You are on page 1of 445

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction

or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

.``.``-`-`..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..``.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.``.`.`.``.....`.`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..

``.`.``.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..`.`...`.`..`--- ..`..``-`-`..``.``.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.

. Code: LRFR-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...`.`.``.``.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.`.GUIDE MANUAL FOR CONDITION EVALUATION AND LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING (LRFR) OF HIGHWAY BRIDGES JUNE 2003 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS ISBN: 1-56051-283-0 • Publ.`..``.`--- .`..`..`...

`.``-`-`.`..`.`..`.``.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .GUIDE MANUAL FOR CONDITION EVALUATION AND LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING (LRFR) OF HIGHWAY BRIDGES --`.``...``.``....`..`.

ISBN: 1-56051-283-0 • Publ. Code: LRFR-1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.GUIDE MANUAL FOR CONDITION EVALUATION AND LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING (LRFR) OF HIGHWAY BRIDGES JUNE 2003 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS © Copyright 2003.``.`.``-`-`..`..`.``.`. This book.... may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.`..`--- . All Rights Reserved.``.. by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Printed in the United States of America. or parts thereof.``..

.`.`.`.``-`-`.--`.`.``.`...`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``...``.`..``..

..``-`-`.``.C. Two-Year Term REGION II: REGION III: REGION IV: Nonvoting Members Immediate Past President: James C.`.`. Pennsylvania Regional Representatives: REGION I: --`. Kentucky AASHTO Executive Director: John Horsley. Utah Vice President: J. Pennsylvania.`. Behrens. Puerto Rico..`--- James Byrnes.. D.Two-Year Term Whittington W. Two-Year Term Michael W. Two-Year Term Mark F. Codell. III. Virginia. Njord..EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 2003-2004 Voting Members Officers: President: John R. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT iii . King. Bryan Nicol. One-Year Term Tom Norton. One-Year Term Allen Biehler. One-Year Term Gloria Jeff. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Wandro.`.``. Michigan... One-Year Term Fernando Fagundo. Texas..``. Colorado. Washington.`.`. Iowa.``. Connecticut. Clement.`. Indiana Secretary-Treasurer: Larry M.

DOT. Harry Lee James MISSOURI. Dan Dorgan. Kevin Western MISSISSIPPI.Y. Kenneth F.`. DIST.Scott Christie PUERTO RICO. Nickas GEORGIA. Mpras UTAH. T. Freemon NEVADA.`. William S. Richard Land COLORADO. James Sothen WISCONSIN.. William F. Secretary ALABAMA. David Cogswell NORTHAMPTON. Tan DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. Gregory R. James E. Pratt ARIZONA. Paul Santo IDAHO. Gordon Barton DELAWARE. Goodpaster LOUISIANA. Joseph J.Y. TURNPIKE AUTHORITY.``. Terry Udland OHIO. OREGON. Woods WYOMING. Christian NORTH CAROLINA. Shyam Gupta MONTANA. F. Matthew M. Donald Cooney FLORIDA.. Mark E.. Paul Liles. John Bower NOVA SCOTIA. Bob Ramsey MANITOBA.HIGHWAY SUBCOMMITTEE ON BRIDGES AND STRUCTURES 2002 TOM LULAY. Kazem Farhoumand SOUTH CAROLINA. Gregg C. Dennis O'Shea D.``. Dilip K.``. Jr. Ed Wasserman TEXAS. Morvant MAINE. Hurst. Jamie Cabre RHODE ISLAND. Leonard CONNECTICUT. Tony M. Randy R. Franz U. COMM. David Nazare VERMONT. Farrar ILLINOIS. Camp NEW YORK. William C. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTUREFOREST SERVICE. Jacob Patnaik U. Fullerton NEBRASKA.`. Timothy Keller OKLAHOMA. Ismail Elkholy NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. Brian Summers HAWAII. Mary Lou Ralls U. Perfettie NORTH DAKOTA. Dasmohapatra. George H. William N. Wade Casey MILITARY TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT COMMAND. Robert J. Malcolm T. Vacant SASKATCHEWAN. Keith R. John C. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSPaul C. Capers. STATE BRIDGE AUTHORITY. Dunne NEW MEXICO. Bardow MICHIGAN. Tukey MARYLAND.C. Steve Beck MINNESOTA. John Cole TENNESSEE..S. METRO. R. Nick E. William Moreau PORT AUTHORITY OF N. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Rusch. Phil Brand CALIFORNIA. Conway. Harry A. Alan MacRae. Richard Raczynski N. James McCarthy VIRGINIA. Ralph E. Hervé Bachelu . Kerley WASHINGTON. Lyman D. Robert D. Mary JOHamman IOWA. Hossein Ghara.`. Jimmy D. Federal Highway Administration. U.. Stephen E. Fredrick. Norman L. Mark J.`. Mark Richardson NEW JERSEY. Anderson INDIANA. Nelson Hernandez Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS iv Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.S.. Earle S.. Chairman SANDRA LARSON.`. Loren R.J. Freedman MASSACHUSETTS. Risch KENTUCKY.`--- ALBERTA. Kelly. Pangalinan NEW BRUNSWICK. Jeff Sizemore SOUTH DAKOTA. AND N... David Lenhardt N.``. McDonald KANSAS. R. Richard W. Connor ALASKA. Cannon. NEW HAMPSHIRE. Doug Finney..S. COOPER.S. Vice Chairman JAMES D.`. COAST GUARD.T. Jerry Weigel. Allen WEST VIRGINIA. Mark Pert ONTARIO.. Jr. Joseph Zitelli BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS. Mark A. Hughes NORTHWEST TERRITORIES. Fulton MASS.. Veldo Goins OREGON. Alexander K. Hirota PENNSYLVANIA.``-`-`.J. Richard A. James OConnell. Crawford. Daniel Davis ARKANSAS. George A. Stanley W.

`..``..``.`.ACKNOWLEDGMENT The first edition of any technical publication is especially labor intensive.`... Inc. P.`--- v Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``-`-`..``. --`.E. AASHTO’s Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures gratefully acknowledges the many contributions made in the preparation of this new title by Mr.``... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Bala Sivakumar.`...`.`. and his associates at Lichtenstein Consulting Engineers.

6.4.7.4.2.`.3-1) Section 5 5.2-1 5.2-1) (6.3.2.3b-1 4.4.EDITOR’S NOTE For ease of reading and reference.3.2.``.2.2a-1) (4.1-1 C4.``.2.4.6.1-2 3.5.4. For additional convenience.2.9.10.3.9.4.``.`.2-1 3.2a-1 4.3d-1 (4.3-1) (5. similar materials in Appendix C of Section 6.6.3.1. tables. tables.10.10.3.6.1-1) (8.6.2.`--- 8-1 8-2 8-7 (8-1) (8-7) (8-14) Note: Entire articles 6.2-1) (6.10..9.8.`.2-1 (8.3.3-6) (6.2.10.11..4-2 C6.5-3 6.7.2.``-`-`.2-1) (8.4.2. This numbering system was intended be used in the third edition of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.7.4.5.2-1 6.4-1 C6.3-1 C6.1-4) (5.9-1) (5.2-3) (5.4.6.6.. The AASHTO Publications staff apologizes for the inconvenience and asks that you please refer to the table of LRFD citations below: Object Type Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Equation Equation Equation Table Table Table Table Figure Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation LRFD Section 3 3.3.10.6.1-1) (5.3.7.2.4.2.7.2.4.8.2.2-1) (5. Under this system.3.4.1.2-1) (6. In 3rd Edition. vi Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2. and equation numbers are cited throughout this publication.1.5-2 6.4.4-1 8.10. table.4.6.8.8.3a-1 4.4-1) (5.2.2.2.6.1-2) (5.1.2c-1 4.2.8.2.4.3-1 C5.4.3.3.2.2.3.1.3-3) (5.2.1.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..2.2.3.4.3a-8) (6.1.6.3.4.6.6.2.6.6.2.5.``.10.2b-1 4.3.2-1 3.7-2) Cited Here (5-136) 6-3 6-5 6-6 6-7 6-10 6-1 n/a * n/a * n/a * (6-9) (6-10) (6-14) (6-15) (6-16) (6-20) (6-17) (6-18) (6-54) n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * n/a * --`.6.4.8.2.3.3-5) (6.2.6.7.1-1) (6.3a-6) (6. and equations have been numbered sequentially within each section..10.9.1.6.8. figures.2.1.`.1.3b-1) (6. a point numbering system will be used for any figures.1-1 3.10.9.3a-7) (6..6.2.1.9.3.2.2.9.2.1-1) (5.6.10 and 6.10.1.7.3-4) (6.1-1 4.9.3-4) (5.10.1.10.2.3-1 6.3.3-1 5.1-1 (6.9. Unfortunately.8.1-1) (6.1-1) (6.10.3a-4) (6.3.3a-5) (6.6.9-1) (C5.1-1 5.10.7.4-2 8.1-1 Section 4 4.5-1 6.2-5 (5.4.7.4.2.3b-3) Section 8 8.4. or equations that are added via interim revision.4. rather than by article number.3.4.4.2.11 are being replaced.2d-1 4.5-1) Cited Here 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 4-4 C4-1 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-11 4-12 4-13 (4-16) (4-14) (4-18) 5-2 5-5 5-7 5-12 C5-19 (5-5) (5-8) (5-16) (5-19) (5-25) (5-26) (5-65) (C5-9) (5-66) (5-68) (5-69) (5-70) (5-72) (5-74) Object Type Equation Table Table Table Table Table Figure Figure Figure Figure Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Equation Table Table Table Equation Equation Equation LRFD (5.. it was necessary to revert to the old numbering system in LRFD.2.2-1) Section 6 6.2-2) (6.2-1) (6.2-1) (5.8.`.2..10.1-1 3.2.7.8.1-1) (4.1.7.3b-2) (6.`.1-2) (6.8.`. the table of contents for each section includes lists of any figures and tables with their page numbers.3.4. Section-referent LRFD figure.2.8.7.7.1-2) (6.1.2.

``-`-`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..`..`...``..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`..``.`.`..`..``.`--- .

.....................``......................``.................5 DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY .........................SECTION 1-INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1...`.............. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.......................................`...........................................................................................................`........... ...... 1.......`--- .........................................................................4 QUALITY MEASURES 1.``... REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 1-1 1.......... 1............................................................``-`-`......3 APPLICABILITY ...6 IMPORTANT 1-3 1-6 1-i Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...............................`...... 1-1 1-2 1-2 1............................................................................2 SCOPE............................`..`......`........................``....................1 PURPOSE..................................

`.`.--`..``.`.``-`-`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..`..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...``..``.``..`.`..

``. with each section representing a distinct phase of an overall bridge inspection and evaluation program. Conditions at a bridge site or the absence of information from original construction may warrant more elaborate material tests.``. 1-1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. Field load testing is a means of supplementing analytical procedures in determining the live load capacity of a bridge and for improving the confidence in the assumptions used in modeling the bridge. The types and frequency of field inspections are discussed in Section 4. The record of each bridge in the file provides the foundation against which changcs in physical condition can be measured..``.SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.. Section 6 sets forth procedures for the evaluation of bridges using the Load and Resistance Factor method..`. as are specific inspection techniques and requirements.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. 1. The evaluation of existing bridges for fatigue is discussed in Section 7.`.`..`.2 SCOPE This Manual has been developed to assist Bridge Owners by establishing inspection procedures and evaluation practices that meet the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS). Key components of a comprehensive bridge file are defined in Section 2. Section 1 contains introductory and background information on the maintenance inspection of bridges as well as definitions of general interest terms.`. and load capacity of the nation’s highway bridges. Changes in condition are determined by field inspections. Load test procedures are described in Section 8.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Section 9 is entitled “Special Topics. maintenance needs..1 PURPOSE This Manual serves as a standard and provides uniformity in the procedures and policies for determining the physical condition... The manual has been divided into nine sections. and various testing methods are discussed in Section 5. A bridge management system is an effective tool in allocating limited resources to bridge related activities. An overview of bridge management systems is included in Section 3.” and deals with the evaluation of masonry bridges and other bridgerelated issues.. The successful application of this manual is directly related to the organizational structure established by the Bridge Owner.``-`-`. Such a structure should be both effective and responsive so that the unique characteristics and special problems of individual bridges are considered in developing an appropriate inspection plan and load capacity determination.``.

( 5 ) Timetables: Types of activities matched to appropriate response and completion time periods. Qualiîy assurance measures include the overall review of the inspection and rating program to ascertain that the results meet or exceed the standards established by the owning agency.4 QUALITY MEASURES To maintain the accuracy and consistency of inspections and load ratings...``.``-`-`. construction. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. (2) Elements of structures or specific types of structures which require special quality control or emphasis.5). materials) should be consulted. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`...3 APPLICABILITY C1. NBIS applies to all bridges on public roads which are more than 20 feet in length. and the periodic field review of inspection teams and their work. Bridge Owners should implement appropriate quality control and quality assurance measures.`. (4) Documentation requirements: Number of copies..1-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 1.`. Approved practices should be described.`. These provisions may be applied to smaller structures which do not qualify as bridges. The routes for approvals and for dispute resolution should be identified. 1. The provisions of this Manual apply to all highway structures which qualifj as bridges in accordance with the AASHTO definition for a bridge (see Article 1.. Typical quality control procedures include the use of checklists to ensure uniformity and completeness.. routing and filing procedures.``. including the situations in which outside experts (design. the review of reports and computations by a person other than the originating individual.``. (3) Responsibilities and authorities within the project team and for the entire unit. Federal regulations entitled the “National Bridge Inspection Standards” (NBIS) have been promulgated which establish minimum requirements for inspection programs and minimum qualifications for bridge inspection personnel.`.4 The Quality Control Plan for bridge maintenance inspection and evaluation should contain at least these basic elements: (I) Level and frequency of reviews for each major activity performed.`--- C1.``. the provisions of this Manual may be applied to highway bridge structures regardless of span or total length of bridge.3 At the discretion of the Bridge Owner. Procedures should be established for preparing and checking calculations and for preparing and checking drawings.`. Organization charts and decision trees are helpful.`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.

.. Calibration-A process of adjusting the parameters in a new standard to achieve approximately the same reliability as exists in a current standard or specification or to achieve a target reliability index. As-Built Plans-Plans that show the state of the bridge at the end of construction. maintenance. U.``. Bridge Management System (BMS)-A system designed to optimize the use of available resources for the inspection. Evaluator-The qualified engineer responsible for the evaluation of the bridge. Failure-A condition where a limit state is reached or exceeded. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Condition Rating-The result of the assessment of the functional capability and the physical condition of bridge components by considering the extent of deterioration and other defects. DC 20001. Bias-The ratio of mean to nominal value of a random variable. and having an opening measured along the center of the roadway of more than 20 feet between undercopings of abutments or spring lines of arches. rehabilitation. Bridge-A structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction such as water. and replacement of bridges.``. Washington.`. where the clear distance between openings is less than half of the smaller contiguous opening.`.`.`. 444 North Capitol Street.``-`-`. N. Department of Transportation.S..``. Suite 249.`.Introduction Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`...5 DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY AASHTO-American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Znventoïy Level Rating-Generally corresponds to the rating at the design level of reliability for new Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Collapse-A major change in the geometry of the bridge rendering it unfit for use..`. and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads. or railway. This may or may not involve collapse or other catastrophic occurrences. or extreme ends of openings for multiple boxes. usually prepared by the contractor or the resident-engineer. FHWA-Federal Highway Administration.``. f Variation-The ratio of the standard CoefJient o deviation to the mean of a random variable.. it may also include multiple pipes.. highway.`--- 1.. Evaluation-An assessment of the performance of an existing bridge.W.`.

..`..1-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges bridges in the L W D Bridge Design Specifications. National Bridge Inspection Standards (PTBIS)Federal regulations establishing requirements for inspection procedures..`. Load Rating-The determination of the live load carrying capacity of an existing bridge. Margin of Safety-Defined as R-S. where S is the maximum loading and R the corresponding resistance (R and S are assumed to be independent random variables). Generally corresponds Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. frequency of inspections. MUTCD-The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.. National Bridge Inventory (NBI)-The aggregation of structure inventory and appraisal data collected to fulfill the requirements of the National Bridge Inspection Standards. LRFD-Load LRFR-Load and Resistance Factor Design.`. bending moment.`.``-`-`.``.`. but reflects the existing bridge and material conditions with regard to deterioration and loss of section. Nominal Resistance-Resistance of a component or connection to load effects. shear force. and the probability of simultaneous occurrence of different loads. The NBIS apply to all structures defined as bridges located on or over all public roads.. based on its geometry.. Limit State-A condition beyond which the bridge or component ceases to satisfy the criteria for which it was designed. Load Factor-A load multiplier accounting for the variability of loads. Operating Level Rating-Absolute maximum load level to which a structure may be subjected for limited passages of the load. and Resistance Factor Rating. the lack of accuracy in analysis. Load EfSect-The response (axial force. NICET-National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies. MCE-AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges (1994). and preparation and maintenance of bridge inventory records. torque) in a member or an element due to the loading.`. or specified strength of materials. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.. qualifications of personnel.`--- .``.`. inspection reports. permissible stresses.``.

Resistance Factor-A resistance multiplier accounting for the variability of material properties.`. Quality Assurance-The use of sampling to veri9 or measure the level of the entire bridge inspection and load rating program.``.. W-Rating Factor. ServiceabilikA term that denotes restrictions on stress.. Strength Limit State-Safety strength and stability.`.. and the uncertainty in the prediction of resistance. A copy of the SI&A sheet is contained in the Appendix to Section 4.``-`-`. Reliability Index-A computed quantity defining the relative safety of a structural element or structure expressed as the number of standard deviations that the mean of the margin of safety falls on the safe side. structural dimensions and workmanship. Serviceability Limit States-Collective service and fatigue limit states.`. and cracking.``.`.`. Safe Load Capacity-A live load that can safely utilize a bridge repeatedly over the duration of a specified inspection cycle.. Owner-Agency bridge. and crack opening under regular service conditions.Introduction 1-5 to the rating at the Operating level of reliability in past load rating practice. deformation.`. Posting-Signing having jurisdiction over the a bridge for load restriction..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. Target Reliabilip-A desired level of reliability (safety) in a proposed evaluation. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . --`. term for limit state relating to Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheet (SI&)-A summary sheet of bridge data required by NBIS. Quality Control-System that is intended to maintain the quality of a bridge inspection and load rating at or above a specified level. Service Limit State-Limit state relating to stress.`.``.``. deformation...

AASHTO. 1998 with Interims.S. U.S. Mississauga. Washington. U. 1991. 1993. Department of Transportation. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.`. Federal Highway Administration. 1978. “The Assessment of Highway Bridges and Structures”. LRFD Bridge Design Speclfications.S.``. Seismic RetroJitting Manual for Highway Bridges. Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventov and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges. U. DC. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. FHWA. DC. Washington. DC. “PONTIS” Release 3. Design Manual for Roads andBridges. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.`. Department of Transportation Washington.`. FHWA. Washington. Part 4. Washington.K.`. Department of Transport.S. Demonstration Project 71. Federal Highway Administration... DC. Iron and Steel Beams. Department of Transportation.. Movable Bridge Inspection. Federal Highway Administration. U. AASHTO.. Washington. January 1993. American Institute of Steel Construction. Evaluation.S. AASHTO. U. U.`. and Maintenance Manual. 1997.1-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 1 . FHWA. Federal Highway Administration. DC. Existing Bridge Evaluation-Supplement to Design of Highway Bridges. 1986. FHWA. AASHTO. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. --`. LRFD Manual of Steel Construction. American Association of State Highway and Transportation OEcials. DC. Federal Highway Administration. Washington. Manual for Condition Evaluation o f Bridges. Second Edition. Washington. AASHTO. AASHTO. Canada. Inspection of Fracture Critical Bridge Members. Guide for Commonly Recognized (CoRe) Structural Elements. Washington. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1995. DC. Department of Transportation. 1988. Federal Highway Administration. DC.``.. Guide Speczjìcations for Fatigue Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges.. AASHTO.`. 1994 with Interims. Section 4. Non-Destructive Testing Methods for Steel Bridges. Guidefor Maximum Dimensions and Weights of Motor Vehicles and for the Operation of NonDivisible Load Oversize and Overweight Vehicles. Washington. T5 140. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Technical Advisory-Revisions to the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS). Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual 90. 1998. DC. 1986. 1990. Washington. DC. DC. DC. DC. U. AASHTO. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Federal Highway Administration. FHWA. Washington. Guide Specijìcations for Fracture-Critical Non-Redundant Steel Bridge Members. Washington. American Association o f State Highway and Transportation Officials. 1995.DC. 1996. 1986.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. DC.S. FHWA.DC.``. Standard Specifzcationsfor Highway Bridges. FHWA. Washington. Department of Transportation. U. 1873 to 1952. 1989. BA 16/93.Washington. 1990..`. Second Edition. Washington.. Canadian Standards Association. DC.I .``.S. DC. American Institute of Steel Construction.21.``-`-`. Washington. DC. CSA. Bridge Management Systems. 1990. CAN/CSA-S6-88-1990. Oct. AASHTO. Standard Specijkations for Movable Highway Bridges. AISC. FHWA-DP-71-O1R. Culvert Inspection Manual. Washington. Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Washington. Volume 3.S. FHWA. FHWA-RD-94-052. AASHTO. U. Ontario. 1988. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. User’s Manual. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. AISC. Department of Transportation. Guidelinesfor Bridge Management Systems. Sixteenth Edition. Department of Transportation. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 6 IMPORTANTREFERENCES AASHTO.

1989. NCHRP Project 12-28 (1 i). Load Capacity Evaluation of Existing Bridges.V.``-`-`. NCHRP Report 368. October 1988. DC. Distribution of Wheel Loads on Highway Bridges. Fatigue Evaluation Procedures for Steel Bridges. U. Department of Transportation.`. NCHRP Research Results Digest. FHWA. Calibration of Load Factors for LRFR Bridge Evaluation. National Bridge Inspection Standards. T. 234. Galambos. Guidelinesfor Evaluation and Repair of Damaged Steel Bridge Members.. 1998. Development of Site-SpeciJic Load Modelsfor Bridge Ratings..``. NCHRP Report 352. Calibrationof LRFD Bridge Design Code. Final Report. Subpart C.. NCHRP Web Document 28 (NCHRP Project 12-46): Final Report: Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load Rating of Highway Bridges Using Load and Resistance Factor Philosophy.S. NCHRP Project 12-28 (A and Bl). Guidelinesfor Evaluating Corrosion Effects in Existing Steel Bridges. Manual for Bridge Rating Through Load Testing.`--- 1-7 FHWA.`. T5 140-23. S .. NCHRP Report 292.`. Department of Agriculture.`. Distortion Induced Fatigue Cracking in Steel Bridges.. NCHRP Report 3 12. Fifth Edition. Washington. 1997 Edition. Code o f Federal Regulations.S.Washington. Timber Bridges-Design Construction. 1993). Inc. DC. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Underwater Inspection of Bridges. John Wiley & Sons. NCHRP Report 27 i. NCHRP Project 12-26 (1) and (2).Introduction --`. Final Report (Nowak. 1990. Ritter.Washington. Topic 28-05. Strength Evaluation of Existing Reinforced Concrete Bridges. NCHRP Report 406. U.`.``. Part 650. FHWA.. Condition Surveys o f Concrete Bridge Components. Federal Highway Administration. New York. Michael A. National Forest Products Association. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``. Federal Highway Administration. Washington. DC. Bridge Management Systems.. Redundancy in Highway Superstructures. National Design Specificationfor Wood Construction. NCHRP Report 299. Federal Highway Administration. Department of Transportation. NCHRP Project 20-5. Calibrationof LRFD Bridge Design Code. 1988. Department of Transportation.Inspection.$. Technical Advisory-Evaluating Scour at Bridges. NCHRP Report 301. and Maintenance. Manual of Uniform Trafic Control Devices. NCHRP Report 454. ed. DC. Government. Forest Service. Guide to Stability Design Criteriafor Metal Structures..S. Final Report. U. NCHRP Report 333. NCHRP Report 336. NCHRP Report 300. NCHRP Project 12-33. U. Dynamic Impact Factorsfor Bridges. Inelastic Rating Procedures for Steel Beam and Girder Bridges. U.. 1991. EM 7700-8.`.``.. November 1998-No. Title 23. “BRIDGIT” Bridge Management System Users Manual and Technical Manual.

