideline for Reliability Based Classification of the Load Carrying Capacity of Existing Bridges).
9. O’Connor, A. and Enevoldsen, I. (2008). Probability Based Modelling and Assessment of an Existing Post-Tensioned Concrete Slab Bridge, Engineering Structures, 30, 1408-1416.
10. State of Illinois (2017). Structural Services Manual, Illinois Department of Transportation, 507 pp.
11. State of Oregon (2018). ODOT LRFR Manual, Oregon Department of Transportation, 739 pp.
12. Washington State (2019). Washington State Bridge Inspection Manual M 36-64.09, Washington State Department of Transportation, 408 pp.
13. FHWA (2019). National Bridge Inventory (NBI). https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbi.cfm
14. Catbas, F. N., Ciloglu, S. K., and Aktan, A. E. (2005). Strategies for Load Rating of Infrastructure Populations: A Case Study on T-Beam Bridges, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 1(3), 47 pp.
15. Cattan, J. and Mohammadi, J. (1997). Analysis of Bridge Condition Rating Data Using Neural Networks, Microcomputers in Civil Engineering, 12, 419-429.
16. Harris, D. K., Ozbulut, O., Alipour, M., Kassner, B. L., and Usmani, S. (2015). Implications of Load Rating Bridges in Virginia with Limited Design of As-Built Details, Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Structural Health Monitoring of Intelligent Infrastructure, 10 pp.
17. Alipour, M., Harris, D. K., Barnes, L. E., Ozbulut, O. E., and Carroll, J. (2017). Load-Capacity Rating of Bridge Populations through Machine Learning: Applications of Decision Trees and Random Forests, ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, 22(10), 12 pp.
18. Foden, A. J. and Van Brunt, Z. J. (2018). Load Testing: Not Just for the Big Bad Bridges, American Concrete Institute Fall Convention, Salt Lake City, UT, March 26.
19. ACI Committee 228 (2013). Report on Nondestructive Test Methods for Evaluation of Concrete in Structures, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 82 pp.
20. Saraf, V., Sokolik, A. F., and Nowak, A. S. (1996). Proof Load Testing of Highway Bridges, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1541, 51-57.
21. Wang, N., O’Malley, C., Ellingwood, B. R., and Zureick, A.-H. (2011). Bridge Rating Using System Reliability Assessment. I: Assessment and Verification by Load Testing, ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, 16(6), 854-862.
22. Faber, M. H., Val, D. V., and Stewart, M. G. (2000). Proof Load Testing for Bridge Assessment and Upgrading, Engineering Structures, 22, 1677-1689.
23. Fu, G. and Tang, J. (1995). Risk-Based Proof-Load Requirements for Bridge Evaluation, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 121(3), 542-556.
24. Lantsoght, E. O. L., ver der Veen, C., de Boer, A., and Hordijk, D. A. (2017). State-of-the-Art on Load Testing of Concrete Bridges, Engineering Structures, 150, 231-241.
25. Casas, J. R. and Gomez, J. D. (2013). Load Rating of Highway Bridges by Proof-Loading, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(3), 556-567.
26. Cai, C. S. and Shahawy, M. (2003). Understanding Capacity Rating of Bridges from Load Tests, ASCE Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, 8(4), 209-216.
27. Chajes, M. J., Mertz, D. R., and Commander, B. (1997). Experimental Load Rating of a Posted Bridge, ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering, 2(1), 1-10.
28. Saraf, V. K. (1998). Evaluation of Existing RC Slab Bridges, ASCE Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 12(1), 20-24.
29. Chajes, M. J., Shenton III, H. W., and O’Shea, D. (2000). Bridge-Condition Assessment and Load Rating Using Nondestructive Evaluation Methods, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1696, 83-9123.
30. Jeffrey, A., Brena, S. F., and Civjan, S. A. (2009). Evaluation of Bridge Performance and Rating through Non-Destructive Load Testing, University of Massachusetts Amherst Report No. 2009-1, 271 pp.
31. Phares, B., Wipf, T., Klaiber, F. W., Abu-Hawash, A., and Neubauer, S. (2005). Implementation of Physical Testing for Typical Bridge Load and Superload Rating, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 159-16723.
32. Shenton III, H. W., Chajes, M. J., and Huang, J. (2007). Load Rating of Bridges without Plans, Delaware Center for Transportation, 66 pp.
33. Thompson, E. (1999). Evaluation of the Load Carrying Capacity of Bridges without Plans Using Field Test Results, M.S. Thesis, University of Delaware.
34. Chowdhury, M. R. and Ray, J. C. (2003). Accelerometers for Bridge Load Testing, Non-Destructive Testing and Evaluation International, 36, 237-244.
35. Law, S. S., Ward, H. S., Shi, G. B., Chen, R. Z., Waldron, P., and Taylor, C. (1995). Dynamic Assessment of Bridge Load-Carrying Capacities. II, ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering, 121(3), 488-495.
36. Khalil, A., Greimann, L., Wipf, T. J., and Wood, D. (1998). Modal Testing for Nondestructive Evaluation of Bridges: Issues, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 109-11223.
37. Bagheri, A., Alipour, M., Ozbulut, O. E., and Harris, D. K. (2018). A Nondestructive Method for Load Rating of Bridges without Structural Properties and Plans, Engineering Structures, 171, 545-556.