.``.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``.`.`--- ...``.`.....``..`.`.`.``-`-`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.

.`..... 2.........................................5 Materials and Tests ..................4..............................................................................3 Load Test Data........ 2........1 Construction Plans .........................................SECTION 2 ........... 2...........................................1 General ...............................................................2................................3..................................2 Shop and Working Drawings................................................. 2-11 2-i --`............................................................................................................................................. 2............... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..2...... 2-10 2........................................................................................................... 2....................................................1 Plans ..1 General ... 2..............................................................................2 Material Test Data ......................................................5.................12 Traffic Data ..........................`........................................... 2............................................................``...4... 2......................... 2................................2.....................`.....................................................................................9 Posting ...........................................................................................................................5................... 2.............................................................2.........2 Revised Inspection Data .........5.....`....................................2 Revised Condition and Load Rating Data ...................................................................................................................................................1O Permit Loads ...............1............................... 2...............................................`..................3 INVENTORY DATA ......3 Correspondence ...........``.... 2-11 2........ 2.......................... 2....8 Accident Records ........................2......2 Revised Inventory Data ............................................... 2-8 2.........................5.........................................................1 General ...................................................15 Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheets ....... 2..................2.............. 2...2. 2..................... 2..............5 CONDITION AND LOAD RATING DATA.3........2.............................2............................................................................... 2....................6 Maintenance and Repair History .................. ................ 2.......................................................`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale............................................................13 Inspection History ........................2........................... 2.................................`.........................................................................................................................................2 Specifications ....................................2.............14 Inspection Requirements ...........1 Material Certification.......................................................................................................................................................2.........2.......................................2....2.....................................................3 As-Built Drawings ...........................17 Rating Records .............................2 COMPONENTS OF BRIDGE RECORDS ....................... 2.1 GENERAL ........................................................2..........``........................ 2... BRIDGE FILES (RECORDS) TABLE OF CONTENTS 2............................................................................1 1 Flood Data ..........................................`....4 Photographs ............2..``-`-`.......................2.............................................................................16 Inventories and Inspections .......2................ 2............................................... 2..........................................1...............2................................................................................................6 LOCAL REQUIREMENTS .....................7 Coating History ......................................................... 2............5......................................................1..............2...................4 INSPECTION DATA 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-4 2-5 2-5 2-5 2-8 2-8 2................................. 2.. 2-11 2............... 2.........``......................................2. 2-11 2............... 2.........2..................................

`.``.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.``-`-`...`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`..``.``.``..`.`..`... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .

`. Information about a bridge may be subdivided into three categories: base data which is normally not subject to change. The file should be reviewed prior to conducting a bridge inspection. 2.``-`-`. Some items could be filed elsewhere and incorporated in the bridge file by appropriate references. including details of any damage and all strengthening and repairs made to the bridge.. General requirements for these three categories of bridge data are presented in Articles 2. The components of bridge records indicated in Article 2.. rehabilitation. such information provides a record which may be important for repair.2.1 Plans 2.SECTION 2 BRIDGE FILE (RECORDS) 2.4. It is recognized that.``. in many cases (particularly for older bridges). respectively. data which is updated by field inspection. and 2.``. and current record of each bridge under their jurisdiction. accurate.``. or replacement.. and data which is derived from the base and inspection data. When both electronic and paper formats are used for saving data. Furthermore.1 GENERAL Bridge Owners should maintain a complete.`. c2.3. only a portion of this information may be available. Complete information.``.. rating.1. A bridge file describes all of the bridges under the jurisdiction of the Bridge Owner. Some or all of the information pertaining to a bridge may be stored in electronic format as part of a bridge management system.`. A bridge record contains the cumulative information about an individual bridge. Items which should be assembled as part of the bridge record are discussed in Article 2.2. if applicable.`. they should be cross-referenced to ensure that all relevant data are available to the inspector/evaluator. is vital to the effective management of bridges. 2.. The components of data entered in a bridge record should be dated and include the signature of the individual responsible for the data presented.2.. or evaluation. including the computations substantiating reduced load limits.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..2.2 encompass a wide range of information which may not be practical to assemble in one location. It contains one bridge record for each bridge and other general information which applies to more than one bridge.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5. in good usable form. The bridge record should report data on the capacity of the structure.`.2 COMPONENTS OF BRIDGE RECORDS Some of the components of good bridge records are described below.`. It should provide a full history of the structure.1 This section covers the records and reports which make up a complete bridge file.1 Construction Plans Each bridge record should include one full-size or clear and readable reduced-size set of all drawings used to construct or repair the bridge.`. including the SI&A Report. 2-1 --`.

2.2-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 2.`.1. one showing a top view of the roadway across and one a side elevation view of the bridge..2 Shop And Working Drawings Each bridge record should include one set of all shop and working drawings approved for the construction or repair of the bridge.``.2. grade.2 Specifications Each bridge record should contain one complete copy of the technical specifications under which the bridge was built. should also be included.`..`. concrete delivery slips. Where a general technical specification was used. daily logs during construction.2.`. memorandums.. Other photos necessary to show major defects. and other manufacturer’s certifications. such as utilities on the bridge.`.2.1. in chronological order in the bridge record.2.``-`-`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . telephone memos. The edition and date of the general technical specification should be noted in the bridge record.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. complete with signature of the individual responsible for recording the as-built conditions. --`. should be included in the bridge record. Material certifications. and all other related information directly concerning the bridge. only the special technical provisions need be incorporated in the bridge record.. such as steel mill certificates.`.2.``.`.``. 2..``.5.2. or other important features..2. notices of project completion.5 Materials and Tests 2.3 Correspondence Include all pertinent letters. 2. and quality of materials incorporated in the construction of the bridge. should be retained in accordance with the policies of the Bridge Owner and the applicable statute of limitations.1 Material Certification All pertinent certificates for the type..4 Photographs Each bridge record should contain at least two photographs. 2. 2.3 As-Built Drawings Each bridge record should include one set of final drawings showing the “as-built” condition of the bridge.

. and related data for in-house projects.``-`-`. and other protective membranes..`. application methods.2.10 Permit Loads A record of the most significant special singletrip permits issued for use of the bridge along with supporting documentation and computations should be included in the bridge record.2.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 2.8 Accident Records Details of accident or damage occurrences.`. description of project.. date of posting. should be included in the bridge record.3 Load Test Data Reports on any field load testing of the bridge should be included in the bridge record. --`.2. Include details such as date.`.2 Material Test Data Reports of non-destructive and laboratory tests of materials incorporated in the bridge. a chronological history of major flooding events. should be included in the bridge record.``. 2..`....2. including surface preparation.5. cost. 2.5.`.2. and description of signing used. including load capacity calculations. 2. and investigative reports. dry-film thickness and types of paint.9 Posting Each bridge record should include a summary of all posting actions taken for the bridge. description of accident. member damage and repairs. during construction or subsequently.2.`. 2.2.``.6 Maintenance and Repair History Each bridge record should include a chronological record documenting the maintenance and repairs that have occurred since the initial construction of the bridge.7 Coating History Each bridge record should document the surface protective coatings used. concrete and timber sealants. contractor. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2..`.Bridge Files (Records) 2-3 2.``. including date. 2. contract number.``.11 Flood Data For those structures over waterways. 2.

.`. scour.``. and fatigue evaluation studies..2.2.``. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and Average Daily Truck Traffic (ADTT) are two important parameters in fatigue life and safe load capacity determination which should be routinely monitored for each bridge and each traffic lane on the bridge. and corrosion studies should be part of the bridge record...`.15 Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheets The bridge record should include a chronological record of Inventory and Appraisal Sheets used by the Bridge Owner. 2.`. when available. Special requirements to ensure the safety of the inspection personnel andíor the public should be noted. should be included in the bridge record where available. such as construction and repair inspections.16 Inventories and Inspections The bridge record should include reports and results of all inventories and bridge inspections. including a traffic management plan. The original of the report for each inspection should be included in the bridge record.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.2. 2.`. if available. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. should also be included in the bridge record. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.12 Traffic Data Each bridge record should include the frequency and type of vehicles using the bridge and their historical variations. 2. fracture critical information. deck evaluations.2.. Weights of vehicles using the bridge. 2. 2.2-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges including high water marks at the bridge site and scour activity. a list of specialized tools and equipment as well as descriptions of unique bridge details or features requiring non-routine inspection procedures or access should be provided.14 Inspection Requirements To assist in planning and conducting the field inspection of the bridge.`.. seismic. A sample Structure Inventory and Appraisal Sheet is shown in Appendix A i.``-`-`.``... When available.`.13 Inspection History Each bridge record should include a chronological record of the date and type of all inspections performed on the bridge.`.

Year of original construction.`..`. 2. the following information should be recorded for each bridge: (1) Structure Number. the type of piers. ( 4 ) Highway System. The full name of the bridge. the type of piles should be stated.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. the subheadings used in this Manual follow those used in the Coding Guide.3. (3b) Year Reconstructed.. The year(s) during which major reconstruction or widening occurred. (3a) Year Built.3 INVENTORY DATA C2..``-`-`. If it is unknown whether ' Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Normally.17 Rating Records The bridge record should include a complete record of the determinations of the bridge's loadcarrying capacity...``.Bridge Files (Records) 2-5 2.`. As a minimum.`. Include the type of superstructure for both main and approach spans.3 The FHWA Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventoly and Appraisal o f the Nation 's Bridges includes detailed descriptions of various bridge items to be inventoried. 2.1 General The bridge inventory data provides information about a bridge which is generally not subject to change. Where possible. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Other common names by which it is known may be placed in parentheses following the official name.`.`.`. along with their foundations. Location of the bridge must be sufficiently described so that it can be readily spotted on a map or found in the field. Briefly give all pertinent data concerning the type of structure. (6) Description o f Structure. and type of abutments. State whether or not the bridge is located on the Federal Aid System. the bridge should be located by Route number.. If the bridge is on piles.`--- ( 5 ) Location.. Describe the type of Federal Aid System and show the Route Number where applicable.``. The official number assigned to the structure by the Bridge Owner.``.. county. (2) Name.2. and log mile.

(1 1)Deck Width..``..``. This will normally be the length from paving notch to paving notch or between back faces of backwalls measured along centerline. or estimated. such as overcrossings. (9) Structure Length. maximum bearing pressures.``.`. Span lengths shall be recorded to the nearest foot and it shall be noted whether the measurement is center to center ( c k ) or clear open distance (clr) between piers. If data is available. Measurements shall be along the centerline of the bridge. This shall be the most restrictive of the clear width(s) between curbs. The number of spans and the span lengths are to be listed.. (12) Clearances. --`. If no plans are available. the skew angle will be taken from the plans and it is to be recorded to the nearest degree.. On divided roadways. and pile capacities. the angle should be measured. the shoulders and median width will be given.`. but. Normally. it should be so stated. or abutments.`. bents. The minimum number of vertical measurements shown on the diagram will be at each edge of the traveled way and the Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. ( 8 ) Spans.. This shall be the overall length to the nearest foot and shall be the length of roadway which is supported on the bridge structure. Spans crossing State highways will be normally listed from left to right looking in the same direction as the log mile for the route under the bridge. The out-to-out width of the bridge to the nearest tenth of a foot. railings. A vertical and horizontal clearance diagram should be made for each structure which restricts the vertical clearance over the highway.`--- (10)Bridge Roadway Width. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. (7) Skew. indicate type of soil upon which footings are founded. These shall be listed in the same direction as the log mile. and through truss bridges. underpasses.``-`-`.2-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges piles exist. If the skew angle is O". this should be so stated. also.. The skew angle is the angle between the centerline of a pier and a line normal to the roadway centerline. computed.`. the roadway width will be taken as the traveled way between shoulders..`.``. or other restrictions for the roadway on the bridge.`.

``.``..Bridge Files (Records) 2-1 minimum vertical clearance within the traveled way.. List the type and material of the railing andor parapet. This information should be updated at intervals of approximately five years.``. a field measurement of 15’-7 3/4” will be recorded as 15’”’’. the sidewalk should be noted thus: “1@5. When a structure is of a deck or pony truss type so that no vertical obstruction is present. a comparison of the alignment with the general alignment of the road should be made. --`. This will include each roadway on a divided highway. note “None.” Vertical measurements are to be made in feet and inches and any fractions of an inch will be truncated to the nearest inch. the vertical clearance shall be noted on the report as “Unimpaired. Note whether the bridge is tangent or on a curve..`.``-`-`. The dimensions of the railing andíor parapet should be recorded. along with the date of record..” If there are no sidewalks. if known.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Note if there are any posted speed restrictions..`.`.`.`.0’ (east). On older bridges. Horizontal measurements are to be recorded to the nearest one-tenth of a foot.`. (13 ) Wearing Sugace and Deck Protective System. If only one is present. State the ADT and the ADTT.0’. If the bridge is on a curve. ( 1 8) Average Daily Trafic and Average Daily Truck Trafic. State the number of traffic lanes carried by the structure and being crossed by the structure.. state the radius of the curve if plans are available for this information.” (15)Railings and Parapets.`. i... (17)Lanes On and Under the Structure. (14)Curb or Sidewalk Widths. The widths of the left and right curbs or sidewalks should be recorded to the nearest tenth of a foot.e. (16 )Bridge Approach Alignment. The report will state the minimum roadway clearance.” Sidewalks on both sides are noted thus: “2@5.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The type and thickness of wearing surface and the type of deck protective system should be noted.``.

pins and hangers. If the design live loading is not known. (21)PZans and Dimensions.``. and other similar items. In addition to the results of the physical condition inspections conducted in accordance with Section 4. a bridge with the name “Wetwater River” obviously cames traffic over the river. and weathering steels should be emphasized and highlighted for special attention during field inspections...``. Special structural details or situations.`. A structure widened or otherwise altered so that different portions have different live load designs is to have each live loading specified. (20)Features Intersected. and if they are as-built. sufficient drawings should be prepared during field investigations to permit an adequate structural analysis of the entire structure. etc. State what plans are available.`.. The bridge inventory data should also be updated to reflect changes in wearing surface. where they are filed. fatigue-prone details. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. List facilities over which the structure crosses in addition to the main obstacle. 2. it may also cross over a railroad. railings.`. such as scour critical locations.`. other roads.. When plans are available. or by some other manner which extensively modifies the structure. For example.`. dimensions and size of structural components should be field checked.3. each bridge record should contain the following inspection information.``-`-`.`--- (22)Critical Features. this should be so indicated. cathodic protection.2 Revised Inventory Data When a bridge is significantly altered by widening.2-8 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges (19)Design Load.. the bridge inventory data should be updated to reflect the changes made to the bridge. fracture critical members.``.4. where practical.`.`. as a minimum: (i) Waterway: The adequacy of the waterway opening should be classed as “Not a Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.1 General Inspection data may be subject to change with each inspection cycle.. 2.``.4 INSPECTION DATA 2.. lengthening. When plans are not on file. The live loading for which the bridge was designed should be stated if it is known. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .

and/or the footings of piers and abutments. the inspection personnel should coordinate with hydraulics and maintenance personnel in placing a painted line on the piling or abutment which would indicate a water surface at which concern and extra precaution should be exercised..” “Normally Medium Velocity.” “Sufficient.Bridge Files (Records) 2-9 Factor. (2) Channel ProJile.” A statement also should be made describing the material making up the stream bed.`. or if it has experienced severe scour. a description of material upon which footings are founded. Channel cross sections from the current and past inspections should be plotted on a Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``..``-`-`.`--- When substructures are located within the waterway.`.``.`.. A sheet showing the channel profile at the upstream side of a bridge over a waterway should be a part of the bridge report.`.``. where available. indicate the type and location of substructure protection devices.``. --`.. the type and placement of navigation lights should be noted and a clearance diagram of the navigable portion of the waterway should be made.” The velocity of the stream should be classed with reference to its scouring probabilities.. this should be so stated. If a bridge has been evaluated as scour critical and is being monitored.`. Bridges may be designed to allow or may experience the overtopping by floods. If none are provided. or if for other reasons its structural stability is in question for higher discharges..” or “Insufficient.`. This information is valuable for reference in anticipating possible scour problems through yearly observation and is especially useful to detect serious conditions during periods of heavy flow.. If the waterway is navigational..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .” “Barely Sufficient. the elevation of the pile tips.” “Excessive. The sketch should show the foundation of the structure and. A statement should be made describing floods that have occurred or that may be possible. This type of indicator could serve as the trigger for closing a bridge. such as “Normally High Velocity. An assessment of the scour vulnerability of the substructure should be included.

The necessity of additional soundings must be determined by the Engineer..``-`-`. The date upon which the field investigation was made should be noted...``.`.4. record date of establishment and identification of agency who put the restrictions in force. Any unusual environmental conditions which may have an effect on the structure such as salt spray. Environmental Conditions. the new dimensions should be recorded. 2. Identi@ the requirements for miscellaneous structural inspections such as those for sign structures.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. unusual loadings or conditions.`.. These soundings will normally be limited to an area within a radius of 100 feet from a pier. though not fastened to the bridge.2-10 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges common plot to observe scouring or stream instability..`.. and other special features. industrial gases. should also be included. When maintenance or improvement work has altered the dimensions of the structure and/or channel.. An attachment sheet should be submitted when there is one or more utilities on the structure.``. Soundings in addition to the single line channel profile are necessary at some river piers to provide adequate information on scour conditions and how the piers may be affected. Include information on high-water marks. catwalks. speed. Restrictions on Stmcture. etc. Utility Attachments. Such requirements will vary with stream velocity and general channel stability. and such general statements as cannot be readily incorporated into the other headings.`.``. Note any load.`. All work that has been done to the bridge since the last inspection should be listed.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Miscellaneous. should be noted in the report. --`.2 Revised Inspection Data The bridge record should reflect the information in the current bridge inspection report. A utiliîy in the immediate area. Vertical measurements should be made or referenced to a part of the structure such as the top of curb or top of railing which is readily accessible during high water..`. such as a sewer line crossing the ROW and buried in the channel beneath the bridge. or traffic restrictions in force on the bridge and if known..

As a minimum... and any other modifying factors which were assumed in the analysis.``-`-`. --`.`.``.. and..`.`. Article 4. These requirements should be considered in establishing the database and updating procedures for the bridge file.`. the safe load capacity should be recalculated..``. 2.2 Revised Condition and Load Rating Data When maintenance or improvement work or change in strength of members or dead load has altered the condition or capacity of the structure. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.. (2) Load Rating.5 CONDITION AND LOAD RATING DATA 2. the following information should be included: (1) Bridge Condition Rating.5. if applicable.1 General This data defines the overall condition and load capacity of the bridge and is based on the Inventory and Inspection data. superstructure. A general statement of the results of the analysis with note of which members were found to be weak.6 LOCAL REQUIREMENTS Bridge Owners may have unique requirements for collecting and recording bridge data mandated by local conditions and/or legislative actions. See Section 6 for the load rating procedures. Document the bridge condition inspection results including observed conditions and recommended maintenance operations or restrictions regarding the deck.`.`. where necessary.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. should be given. substructure. 2.. A record should be kept of the calculations to determine the safe load capaciîy of a bridge and. channel.13 provides guidance on data collection requirements for load rating.5. the load limits for posting..``.Bridge Files (Records) 2-11 2.``.

`.``-`-`..`..`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..``.`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.``.``....``.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.

........`...................... 3..3.............................................4 NATIONAL BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS .........``...................``........................................1 Condition Data Analysis.. 3...............................2.............................................. 3-i --`....2.......`.......... 3.....SECTION 3-BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS TABLE OF CONTENTS 3................2 Cost Data Analysis ............ 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .....3....................`........3........ 3.............................1..............................................`.......1 Database ...........``............`...........................2 OBJECTIVES OF BRIDGE MANAGEMENT OF A BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ... 3..................................``-`-`..2 Data Analysis ..3................2....1 INTRODUCTION ......... 3.. 3..............................3................................... 3-1 SYSTEMS ...............................................3....................................................................`....................................................................................3 Optimization ............................3...............3 COMPONENTS 3-1 3-1 3-2 3-2 3-3 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 3-6 3............`...``....`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...................1 Commonly Recognized Structural Elements (CoRe) ..................... 3............................................ 3.........................................................3 Decision Support ....................................................................................

`.`.``...``....`.``.``..`--- .`..`.``-`-`.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.

``... and public officials have acknowledged the need for new analytical methods and procedures to assess the current and future conditions of bridges and determine the best possible allocation of funds within a system of bridges among various types of bridge maintenance..`. considered alone. The best action for each bridge.2 OBJECTIVES OF BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS --`. 3.and short-term capital improvement and maintenance programs in the face of fiscal constraints.`--- The goal of BMS is to determine and implement an infrastructure preservation and improvement strategy that best integrates capital and maintenance activities so as to maximize net benefit to society..SECTION 3 BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 3. BMS helps engineers and decision makers determine the best action to take on long.``. extend the service life of bridges. The aim of this section is to provide an overview of BMS and discuss their essential features.``. The advent of Bridge Management Systems (BMS) is a response to this need.. Bridge engineers.`.`. administrators.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT 0 0 .`. repair.``-`-`.`.``.`.. 3. rehabilitation.. Bridge Management Systems require the data and results from condition evaluation. and replacement choices. It enables the optimum or nearoptimum use of funding by enabling decision makers to understand the essential trade-offs concerning large numbers of bridges.3 COMPONENTS OF A BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM In any BMS there are three main components: Database Data Analysis Decision Support 3-1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. is not necessarily the best action for the bridge system when faced with funding constraints. It also provides essential information to help transportation agencies enhance safety.1 INTRODUCTION Transportation agencies must balance limited resources against increasing bridge needs of an aging highway system. and serve commerce and the motoring public.. The best action to take on a bridge cannot be determined without first determining the implications from a system-wide perspective.

There are three major types of data required by a BMS: 1) bridge inventory.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. More detailed condition data on elements of each component must be gathered to model deterioration at the element level.``.`. especially more detailed inventory and condition data on the elements of each structure.3-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 3.`.``. an element level condition assessment system was developed that tracks not only the severity of the problem but also its extent. is not considered unique to Pontis@. though originally developed for Ponti?. and rating data.``. The CoRe elements provide a uniform basis for detailed element level data collection for any Bridge Management System and for sharing of data among states.`. Projecting overall condition of bridge components such as deck.``-`-`.. superstructure. The element level data collection. BMS analyses require more detailed condition assessment of a bridge according to its constituent elements.`.``. which is a quantitative measure of deterioration.. The CoRe element definitions are supplemented in some cases with a ?Smart Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. where applicable... and 3) preservation and improvement activity data.3. The condition states are defined in engineering terms and based on a scale from 1 to 5 for most elements.`.3.. Element descriptions consider material composition and. To meet the data needs of BMS.`. The essential data elements for BMS include many NBI data items but also other information.`--- . 3. but it is not sufficiently detailed to adequately project deterioration.`. Many states obtain additional data through expanded inspection programs to supplement data for bridge management purposes.. AASHTO and FHWA have defined a group of Commonly Recognized (CoRe) structural elements that are common to bridges nationwide. and substructure is useful. The condition of each element is reported according to a condition state.. condition. 2) cost data.1 Database A BMS requires a comprehensive database or a system of databases that is capable of supporting the various analyses involved in bridge management. A bridge is divided into individual elements or sections of the bridge that are comprised of the same matenal and can be expected to deteriorate in the same manner.1 Commonly Recognized Structural Elements (CoRe) NBI ratings provide a general idea of the overall condition of each major component of a bridge but provide no details on the type of deficiencies that may be present or their extent. the presence of protective systems. Much of this data is not available in the NBI.1.

Assessing future needs based on current condition data is an essential component of BMS data analysis.``.``.`--- 0 0 3.`.... Deterioration models use several cycles of condition data to identi@ trends. As an alternative.. the remaining life of in-service bridges.``.3.`.`. BMS include mechanisms for predicting the future effects of today’s decisions.. Deterioration models in most BMS project the hture condition of structural and other key elements and the overall condition of each type of bridge. Deterioration models can be used to estimate the service life of new bridges.. Because decisions made today on bridge maintenance or improvement affect the condition of the bridge system in the future.``-`-`.1 Condition Data Analysis Long-term planning requires highway agencies to make decisions that are cost-effective over the long run. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2. along with additional budget and policy data. a highway agency can survey an experienced group of engineers and bridge inspectors and form deterioration models based on expert opinion. 3. Two major prediction tools that are important for BMS operation are bridge deterioration models and bridge-related cost models.`.`.Bridge Management Systems 3-3 Flag” to provide additional information about the condition of an element.2 Data Analysis The purpose of data analysis is to enable better strategies to allocate and use limited resources in an optimum way. and the extension in service life due to rehabilitation or other maintenance activities. where these inputs. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . both with and without intervening actions.`.``. The best decision is the one that minimizes costs over the long run while providing the desired level-of-service...3. are analyzed to yield a selection of projects for maximum economic benefit. The deterioration and cost models feed engineering and economic data into the optimization module. then extrapolate the trends to predict how an element will deteriorate over time. A minimum of three or four cycles of inspection data is required to develop deterioration models. Element level deterioration models of various formulations have been developed to serve as condition prediction tools.`. Data analysis is composed of three main components: Condition data analysis Cost data analysis Optimization --`.

multi-year investment of a series of expenditures for maintenance.. Lifecycle costs should be comparable from one structure to another.``-`-`.. For example. and environment are examples of the major factors that affect deterioration. repair. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. the cost implications of alternative actions have to be known and considered.. The choice of MR&R actions should be predicated on minimization of agency lifecycle costs while improvements should be based upon the benefit to road users of eliminating bridge deficiencies. current condition.`. 3. Costs to be considered include the direct and indirect costs that will be incurred by the agency and the user. and improvement costs. Costs incurred by the public may make up most of the total costs. Other factors may be prevalent for certain element types or in certain geographic locations. Agency Costs The cost to a highway agency for a bridge is seldom a one-time cost.2. bridge management should take a longterm view of the economic life of a bridge. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. If lifecycle costs are calculated over an expected life that varies with each type of structure.`. Once the major factors are identified. and motor vehicle operating costs that result mainly from reducing load and clearance restrictions. These benefits include reductions in travel time.. lifecycle costs address maintenance. and replacement..``.`. and rehabilitation actions are a response to deterioration while improvements such as widening and strengthening respond to user demands. Element type and material.3. it is a long-term. rehabilitation.`. In BMS.``. relevant data can then be collected to form a database for building reliable deterioration models.. reflecting the highway agency’s long-term responsibility.`.2 Cost Data Analysis To manage the infrastructure efficiently.`. accidents. maintenance history. repair.`.``. traffic volume and the presence of de-icing salts are known to influence deck deterioration rates. and rehabilitation (MR&R)..`--- .3-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Successful prediction of bridge deterioration depends upon identiQing all factors that have a major influence on the elements’ condition over time. it is convenient to convert lifecycle costs to equivalent uniform annual costs. Therefore. age. Lifecycle costs are normally defined as the sum of future agency costs that occur over a specified period in which each cost has been discounted to its present value.``. rather. User Costs Optimization approaches to BMS recognize that maintenance.

2. When a project has to be delayed.``. 3.. If unlimited budgets are available. Where adequate funding is not available to maintain a desired level-of-service..`. the alternatives would tend to favor maintenance only to extend life until permanent closure.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . The differences in optimization approaches tend to be in the specific techniques used and in the way that network level considerations are reflected in the analysis. traffic growth. both short and long run.`.. and the impact on road users. Bridges with low vertical clearance or insufficient load capacity will force a certain volume of truck traffic to be detoured to alternate routes.Bridge Management Systems 3-5 Consideration of user costs is essential in BMS if functional deficiencies are to be eliminated. multi-year programs can be generated. then the results are used to guide project selection and scheduling. low vertical clearance. The ability to establish project priorities and optimally allocate limited funds over a predefined planning horizon.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. Two common approaches are: i) Top-down approach.. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The purpose of optimization at the network level is to select a set of bridge projects in such a way that the total benefit derived from the implementation of the selected projects is maximized (agency and user costs are minimized).3. and to determine the new optimal set of actions for the bridge at a later period.``. or poor alignment have a higher occurrence of accidents than bridges without these deficiencies. Bridges having narrow deck width.`. the BMS calculates the economic consequences of a lower level of service and provides an objective means of setting priorities for bridges so that the impact on agency and user costs is minimized.3 Optimization Optimization has become the preferred method for bridge network management. Two types of costs are incurred by users because of functional deficiencies of a bridge: accident costs and detour costs.``-`-`. where an improved form of the project-level analysis is automatically iterated and adjusted until all network-level concerns are satisfied.. resulting in increased vehicle operating costs.. If agency costs alone are considered. the BMS is capable of using the deterioration models and cost models to quantifi the bridge level effect.`.. By exploring period-byperiod project deferrals.`. The system should consider both constrained and unconstrained budget cases. Modem optimization approaches can take several forms.``. where network-level issues are addressed first.is a fundamental part of BMS software.``. 2) Bottom-up approach. it is possible to determine the optimum period in which selected alternatives should be scheduled.

`. often referred to as “what if” analysis... BRIDGITTMuses a project level-based B Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. In 1985 NCHRP Project 12-28(2) was initiated. 3. and a project programming model that integrates the results of the preservation and improvement analyses.`.`..``-`-`. An optimization performed by a BMS is only as valid as its underlying assumptions.meeting FHWA and AASHTO guidelines for bridge management systems.`--- . In the subsequent phases.. Instead. experienced.3.`.``. and political considerations.`. and knowledgeable input from the Engineermanager. FHWA. Pontis has separate sets of models for optimizing bridge preservation and improvement activities.`. This process is most useful for network budgeting and programming. a microcomputerbased software package (BRIDGITTM). A BMS may therefore build in user adjustments at all critical decision areas. The effort resulted in the develo ment of the Ponti?’ computer program.. in conjunction with six state DOTS.. local needs. A BMS may never have all the necessary information in its database. Recommendations for best action for each bridge are based on network-level considerations.3-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 3. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.3 Decision Support The function of a BMS is to provide bridge information and data analysis capabilities to improve the decision-making abilities of Bridge Managers. was developed to handle the immediate and long-term needs of highway agencies. Managers should use the BMS as a tool to evaluate various policy initiatives. The first phase of this project developed the modular elements necessary for a model form of effective bridge management at the network level.`. Often the missing information is mostly intangibles. sponsored the development of a network-level bridge management system for use by state and local transportation officials.. The available choices may relate to network level decisions or project-level decisions. A BMS is never used in practice to find one best policy among the possible choices.``.``. Pontis’ uses a top-down optimization approach in that it optimizes the network needs before arriving at individual project needs. Bridges cannot be managed without the practical. In 1989. A BMS must never make decisions.4 NATIONAL BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Research efforts initiated in North Carolina and a few other states in the 1980s resulted in the emergence of bridge management concepts that were further refined in subsequent FHWA demonstration projects. such as engineering experience.``..

`..`.`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. Pontis@and BRIDGITTM..``.`. B R I D G I T ~is ~ usefui for ail areas of bridge management.. national systems.``-`-`. have a generic design that can be adapted to accommodate the individual needs of an agency.``.. It recommends specific actions for each bridge.`. consistent with the overall network strategy. The two U S .Bridge Management Systems 3-7 optimization strategy to provide network level recommendations..`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. A few states have opted to develop their own BMS.. from programming and budgeting to project selection to bridge maintenance...`.``.

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`...`..`.`.`.`..``..``-`-`.`..``.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...``.``.

5 Bridge Stability and Movements .........3 Equipment ...........................................2 Personnel Safety ........................4 Critical Deficiency Procedures ................................................................................................ 4...........4 In-Depth Inspections ... 4........................1..................1 General .......................................................`......2..............6......................2.........5..................................................4-111 ......................................... 4.1 Planning................1.......................8......3 Guidelines for Condition Rating of Bridge Components .8.........``.4 Timber Systems .......................................................................2................................................................ 4...... and Box Sections...............2.......................................3 Superstructure ...................................................... 4................... 4...................... Girders...8.......................................................................................4......1 General ...6 Dolphins and Fenders .................................................................................5 Special Inspections..........1................................................................ 4.........1 Steel Beams................................................. 4............................................................ 4........... 4...1 Abutments ....... 4......................................................... Girders..............1 Initial Inspections ................................. ........................1 GENERAL 4. 4..................................8 PROCEDURES 4....3...........2 Routine Inspections .........3.......................................................................2............8. 4...................... 4.............................. 4.................................... 4..................3 FREQUENCY .....3 Piers and Bents ......................................... 4........................ 4.................................................4...................................... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ....6 PLANNING.8...................3........................`...............................2.................... 4........................................................... 4....1..........`...............................................8......................................................8............................................................................``...............2 Retaining Walls ..................................2 Scheduling ..3....``... and Box Sections ..`.......................................................................2 Reinforced Concrete Beams and Girders.....3 Public Safety ...................................................................................... ......................... 4.................................................................................. 4..... 4..................................................... 4-i --`.....................1 General .......2................................8..3 Damage Inspections ...................................................................................8..8............ 4-1 4-2 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-4 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-6 4-6 4-7 4-7 4-7 4-8 4-8 4-8 4-9 4-9 4-9 4-10 4-10 4-11 4-11 4-11 4-12 4-13 4-13 4-14 4-14 4-15 4-15 4-16 4-18 4-19 4-19 4-20 4-21 4-21 4-22 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.................................................................... 4.....................................................................................................................6..... 4....2 Cleaning ......................3 Inspection Team Leader ...................................................................7 INSPECTION FORMS AND REPORTS ...........................................``-`-`..........8........3.....................................2.................................................................``............`........................................................................................... AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSPECTION PERSONNEL .....................................................................5.........................................2...........4 Pile Bents ..... 4....... ..................8........................ 4......................................................2 Inspection Methods and Equipment ..............................6.....................................................................................5 SAFETY .........................................2 Inspection Program Manager ................`. SCHEDULING..............8.......3 Prestressed Concrete Beams............................ 4.............SECTION 4-INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTOF FIGURES ...............8... 4...............................................................4........ 4....`.......................................................5........................3.........8...................2.... 4........!............................................ AND EQUIPMENT ........................1 Access Methods and Equipment....6. 4-1 4..2................................. 4.............................................................................................................................8.2 Substructure.......................................... 4......................................1 Field Measurements..............4 QUALIFICATIONS 4........8........................`--- ....................................................................................... 4......................... 4...................6............................ 4.............. 4..................2 TYPES.......

...........13 Paint ..4........................... 4............8.... 4..... 4.....8.....................................................5....... 4........ 4......................6................................4.............8................................................................................. Portals....... 4................................. 4.. 4.........3...... 4.....4 Decks ....8....8.....................................3...............`.............4........................`............4......................................................4... and Curbs .....6 Signs .....................4............5 Expansion Joints .................13 DATA COLLECTION FOR LOAD RATING.................``................................. 4.....9 Deck Overlays ................................................`...........................................6 Trusses ..................................... 4.8........................................... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT 4-44 4-45 4-45 4-45 4-47 4-47 4-48 --`...........7 Cables ........ Sidewalks...............5.8......................... 4........1 Pavement.10 Rivets...... 4............ 4-23 4-23 4-25 4-25 4-25 4-26 4-26 4-29 4-29 4-30 4-31 4-31 4-32 4-33 4-33 4-34 4-34 4-36 4-36 4-36 4-36 4-37 4-37 4-37 4-37 4-37 4-38 4-38 4-38 4-39 4-40 4-41 4-41 4-42 4-42 4-42 4-43 4-43 4-44 .........................................8....................................... 4.......................................... 4......... 4..............................................................8......................8..........8.... and Sway Frames ...........................8..........10 UNDERWATER INSPECTIONS 4...9 SPECIAL STRUCTURES ...............4.........................3...........................................................................3......................................................................................................................................`--- 4.................................8..........``...............................................................................................................................................5..3............ 4.......3............................3................................................10........8...................................8....................... and Welded Connections................................. 4................................ ........1 Movable Bridges .............2 Sidewalks and Curbs .................. 4.....................................................1 Railings ...............................................................15 Arches .......................... 4..8..................................................................... 4.......................8................9..................12 Bearings ........................................2 Prestressed Concrete Deck Panels ........6 Railings............1 General ............................................................. 4...``...............................................................................`.....8..........................................12 FRACTURE CRITICAL MEMBERS 4............. 4.4.................................................................. 4..............4......`........7 Drainage.......................................................8.........................`............................. 4......................7 Waterways ..... 4........................................................................8.......................11 Pins and Hangers ........ 4....................................... 4.........................................8..................4........ 4..........8...................................8.......8..........................3 Cable-Stayed Bridges ................................................. 4...........................5 Approaches........... 4.....................................................14 Utilities ...............................4............................................................ 4..................... 4................ Bolts.............................2 In-Depth Underwater Inspections .8................ 4....................................................................................3............2 Suspension Spans ....9...........4 Embankment Slopes ................3 Traffic Safety Features.......13...8 Lighting......................................................................................................................... 4................... 4................8............................................................................................4...........................9 Corrugated Metal Plate Structures ............................................. 4......8 Diaphragms and Cross Frames ..``-`-`........... 4.........8............................................................................................................................................................3 Steel Decks .........................................................4 Timber Decks..................................................................................8................................................2 Drainage..................................`..............................9 Lateral Bracing................3............5 Floor Systems .................. 4............8.....6.....9.... 4....................8............1 1 FATIGUE-PRONE DETAILS ...........................3...................4 Prestressed Concrete Segmental Bridges ............................................................. 4..............................................5..........................................2 Observations Under Traffic .......... .................... 4..10 Encroachments ...................................1 Concrete Decks .......................3. 4-ii Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale......................................................8...............``.......9......8....................1 Routine Underwater Inspections ..................................................8 Box Culverts as Bridges ...............................10.........8......13...................................................................

............ 4-48 4-48 4-49 4-49 a.......................................... APPENDICES A....``...........3..........................`--- 4-iii Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..... 4...`...........2 BRIDGE NOMENCLATURE .....................`...................2 Live Load Effects ..........................``........................................ 4....4...............`..............4.........3.............................................`........................13.....4-2 A.13.............................................. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ........3 Inspection for Loadings ......``.4 Inspection for Resistance ................... LISTOF FIGURES Figure C4-1 Pin And Hanger Assembly ..1 Dead Load Effects ...........`....................`......4.......................... 4.`.......4-1 A..................................``-`-`...................1 STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL SHEET .................................................... 4-28 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`...................................13..................13.............``...........

--`..`.``..``-`-`.`..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.`.`.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.`.....``.

The actual inspection procedures themselves have been listed by bridge element.2 The type of inspection may vary over the useful life of a bridge in order to reflect the intensity of inspection required at the time of inspection.SECTION 4 INSPECTION 4. as well as analysis of overload permit applications. for ease of use by the inspector.. are C4.`..`.`--- 4-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. --`. to provide a continuous record of bridge condition and rate of deterioration.``.. The inspection plan and techniques should ensure that: Unique structural characteristics and special problems of individual bridges are considered in developing an inspection plan. safety of both the inspecting personnel and the traveling public.`. Inspections should not be confined to searching for defects which may exist but should include anticipating incipient problems. Successful bridge inspection is dependent on proper planning and techniques.1 This section covers methods and equipment used to make bridge inspections..`.``-`-`. the inspection team should determine if there is a need for greater than a routine inspection regimen for any given bridge. Inspection personnel are assigned in accordance with their qualifications. and maintenance is essential to the overall effectiveness of such programs.2 TYPES C4. The intensity and frequency of inspection is consistent with the type of structure and details.``. superstructure. load rating. to form the basis for the evaluation and load rating of the bridge. Each of these items is discussed in detail in the following articles. condition rating of bridge components. adequate equipment. cleaning procedures. Particular attention should be given to details that are outmoded in the original design or have potential fatigue problems... such as substructure.``. to initiate maintenance actions.. guidelines for making field measurements.. Cooperation between individuals in those departments responsible for bridge inspection.``.`. and to establish priorities for repair and rehabilitation programs. and the potential for failure.`. 4.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . For new and existing bridges. Thus inspections are performed in order to develop both preventive as well as corrective maintenance programs. and “critical condition” procedures. and the experience and reliability of the personnel performing the inspection. and decks. as determined by the Bridge Owner.1 GENERAL Bridge inspections are conducted to determine the physical and functional condition of the bridge. The five types of inspections listed below will allow a Bridge Owner to establish appropriate inspection levels consistent with the inspection frequency and the type of structure and details. Current technology and practice applied during the inspection. permits.

and the degree of testing will vary considerably for each type of inspection. it may be necessary to include some or all of the elements of an In-Depth Inspection.`. Special and more intense inspections than for ordinary bridges should also be considered for: 0 0 New structure types Structures incorporating details which have no performance history Structures with potential foundation and scour problems 0 Nonredundant structures 4.. supplemental bents.``. and to ensure that the structure continues to satisfi present service requirements. lengthenings.``. it is during this inspection that any fracture critical members or details are noted. The Routine Inspection must fully satisfy the requirements of the National Bridge Inspection --`.2. First. The purpose of this inspection is two-fold.... The second important aspect of the Initial Inspection is the determination of baseline structural conditions and the identification and listing of any existing problems or locations in the structure that may have potential problems.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 4. Such items as the extent of access to structural elements..`. and all other relevant information normally collected by the Bridge Owner..) or a change in bridge ownership.`.``. the level of detail required for the physical inspection.`.2.`. If the bridge subjected to an Initial Inspection is anything other than a newly constructed structure.1 Initial Inspections An Initial Inspection is the first inspection of a bridge as it becomes a part of the bridge file. Special inspections are required for any bridge in questionable condition. etc.`. The Initial Inspection is a fully documented investigation performed by persons meeting the required qualifications for inspection personnel and it must be accompanied by an analytical determination of load capacity. to identify any changes from “initial” or previously recorded conditions. but the elements of an Initial Inspection may also apply when there has been a change in the configuration of the structure (e..``. All bridges which have weight limits less than established by statute may require special inspections.``-`-`.2 Routine Inspections Routine Inspections are regularly scheduled inspections consisting of observations andor measurements needed to determine the physical and functional condition of the bridge.. and assessments are made of other conditions that may later warrant special attention.. Aided by a prior detailed review of plans. widenings.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. it should be used to provide all Structure Inventory and Appraisal (SI&A) data required by Federal and State regulations.4-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Each type of inspection requires different levels of intensity.g.

3 Damage Inspections Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. If major damage has occurred.2.2..`...2. The results of a Routine Inspection should be fully documented with appropriate photographs and a written report that includes any recommendations for maintenance or repair and for scheduling of follow-up In-Depth Inspections if necessary. verification of field measurements and calculations and perhaps a more refined analysis to establish or adjust interim load restrictions are required follow-up procedures. such as under-bridge inspection equipment. from ground and/or water levels. This inspection may be supplemented by a timely In-Depth Inspection as described below to document.`. Inspection of underwater portions of the substructure is limited to observations during low-flow periods and/or probing for signs of undermining. If additional close-up..``.``. inspectors must evaluate fractured members.`.`. The areas of the structure to be closely monitored are those determined by previous inspections and/or load rating calculations to be critical to loadcarrying capaciîy. A particular awareness of the potential for litigation Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. determine the extent of section loss..``.`. The load capacity should be re-evaluated to the extent that changed structural conditions would affect any previously recorded ratings.``.`. and check for any loss of foundation support.4. The amount of effort expended on this type of inspection may vary significantly depending upon the extent of the damage.. then an in-depth inspection of those areas should also be performed in accordance with Article 4. 4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . and to assess the level of effort necessary to effect a repair. and from permanent work platforms and walkways. if present.. make measurements for misalignment of members. hands-on inspection of other areas is found to be necessary during the inspection.4. rigging or staging. The scope of inspection should be sufficient to determine the need for emergency load restrictions or closure of the bridge to traffic.`. In-depth inspection of the areas being monitored should be performed in accordance with Article 4.Inspection 4-3 Standards with respect to maximum inspection frequency. the updating of Structure Inventory and Appraisal data and the qualifications of the inspection personnel. A capability to make onsite calculations to establish emergency load restrictions may be desirable. is necessary for Routine Inspection in circumstances where its use provides for the only practical means of access to areas of the structure being monitored. Special equipment.`--- A Damage Inspection is an unscheduled inspection to assess structural damage resulting from environmental factors or human actions..``-`-`. These inspections are generally conducted from the deck.

4 In-Depth Inspections An In-Depth Inspection is a close-up. should include all critical elements of the structure.`. or details that can be efficiently addressed by the same or similar inspection techniques. though generally at a longer interval. and workboats.``..`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. When appropriate or necessary to fully ascertain the existence of or the extent of any deficiency(ies).2. the activities. and findings of In-Depth Inspections should be completely and carefully documented. hands-on inspection of one or more members above or below the water level to identifi any deficiency(ies) not readily detectable using Routine Inspection procedures.2. The inspection may include a load rating to assess the residual capacity of the member or members.``. these inspections may be scheduled separately for defined segments of the bridge or for designated groups of elements.4-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges must be exercised in the documentation of Damage Inspections.. 4. should be provided to obtain access. each defined bridge segment andor each designated group of elements. such as foundation settlement or scour. To an even greater extent than is necessary for Initial and Routine Inspections.`. On small bridges. if warranted. 4.``.`.`. Traffic control and special equipment. This type of inspection can be scheduled independently of a Routine Inspection..`. It is used to monitor a particular known or suspected deficiency. or details should be clearly identified as a matter of record and each should be assigned a frequency for re-inspection. the In-Depth Inspection. If the latter option is chosen. depending on the extent of the deterioration or damage. and the public’s use of a load-posted bridge..5 Special Inspections A Special Inspection is an inspection scheduled at the discretion of the Bridge Owner. and can be performed by any qualified person familiar with the bridge and available to accommodate the assigned frequency of investigation.. such as under-bridge inspection equipment.`. nondestructive field tests and/or other material tests may need to be performed. staging. connections. The individual performing a Special Inspection should be carefully instructed regarding the nature of the known deficiency and its Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. member condition. Non-destructive load tests may be conducted to assist in determining a safe bridge load-carrying capacity. procedures. Personnel with special skills such as divers and riggers may be required... connections.`. or it may be a followup for Damage or Initial Inspections.. if needed. For large and complex structures. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``-`-`.

The intent of the term ?Be qualified for registration . location.10.`. However. but may be adjusted where past performance justifies such strategies. plan reading. extent of deterioration.10.3 FREQUENCY Each bridge should be inspected at regular intervals not to exceed two years or at longer intervals for certain bridges where such action is justified by past reports and performance history and analysis..``-`-`. detour length.1 General Minimum qualifications have been established in the National Bridge Inspection Standards..``.Inspection 4-5 functional relationship to satisfactory bridge performance. In this circumstance. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .21.2. Guidelines for obtaining FHWA approval are contained in FHWA Technical AdvisoryRevisions to the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS).1 General Qualified personnel should be used in conducting bridge inspections. Special Inspections usually are not sufficiently comprehensive to meet NBIS requirements for biennial inspections.``. --`.``. 4.T5 140.. national defense designation. traffic volume. The evaluation of these factors should be the responsibility of the person in charge of the overall inspection program.4.`.3 inspection intervals are not limited to a maximum of two years. If the Bridge Owner proposes to inspect some bridges at greater than the specified two-year interval. Such a plan should include the criteria for classisling structures by inspection intervals and the intended intensity of inspections at each interval. It should consider such factors as age. C4.1O..4.. sketching. a detailed plan which includes supporting rationale must be developed and submitted to Federal and State agencies for approval. c4.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The quality and efficiency of the inspection is influenced by the inspector?s knowledge of how the bridge works and what controls its strength and stability.? is that the individual should meet all of the education and experience requirements for licensing but has not obtained the license..`.. load rating. performance history of the bridge type. The inspection frequency for those bridges which require an underwater inspection for structural integrity is discussed in Article 4.``.`. An understanding of material characteristics and construction procedures.. and social and economic impacts due to the bridge being out of service. Minimum qualifications for the top two levels of responsibility are described below.`. susceptibility to collision. The determination of an appropriate Special Inspection frequency should consider the severity of the known deficiency.`.. The plan should also outline the details of the types and intensity of inspection to be applied.4 QUALIFICATIONSAND RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSPECTION PERSONNEL 4. combined with skills in organizing data. prior approval by FHWA is required if an inspection interval longer than two years is proposed... guidelines and procedures on what to observe andfor measure must be provided. 4. size. and a timely process to interpret the field results should be in-place. Underwater inspection frequencies are described in Articles 4.`.1 and 4.

.. When appropriate.``. soils.``.4-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges photography. --`. The inspection program manager provides overall supervision and is available to team leaders to evaluate problems.`. Ideally.. or (3) NICET Level III or IV certification in Bridge Safety Inspection. or (2) Be qualified for registration as a professional engineer under the laws of the State.`.`.. Good judgment is important to determine the urgency of problems and to implement the necessary short-term remedial actions to protect the safety of the public. materials. the specialized knowledge and skills of associate engineers in such fields as structural design.`.``-`-`.tion. Team members should have some formal classroom training to supplement on-the-job training. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . or (3) Have a minimum of 1O years experience in bridge inspection assignments in a responsible capacity and have completed a comprehensive training course based on the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual.`.. the position requires a general understanding of all aspects of bridge engineering. hydrodynamics. new construction.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. or (2) Have a minimum of five years experience in bridge inspection assignments in a responsible capacity and have completed a comprehensive training course based on the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual.``. and technical report writing are valuable.`. 4.. including design. electrical equipment. maintenance. or emergency repairs should be utilized.. and maintenance. reporting. load rating.4.4. machinery.3 Inspection Team Leader The second levei of responsibility is the Inspection Team Leader. construction. the individual in charge of the organizational unit that has been delegated the responsibilities for bridge inspec.`. and inventory shall possess the following minimum qualifications: (1) Be a registered professional engineer.``.2 InspectionProgram Manager At the highest level.. The minimum qualifications of a Team Leader shall be: (1) Have the qualifications specified for the organizational Unit Leader. 4. rehabilitation. Short courses have proved to be effective in establishing standards and consistency within the inspection organization.

Worn or damaged equipment should be discarded. including hard hats. Belts. harnesses.5.5 SAFETY 4. inspection personnel should be cautioned to keep safety equipment clean and away from potentially harmful chemicals such as gasoline. Proper hearing. This program should embody applicable State and Federal legislation governing safety and health in the bridge inspection work environment. air changes.`. In addition. dye penetrant.`.`--- 4. vests.. --`. All lifelines. and other equipment should be maintained in good repair. and/or the use of air packs may be required. Inspection personnel should have first aid training. belts. Air testing.. specialized safety precautions may be required. lanyards. lanyards. Proper safety precautions should be employed when entering confined spaces such as the interior of a box girder..2 Personnel Safety Personal protective clothing should be worn at all times..``. and machinery should be kept in the best possible operating condition. Personnel should be trained in the safe use of the vehicles and emergency procedures in the event of equipment failure.`. Safety programs provide a guide to inspection personnel but do not substitute for good judgment and common sense. Inspection vehicles should be operated in accordance with the operating manuals provided by the manufacturer.. There should be at least one team leader at the bridge at all times during each inspection.`. Bridge Owners should develop a safety program to provide inspection personnel with information concerning their safety and health.5. preparing. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. including the proper operation of inspection tools and equipment. It should be recognized that each bridge site is unique. and/or oil. safety glasses (where needed).``.`..``. and face protection methods should be practiced whenever using manual and power tools.Inspection 4-7 The Inspection Team Leader is responsible for planning.1 General Safety of both the inspection team members and the public is paramount.`.``. 4.``-`-`... and performing the field inspection of a bridge. safety devices. All equipment. and other personal safety equipment should be used in accordance with applicable standards. and appropriate footwear. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . In situations where unusual working conditions may exist.`. sight.

``.1 Planning Determine the type of inspection required.``. Determine which members or locations are noted in previous inspections or maintenance records to have existing defects or areas of concerns.`--- The key to the effective. SCHEDULING.`. The inspection plan should be developed based on a review of the Bridge Record (see Section 2) and may require a pre-inspection site visit.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.6. AND EQUIPMENT 4. Assemble field recording forms and prepare appropriate pre-drafted sketches of îypical details.. fatigue-prone details..`. The following items should be considered: . other agencies or the public. safe performance of any bridge inspection is proper advance planning and preparation. Determine the extent of underwater inspection required and the vulnerability to scour. Special needs such as diving or scour studies should be identified.``. and non-redundant members...5. Estimate the duration of the inspection and the scheduled work hours. such as fracture critical members. Bridge Owners should employ proper procedures for traffic control and work zone protection during the inspection of a bridge.`..`. or notification of. Decide whether non-destructive or other specialized testing is appropriate. Determine the number of personnel and type of equipment and tools necessary to perform the inspection.``.3 Public Safeîy In the interest of public safety. as needed..4-8 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 4. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.. The Manual o f Uniform Trafic Control Devices as supplemented by State and Local authorities should be used as a guide for such procedures. Determine whether the structure contains members or details requiring special attention. Determine whether there are structures nearby which are also scheduled for inspection which require a similar crew with similar tools and equipment.6 PLANNING.``-`-`..`. Establish coordination with. 4.

Once the equipment requirements are established for a bridge..1 Access Methods and Equipment The variation in types of structures to be inspected requires that a broad range of techniques and equipment be used by the bridge inspectors to gain access to the structural elements to perform the inspection. or bridge structure to safely support the access equipment.`.`.. the following items must be considered: The ability of the ground. assisted free climbing. bridge inspections should be scheduled in those periods of the year which offer the most desirable conditions for thorough inspections. 4. The methods and equipment used to gain access to bridge members include ladders.. In selecting the use of such equipment.6..14). Stream action during periods of high water and position of expansion joints at times of very high and low ambient temperatures are examples of conditions observed by local maintenance personnel which may not be seen by the inspector. rigging and scaffolds.3 Equipment Bridge inspection equipment consists of those items used for access and those used to perform actual inspection tasks. power lift vehicles.. 4.``. --`.`. joints.`--- 4.6. pavement. and structures requiring high climbing should be inspected during those seasons when high winds or extremes of temperature are not prevalent. The need for traffic control and/or lane closure. These examples illustrate the importance of proper scheduling. and diving equipment.6..2.`.``. where trouble from thermal movement is suspected. power lift staging.`.``-`-`. The local maintenance person sees the bridges at all times of the year under all types of conditions and may point out peculiarities which may not be apparent at the time of the investigation.`.. depending on the location of the Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. boats.3. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . etc. Inspections during temperature extremes should be made at bearings.2 Scheduling So far as is practicable. it should become part of the bridge record (see Article 2. Substructures of bridges over streams or rivers can best be inspected at times of low water.It is advisable for the individual making the inspections to confer with the local highway maintenance superintendent or foreman regarding the bridges to be inspected.`.``..

`--- Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges equipment.. The language used in reports should be factual. Experienced personnel should be responsible for planning the use of inspection equipment. If utilities are present. recommendations for repair and maintenance should be included.2.``. The information contained in reports is obtained from field investigations..2 Typical inspection equipment and tools are listed in the Bridge Inspection Training Manual (BITM) and other related publications. a pre-inspection site visit by the Team Leader may be helpful.`. the pre-inspection should be done plans-in-hand to allow preliminary verification of structure configuration and details.. documenting this information would be valuable in the future.``. Special Inspections are made many times for the purpose of checking some specific item where a problem or change may be anticipated. A report should be made for each bridge inspection even though it may be only a Special Inspection. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. and utility de-energizations. Sketches and photographs should be used to supplement written notes concerning the location and physical characteristics of deficiencies.`. All signs of distress and deterioration should be noted with sufficient accuracy so that future inspectors can readily make a comparison of condition.``.. which will require close attention during subsequent inspections. without resorting to lengthy written notes.6. disclose areas of potential concern..4-10 --`. and other special considerations for bridges over railroads.. The sources of all information contained in a report should be clearly evident and the date of the inspection or other sources of data should be noted. Photographs should be taken in the field to illustrate defects and cross referenced in the forms and reports where the various defects are noted. supplemented by reference to “as-built’’ or “Field Checked” plans. The use of simple elevation and section sketches of deteriorated members permits the drawing and dimensioning of defects clearly..3. in the interest of uniformity.6. 4.`.. c4.3. The MUTCD and/or State and Local requirements should be used as a guide in planning such measures.`.`. The pre-inspection should determine the means of access. weather conditions.7 INSPECTION FORMS AND REPORTS Inspection forms and reports prepared for field use should be organized in a systematic manner and contain sketches and room for notes.7 In making a report. flagmen. If conditions warrant.`.2 Inspection Methods And Equipment The inspection methods and equipment to be employed will depend on the type of inspection as described in Article 4.``. and (d) The need for permits. If plans are available. (c) The presence of utilities. C4. Even though no changes are evident in this inspection and the condition seems relatively unimportant. traffic controls. and. it is a legal record which may form an important element in some future litigation. The completed report should be clear and detailed to the extent that notes and sketches can be fully interpreted at a later date. the same phraseology should be used insofar as possible to avoid ambiguity of meaning.``-`-`. keep in mind that money may be allocated or repairs designed based on this information. special care may be required to prevent accidents. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . In planning the inspection. clear and concise.`. 4. and form the basis for decisions on timing. Furthermore.

4.`. Defects found in various portions of the structure will require a thorough investigation to determine and evaluate their cause. including accumulation of debris such as drift.``-`-`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.8. further investigation should be made until the cause is determined. Careful measurement of line. and garbage. in control houses on movable bridges. If possible. weeds.8. The storage of combustible material under or near a bridge. but not necessarily be limited to.``. however. Unusual or unique bridges or portions of bridges may require special considerations and these should be defined in the inspection plan for the bridge. vibration.``.1 Field Measurements Field measurements are made to provide baseline data on the existing bridge components and Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. If detected.``.2 through 4. and methodologies for systematic numbering of bridge components to facilitate note taking and produce uniform results which are easily understood by all inspection teams and office personnel. To achieve this objective. Possible fire hazards should be identified.`--- . or deflection. The use of photographs and sketches to define areas and extent of deterioration should be encouraged.`. Nomenclature used to describe the bridge components should be consistent.. 4. The cause of most defects will be readily evident. consideration should be given to standardizing the sequence for inspection of a bridge. it may take considerable time and effort to determine the cause of some defects and to fully assess their seriousness.. observations described in Articles 4. brush.`. legends.Inspection 4-11 Bridge Owners should develop and use standardized abbreviations.10.`...`. grade.4. Basic highway bridge nomenclature is shown in Appendix A.8.8...8 PROCEDURES 4.1 General The field investigation of a bridge should be conducted in a systematic and organized manner that will be efficient and minimize the possibility of any bridge item being overlooked.. Seriousness of the condition can then be appraised and corrective action taken as required. Items common to these procedures are discussed below. The procedures should include..`.1. and length may be required for this evaluation. bridges should be observed during passage of heavy loads to determine if there is any excessive noise.2. or in storage sheds in the vicinity of the bridge should be reported.

. However. vines. and peeling paint for proper inspection. crack size. When plans are available for a bridge which is to be load rated. Necessary accuracy to identie section Nearest O.``. and/or new utilities. Nearest 112 in. 1 ft. On metal structures. additional overlays. it is necessary that permanent markings be made on the structure and recorded in field notes by the inspector.8.`.. which may occur over time. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.8. Special attention should be given to checking for possible changes in dead load. marine growth. A log of the readings should be kept in the inspection file. Measurements sufficient to track changes in joint opening. nor do they reflect all changes made to the bridge.``-`-`. Direct measurement of the surface area. and location of defects and deterioration is preferred to visual elements of “percentage loss. Metal structures with heavy plate C4. The following limits of accuracy are generally ample for field measurement: Timber Members: Concrete Members: Asphalt Surfacing: Steel Rolled Sections: Span Lengths: Nearest 1/4 in.`. vegetation. or other hidden defects. Debris. Measurements to monitor suspected or observed substructure tilting or movement may be required. cracked.`.`. such as a change in the type of decking.``.`--- .. In these cases. deterioration. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. litter.`.``. Measurements are to be made only with sufficient precision to serve the purpose for which they are intended..`.1. to serve as a datum for future readings. Unnecessarily precise measurements lead to a waste of time and a false sense of value of the derived results. The corrosion thickness varies with environmental conditions and the existing corrosion at the time of inspection could be new deterioration on top of a previously deteriorated and cleaned area. Measurements may be required on bridges for which no plans are available and to veri@ data shown on plans. dimensions and member types and sizes will normally be taken from the plans.” 4. particularly on fracture critical members.. it may be necessary to remove alligatored.1.2 Cleaning It is a good inspection practice to clean selected areas to allow close “hands on” inspection for corrosion. or rocker position may need to be made and recorded.. fungus.`.4-12 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges to track changes such as crack width and length. Sufficient checking must be done during field inspections to ensure that the plans truly represent the structure before they are used in structural calculations. depth. Nearest 112 in... and numerous other obscuring coverings can accumulate and hide problem areas. many of the plans for older structures are not as-built plans. and updated with the readings after each inspection cycle.2 It is inadvisable to estimate corrosion depth from the thickness of corrosion bloom for many reasons.

Rapid evaluation of the deficiencies found. FHWA.. lime encrustation. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8.``-`-`. Inspectors should give particular attention to cleaning and carefully inspecting such areas.1. (Refer to Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges.`.1.``..``. leaching.. including: Immediate critical deficiency reporting steps. A tracking system to ensure adequate follow-up actions.. or other deterioration.`. especially when they are present near end grain.``.Inspection 4-13 corrosion will require chipping with a hammer or other means to remove corrosion down to the base metal in order to measure the remaining section. Rapid implementation of corrective or protective actions. Bridge Owners should implement standard procedures for addressing such deficiencies. cracks..3 Guidelines for Condition Rating of Bridge Components Guidelines for evaluating the condition of bridge components should be developed to promote uniformity in the inspections performed by different teams and at different times. On concrete structures. if a safety hazard is present.`. December 1995. Emergency notification to police and the public.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. and debris may cover heavily corroded reinforcing. Timber structures are particularly susceptible to termites and decay in areas where debris causes a wetídry condition.``.. Numeric coding systems have proved to be effective in establishing such uniformity in condition evaluation.`.) 4. Debris on piles can obscure heavy spalling or salt deterioration and vegetation (particularly vines) can obscure large defects such as cracks or spalls.8.`. 4.4 Critical Deficiency Procedures Critical structural and safety-related deficiencies found during the field inspection and/or evaluation of a bridge should be brought to the attention of the Bridge Owner immediately. Provisions should be made to recoat such areas exposed during the inspection which are critical to the structural integrity of the bridge. --`.. Provisions for identieing other bridges with similar structural details for follow-up inspections.`..`.

Particular attention should be given to foundations on spread footings where scour or erosion is more critical than for a foundation on piles. deterioration. In some areas.2..``.`.1 Abutments The footing of the abutment should be investigated for evidence of significant scour or undercutting..4. 4.``. --`. Horizontal instability may also result from earth or rock fills piled against abutments or on the slopes retained by wingwalls.`. but the horizontal stability may be jeopardized. cavities.. Devices installed to protect the structure against earthquakes should be examined for evidence of corrosion. movement. Structural steel partially encased in substructure concrete should be inspected at the face of the concrete for deterioration and for movement relative to the concrete surface. evidence of scour. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . missing bolts..`. cracking. Probing is normally performed if all or part of the abutment is located in water.2. However. and discoloration of the concrete. The horizontal surfaces of the tops of abutments are particularly vulnerable to attack from deicing salts.8. Check for evidence of horizontal or vertical movement of the superstructure relative to the abutment.2 Substructure An inspection of the substructure of a bridge is generally comprised of an examination and recording of signs of damage.. nuts or cable clamps. broken strands. spalling. and other signs of deterioration of the stones.8. Stone masonry should be checked for cracking in the mortar joints and to see that the pointing is in good condition. Those underwater situations which require diving to establish the structural integrity are described in Article 4. and. horizontal instability may result. Typical evidence of abutment SCOUT for spill-through abutments is an observable instability of the slope protection due to removal of material at the toe of slope.``.``-`-`. The vertical support capacity of the piles normally should not be greatly affected unless the scour is excessively severe. Any exposed piling should be inspected in accordance with the applicable procedures listed in Article 4. When erosion has occurred on one face of the abutment only.`.`. if in water.4-14 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 4. leaving solid material on the opposite face. Check the stone masonry for erosion.10. and proper adjustment. corrosion of reinforcing steel near the surface can result in cracking. be aware that scour and undercutting of a foundation on piles can also occur.8.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``. All exposed concrete should be examined for the existence of deterioration and cracks...`..

`. Exposed concrete and stone masonry should be examined for the existence and severity of cracks and any deterioration of the concrete. Wall faces. This type of inspection should be performed after an earthquake has occurred in the vicinity. Riprap that has been placed as a countermeasure against pier scour should be evaluated for Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS C4. should be inspected as described in the applicable portions of Article 4.. without attempting to distinguish between the two terms. or by changes in measured clearances between ends of girders and the abutment backwall.3 Piers and Bents Piers and bents located in or adjacent to water should be inspected for evidence of scour as described in Article 4.8.2.`.. the footings should be examined for scour as described for abutments in Article 4.2. Cracks in the slope behind a wall can indicate settlement of the toe and rotation of the wall. lateral or longitudinal shifting.Inspection 4-15 Abutments should be checked for evidence of rotation of walls. A separate discussion on open pile bents is contained in Article 4.3 This article contains general instructions covering both piers and bents.8. or mortar..2 Retaining Walls If the retaining wall is adjacent to water.8.`.8.1 for abutments.. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. by bearings being off center or at a changed angle. Exposed piling should be inspected as described in applicable portions of Article 4.2.4..8.`.2.4..4. or settlement of foundations as compared to previous records.`--- . Footings in some locations should also be examined for undercutting caused by soil settlement or wind erosion..2.``. tops.``..``-`-`.``. The toes of all retaining walls should be examined for soil settlement.8. 4. or settlement). 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.2. Bulges in the faces of sheet pile walls or mechanically stabilized earth walls can indicate failure of individual anchors. Mounds of earth adjacent to drains indicate the probable presence of burrowing animals. Seepage of water at cracks or joints away from the weep holes may indicate an accumulation of water and improper functioning of the weep holes.2.`.``. The exposed ends of headers of concrete crib walls should be closely examined for cracks which could indicate possible fuhire loss of the interlocking feature and failure of the wall. Examine the abutment drains and weep holes to see if they are functioning properly. erosion. masonry. Such movement is usually evidenced by the opening or closing of cracks or joints.2.`.8. Any exposed piling. 4.8. Loss of full bearing at the toe can bring about failure of the wall. as well as for erosion and scour.`.1. and joints should be checked for bulging or settlement since the last inspection. whether exposed as a feature of the wall (sheet pipe and soldier pile walls) or by adverse action (scour.

It may be larger material deposited at the pier by the stream and may not be providing adequate protection. Steel piers and bents should be checked for corrosion. The timing of such borings will vary greatly from area to area because of climatic variations. Timber piles should be checked for decay. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. tilt.. Areas of special vulnerability are the water line and splash zones. Although piles may appear sound on the outer surface.``. type of wood used for piling. the ground line.8. Horizontal instability could result from such loads. Creosoted piles. some may contain advanced interior decay. Examine all exposed concrete and stone masonry for the existence and severity of cracks and any deterioration of the concrete.`--- .`. for example. or mortar. or timber piles extending to a cap which may be separate from the bridge superstructure or integral with it.4 Pile Bents This article covers those bridge supports which are composed of concrete. and the preservative treatment that has been used on the timber. bolts. the earth has to be removed from around the pile to a depth of a foot or so and the timber probed or bored. rockers. and bearings during passage of heavy loads to determine whether movements are unusual or as expected.. Sounding with a hammer may reveal an unsound pile. masonry. 4. Any material deposited against a bent or pier which was not provided for in the original design should be noted.`.``-`-`. or settlement. Bearing seats.. Cable connections.``.``. even though the outside surface shows no evidence of deterioration. Angular rock is typically specified for riprap while material deposited by a stream is usually rounded. Often. spalls. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.3 contains a more complete discussion on examinations of structural steel members. and rivets are especially vulnerable to rust. particularly after periods of high water. pins. especially at joints and splices. The key to making the evaluation is the shape of the material.. Article 4. and pedestals should be examined for cracks.8. especially in areas where they are alternately wet and dry. All bents and piers should be checked for lateral movement..`. may become decayed in the core area where the treatment has not penetrated.`.. including the tops of piers or bents. or other deterioration. steel. The most likely place for this condition to be found is at the ground line or tidal zone in coastal areas..`. and locations where the concrete is exposed to roadway drainage. Holes made for testing which might promote decay should be filled with treated wooden plugs..2. grout pads.`. Observe bent members. storm.4-16 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges stability.`.``. It should be verified that the material being observed as riprap is actually riprap. or earthquakes.

In addition to the above.`. (2) Areas where earth or debris may have accumulated.`. and (5) Checked or split areas. (4) Areas where the bracing members are fastened.. Coastal streams may be brackish due to tidal effects for several miles upstream and should be considered a potentially corrosive environment until confirmed otherwise.Inspection 4-17 Timber piles in salt water should be checked for damage by marine organisms which will attack timber in the area at and below tide line down to mud line.`. or other connections provide an entrance to the untreated heartwood area.4. and any evidence of overstress.. bolt holes. sound.`.. Examine steel and concrete piles both in the splash zone and below the water surface for corrosion and deterioration. daps. (3) Areas such as the top of piles where the cap bears. cracks. should be inspected carefully under passage of heavy loads to confirm that their movement is not being restrained (see Article 4.8. Bracing members must be checked to see that they are adequate. Inspect all submerged piles for deterioration and loss of section. Corrosion of exposed steel piles may be more active at the terminus of concrete encasements on partially encased structural steel members.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3.3.`. Attack may also occur in treated piles where checks in the wood.``.1O..``-`-`.12).``. and at the mudline. Observe the caps under heavy loads to detect unusual movement or any excessive deflection. Special attention should be given to exposed piles in or near salt water.`...`.``. at the waterline or tide affected zone.``.. if feasible. Caps must be examined for decay. special attention should be given to the following: (1) Contact surfaces of timber when exploring for decay. checking. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . When subjected to a corrosive environment. Steel and timber caps should be observed for any rotational movement resulting from eccentric connections.8. Further information on the inspection of timber members is found in Article 4. Bearings are designed to move freely about their pins or bearings and. Footing piles which have been exposed by scour below the mud line are highly vulnerable to attack. structural steel substructure elements should be inspected below the waterline and in the splash zone by manned or unmanned underwater surveillance.. and securely fastened. Additional information on underwater inspections is given in Article 4. --`.

--`. or seepage in the earth slopes in front or behind the walls as well as for unbalanced. Large movements will cause joints and hinges to jam or function improperly. This damage could have been caused by settlement or a change in pressure against the walls.1-4 contain references to the need for checking bridge substructure elements for movement. superstructure beams and girders to crack.`. Differential settlement between one side of a bridge and the other may also require checking with a level. spalling. Large or differential movements should be investigated further to determine the probable cause with a view toward corrective measures being taken.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . slabs and deck units to crack. and at hinges. C4. one can check for differential vertical movements by sighting along the top of railing or edge of deck. wingwalls.. Use of a transit is suggested for checking bents. rollers.2. slipouts. or along a girder. or other application of horizontal forces.`. piers.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. This article is intended to assist the inspector in locating places where movement has occurred and in tracing damage to determine if movement was its cause.8. edge of deck. and elevation differentials on opposite sides of the joint are evidences of substructure movement (or bearing failure).``-`-`. and faces of abutments and retaining walls for rotational movements or tilt. Jamming. post-construction embankment exerting pressure against these walls.8. relatively equal movements should be noted. but usually are of little consequence.2.`. it may be necessary to use a level or transit to detect movement.. Vertical movement in the superstructure is usually evidence of foundation settlement or rotation of the abutments or piers. Lateral or longitudinal sliding is caused by high water. Small.``.`. Check abutment backwalls and ends of beams for cracking.5 Articles 4.``. and retaining walls for distortion...5 Bridge Stability and Movements The baseline condition of the structure should be established during the Initial Inspection and should be the basis for the future determination of movement. A plumb bob may be used where heights are not great or where only a preliminary determination is desired..`. unusually large openings. and hanger elements for movements or inclinations not consistent with the temperature. piers. On large structures or structures on complex alignment. Inspect joints at abutments. Examine rockers. abutments.. rotate or slide. Similarly. ice pressure. bents and piers to crack.4-18 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Hiehwav Bridees 4.. unusual cracking. buckle or lose their support. earthquake.`. Causes could be rotation or sliding of the abutment or pressure from the roadway pavement against the back of the abutment.``. or changes in joint widths or inclination. Check for transverse movement by sighting along the top of railing..``. or improper clearances. Compare with notes from previous inspections to see if movements or inclinations are signs of settlement or shifting of foundations.`. bents.8. Examine abutments. and retaining walls to fail. Look for cracks.

.8..`...4.8. The discussion covering inspection of bridge decks. Piles used in dolphins or fenders are to be inspected as described in Articles 4. frame members.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. For concrete surfaces which have a protective treatment. joints.” Steel piles. and protective coatings.4. (See Article 4. abrasion and structural damage..``. insect damage.3 Superstructure This article includes discussions covering inspection of all commonly encountered types of superstructures composed of reinforced concrete.8.3.Inspection 4-19 4. Catwalks and their fastenings should also be examined for decay and other damage. and fastening devices should be examined for rust. Pneumatic and hydraulic elements should be examined for damage and to see if they are functioning properly under impact. 4. Wiring. --`. or loose connections.8.. Inspection of the more unusual types of bridges is covered in Article 4. cracking.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2. the inspection must include a close examination for the results of these actions. particularly in the “splash zone. connection devices..” Since both dolphins and fenders may suffer frequent hits and abrasion. and other damage to elements or fastening devices. and curbs is included in Article 4. Lighting devices on dolphins or fenders should be checked for rust. structural steel. or timber. Timber piles and other timber members should be examined for decay. conduits. marine organisms. The term “fender” refers to the protective unit or cover placed around the pier or abutment face and which is frequently attached to substructure.`.``.. sidewalks.2. Cable ties and bolts should be examined for rust. deterioration. The term “dolphin” refers to the stand-alone unit placed upstream or downstream from the pier. cracking.`.8. broken or missing lenses. and to see whether the lights are functioning correctly.) Note whether protective treatment needs patching or replacement. and cables should be inspected for rust damage. Check at the waterline for weathering of material. including bearings.``-`-`. “Pile Bents. fasteners.9. Concrete members should be examined for spalling.4.``.`.`.`.. rusting of the reinforcing steel. breaks. Rubber elements should be examined for missing parts. indicate the condition of the treatment and the need for patching or replacement.6 Dolphins and Fenders Dolphins and fenders are used to protect substructure units from impacts by floating debris or maneuvering vessels. and damage from abrasion or collisions.

. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Hand scrape areas of rust scale to base metal and measure remaining section using calipers. respectively. The inspector should note if flammable material is stored under or near a bridge and check for the accumulations of debris.``-`-`.3. birdanimal excrement.`. bushes. girders. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. and. Box members should be entered and inspected from within where accessible. Check for fatigue cracks which typically begin near weld terminations of stiffeners and gusset plates due to secondary stresses or out-of-plane bending. or other appropriate method. as defined in the AASHTO LRFD Design Specifications.``. The tension zone of members should be checked for cracking near erection or "tack" welds and at other fatigue-prone details.``. a visual observation is usually not sufficient to evaluate section loss. Members should be checked for out-of-plane bending in webs or connection plates.1 Steel Beams. Girders.`.12.. The bridge record should contain a complete listing of all FCMs and the type and location of various fatigue-prone details found on the structure.``. Where the deck obscures the steel top flange or the steel member is totally encased. rodents. and box sections should be evaluated as to whether or not they are Fracture Critical Members (FCM) or contain fatigue-prone details.8. Sufficient measurements should be taken to allow the evaluation of the effect of the losses on member capacity. Structural steel members should be inspected for loss of section due to rust. weeds. 4.`. More information on fatigue-prone details and FCMs may be found in Articles 4. driftwood. Any evidence of cracking should be carefully documented for evaluation and appropriate follow-up. Check enclosed members for water intrusion.`..4-20 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Girders over a traveled way should be checked for any damage resulting from being struck by overheight loads passing under the bridge.1 1 and 4.. as necessary.. if over water.``. and other deleterious materials.`..`. If feasible.. and other animals. and Box Sections Steel beams. Check for collection of debris. the inspector may recommend that portions of the covering material be removed at random locations to determine if significant section loss has occurred. Access points to enclosed box members should be closed or screened to prevent entry of birds. Compression flanges should be checked for buckling.`--- .`.. ultrasonic thickness meters. Where a build-up of rust scale is present. note any excessive vibration or deflection as truck loads move across the superstructure.

.. High-edge pressure at the bearings may cause spalling in the girder stems. If there are earthquake restrainer mechanisms at abutments. and (c) Pitting of the surface of the steel indicating unacceptable degradation of the steel. (b) Bridge geometrics which result in salt spray (marine or traffic generated) reaching the uncoated steel. lateral. the inspection should cover close examination of these elements for damage due to corrosion or stress. Check for cracking or spalling in the area around the bearings. settlement of substructure. especially over bearings. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.3. Examine the soffit of the lower slab in box girder structures and the outside face of the girders for significant cracking... Check the diaphragms for cracks. and Box Sections Prestressed concrete girders should be examined for alignment. Vertical cracks extending upward from the girder soffit near centerline of span indicate overstress in tension...8. Vertical.`. Stems of members should be checked for abnormal cracking and any disintegration of the concrete.`. or possible chemical action. perform periodic inspections at a level of effort sufficient to detect very small cracks.`.`. Note any offset at the hinges which might indicate problems with the hinge bearing. cracking. 4. The locations of the cracks and their size should be carefully noted for future reference and comparison.`.`--- .3 Prestressed Concrete Beams..``.Inspection 4-21 On FCMs.2 Reinforced Concrete Beams and Girders All reinforced concrete superstructures should be inspected for cracking.`. Girders. An abnormal offset may require further exploration to determine the cause and severity of the condition. and deterioration of the concrete.``. Inspect uncoated weathering steel structures for: (a) Details or conditions which promote continuous wetting of the uncoated steel. 4. An effort should be made to determine the probable cause of the cracking: shrinkage. and longitudinal movements relative to the substructure should be noted. Examine the inside of box girders for cracks and to see that the drains are open and functioning properly. bents. and at cast-in-place diaphragms where creep and humping of the girders Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3.8. or hinges. Diagonal cracks radiating from the bearings toward the center of span indicate overstress caused by shear.``-`-`.. overstress.``.``.

and (0 The species and grade of the lumber should be identified.`.. In order to evaluate the capacity of existing timber structures. (b) The type of beam: rough sawn. (e) The moisture content of the timber should be estimated or measured.8. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale... Spalling. dressed..4 Timber Systems Examine timber stringers for splitting.`--- 4.`..``. The bridging between the timber stringers should be checked to see that it is tight and functioning properly. (c) Horizontal shear capacity is controlled by beam depth. Whether beams have been cut or notched at the bearing and to what extent. or glue-laminated.3. or damage to prestressing steel should be noted. The location of any cracks and their size should be carefully noted for future reference and comparison. the following information should be recorded: (a) The beam size.`. cracking. Such independent action would indicate spreading of the girders or failure of the longitudinal key between girders. Timber connections should be checked for loose or missing fasteners. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. Where no information is available. (d) Age of timber should be estimated.`.`. Look for crushing and evidence of decay where they bear on the bent caps or abutment seats and at their top edge where the floor is supported. Inspections of earthquake restrainer mechanisms and for earthquake damage should be conducted as outlined in Article 4.4-22 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Hiphwav Bridges may have had an effect.3. Original and repair construction records should be checked for material delivery slips.``.``.``-`-`. --`.`.8.. and span length.`. nail-laminated. cracking.2. Stringers should be kept clear of dirt accumulations to help prevent decay from starting and to help prevent its acceleration once it has started. On bridges with underpassing traffic the exterior faces and the soffits of all types of prestressed girders should be examined. the inspector must use judgment based upon local experience. Pretensioned box sections should be checked during the passage of heavy loads to see whether any unit is acting independently of the others. spacing.``.. and excessive deflection. Evidences of rust at cracks can mean possible damage to prestressing steel.

Floorbeams and connections located below deckrelief joints frequently show severe rust due to leakage through the deck joint. odor. moisture content. Check for evidence of fatigue cracks adjacent to the various connection points..`..`. or other evidence that the floor system is not functioning as designed. Field grading and/or estimates of allowable stresses may be necessary.. Floorbeam overhanging tie plates should be carefully examined for evidence of cracking or section loss. and bracing connections. The transverse floorbeams and/or brackets can be Fracture Critical Members depending on the framing used. and grade of timber are used in establishing values for the allowable timber stresses to be used in the load rating computations. Check alignment of trusses carefully for any sag which may indicate partial failure in joints or improper adjustments of the steel vertical or counters.``. and.``.. Stringer systems are usually provided with simple expansion devices such as slotted holes at the floorbeam connections. if present. girder..`.Inspection 4-23 visual appearance.``.3. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. These expansion devices should be checked for freedom of movement.8. The age.3. The floorbeams are frequently subjected to outof-plane bending due to restraints imposed by the stringer. cross grain.8.6 Trusses The examination of any truss will normally begin with sighting along the roadway rail or curb and along the truss chord members to determine any misalignment.``-`-`. Inspect stringers. Any Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`--- . On those bridges where the deck does not bear directly on the main longitudinal members. floorbeams. The bridge record should clearly indicate whether or not the floor system contains FCMs. Check for evidence of fatigue cracks adjacent to the floorbeadgirder connections. Where more exact information is required. either vertical or horizontal. brackets to transmit the live load from the deck to the main load-carrying members (girders or trusses).`. uplift.5 Floor Systems Truss and deck girder structures are constructed with a system of stringers..``. 4.`. 4. which can cause twisting and outof-plane bending in the floorbeams.. floorbeams. A U-bolt floorbeam connection to the truss may be an example of a fracture critical detail. and overhang brackets for cracks and losses due to rust. obtain a sample for testing by a laboratory. species. etc.`..`. there is a tendency for the deck and main longitudinal members not to respond to dynamic loading in synchronization.

and around holes through which truss rod bolts are fitted. Decay is most often found at the joints where there are contact surfaces. splits. Steel tension members in trusses should be identified as to whether or not they are Fracture Critical Members. Examine truss and bracing members for traffic damage.`.. daps in the timbers where moisture can enter.`.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.. When a tension member consists of more than one component.`. End panel joints are likely areas for decay because of the dirt and debris which tends to accumulate on the bridge seat.`.4-24 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges deviation from the normal alignment should be fully investigated to determine its cause.12. Eccentricity in the connecting details has a great influence on the strength of the member and. In old bridges. an appraisal of the lateral and sway bracing should be made to determine its adequacy. Counters are sometimes carelessly tightened in order to prevent vibration or rattling. see that spacers on the pins are holding eye-bars and looped rods in their proper position. Looped rod tension members found in old trusses should be checked carefully for abnormal cracking where the loop is formed and eyebar members examined for cracks in the eyes. Check for any evidence of crushing at the ends of compression chord and diagonal members. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . compression members should be checked to see that their connections are intact.`. Counter members should be checked to see that they are in proper adjustment. All timber members should be examined for checks. Also. each component should be checked to see that the stresses are being divided equally.`. therefore. or sheared. worn. Check rivets and bolts to see that none are loose. All bolts should be checked to see that they are tight and 'in good condition.``-`-`..`. This appraisal will normally be a judgment of the Engineer based on observation of transverse vibration or movement of the structure under traffic. All Fracture Critical Members should be inspected closely in accordance with the provisions of Article 4. and decay.. Each of the truss members must be checked.. Portal bracing usually is the most restrictive overhead clearance and consequently is most susceptible to damage from overheight vehicles. warrants a close check.``.``.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Also. thus throwing abnormal stresses into the counters or other members. Steel compression members should be examined to see if they are straight with no kinks or bows....``. Check all upper and lower lateral bracing members for damage and observe if they are properly adjusted and functioning satisfactorily. All splice points should be checked for soundness in the shear connections. Check the conditions of the pins at the connections and see that the nuts and keys are in place.

`. and surface pitting. and Sway Frames Check lateral bracing and sway frame connection plates for fatigue cracking due to wind or live load induced vibrations.``-`-`. Long runs of cable should be observed for excessive vibration due to the passage of trucks or wind.``. Report any fire hazards which exist and need correction to safeguard the structure. socket assemblies. Cable hangers should be closely examined for cracked wires at the socket attachment... Cable anchorages should be entered and the wire terminations examined for loss of section and the presence of moisture. Portals.``..``. fraying. Truss portal members should be examined for collision damage or misalignment.9 Lateral Bracing. Measure the vertical clearance to knee braces or other portal connections and record the actual minimum clearance.8. Where severe surface deterioration or wire breakage is present.`. Riveted or bolted connection points should be checked for evidence of prying and soundness of the fasteners. Welded attachments and gusset plates in the tensile zones of girders are fatigue sensitive and may induce out-of-plane bending in girder webs. should be required to determine the extent of loss.`.8. Note any lateral brace or sway frame which vibrates excessively due to wind or live load passage.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3. particularly at the points of attachment to the main structural elements. and connections for cracking and evidence of internal rusting. Special attention should be given to cable in the vicinity of saddles and at low points... 4.`.`--- . a more detailed inspection of the cable.Inspection 4-25 Roof and sides of covered bridges should be investigated for adequacy of protecting the structural members from the elements. 4.8. Inspect cable terminations for “fretting fatigue” due to flexure.``.. The inspector should check for cracking or distortion in the diaphragmsfcrossframe and the girder web.8 Diaphragms and Cross Frames Diaphragms and cross frames on steel multigirder bridges should be checked for condition.7 Cables Inspect wire rope cables for breakage.3.`.`. Build-up of debris at gussets should be removed to examine for loss of section. 4. Inspect saddles.3.`. such as spreading with wedges or nondestructive testing techniques..

the hanger may not be fracture critical if sufficient cross-framing is present to redistribute the load to adjacent members without causing progressive failure. When present on trusses or two-girder systems. Severe loss to the heads of rivets should be recorded. On multi-girder systems..`... Ultrasonic testing of pins should be conducted by properly trained personnel. The inspector should be familiar with the types of connections present on each bridge.8. The hanger connecting the pins is usually a cut steel plate on girder bridges. Where such areas are visually detected. Sound suspect bolt heads with a hammer for audible sounds of distress and observe any movement of the bolt when struck. which frequently exhibit rust staining. Welded connections should be checked for the development of fatigue cracking. which occurs most commonly at weld terminations and returns. The details of these connections should normally be a part of the bridge record.. Fracture Critical Members must receive immediate attention when weld cracks are detected. may be helpful in obtaining more meaningful ultrasonic test results. relying on friction to transfer the load.. 4. Look for signs of rubbing or broken paint or rust around the bolts. Riveted and bearing type high-strength bolted connections in shear should be checked for condition and loose elements. the hanger is usually constructed similarly to the adjacent chord members. --`.`--- C4. Examine the weld for fine cracks..3. Bolted connections are either designed to act in bearing (load transferred through the bolts) or in friction where the bolts clamp the joined pieces together.11 Pins and Hangers Pin and hanger assemblies are generally provided to allow an increased clear span without an increased member depth on multi-span bridges and to allow for a statically determinant structural system.3.`. Calibration pins.8.`.8. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Missing or unsound rivets or bolts in such a connection should be reported and follow-up repairs should be made to avoid the possibility of a progressive failure of the connection.`.11 Figure C4-1 illustrates the many parts that make up one type of pin and hanger assembly.3.`.``.``-`-`. Rivets and bolts which act in tension should be hammer sounded for the presence of distress or movement.`. On truss bridges.4-26 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 4. and Welded Connections Connections between structural members are either welded or mechanically fastened using rivets or bolts. high-strength bolted connections should be checked to verify that all bolts are fully tightened. the presence of red lead dust and corrosion stains near the connection is an indication of abrasion caused by slipping of the joint. a pin and hanger assembly is fracture critical. when available. Bolts.`.. Friction type. For example.``.``.10 Rivets. microscopic or nondestructive tests can be performed to confirm and define the cracks present (see Section 5).``.

``-`-`.. the Bridge Owner should establish a program to routinely remove the cap plates and test the pins by ultrasound..`. Measure the relative position of the pins in both the longitudinal and lateral directions.`.`. Check that this restrainer is not subject to flexure or distortion.``. such as with threaded nuts. Pin and hanger assemblies at “fixed” connections usually are provided with a restrainer or thrust plate to prevent longitudinal movement.`. These assemblies often become bound due to rusting of the components. Inspect these assemblies for evidence of transverse movement at the pins..`.``. Fatigue cracking can develop along the entire length of the hanger assembly. ultrasound testing may be used to check for cracks in the pins parallel to the tested face of the pins. The pin retainer plates or nuts should be able to restrain the hangers against the main structural element. Record these measurements along with the ambient temperature to establish an ongoing record at each inspection. vulnerable to corrosion.. including fracture of the hanger. or by movement of the hanger of the pin. Check for rust build-up between the elements and evidence of lateral movement along the pin.. which places unanticipated torsional stresses on the pins and bending stresses in the hangers. Where the end of the pin is exposed. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. Check for evidence of fracture or distress. causing rotation of the hanger. Impacted rust build-up between the element can develop enough force to move the hanger laterally to a point where the bearing area is insufficient and the pin shears or the hanger falls off the pin. therefore. Such movement is provided for by longitudinal translation of the upper pin past the lower pin. On those pins which are covered by cap plates.``. The pins are frequently obscured from direct view. They are usually located next to an open joint and. Pin and hanger assemblies are frequently used to provide thermal movement of adjacent spans. Some pin and hanger assemblies are built with a limited distance between the end of the pin and the hanger plate.Inspection 4-27 Pin and hanger assemblies can fail in many ways.``.`--- .. fracture or shear in the pin. The retainer nuts or cap plates must be checked to see that they are adequately secured. Cap plates may not be strong enough to restrain this movement. Check the hangers for evidence of misalignment or bowing. consistent with the testing program established for matted pins.. such as displacement of connected elements or leaking abrasion dust. All welds on pin and hanger assemblies should be carefully checked. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`..

`--- \ e PIN ..`.``.. C4-1 Pin and Hanger Assembly.`...`.`.``.`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..``-`-`.4-28 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges WASHER PIN CAP PACER CANTILEVER ARM WASHER PACER //-OUTSIDE HANGER O /--OLT TAPERED i L------l SPACER W A S H E Y WASHER NUT WASHER I Fig.``..`.`...

Rollers and rockers should bear evenly for their full length and should be in proper position relative to the temperature at the time of the inspection. and batterings from debris in flood periods. See that anchor bolt nuts are properly set on the expansion bearings to allow normal movement. and cracked steel. disc.3. Check anchor bolts for any damage and to see that nuts are secure. spalls.” C4. Most Bridge Owners standardize on one or more paint systems. Note the physical condition of the elastomeric bearings pads and any abnormal flattening.InsDection 4-29 4. bulging. or splitting which may indicate overloading or excessive unevenness of loading. earthquake. Examine pot. A copy of the when-installed paint specification should be available to the inspector. and spherical bearings and note any instances of extruded or deformed elastomer.. the date(s) of application. or deterioration.. the inspector should identify in the field the approximate number of paint layers present and any identifjkg paint Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. Lubricated type bearings should be checked to see that they are being properly lubricated.`. 4.`--- . keys.`.``. Determine and note the probable cause of such “noise.. or TFE (polytetrafluorethylene). Examine the concrete for cracks and spalls at abutment seats and pier caps.`.12 Bearings All bearing devices should be examined to determine that they are functioning properly.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.3.12 Sharp skewed and curbed girder bridges may not have bearings which permit multi-rotation and movements. Expansion bearings should be checked to see that they can move freely and are clear of all foreign material. Make a careful examination for any such defects. polyether urethane.`.8.13 Paint The bridge file should provide a record of the paint system(s) present..`. Bearings. and the nature of surface preparation used prior to the last application. such as pier or abutment settlement.8.``. Small changes in other portions of the structure. uneven wear of the bearing components should be expected. Bearings and lateral shear keys are subject to binding and damage from creep in bridges with a relatively high skew. On older structures without an identifiable record of coating types.8. The substructure in the vicinity of such bearings should be checked for possible distress.``.. damaged seals or rings. and earthquake restrainer mechanisms should be examined carefully after unusual occurrences such as heavy traffic damage. may be reflected in the bearings.``. check the bearings under passage of heavy and rapidly moving loads to detect rattles...3.`.``-`-`. In such instances. If feasible. Examine grout pads and pedestals for cracks.

the utility and the supports are owned. sanitary sewer.4-30 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges characteristics which might assist in identifying the paint system(s) present.`. and telephone. causing them to be pushed apart. Report individual areas of more severe rust for touchup painting. In certain cases such as lighting circuits.3. 4. The inspector should investigate cracks on painted surfaces which may indicate a crack in the underlying material.`.14 Bridges frequently are used to support utilities such as water supply.`. The nature and type of the retrofitted support system should be inspected for the presence of improper welded connections which may be fatigue sensitive or which may result in overloading secondary bridge elements.8.`. or generalized rust staining.3. However.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.. It is difficult to inspect many of the areas around connection details for condition of paint and to determine if any corrosion is beginning. The painted surfaces should be free of rust pitting..``.8. crazing. The inspector should make an overall judgment as to the condition of the paint based on the condition of the majority of surfaces.. Most commonly these are suspended between beams or girders.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Utilities are frequently retrofitted on bridges. C4. Truss chord and panel joint connection details are particularly susceptible to corrosion.`.14 Utilities The bridge record should contain a clear description of the utilities present on the bridge. and a party to notify both prior to the inspection and in case any defects are uncovered by the inspection. below the deck.. The inspector should be familiar with the type of utility present and the nature of hazards which may be present during the inspection. not on localized areas of rusting. Look for the deformation in riveted or bolted multi-plate sections where moisture may have entered and corroded the contact surfaces of the plates. gas.`. especially where contaminants fi-om the roadway surface such as deicing salts may be deposited on the steel. the owner of the utility.. electric. They may also cause a build-up of ice during cold weather periods.. In most jurisdictions.. chalking. and maintained by the utility company. the owner agency may be the same as the Bridge Owner. the agency responsible for maintaining the utility. installed. the date of installation or modification of the utility encroachment.``. --`. Check carefully around bolt and rivet heads. Failures in the utilities can introduce several different types of problems: (1) Structural deterioration may occur as a result of pipes carrying liquids leaking onto superstructure or substructure elements. This is especially true if rust staining is present.``. Examine the condition of the paint and document the extent of corrosion.``. these areas should not be overlooked as they frequently are the spots where the corrosion will first start..

8.Inspection 4-31 (2) Utilities on bridges over waterways may cause restriction in the hydraulic capacity or navigational clearance of the structure.`--- 4. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. weathering.`.`.`. Concrete arch culverts should be inspected as described for concrete box culverts in Article 4.2..``-`-`. Special attention should be paid to the footing area for evidences of undermining. The bridge inspector will frequently be the first person to detect and report such a failure. spalling. or other deterioration noted and compared with previous inspection reports.4. and masonry arch bridge superstructures and long-span concrete arch culverts.3. leading to loss of balance. should be evaluated.`. vegetation. The inspector should immediately report the presence of a utility deficiency. prestressed concrete. and timber. and any cracking.. timber.``.8.. Longitudinal cracks in this area of the soffit indicate shear or flexure problems. and spalled or split blocks and stones. loose or missing stones or blocks.8.8..``. 4. settlement. (3) Leaks in gas or sewer lines can cause asphyxiation or light-headedness in the inspector. Since arches are compression members.15 Arches This article covers steel.1 and 4. roughly one third of the distance outward between crown and springing.`. any cracking in the arch ring should be carefully noted as indicative of improper loading or movement of supports.3... steel.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . or adjacent to a major structural element. concrete. or outward movement.8. and cannot assume that the utility is aware of the problem.3. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. The concrete in the arch ring and in the elements supporting the deck is to be inspected as generally covered in Article 4.`.. and to the soffit of the arch ring. (4) Electric short circuits can cause any consîruction material to become electrically charged and a danger to the inspector or the general public.3.4 Decks This article covers decks constructed of reinforced concrete.8.`. Masonry arches or masonry-faced concrete arches should be checked for mortar cracks. The risk of fire or explosion in an enclosed area.8. respectively.``. Elements of steel and timber arches should be inspected as generally covered for steel and timber members in Articles 4. regardless of type of superstructure. water seepage through the cracks.

`. sidewalks and curbs. Many decks were designed to act compositely under live load with the supporting superstructure members.. railings. scaling. Evidence of deterioration in the reinforcing steel should be examined closely to determine its extent. The hollow areas should be mapped and recorded.4-32 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges expansion joints. the inspector may recommend that some panels at random locations be removed to check the condition of the slab.`. Skid resistance tests may --`. leaching.. When permanent stay-in-place forms have been used in construction of the deck. Note any evidence of water passing through cracks in the siab.``. Movement between the bottom of the deck and top flange of supporting members or the loss of camber may be indicative of a breakdown in the composite action.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Any loose concrete which could fall and harm individuals under the bridge is a critical condition and should be reported immediately. Concrete decks should be examined for rutting and wear that may result in reduced skid resistance. Such defects may show as cracking or breaking up of the surfacing. The underside of the deck slab should always be examined for indications of deterioration or distress. These and other nondestructive field test methods are discussed in Section 5. Each item should be evaluated to determine its effect on the structure and the need to restore the loss of structural integrity and maintain a smooth riding surface.. pot-holing.`. Concrete containing certain varieties of limestone aggregate is especially susceptible to wear and the polishing action of tires.``.``-`-`. bridge drainage. The inspector should check to see that composite decks are acting as intended by the designer.``. Decks which are treated with deicing salts or are located in a salt air environment are likely to be affected.`..1 Concrete Decks Concrete decks should be checked for cracking.``. In areas where deck deterioration is suspected. and other evidence of deterioration.`. and lighting which is affixed to the bridge.4. 4. spalling. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.. Asphaltic or other type wearing surface on a deck may hide defects in the deck until they are well advanced. The surfacing must be examined very carefully for evidence of deterioration in the deck or the wearing surface. A hollow sound indicates a separation or fiachire plane in the concrete beneath the surface.`...8. The extent of spalling and/or delamination can be determined by tapping lightly with a hammer or by dragging a chain across the deck in the vicinity of the spall. the inspector may recommend the removal of small sections of the wearing surface for a more thorough investigation..

`--- The inspector should check the steel deck section since any wearing system which may be present is for riding quality only and is not structural.``-`-`.4..`. bulging.``..``. the surfaces of prestressed concrete deck panels should be checked for cracking. water leakage through cracks.8.`. Check to see that nuts or boit heads on slab anchoring bolts are tight.. and other evidences of deterioration. Open grid decks should be checked carefully for broken tie down welds.. with or without composite action. leaching. lifting.``. or separation at the joints between slabs should be noted during inspection of the underside of slabs. potholing.8.`.`. The neoprene or fabric shims between slabs and girders should be examined for tearing. 4. or loss of bond of the wearing surface as well as a close inspection of the underside of the slabs.1. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. See Article 4.`. or loosening. Fatigue cracking of all bars is common in open grid decks. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4. Where the slab units are covered by a wearing surface of asphalt concrete or other material. The joints between adjacent slab units should be examined for spalling and for intrusion of foreign material. scaling. Notations should be made of the location and extent of damage for comparison with previous reports and as a basis for future reports. The slab units may or may not be covered with a wearing surface.Inspection 4-33 be requested and performed to determine the need for remedial action to restore the surface skid resistance.8. 4. The ends of slab units should be examined for evidences of deterioration or failure in the anchorage zone.4. Check for wear in the wheel lines which reduces skid resistance.`. defects will tend to be hidden from view. Evidence of cracking. spalling.2 Prestressed Concrete Deck Panels This article covers precast prestressed concrete deck slabs. Areas where the slab units bear on the girders must be examined closely for cracking and spalling of concrete in the deck slabs or on the edges of concrete girders.. Check the slab units under passage of heavy loads to see that keys or other connecting devices between adjacent slab units are functioning properly. As with conventionally reinforced concrete. spalling.. Not included in this discussion are those precast panels used as stay-in-place forms for cast-in-place concrete deck.``. This will require very close inspection for cracking..3 Steel Decks Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`..

Corrugated metal pan decks consist of a corrugated sheet metal structural element with either a Portland cement concrete or. 4. The inspector should check for debonding of the overlay. A wearing surface is bonded to the top of the steel plate. Where the grid is visible.4. which can cause a traffic hazard and promote further concrete deterioration and/or rusting of the grid.``-`-`. check for evidence of water ponding.4-34 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Closed grid decks are either filled full depth or partial depth with concrete.`.8.`.4 Timber Decks Timber decks should be examined for decay. Vertical movement of the deck under the passage of live load may indicate weld failure. They should be checked for the same defects as open grids..`. where visible. Check this type of deck for evidence of rust-through of the bottom corrugations where water collects. On some structures. these decks are susceptible to a build-up of rust on the grid elements embedded in concrete.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..5 Expansion Joints Expansionjoints provide for thermal expansion of the deck and superstructure..`.``.. rust through or cracks in the steel plate. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Open cracks in the wearing surface will allow rust through of the deck elements to occur at an accelerated rate. and any evidence of live load movement noted. the steel plate is itself a flange element of a box girder section.`. especially at their contact surfaces where they bear on the stringers and between layers of planking or laminated pieces. asphalt concrete fill which forms the wearing surface.``. The connection between the orthotropic plate deck and supporting members should be checked. In addition.8.`. and for the development of fatigue cracks in the web elements or connecting welds. which can cause expansion of the deck and break the tie-down welds or distort the supporting structure. This type of deck is usually attached to the siringers with plug welds which are not directly observable. Observation under passing traffic will reveal looseness or excessive deflection in the members.. The concrete fill wearing surface should be examined for spalling or scaling which exposes the grid. The clear --`.. Orthotropic steel plate decks consist of a flat steel plate with a series of stiffening web elements.`. The fill material of the wearing surface should be examined for cracks or depressions. 4. more usually.. They should be checked for freedom of expansion.. or where the spikes have worked loose.4. The underside of the filled grid should be checked for evidence of water leakage and rusting of grid elements.``.``. Note any looseness which may have developed from inadequate nailing or bolting.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. check for a build-up of debris that prevents proper drainage and causes spill over onto the superstructure and substructure components. such as sliding plate dams or finger joints. separations. or impedes joint movement. Modular joints are composed of single or multiple support systems working together to accommodate large bridge movements. Examine underside for evidence of leakage and also for unusual noise which may indicate fractured welds or bolts.`. Where drainage troughs are provided. the presence and condition of any joint sealant material..`--- . Ultraviolet degradation of the seal material is evidenced by hardening and brittleness of the surface and by the appearance of pattern cracking.`. shown by water staining of the underlying structural elements... inspect for proper joint alignment. protrusions.Inspection 4-35 opening of the joint should provide for adequate expansion of the adjacent superstructure elements. The inspector should measure expansion joint openings and ambient temperature at easily identifiable locations so that future inspections can establish a record of joint movement over time.``. and for evidence of spalls or ?D? cracking in the slab edges which would prevent proper sealing of the joint. Inspect for missing anchor bolt covers. Inspect for surface damage to seals and separation beams.``. Reinforced elastomeric joints are composed of various proprietary combinations of steel supports and sealant material. Any horizontal or vertical misalignment of the joint elements should be recorded and checked at future inspections. The underside of all sealed deck joints should be checked for evidence of active joint leakage.. Sealed armored joints such as strip seals or compression seals should be checked for the presence of defects such as tears. considering the span lengths and temperature at the time of inspection..`. sagging. Loose joint panels should be repaired immediately because the bolt failure is progressive and may result in one of the joint panels breaking loose under traffic. separation of joint elements. and audible or visual evidence of loose joint panels under traffic. should be inspected both above and below deck for the condition of the supports. On joints without armoring.`. Armored joints without sealant material.``.``.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`...`.`. or embedment of foreign material.``-`-`. Areas of water staining should be clearly marked on drawings or in the field notes so that future inspections can more accurately assess the extent of active leakage.`. Inspect for solid objects (non-compressibles) which can become wedged in the joint and prevent joint contraction.

The exposed side of vehicular railing should be smooth and continuous.4. Record any areas of erosion or undermining caused by down spout outfalls. Anchor bolts. condition.. Water ponding on the bridge deck due to clogged scuppers can accelerate fieeze- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Curbs should also be checked to see that they are properly anchored. and a walking surface which will not be slippery in wet weather.`..`. Note drainage through open joints..4. or evidence of active water leakage between the parapet and the deck.2 Sidewalks and Curbs Sidewalk areas should be inspected for structural defects and pedestrian safety items such as tripping hazards. The type..4. Report broken or missing grates that are a traffic hazard immediately. Check for separations of the base of the precast element from the deck. should be hammer sounded. or other routes that are not intended.``-`-`. Clogged scuppers and down spouts should be documented and reported... if present. if exposed. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . the structural elements. The inspector should be familiar with the railing requirements of the Bridge Owner. and alignment of the curbs should be examined by the inspector.. 4..`.6 Railings.7 Drainage Examine bridge drainage for both its adequacy and condition. Sidewalks. etc. On through-truss bridges.8. On precast parapet elements.8. --`. Inspect post and beam railing systems for collision damage and deterioration of the various elements. especially fracture critical members such as eyebars. cracks.`.6.``. ponding of water or ice. or spalls in the curbs or parapets. Record areas of collision damage or movement. and Curbs 4. Check that the grating over the scupper or drain is intact.`.`.4..`.8. Inspect reinforced concrete parapets and curbline barriers for evidence of impact damage or rotation.6.``.``. check for evidence of anchorage failure.4-36 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 4. should be evaluated as to condition and as to adequacy of geometry and structural capacity.1 Railings Bridge railing and parapets.`--- 4. should be separated from traffic by an adequate vehicular railing system to prevent vehicle impact from causing major structural damage and to protect the vehicle. Check that the bridge drainage level through the down spouting and scupper is adequately terminated in drainage facilities or splash blocks.8.``. Post bases should also be checked for loss of anchorage. hangers.

or roughness.`--- The inspector should assess the condition of the deck overlay..9 Deck Overlays --`.8. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Check that roadway drainage facilities adjacent to the bridge are functioning..8...4. The extent of surface deterioration should also be reported as well as the overlay thickness.. If the joint was intended to be sealed.`.``. Joints between the approach pavement and the abutment backwall should be examined. Some of these joints are designed for thermal movement. 4. exposed wiring or missing junction box covers should be reported. and scuppers should be reported. when inspecting them.`.`. Existence of one or more of these defects may cause vehicles coming onto the bridge to induce undesirable impact stresses in the structure.2 Drainage The approach roadway drainage should be directed away from the bridge.. and that runoff flows into the drainage facilities and does not pond in the roadway or shoulder areas and does not erode the approach fill.`.5. 4.``.`.4. The condition of the overlay at the curblines. The Bridge Owner should establish a clear line of authority for reporting and clearing a clogged bridge drainage.``-`-`. determine if the seal is adequate to prevent leakage.8 Lighting The inspector should inspect lighting standards and supports for proper anchorage and fatigue damage.8. 4. unevenness. Cracking or unevenness in a concrete approach slab may indicate a void under the slab from fill settlement or erosion.8.``..5.``.5 Approaches 4. 4.8. joints.`.1 Pavement Approach pavement condition should be checked for cracking. Settlement of the approach pavement or fill can significantly alter the roadway profiles and cross slope and redirect water away from the drainage facilities. Any missing or broken luminaires. settlement. a determination should be made whether or not there is adequate clearance to provide for this movement..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .Inspection 4-37 thaw deterioration of the deck and poses a hazard to the traveling public.

Check that cables and anchorages are secure and undamaged.``-`-`. --`. The slope beyond the guide rail posts should be checked for settlement or erosion which may reduce the embedment of the posts. the inspector should review the adequacy and condition of traffic safety devices for both the upper and lower roadways.. or steel. and impact attenuation devices.8. Often such slope features result in lateral loading of the first interior pier from the abutment. Check impact attenuation devices adjacent to bridgc elements for evidence of damage due to impact.. curbing. Also check for slope failure in vicinity of abutments. rust..8. such as water or sand filled tubes.`.`.`--- 4. Wood posts should be checked for rot or insect damage. or guide railing.``.8. and that the energy absorbing elements.6 Signs Check to see that ail signs required to show restricted weight limit.`.. cracks. should be embedded in the ground and cannot be moved by hand. reduced speed limit. have not ruptured.. This inspection should include signs at or on the structure and any necessary advance warning signs.3 Traffic Safety Features This article covers the inspection of traffic safety features such as steel rail or wire cable approach guide rail. Each approach guide rail assembly should be checked as to its conformance to current standards. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``. 4. Posts which have been hit by vehicles and displaced horizontally should be reported.5.4 Embankment Slopes Check approach slope embankment for evidence of excessive erosion.`. especially at the ground line.. impaired vertical clearance. installation heights.`. and any minimum clearances..``. Check the signs to see that the Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5.`.`. Guide rail approach ends and connections to the bridge parapet or railing should be checked for conformance to current standards.``. either wood. Inspectors should be familiar with the current agency standards for approach guide rail types. slope-faced concrete barriers..4-38 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 4. or closure are in their proper place. Check that connections between rails and posts are secure and tight. On structures over highways. or breakage. The inspector should check the guide rail condition for collision damage. concrete. and in some cases cause tilting andor bending of the pier. All areas of settlement or frost heave should be noted. Check the alignment of the rail. settlement. and undermining of pavements. The posts.

``.7 Waterways The adequacy of the waterway opening under the structure should be assessed. will necessitate remeasurement of the clearances and correction of the signs and records to reflect the change.Inspection 4-39 lettering is clear and legible and that they are in generalIy good physical condition. Determine if changes in the channel have caused the present protection to be inadequate and if it may be advisable to place more protection or to revise the existing protection. such as groins and guide banks (spur dikes). channel shifting.`.8.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`. should be checked to observe if they are sound and functioning properly. Connections used in sign framing members may be fatigue prone and should be inspected in accordance with Article 4. check to see that the required navigational signs for water traffic are in place and in good condition... The Bridge Owner should designate the parties responsible for replacing missing or damaged signs and for removal of vegetation and otherwise restoring sign visibility.. 4. Evidence of materiah mining should be observed. A channel profile record for the structure should be developed and revised as significant changes occur.`. or aggradation.`.``.. The inspector should know to whom sign deficiencies are to be reported.. --`.``. the inspector should bear in mind the potential for debris build-up during periods of high flow and the hazard posed by ice jamming under the bridge during winter and early spring periods. such as addition of surfacing to the roadway. Sign framing members including the connections and anchor bolts should be inspected for structural integrity. This provides an invaluable record of the tendency toward scour.1 1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The inspector should be familiar with the regulations of the United States Coast Guard to the extent necessq for making these determinations.``-`-`.`. A study of these characteristics can help predict when protection of pier and abutment footings may be required to avoid or minimize future problems. When assessing the adequacy of the waterway opening. Inspections which occur in the colder months of the year should account for summer foliage in assessing sign visibility..`. The navigational lights should be examined to see that they are properly installed in their intended positions and functioning. Any revision made which will alter the vertical clearances. Existing bank protection and other protective devices. The aerial obstruction lights on high bridges should be inspected to see if they are functioning.`.``. degradation. For bridges over navigable channels..

Watch for sand and gravel bars deposited in the channel which may direct stream flow in such a manner as to cause harmful scour at piers and abutments. 4. Evidence of overtopping of the bridge by floods should also be recorded. which could block the entrance.`. The downstream cut-off wall. and any footings for abrasion. Items to look for will include possible flooding from inadequate openings at the structure.``.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4-40 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges See that the waterway is not obstructed. Check for slides in the roadway embankment and in the banks of the waterway which could affect the performance or structural integrity of the culvert. or skew of the piers or abutments. should be checked for potential scour behind the wall in the upstream direction..8 Box Culverts as Bridges This article covers reinforced concrete singleor multiple-cell box culverts which are classified as bridges in accordance with the AASHTO definition of a bridge (see Article 1.. Inspect the side walls. but that it affords free flow of water. Note whether brush or trees are interfering with proper flow through the culvert. --`. differential movement at joints in the box.`.``. Much of the material is also applicable to concrete arch culverts and to reinforced concrete facilities constructed in an opened box.`.``.. Check for outward evidences of settlement or other movement by sighting for a sag in the profile of the roadway overhead..``-`-`. Areas upstream and downstream of the bridge should be checked to see if the bridge and its approaches are causing any problems or potential problems. erosion of banks or levees from improper location. if present. cracking or other deterioration of the concrete surfaces. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..8. Longitudinal cracks usually indicate shear or tension stresses due to loadings in excess of those the structure can safely carry. Inspect the underside of the top slab for cracks and spalls. base slab. Transverse cracks usually indicate differential settlement along the barrel of the box. Check for leakage of water through the expansion joints and for any undermining of the structure at the outlet due to scour.`. Check for accumulations of debris.. particularly at the inlet and immediately upstream from the inlet. and for rotation of the wingwalls at the ends of the box. Note excessive accumulations of earth in the culvert.`.`.. Note the location and size for comparison with previous and subsequent reports.5). either without a bottom slab or with a bottom slab not rigidly connected to the side walls. Obstructions such as debris or growth may contribute to scour and may present a fire hazard to the structure.`. sag of the culvert floor or in the underside of the top slab.``..

`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The shape of the CMP Arch should be inspected and compared to the as-built shape. evidence of the edges folding inward should be checked.``.``. Any flattening of the top arch elements or sides should be highlighted.`. and dents or other local defects.14. leakage at seams. Coring or test pits may be required to determine the extent of loss at backfill material.3. particularly after repaving projects.``. Note the aesthetic effect encroachments may have on the bridge.. The inspector should note if the encroachment is located where there is a possibility that it may be hit and damaged by traffic. For those installations with an inlet end mitered to the embankment slope.`.. The general appearance of the vicinity around the --`. and spalled or split blocks and stones.``-`-`. weathering. over the bridge. The horizontal and vertical clearances should be checked by field measurements.. and debris are examples of encroachments which reduce the horizontal and vertical clearances for the passage of vehicles. if present. This item must be considered in permitting encroachments to remain on a bridge. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . In the absence of headwalls.8.Inspection 4-41 Masonry facing.8.10 Encroachments Encroachments at or adjacent to a bridge site are man-made or natural elements which restrict the clearance under a bridge or. Signs and sign structures. utilities.`.8.`. The backfill material at the outlet should be inspected for evidence of material being removed from underneath and alongside of the structure due to water infiltrating the material from the inlet. dense vegetation.9 Corrugated Metal Plate Structures Corrugated Metal Plate (CMP) Structures depend on the interaction with the backfill soil for their stability and ability to carry loads.`... should be checked for mortar cracks. and all changes from the as-built condition or previous inspection should be noted. The CMP Arch is a compression ring with little bending resistance..`.. especially at bolt locations. The entire length of the barrel of the CMP arch should be checked for misalignment of plate elements.`. see the FHWA Culvert Inspection Manual. All CMP structures should be checked for cracks and distortions.``. 4. C4. loose or missing stones or blocks. in some areas. 4. evidence of an upward displacement of the inlet should be checked.. The base of the CMP arch should be checked for differential settlement or undermining.9 For more information on the inspection of CMP Arch culverts.8.7 and the inspection of utilities carried by the bridge is described in Article 4.8. The encroachment of waterways is discussed in Articles 4. CMP structures should be checked for partial or full concrete headwalls at the inlet to which the structures should be anchored.

`.`. Evaluation.`.`--- 4. In general.``-`-`. and at the anchorages. towers. For cable suspension systems.. Emphasis should be placed on checking the condition of caulking.4-42 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges structure will be a factor in making this determination... a member consisting of two eyebars or less should be considered as fracture critical unless evaluation indicates otherwise (see Article 4. --`.9. Check anchorages for corrosion and to see that there is adequate protection against moisture entering or collecting where it may cause corrosion.`.``.9. when it exists... Nondestructive testing may be helpful in evaluating the condition of cables (see Section 5). and bascule spans (single or double leaf).``. Eyebars used in a chain suspension span are very similar to those in a truss. at the saddles over the towers.1 Movable Bridges The most common types of movable bridges are the swing span. at cable band locations on suspension bridge main cables. examine the main suspension cables to see that their protective covering or coating is in good condition and protecting the steel from corrosion. The same type of Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Special attention should be given to the cable areas adjacent to the cable bands. and cable bands are to be made in detail as covered in other sections of this Manual.``.`.2 Suspension Spans Suspension spans include cable suspended and eyebar chain suspension systems. Special attention should be given to steel anchor bars embedded in concrete at the interface of the steel and the concrete.`. Inspection of the stiffening trusses. with each link member consisting of two or more eyebars. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 4.12).. and Maintenance Manual. floor system.`. Examine the bands holding the suspenders to the main suspension cable to see that no slippage has occurred and that all bolts appear to be tight. 4.. Eyebar suspension systems have flat steel bars fabricated into a chain.9 SPECIAL STRUCTURES The Bridge Owner should develop a separate inspection plan for each unusual or special bridge to reflect the unique characteristics of such structures. Some of the special structures and their inspection requirements are briefly described below. Movable bridges and their inspections are described in detail in the AASHTO Movable Bridge Inspection. vertical lift spans.. connected by pins.``.

The manual will also outline the inspection procedures to be followed for each element and will include recommended maintenance procedures.8. bearings. the design requirements. These cables may be fracture critical elements and inspection is paramount.9.``-`-`. A few bridges exhibited longitudinal cracks in the deck surface immediately outboard of the exterior girders.`..Inspection 4-43 inspection should be used on a suspension chain as that used on the truss chord.`. (2) Examine the spacers on the pins at the end of each eyebar to be sure they are holding the eyebars in their proper position. and expansion joints should be carried out in accordance with the applicable discussions in Article 4. The deck surface should be closely examined for longitudinal cracks at the edge of the exterior girder web. pin nuts.`.3.3.``.`. and other similar components very carefully..4 Prestressed Concrete Segmental Bridges c4.`--- Cable-stayed bridges consist OP concrete or steel box girders or trusses supported by cables originating from a tall tower. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Each cable-stayed bridge should have an inspection manual prepared by the designer that provides a comprehensive set of special procedures for use in conducting inspections. Maintenance engineers have noticed a few instances of cracking which are peculiar only to segmental prestressed concrete bridges.`. it is advisable to develop a separate inspection plan for each bridge.. as discussed in Article 4. The manual will usually describe the various components of the bridge. Because of the many differences between design details used for segmental bridges. 4. ( 5 ) Look for weld repairs. and construction techniques used.`.`..``. through bolts.. deck.. . The inspection of substructure. (4) Examine closely-spaced eyebars at the pin for corrosion build-up (pack rust) between each member. pin caps. The inspector should: (1) Inspect carefully the area around the eye and the shank for cracking. anchorages.4 Prestressed concrete segmental bridges may be made up of cast-in-place segments or precast segments. Most of these cracks were felt to have been caused by casting or curing methods which caused Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Cable inspection procedures should address cable enclosures. The inspection of the other structural elements should be done in accordance with appropriate articles of this Manual.9. The inspection of the superstructure of a segmentally cast-in-place or precast bridge is much the same as that for prestressed concrete bridges.9.3 Cable-Stayed Bridges 4... and damping systems.8. (3) Observe the eyebars under live load to assure that the load is distributed evenly to each member of the link.``. (6) Inspect pins.``.

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. In wadeable water.23.``. The areas around the keys in the girder stems and the slabs should be examined closely for cracks.`... particularly at interlocking comers.. 5 140. Special attention should be given to monitoring scour critical bridges during and after major flood events. Underwater members must be inspected to the extent necessary to determine structural safety with certainty. For additional information.. Particular attention should also be paid to the profile of the roadway surface (by sighting the top of railing or edge of deck).303 pertain to inspections that require diving or other special methods or equipment. differential shrinkage between the overhanging slab and the box section.`. probing to locate deterioration of substructure and undermining.``. While inside the box. or possible failure of the bearings under an end unit at its support. 4.. Differential movement between segments will also show up as cracks in the wearing surface on the deck.`. check the underside of the deck at joints between segments under passage of heavy loads..10. andíor diving to visually inspect and measure bridge components.`. In addition to structure elements.`.. 4.10 UNDERWATER INSPECTIONS Underwater inspection is the combined effort of sounding to locate the channel bottom.``-`-`. Such an inspection will require entry into the box sections and examination of the interior anchorages. inspections in deep water will generally require diving or other appropriate techniques to determine underwater conditions. The article highlights the need to thoroughly inspect substructure elements in a water environment.10 This article covers underwater inspection procedures and scour evaluation. see the FHWA Technical AdvisoyEvaluating Scour at Bridges. C4.. Differential movements indicate improper functioning of keys in the girder stems. underwater inspections must include the stream bed.1 Routine Underwater Inspections Observations during low-flow periods andor probing for signs of undermining or substructure deterioration should be done during all routine Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Humps or sags of an entire span length are evidences of long-term creep of tendons or concrete not anticipated in the original design.`--- . Localized sags or humps are indications of problems deserving closer inspection to see if there has been a failure of prestressing units or their anchorages.``.4-44 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Cracking could have resulted fiom heavy loads on the overhang or by casting or curing methods which resulted in transverse bowing of individual units and resultant cracking during stressing. Scour evaluations are to be conducted for all existing bridges that have been screened by Bridge Owners and found to be scour susceptible.`. however. The deck soffit must be inspected for cracks and spalls and for evidences of water leakage through cracks or joints.`. The underwater inspection requirements of f Federal Regulations Section Title 23 Code o 650. underwater inspections can usually be accomplished visually or tactually from above the water surface. It should be an integral part of a total bridge inspection plan.``. Cracks showed up when the section was stressed.

11 FATIGUE-PRONE DETAILS Fatigue cracks may occur at locations of stress concentration. Bridge Owners may establish the frequency of such inspections based on the category of the detail. Tension components of a bridge member consist of components of tension members and --`. navigation traffic collision.. ice loading. Observations should also be made to review the structural integrity of the foundations.2 In-Depth Underwater Inspections In-depth underwater inspections of structural members that cannot be inspected visually or by wading are required at least every five years. see Inspection o f Fracture Critical Bridge Members. and other related factors. the inspection interval should be established by the Bridge Owner. see BUM-90. For further information. Typical occurrences which should result in a decision to make an underwater inspection at a shorter intervals are structural damage.``. Various connection details have been identified and assigned a fatigue stress category. All locations prone to fatigue cracking should be given a close visual inspection. Welds made in the field are especially susceptible to fatigue cracking. (See LRFD Table 6-3). and corrosion-notched sections are examples of such locations. 4. scour and erosion due to water movement.11 Fatigue refers to the process of material damage caused by repeated loads.`.`. Bridge inspectors should be trained to identify fatigue-prone details. drift. Additional observations may be required at high-water levels for those structures located in or adjacent to alluvial stream beds.12 This article contains material on the inspection of fracture critical bridge members. streambed load. Category E9 details have the shortest fatigue life and are the most prone to fatigue cracking.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 4. If more frequent underwater inspection is determined to be required.10. including tack welds. Generally. The inspection of fatigue-prone details may include nondestructive testing (see Section 5). FHWA Report No.`. C4.. and deleterious effects of water movement or deleterious effects of elements in the water.12 FRACTURE CRITICAL MEMBERS Fracture critical members or member components (FCMs) are steel tension members or steel tension components of members whose failure would be expected to result in collapse of the bridge. IP-86-26.`--- C4.`. damaged components.``-`-`..Inspection 4-45 inspections. the size and number of repetitions of truck loads. and BITM-90..`.. The susceptibility of the detail to cracking decreases from Category E9 to Category A. Connection details.``. Bridges that cany a large volume of heavy loads are more likely to experience fatigue problems. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 4. Many of the problems associated with these details are related to weld terminations and weld defects. where the rigidity of the member changes.``. For further information..`.`...

a material flaw. close visual “hands-on” inspection in the field is the primary method of detecting cracks.``.`.`--- 0 One. Welded tied arches.``. Suspension systems with two eyebar components. failure of the member could be sudden and may lead to the collapse of the bridge. Suspended spans with two girders. This requires that critical areas be specially cleaned prior to the inspection and additional lighting and magnificationbe used.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Frequently the crack is a result of fatigue. and Pin and hanger connections on two or three girder systems.. A very detailed. The FCM inspection plan should identifj the inspection frequency and procedures to be used. Steel pier caps and cross girders.or two-girder systems. Other non-destructive testing procedures (see Section 5 ) may be used at the discretion of the Bridge Owner...1 I).`. generally at a flaw or defect in the base material. some tests may be necessary to determine the threat of brittle fracture at low temperatures. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. For this reason. steel bridges with the following stnrctural characteristics or components should receive special attention during the inspections: --`.” FCMs have all or part of their cross section in tension..`.``. After the crack occurs. Two truss systems.. andíor changes in member cross section (see Article 4.``-`-`.`. Any attachment having a length in the direction of the tension stress greater than 4 inches (1 O cm) that is welded to the tension area of a component of a “fracture critical” member shall be considered part of the tension component and. Inspection of steel bridges should include the identification of fracture critical members and the development of a plan for inspecting such members. Where the fracture toughness of the steel is not documented..4-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges those portions of a flexural member that are subject to tension stress. shall be considered“fracture critical. Photographs and sketches should be made of the conditions found and on-site comparisons of photographs and sketches should be made at follow-up inspections.`. therefore. Most cracks in steel members occur in the tension zones. occurring near a weld.. including angle boxes with welding.`.``.

current condition and loading data for the bridge will have to be collected.`.``. or closure of the bridge to traffic. Where feasible...``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .13.`.``. Geometric Data 0 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.13 DATA COLLECTION FOR LOAD RATING 4. Where certain data is unavailable or unknown. all important plan data used should be verified in the field at the time of inspection. but also analysis and calculations for determining its load rating and for reviewing overload permit applications. strengthening.`. and sidewalk widths Member and Condition Data 0 0 0 0 0 0 Member types and actual member sizes Material grade and specifications Reinforcinglprestressinglpost-tensioning data Material losses due to deterioration Condition ratingslflagged conditions Presence of fatigue sensitive details Presence of fracture critical members and connections Loading and Traffic Data Actual wearing surface thickness.1 General Bridge evaluation involves not only the inspection of a bridge to assess its physical condition and functional capability..``...`. The load ratings used in conjunction with the inspection findings will assist the Bridge Owner in determining the need for posting. The quality and the availability of data will have a direct influence on the accuracy and reliability of the load rating results... The re-evaluation of in-service bridges for load capacity is required to the extent that changed structural conditions would affect any previously recorded ratings. Before load rating a bridge. traffic lane..Inspection 4-47 4.`. The scope of the inspection should be sufficient to provide the data necessary for load capacity evaluation of primary members and connections.``. The following important items of data required for load rating should be obtained from field inspection and from available bridge records.`--- o 0 0 Span lengthímember lengths Support conditionslcontinuityloverhangs Bridge skew at each bearing Girder/tniss/floor beam spacings Roadway.`. if present Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. this Manual provides guidance on arriving at suitable estimated values.`.

3 Inspection for Loadings 4. vibration. if any Posted speed limit. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. if feasible. Where as-built information is incomplete or unavailable.13. if any Roadway surface conditions at approaches and on bridge Roadway conditiodbumps at deck joints 4.. soil type. The bridging between the timber stringers should be checked to see that it is tight and functioning properly.``. such as overloads. the evaluator should utilize all available bridge records. If detected..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Overlay thickness and depth of fill should be measured during each inspection.2 Observations Under Trafic Bridges should be observed during passage of heavy loads to determine if there is any excessive noise. Movement between the bottom of the deck and top flange of supporting members during passage of heavy loads may be indicative of a breakdown in the composite action. Dead and super-imposed dead loads should be accurately estimated by undertaking detailed measurements of the structure.. or deflection.`.``-`-`.13..`. The inspector should check to see that composite decks are acting as intended by the designer.``.`.. A bridge that exhibits a permanent sag or kink in its profile should also be investigated further to determine a likely cause. Weight of utilities present and their distribution should be field verified during inspection.`--- o Non-structural attachments and utilities Depth of fill.. 4.``. the inspector should field determine all pertinent information. Bearings are designed to move freely about their pins or bearings and.`..13.4-48 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges o --`.`.`. should be inspected carefully under passage of heavy loads to confirm that their movement is not being restrained. Many decks were designed to act compositely under live load with the supporting superstructure members.1 Dead Load Effects Dead load effects of the superstructure are computed through detailed calculations of the existing dead loads. To this end. further investigation should be made until the cause is determined..`. and condition (buried structures) Number and positioning of traffic lanes on the bridge Pedestrian traffic intensity ADTT or traffic volume and composition Posted load limit.3. Observations under traffic will reveal looseness or excessive deflection of timber decks and stringers.

``. settlement. Data may be available from recent traffic surveys including ADT.. ADTT.. and approaches should be reported. The inspector should assess the condition of the deck overlay. and other pavement roughness.2 Live Load Effects The live loading depends on the number of traffic lanes carried by the bridge. Traffic Data-The expected loading during the evaluation exposure period is affected by the truck traffic at the site..``.`. Advice should be sought from the bridge ownerltraffic division regarding available traffic data. 4. The condition of the overlay.3.`.. Existence of one or more of these defects may cause vehicles coming onto the bridge to induce undesirable dynamic stresses in the structure.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..8.`. unevenness. and nature of pedestrian traffic would also assist the evaluator during the load rating process..``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. or roughness.``-`-`.4 Inspection for Resistance The inspector should record all the parameters necessary to determine the strength of primary members and connections. bumps.. Dynamic Load Allowance-The main parameters affecting dynamic load allowance are the bridge approach.`. The actual number of lanes in service may be less than the maximum number of lanes that could be accommodated by the bridge. deck joints. Approach pavement condition should be checked for cracking.`.`--- .13. in accordance with Article 4.13. Observations regarding travel speed. apparent violations of load postings when present.`. and truck load data measurements. The clear width of roadway and sidewalks and position of lanes on the bridge should be recorded by the inspector.`.``.Inspection 4-49 4.

`...`.`..``.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``..``....``.`.``-`-`.--`..`.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .

APPENDIX A.4.1

STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL SHEET
NATIONAL BRIDGE INVENTORY-STRUCTURE INVENTORY AND APPRAISAL MM/DD/YY
...............................................................
(1) (8) (5) (2) (3) (6) (7) (9) (1 1) (16) (98) (99) STATE NAME CODE # STRUCTURE NUMBER MVENTORY ROUTE (ONAJNDER) STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT DISTRICT COUNTYCODE (4) PLACE CODE FEATURES INTERSECTED FACILITY CARRIED LOCATION MILEPOINT (17) LONGITUDE -D -D LATITUDE -D BORDER BRIDGE STATE CODE __ % SHARE BORDER BRIDGE STRUCTURE NO. SUFFICIENCY RATING STATUS =
=

.
%

8888*****88*8**8*

STRUCTURE TYPE AND MATE~888*8*8*888**8*8 STRUCTURE TYPE MAIN: MATERIAL TYPE CODE (44) STRUCTURE TYPE APPR MATERIAL TYPE CODE (45) NUMBER OF SPANS IN MAIN UNIT (46) NUMBER OF APPROACH SPANS CODE (107) DECK STRUCTURE TYPE (108) WEARING SURFACEPROTECTIVE SYSTEM: A) TYPE OF WARING SURFACECODE B) TYPE OF MEMBRANECODE C) TYPE OF PROTECTIONCODE (43) (27) (106) (42) (28) (29) (30) (19) (48) (49) (50) (5 1) (52) (32) (33) (34) (10) (47) (53) (54) (55) (38) (1 11) (39) (1 16) (40) YEAR BUILT YEARRECONSTRUCTED TYPE OF SERVICE ONUNDERLANES ON STRUCTURE STRUCTURE AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC YEAR OF ADT 19 BYPASS, DETOUR LENGTH

NBIS BRIDGE LENGTH HIGHWAY SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL CLASS DEFENSE HIGHWAY PARALLEL STRUCTURE DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC TEMPORARY STRUCTURE DESIGNATED NATIONAL NETWORK TOLL MAINTAIN OWNER HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE ~~

(58) (59) (60) (61)

DECK SUPERSTRUCTURE SUBSTRUCTURE CHANNEL & CHANNEL PROTECTION

(64) (66) (70) (41) CODE UNDER (109) TRUCK ADT
%

OPERATING RATING INVENTORY RATING BRIDGE POSTING STRUCTURE OPEN, POSTED OR CLOSED DESCRIPTION -

MI

*88888*88**888*888*8888

GEOMETRIC DATA 8888t8tl888*8888888*88*88 LENGTH OF MAXIMUM SPAN FT (71) (72) STRUCTURE LENGTH FT . FT RIGHT . FT (36) CURBORS1DEWALK:LEFT . FT BRIDGE ROADWAY WIDTH CURB-TO-CURB (1 13) FT ~DECK WIDTH OUT-TO-OUT APPROACH ROADWAY WIDTH _____~ FT WEHOULDERS (75) BRIDGE MEDIAN CODE (76) SKEW-DEG (35) STRUCTURE FLARED (94) IN INVENTORY ROUTE MIN VERT CLEAR __ FT (95) . ET (96) INVENTORY ROUTE TOTAL HORU CLEAR MIN VERT CLEAR OVER BRIDGE RDWY FT IN (97) MIN VERT UNDERCLEAR REF FT (114) (1 15) MIN LAT UNDERCLEAR LT - FT (90) (92) 'A) B) C)

(67) (68) (69)

STRUCTURAL EVALUATION DECK GEOMETRY UNDERCLEARANCES, VERTICAL & HORIZONTAL WATERWAY ADEQUACY APPROACH ROADWAY ALIGNMENT TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURES SCOUR CRITICAL BRIDGES TYPE OF WORK LENGTH OF STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT COST ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT COST TOTAL PROJECT COST YEAR OF IMPROVEMENT COST EST. 19/20 FUTUREADT YEAR OF FUTURE ADT

. % -I -,o00 -, -,DOO
$ 7

FT

$ -~ o ,0 0

-

20 -

-

888*88***8*88+888**88*88888~SPECTIONS88*88*~*88*88+*8*8*88*

NAVIGATION CONTROL CODE CODE PIER PROTECTION NAVIGATION VERTICAL CLEARANCE VERT.LIFT BRIDGE NAV MIN VERT CLEAR NAVIGATION HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE

FT

FT
FT

INSPECTION DATE / (91) FREQUENCYMO CRITICAL FEATURE INSPECTION: (93) ~,CFl DATE FRACTURECRITDETAIL. MO A) / UNDERWATERINSP. MO B) / OTHERSPECIALINSP. MO C) /

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

A.4-1
Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

A.4-2
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

SECTION %MATERIAL TESTING

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOF TABLES .................................................................................................................................. 5.1 GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................... 5.2.1 Concrete Field Tests .......................................................................................................... 5.2,l. 1 Strength Methods ..................................................................................................... 5.2.1.2 Sonic Methods ......................................................................................................... 5.2.1.3 Ultrasonic Techniques ............................................................................................. 5.2.1.4 Magnetic Methods ................................................................................................... 5.2.1.5 Electrical Methods ................................................................................................... 5.2.1.6 Nuclear Methods ...................................................................................................... 5.2.1.7 Thermography.......................................................................................................... 5.2.1.8 Radar ........................................................................................................................ 5.2.1.9 Radiography ............................................................................................................. 5.2.1.10 Endoscopes ............................................................................................................ 5.2.2 Steel Field Tests ................................................................................................................ 5.2.2.1 Radiography ............................................................................................................. 5.2.2.2 Magnetic Particle Examination ................................................................................ 5.2.2.3 Eddy Current Examination ...................................................................................... 5.2.2.4 Dye Penetrant Examination................................................................................... 5.2.2.5 Ultrasonic Examination ......................................................................................... 5.2.3 Timber Field Tests .......................................................................................................... 5.2.3.1 Penetration Methods .............................................................................................. 5.2.3.2 Electrical Methods ................................................................................................. 5.2.3.3 Ultrasonic Techniques ........................................................................................... ............................................................................................................... 5.3 MATERIAL SAMPLING 5.4 LABORATORY TESTS ................................................................................................................. 5.5 INTERPRETATION AND EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS ........................................................... 5.6 TESTING REPORTS ..................................................................................................................... LISTOF TABLES Table 5- 1 Capability of Investigating Techniques for Detecting Defects in Concrete Structures in Field Use ..................................................................................................... 5-2 Table 5-2 Capability of Nondestructive Examination Techniques for Detecting Defects in Steel Structures in Field Use ........................................................................................ 5-8 Table 5-3 Capability of Investigative Techniques for Detecting Defects in Timber Structures in Field Use ................................................................................................... 5-12 Table 5-4 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Methods for Material Sampling.................................. 5-15 Table 5-5 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Test Methods for Concrete for Use in the Laboratory .................................................................................................... 5-16 Table 5-6 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Test Methods for Steel for Use in the Laboratory....... 5-17 Table 5-7 Standard Test Methods for Timber for Use in the Laboratory ...................................... 5-18
5-i
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5-i

5-1 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-3 5-4 5-5 5-5 5-6 5-6 5-6 5-7 5-7 5-7 5-9 5-9
5-10

5.2 FIELDTESTS ................................................................................................................................ 5-1

5-11 5-12 5-13 5-13 5-14 5-15 5-15 5-16 5-18

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

SECTION 5

MATERIAL TESTING
5.1 GENERAL
This section describes the more common testing procedures for assessing the strength and condition of materials and structural components of bridges. New testing procedures are evolving rapidly as a result of improved technology. Material testing should be performed by properly trained personnel.

C5.1
This new section defines the types of nondestructive field tests and provides guidance on when to use them. In addition, guidelines are provided for sampling bridge materials and using related laboratory tests. Source material included FHWA Manual on the Inspection of Fracture Critical Bridge Members, NCHRP Report 312 on the Condition Surveys of Concrete Bridge Components, NCHRP Report 206 on the Detection and Repair o f Fatigue Damage in Welded Highway Bridges, NCHRP Report 242 on the Ultrasonic Measurement of Weld Flaw Size, FHWA Training Course on Nondestructive Testing, NCHRP Project 10-30 on the "Nondestructive Methods for Field Inspection of Embedded or Encased High Strength Steel Rods and Cables," various ASTM specifications, and State manuals. Properly trained personnel should perform the testing described in this section. The American Society of Non-Destructive Testing has programs for certiS.ing technicians at various skill levels which may be used as a guide in establishing minimum levels of competency for test personnel.

5.2 FIELD TESTS
Numerous field test procedures are available for concrete, steel, and timber structures. Many of these procedures are non-destructive, while others result in some removal or damage of the material.

5.2.1 Concrete Field Tests
Typical field test procedures for concrete bridge components are described below. A comparison of the test methods in terms of their capability of detecting defects in concrete components is shown in Table 5-1. This table should be used as a guide in selecting an appropriate field test method for concrete components.
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5-1
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

5-2

Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges

Table 5-1 Capability of Investigating Techniques for Detecting Defects in Concrete Structures in Field Use.

Capability of Defect Detectiona

M
E
. I i (

LFi

u

Method Based on

Strength Sonic Ultrasonic Magnetic Electrical Nuclear Thermography Radar Radiography
a

N N N N N

N

Gb N -

Gb

G

= Good; F =

Fair; P = Poor; N = Not suitable.

Beneath bituminous surfacings. Detects delaminations.
5.2.1.1 Strength Methods

Rebound and penetration tests measure the hardness of concrete and are used to predict the strength of concrete. The Schmidt Hammer is probably the most commonly used device of this type. It consists of a plunger and a spring-loaded mass that strikes the free end of a plunger, that is in contact with the concrete, and rebounds. The extent of rebound gives an indication of the strength of the concrete at the surface position tested. The measurement is influenced by the finish of the concrete, age, and other factors. As an inspection technique, the hammer may be used to compare the quality of the concrete in different parts of the concrete bridge components. It should be remembered that only the surface of the concrete is being checked and the strength values are relative. This test is covered in ASTM Test C 805, "Test Method for Rebound Number for Hardened Concrete." Actual strength must be determined by other means. The relative compressive strength of concrete can also be determined by the Windsor Probe. The Windsor Probe is a commercial test system that utilizes procedures outlined in ASTM C 803, "Test Method for Penetration Resistance of Hardened Concrete." This device drives a steel probe into the concrete using a constant amount of energy supplied

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Material Testing

5-3

by a precise powder charge. The length of the probes projecting from the concrete is measured. A normal result is based on the average of three measurements. This test and the Schmidt Hammer are considered usable only with relatively new, less than one-year old, concrete.

5.2.1.2 Sonic Methods
Mechanical sonic pulse-velocity methods have been used for concrete for many years. Hammer blows create the impulse and the time of travel of this sonic pulse between pickups placed on the concrete is measured. The time of travel is related to the modulus of elasticity and, hence, the strength. This technique can be effective, but is tedious and can be applied to small areas only. The procedure is capable of detecting differences between areas of sound and unsound concrete and is frequently used to detect delaminations or other fractures. The technique is impractical in evaluating large surface areas, such as concrete decks. However, on vertical surfaces there is currently no alternative that is practical and reliable. Chain drags, sounding rods, or even hammers are frequently used for detecting delaminations on horizontal surfaces, such as decks or tops of piers. The chain drag can be used to quickly traverse a large area with reasonable accuracy in determining areas of delamination provided the inspector has experience in detecting hollow sounds. Chain-drag surveys of asphalt-covered decks are not totally accurate, but they are quick and inexpensive and may be used as an initial test to determine the need for more thorough investigations. The practice for measuring delaminations in concrete bridge decks is discussed in ASTM D 4580. Portable automated acoustic methods have been developed for bridge decks. The instrument consists of three components: a tapping device, a sonic receiver, and a signal interpreter. The instrument is moved across a deck as acoustic signals are generated, propagated through the concrete, received, and interpreted electronically. The output is used to generate a plan of the deck indicating delaminated areas. The accuracy decreases when used on an asphalt-covered deck.

5.2.1.3 Ultrasonic Techniques
Ultrasonic devices are normally used by measuring the velocity in concrete of a pulse generated by a piezoelectric transducer. The pulse velocity depends on the composition and maturity of the concrete and its elastic properties. The relationship to strength depends on several other properties and is best determined experimentally.
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5-4

Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges

The recommended procedure is the direct transmission method that has the transmission and receiving probes in line on opposite sides of a concrete thickness. Caution should be used in comparing results fi-om indirect transmission tests with calibration or tests from direct transmission techniques. There appear to be reasonably good correlations between pulse velocity and compressive strength provided the system has been calibrated with cores of the particular concrete being evaluated. The concrete strength can be predicted within about 20 percent of the calibration curve established for the particular concrete being investigated. It is not possible to predict the strength of concrete without calibration, with the particular concrete in question. The presence of steel parallel to the line of transmission provides a path along which the pulse can travel more rapidly. Corrections can be made for this situation, but detailed information on the reinforcement is needed. It is generally desirable to choose path lengths that avoid the influence of reinforcing steel. Open cracks or voids may also affect the ultrasonic pulse. The path of the pulse will thus travel around any cavity in the concrete and the time of transmission of the pulse is lengthened. Large cracks and voids may be detected by this means. Narrow cracks will transmit the pulse through points of contact, and small voids will increase the path length only a small amount and may not be distinguishable from the normal variability of the measurements. Ultrasonic techniques can, with proper experience and training, provide excellent information regarding the condition of the concrete. However, the method is complex and requires some skill to obtain usable results. The technique is not normally used in routine bridge evaluation.
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5.2.1.4 Magnetic Methods The principal application of magnetic methods in testing of concrete bridge components is in determining the position of the reinforcement. Magnetic methods are not techniques for detecting defects or deterioration directly but the fact that inadequate cover is often associated with corrosioninduced deterioration indicates that a method for locating the reinforcing bars can be important in corrosion control. Several portable, battery-operated magnetic devices known as cover meters or pachometers have been designed to detect the position of reinforcement and measure the depth of cover. The devices generate a magnetic field between the two poles of a probe, and the intensity of the magnetic
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

Material Testing

5-5

field is proportional to the cube of the distance fiom the pole faces. When a reinforcing bar is present, the magnetic field is distorted and the degree of distortion is a function of the bar diameter and its distance from the probe. In general, the cover meters can measure cover within 0.25 in. in the range of O to 3 in. The instruments give satisfactory results in lightly reinforced members but, in heavily reinforced members or where large steel members are nearby, it is not possible to obtain reliable results. In addition, some reports indicate epoxy coatings distort readings.

5.2.1.5 Electrical Methods
Electrical methods for inspection of concrete bridge components include resistance and potential measurements. Electrical resistance has been used for measuring the permeability of bridge deck seal coats. The procedure has been published as a standard test in ASTM D 3633 and involves measuring the resistance between the reinforcing steel and a wet sponge on the concrete surface. Corrosion of reinforcement produces a corrosion cell caused by differences in electrical potential. This difference in electrical potential can be detected by placing a copper-copper sulfate halfcell on the surface of the concrete and measuring the potential differences between the half-cell and steel reinforcement. It is generally agreed that the half-cell potential measurements can be interpreted as follows:
0

0

Less negative than 4 . 2 0 volts indicates a 90 percent probability of no corrosion; Between -0.20 and -0.35 volts, corrosion activity is uncertain; and More negative than -0.35 volts is indicative of greater than 90 percent probability that corrosion is occurring.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

If positive readings are obtained, it usually means that insufficient moisture is available in the concrete and the readings are not valid. These tests do not indicate the rate of corrosion and the measurements only manifest the potential for corrosion at the time of measurement. Alihough most commonly used with bridge decks, the half-cell has been used with other bridge components, such as bents, to determine active corrosion.

5.2.1.6 Nuclear Methods
The main use of nuclear methods is to measure the moisture content in concrete by neutron absorption and scattering techniques. These moisLicensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

5-6

Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges

ture measurements are then used to determine if corrosion of reinforcement is likely to occur. A more direct measurement of the rate of corrosion would be more useful to the bridge inspector and, hence, the nuclear methods are more research oriented than operational.

5.2.1.7 Thermography
Infrared thermography has been found to be a useful supplemental test in detecting delaminations in concrete bridge decks. The method could be used for other concrete bridge components exposed to direct sunlight. Thermography works on the principle that as the concrete heats and cools, there is substantial thermal gradient within the concrete because concrete is a poor conductor of heat. Delaminations and other discontinuities interrupt the heat transfer through the concrete, and these discontinuities cause a higher surface temperature during periods of heating than the surrounding concrete and the reverse situation during periods of cooling. The differences in surface temperature can be measured using sensitive infrared detection systems. The equipment can record and identify areas of delamination and correlations can indicate depth of delamination below the surface by the differences in surface temperature. The test method for detecting delaminations in bridge decks using infrared thermography is discussed in ASTM D 4788.
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5.2.1.8 Radar

Ground-penetrating radar has been used to detect deterioration of bridge decks. These investigations are carried out by low-power, highfrequency pulsed radar. The radar picks up any discontinuity such as air to asphalt, asphalt to concrete, or cracks in concrete. The ability to measure the thickness of asphalt covering is an important benefit. The radar method also has important potential for examining the condition of the top flange of box beams that are otherwise inaccessible. More than a little experience is necessary for proper interpretation of the data.

5.2.1.9 Radiography
Gamma radiation will penetrate concrete and therefore can be used to investigate concrete by exposing photograph film to radiation. A source of radiation is placed on one side of the concrete and a film is attached to the other side. Steel impedes the transmission and an image shows up on the developed film as lighter than the surrounding concrete. Void areas show up as darker images. The

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

Matenal Testing

5-7

inspector then can get a reasonable idea of the concrete steel reinforcement pattern and the location and extent of defects in the concrete mass. Radiography can be carried out only by licensed firms that can handle radioactive isotopes. Radiography of concrete is expensive and limited applications of the technique are likely to be used in bridge inspection.

5.2.1.10 Endoscopes
Endoscopes consist of rigid or flexible viewing tubes that can be inserted into holes drilled into concrete bridge components. Light can be provided by glass fibers from an external source. In the rigid tubes, viewing is provided through reflecting prisms and, in the flexible tubes, a fiber optics system is used. These scopes allow close examination of parts of the structure which could not be otherwise viewed. The inside of a box girder or a hollow posttensioning duct are two examples. Some equipment is available with attachments for a camera or television monitor. Although this is a viewing instrument, some destruction of material is necessary for its proper use with concrete.

5.2.2 Steel Field Tests
Typical field test procedures for detecting defects in steel bridge components are described below. A general summary of the relative capabilities of the steel test methods is given in Table 5-2. This table should be used as a guide in selecting an appropriate field test method for steel components.

5.2.2.1 Radiography
Nondestructive examination by use of X-rays depends on the fact that X-radiation, produced either by a commercial X-ray machine or by radioactive decay of a radioisotope, will be absorbed by a material in proportion to the thickness of the part examined and the atomic number. Thus, if a defective piece of material is examined by this method, the X-ray absorption at the region of the defect will be different (usually less) than sound material next to this region. The Xradiation coming through the part is recorded on a film or fluorescent screen; the image is usually darker in the area where the defect is located. The X-ray image on film provides a permanent record of the defect and also shows the size and shape of the defect in two dimensions. It does not show its position in depth in the part.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5-8

Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges

Table 5-2 Capability of Nondestructive Examination Techniques for Detecting Defects in Steel Structures in Field Use.

Capability of Defect Detectiona

c n

E
5: .M
i

e n

o n
O i L .

I
~

Fb
G

Fb

G

G

u P G
N

g

c W

N
G
N

N

N

N
P
N

N
N I P

F
c _

N N

1

Eddy Current

1

I

F

G

G

G

F

F

a

G = Good; F = Fair; P = Poor; N =Not suitable. If beam is parallel to cracks. " Capability varies with equipment and operating mode.

It follows from this description that defects such as slag inclusions or porosity in welds or castings are easily detected by this method. Planar defects such as cracks are also detectable; but only if oriented approximately parallel to the axis of the X-ray beam. Cracks or planar defects perpendicular to the X-ray beam axis will not change the X-ray absorption significantly and thus will be undetected. Intermediate orientations will produce varying degrees of defect detectability. Advantages of this method of nondestructive examination are the permanent record that normally results, the abiliîy to determine internal defect size and shape (and thus defect nature), and its almost universal acceptance in codes and by the engineering profession in general. The prime disadvantages to this method are its inability to locate the depth of the defect, its inability to locate poorly oriented planar defects, and the need to use, in general, large or hazardous equipment. It may also be difficult to apply in some field locations. One special consideration with this method which makes it particularly attractive is the fact that the resulting film is, in fact, a photograph of the part, and thus is immediately geometrically relatable to the part examined. No secondary analysis of the data is necessary.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

-

P N N G -

N

F

P - - --

Material Testing

5-9

5.2.2.2 Magnetic Particle Examination
This method of inspection, like the dye penetrant one, is limited to surface or near-surface defects. An additional limitation placed on the process is the fact that only magnetic materials may be examined. In the shop application of the method, the part to be examined is placed in a magnetic field and fine powdered iron is sprayed (in suspension) or blown on it. If the magnetic field is undisturbed by any surface or subsurface discontinuities, the iron powder aligns itself with the field in a uniform film. If a discontinuity (such as a crack) disturbs the field, a concentration of magnetic lines of force will occur and, thus, a concentration of iron powder. This concentration will show the presence of the crack during visual inspection. In order to detect the crack, it must be aligned transverse or nearly transverse to the magnetic field. For this reason, the magnetic field must either be aligned perpendicular to the expected direction of defect formation or must be varied in direction. For shop tests, this is usually accomplished by sequentially magnetizing the part in a large circular coil to produce a longitudinal magnetic field and passing current through the part to produce a circular magnetic field. In field applications, the part is locally magnetized by use of two current-carrying copper prods that are placed on the surface of the part. These prods produce a circular magnetic field about each contact point when current flows between them and surface defects transverse to the field are detected by use of iron powder. If the prods are moved about the part or structure to be examined, defects at any orientation may be detected. Application of this procedure may produce surface defects'which could result in crack initiation sites. The advantages to this method are its relative portability, the minimum skills required to operate it, and its ability to detect even tight cracks. Of course, it is limited in the materials that it may be applied to and the type of defects it may detect. Again, in some applications, it has the additional limitation that it leaves the part in the magnetized condition. Although this is not normally a problem, it may interfere with some subsequent operations, such as welding. It is possible to demagnetize the area examined by this method, but this is time consuming and adds to the cost.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

5.2.2.3 Eddy Current Examination
This method operates very similarly to magnetic particle inspection but the defect is detected by a perturbation in the electrical, not magnetic, field in the material examined. In this technique, a coil carrying alternating current

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

. Modifications of the system include penetrants of different viscosiîy to detect different Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Certainly the geometry sensitivity of the method is a real disadvantage. and allowed to penetrate cracks or surface defects by capillary attraction or other surface wetting phenomena. The surface of the pari to be examined is cleaned.`. a separate search coil.`.2.4 Dye Penetrant Examination The dye penetrant method of inspection is probably the most commonly employed shop and field method of defect detection.. the penetrant is removed and a second solution is sprayed on the surface. It is insensitive to many surface conditions (for example. the magnitude and frequency of the current. Although it is limited entirely to defects that penetrate the surface of the structure. The impedance produced depends on the nature of the conductor and the exciting coil. In the location of a crack. with suitable frequency control.``... the penetrant seeps from the crack where it is trapped and stains the developer. The method itself is simple.`. Again.5-10 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges produces eddy currents in a conductor nearby. in turn. The conductor eddy currents. only conductors can be examined.``. There is some potential for this method..2. Defect size can also be estimated from the response of the area examined.``. examination may be limited to the surface. This method has been given only limited application for several reasons.`. paint) which limit other methods. 5. easily applied. Defects in depth can be detected or. The red penetrant stains on the white chalky developer indicate the presence of a crack or other defect when visually inspected by the examiner. it is inexpensive.. usually mechanically and/or with a chemical degreasing agent.`. For this reason bright-colored (often red) penetrants are used. and the presence or absence of discontinuities in the conductor.`. After a period of time. create impedance in the exciting or. if desired. This method appears to need further development. and easily interpreted. most important of which has been that generally only simple geometries can be examined.``. usually dries to a chalky powder and remains unchanged in the regions where no defect exists. and thus limit the usefulness of the procedure. A fluid is placed on the surface to be examined. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. often with an aerosol spray. The method is therefore instrumented such that a coil is scanned over the surface of the area to be examined and defects produce a characteristic change in impedance as read from a dial or meter (output can be put on a chart if desired)..`--- . to be generally applicable.``-`-`. however.. as with magnetic particle examination. called a developer. Complex geometries change the impedance readings in themselves. The second coating. usually minutes.

an external surface. passing through the material.`. The principal advantages of the method are the ease with which the tests are conducted. and the low cost. Normal results of the examination are a form prepared by the operator based on his observations of the display screen. such as sound frequency. are rarely used in field applications. sensitivity. Tests are not time consuming and may be made frequently during other operations (for example. 5.2. defects that are later buried can be detected and repaired before they are hidden from view.``-`-`. make smaller defects visible. eventually. weld cracks) are detectable if dye penetrant is used at intermediate stages in the construction. using ultraviolet light.``. many defects that occur during construction (for example. It must be considered the most portable of all methods..`. Thus. Normal instrumentation includes a sound wave generator and pick-up device (usually combined in one unit) and a display screen on which the initial and reflected pulse is displayed.2. strike either a defect or.``. the nature of the defect and. design of the search unit.5 Ultrasonic Examination Ultrasonic testing relies on the wave properties of sound in materials to detect internal flaws.`.`. This places a limitation on the usefulness of the method for the defect depth determination and "code" approval of most structures. However. electronic processing of the return signal. These penetrants. The test sensitivity is influenced by a great number of testing variables..``.. The major advantages of this system of nondestructive examination are its portability. from the practical shop viewpoint.`.. Highfrequency sound waves in the form of mechanical vibrations are applied to the part to be tested and the waves. The more sophisticated dye penetrant methods.Material Testing 5-11 size cracks. instrumentation. and ability to detect the location of Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``. used in conjunction with ultraviolet light examination.. to determine if a defect being removed by grinding is completely eliminated).. the minimal skills required.. Use of dye penetrant during fabrication may prevent later rejection when ultrasonic or X-ray examination is used. The sound vibrations are then reflected and the nature of the return signal indicates the location and type of reflecting surface. and the skill of the operator. the size of the defect. Display instrumentation permits an estimation of the position (in depth) of the defect. by moving the detection portion of the unit (called the search unit) along the part to be examined. wet rather than dry developers.. The principal disadvantage is that only surface defects can be detected.`.`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . and penetrants that fluoresce under ultraviolet light.

no permanent record of the defect was produced.`. and equipment is now available to permit the storage of field data in a format suitable for subsequent computer processing and reporting. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.3 Timber Field Tests Typical field test procedures for detecting defects and deterioration in timber bridge components are described below.. Le.5-12 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges cracks or defects in depth. F = Fair. so advances in technology are more likely in this field.`. --`.`.``.`.`.. Another characteristic of the system often cited as a difficulty is the sensitivity of the method..``-`-`. The dependency of the method on operator skill must also be considered an unfavorable factor. More research has been undertaken to modi@ this method and make it more widely applicable than most of the others. the major fault of the system is that. N = Not suitable. until very recent times. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. The system cannot detect surface defects very well. A summary of the capabilities of each of the test methods for detecting defects and deterioration in timber components is given in Table 5-3.. On the other hand. Table 5-3 Capability of Investigative Techniques for Detecting Defects in Timber Structures in Field Use.`--- Capability of Defect Detectiona Method Based on U1trasonics a G = Good.2. grain size in metals and minor defects not observable by other methods...``.. This table should be used as a guide in selecting an appropriate field test procedure for timber components. It is possible to see too much.``. P = Poor..`. It is now possible to make photographic records of the display.``. 5.

can be used to test for internal decay or vermin infestation.3. The meters measure primarily surface moisture content and. and inexpensive.`. The ease with which a member can be penetrated is then a measure of its soundness.``.1 Penetration Methods Any probe. Capacitance meters have a wider range (O to at least 35 percent moisture content) than resistance meters and are less affected by the presence of chemicals.. do not respond to internal moisture adequately.2 Electrical Methods The main application of electrical methods is to measure the moisture content of timber. which consists of a sharpened hollow tube.2.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. such as a knife. or brace and bit.``-`-`. 5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . There are several electrical techniques available for measuring moisture content. The results are affected by the species of timber and correction factors must be applied.. compact. ice pick.`. Capacitance meters are based on an alternating current measure of the dielectric constant of wood..3.. (50 mm). can also be used to penetrate the wood. Readings over 30 percent moisture content are not reliable and contamination by some chemicals. on lumber thicker than 2 in. it is rapid and an overall assessment of the condition of a structure can be obtained quickly.`. such as salt. --`.2. An increment borer.`.Material Testing 5-13 5. (6mm) internal diameter. Only a qualitative assessment is obtained because the pressure on the instrument is neither controlled nor measured.`..``.`. which is displayed on a calibrated scale.. or to be cultured for positive evidence of decay fungi.. affects the readings. It also allows samples to be removed from the interior of the member for detailed examination or testing for such items as moisture content and preservative penetration. but the major disadvantage is that they measure the moisture content of the surface layers unless special deep probes are used.. Resistance moisture meters are light. which is proportional to its moisture content. and may lead to erroneous conclusions. The results are a function of the relative density of the wood and correction factors must be applied. The resistance is related to the moisture content. The borer is superior to a nail or ice pick because it gives a more accurate record of the depth of decay or infestation. Resistance meters are based on a direct current measurement of electrical resistance between point or blade electrodes pushed into the timber. The use of a probe is much more satisfactory than attempting to identify a hollow member by sounding because the load on the member affects the response. Although the procedure is rather crude.`.``. nail. usually about 1í4-h.

. checks.`.`. 5. a good contact between the transducer and the surface of the timber is essential. Pulse-velocity measurements relate to the elastic properties of the wood and are. reflects part of the sound wave and changes the velocity of the transmitted wave. being higher than that of simple resistance types.``-`-`. the strength and stiffness properties of the timber can be assessed. the technique is most sensitive to detecting defects that are oriented perpendicularly to the pulse. in some situations. They need to be calibrated for wood species and density. A light grease or glycerol is suitable for the coupling medium.`.`. it is common practice to compare the pulse velocity from a suspected area of deterioration with that from an area known to be sound (measured using the same transducer configuration). as well as internal knots. A marked change in electrical resistance is an indication of decay.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. In all cases. (2. it is susceptible to false indications of decay in apparently sound wood.3. Bentonite paste has also been found satisfactory. However.`--- .3 for application to concrete members can also be used for the in-situ testing of timber structures. sensitive to the direction of the grain. which is inserted to various depths in a hole 3/32 in. the direct transmission mode with transducers on opposite faces of the member is generally the most useful configuration. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..`.``.`. thereby eliminating the need to measure the density of the timber. The meters use platetype electrodes and the field penetrates about 314 in.... The cost of the meters is similar to that of capacity-type meters.1.2. To simpliQ interpretation of the results. However.`.. Consequently. and shakes. therefore. The ultrasonic method can also be used to identi@ internal decay and hollow areas. Electrical resistance measurements are also the basis of an instrument designed to detect internal rot.3 Ultrasonic Techniques The same ultrasonic pulse-velocity equipment and techniques described in Article 5. The device consists of a resistance probe. pulse-velocity measurements have been found to follow similar trends to strength changes caused by fluctuations in density and local defects. such as a crack or a hollow area caused by decay.5-14 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Radio frequency power-loss meters operate in the frequency range O to 25 MHz and are based on an alternating current measurement of the impedance (combined effect of resistance) and capacitance of timber.2. (20 mm) but the surface layers have the predominant effect.``. Although the device effectively detects rot. Because a discontinuity. both above and below the water surface.4 mm) in diameter. For this reason.``. it may be necessary to investigate other relative positions of the transducers in order to produce a maximum response...

`.3 Additional guidance on repairing areas of bridge members from which material was removed for testing may be found in the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Maintenance. Tables 5-5..`.``. Samples should be removed from those areas of a bridge subjected to low stress levels as determined by the Engineer. and NCHRP Report 280.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ... Normally. there are many laboratory tests which have been standardized and used routinely in the evaluation of materials used in bridges.``-`-`. and timber components. NCHRP Report 271. Care should be taken to minimize any residual stress resulting from the repair. and should be camed out by experienced personnel... Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. Guidelines for Evaluation and Repair o f Prestressed Concrete Bridge Members.``. An adequate number of samples should be obtained to provide results representative of the entire structure being evaluated. A few common material sampling standards are shown in Table 5-4.``. respectively. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. testing of concrete. c5..`. a minimum of three samples would be required. steel. Guidelinesfor Evaluation and Repair of Damaged Steel Bridge Members.`. and timber members.`--- I T260 C 823 A 610 1 I A673 Concrete Samplingand Testing for Total Chloride Ion in ConcreteRaw Materials Standard Practice for Examinationand Samplingof Hardened Concretein Constructions SamplingFerroalloys for Size (Before or After Shipment) SamplingProceduresfor Impact Testing of Structural Steel (Charpy Test) Standard Test Methods and Defuiitions for MechanicalTesting of Steel Products The removal of material from a structure will leave a hole or void in one or more members.`. 5-6.3 MATERIAL SAMPLING Tests which require the removal of material from the structure should be used only when a particular piece of information is desired.4 LABORATORY TESTS To supplement field tests and observations. and only when the results can provide something useful in the overall evaluation of the bridge. and 5-7 list the ASTM and AASHTO standards governing the laboratos. Table 5-4 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Methods for Material Sampling.`. Repairs can be readily made to concrete. 5. Laboratory tests should be conducted by testing laboratories familiar with the AASHTO. particularly if welding is used.`.. Repairs to steel members may be much more complex.Material Testing 5-15 5.. and Bridge Owner standards to be employed. masonry. ASTM.

5-16 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Table 5-5 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Test Methods for Concrete for Use in the Laboratory.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``.`.0 pounds of chloride per cubic yard.`. Corrosion threshold is about 1..``. --`.``-`-`..`.3 to 2. 174/T 14' c 457 C 469 C 496 C 617/T 231 1 C 642 C 666lT 161 C 856 1 C259 I Hardened Portland Cement Concrete Method of MeasuringLength of Drilled Concrete Cores Practice for Microscopical Determinationof Air-Void Content and Parametersof the Air-Void System in Hardened Concrete Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson's Ratio of Concretein Compression Test Method for Splitting Tensile Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens Method of Capping Cylindrical Concrete Specimens Test Method for Specific Gravity...`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.`.5 INTERPRETATIONAND EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS Field and laboratory test results must be interpreted and evaluated by a person experienced C5...`.5 Care must be exercised in the interpretation and evaluation of field and laboratory test results.``. Absorption. 5.``. AASHTO test methods are designatedT. and Voids in Hardened Concrete Test Method for Resistance of Concreteto Rapid Freezing and Thawing RecommendedPractice for PetrographicExaminationof Hardened Concrete Method of Test for Resistance of Concreteto Chloride Ion Penetrationb Method of Samplingand Testing for Total Chloride Ion in Concrete and ConcreteRaw Materials Interim Method of Test for Rapid Determinationof the Chloride Permeabilitv of Concrete a ASTM test methods are designated C.

``.. in such activity..``.`.Material Testing Table 5-6 Standard ASTM and AASHTO Test Methods for Steel for Use in the Laboratory.. and then evaluated.``. AASHTO test methods are designated T... for instance: 0 Was sampling done properly? (location..`. --`. the test results should be compared.`..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . the individual test results should be compared and differences explained.``-`-`. number to adequately represent the member being tested) Do the results confirm expectations? Any surprises? Is there a pattern or consistency to the results of the group of tests or to previous test results? Was the test performed by an experienced individual or firm? (the reliability factor) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. size.`. If the same test has been previously run on material from this structure. When more than one type of test is used to measure the same material property.``.`--- 5-17 Designationa A 370lT 244 1 1 Title MechanicalTesting of Steel Products Guide for Preparation of Metallographic Specimens Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials Test Method for Brinnel Hardness of Metallic Materials Test Method for Vickers Hardness of Metallic Materials Method of Rapid Indentation Hardness Testing of Metallic Materials Test Method for Indentation Hardness of Metallic Materials by Portable Hardness Testers Methods for DeterminingAverage Grain Size Method for MacroetchingMetals and Alloys E3 E 8/T 68 E 10/T 70 E 92 E 103 E 110 E 112 E 340 I E 384 I Test Method for Microindentation 1 Hardness Alloys E 407 E 807 of Materials Practice for MicroetchingMetals and Practice for Metallographic Laboratory Evaluation Guide for Reflected-Light Photomicrography E 883 aASTM test methods are designated A or E.. Several issues may play a part in the evaluation.`. differences noted.

the report should include the Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..``.) Are other tests or inspections needed to veriîy results.. Designation" D 143 D 198 D 1860 D 2016 "Substantially the same as AWPA-A6 5..``. to investigate other members in the same structure for like defects.`...`. must veri@ data.``..`.5-18 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Do the results indicate incipient failure.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6 TESTING REPORTS It is important that all field and laboratory tests be documented in writing and become part of the bridge file. or for weight-limit posting? (If so.`.`..``.`--- ~~ Title Method of Testing Small Clear Specimens of Timber Method for Static Tests of Timbers in Structural Sizes Test Method for Moishire and Creosote-TypePreservation in Wood" Test Methods for Moisture Content of Wood Method for Accelerated Laboratory Test of Natural Decay Resistance of Woods Test Methods for Chloride for Calculating Pentachlorophenolin Solutions for Wood (Lime Ignition Method) Test Methods for Specific Gravity of Wood and Wood-Base Materials Method for Evaluating Allowable Properties for Grades of Structural Lumber Method for Laboratory Evaluation of Wood and Other Cellulosic Materials for Resistance to Termites D 2017 D 2085 D 2395 D 2915 D 3345 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Where instrumentation is used in the conduct of the test.``-`-`.. or to look into the possibility of there being companion-type defects in the same member? Is there a likelihood that other structures on the system have experienced like problems-or that there may be similar structures where the problem is as yet undiscovered? Table 5-7 Standard Test Methods for Timber for Use in the Laboratory. the need for immediate repairs.

`. signed by a responsible official of the laboratory. including the manufacturer and serial number.`. a copy of the most recent calibration certificate.`.``...``..`. and the name of the trained operator.``-`-`.. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`..`--- .``. For laboratory tests..`. the results should be submitted in a formal report using the laboratory letterhead. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.`.Material Testing 5-19 type of equipment..

.`...``-`-`.`..``.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.``.`.`...`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..--`.``..

............................... 6..............3 Refined Methods of Analysis ..............................................................................2........................................2 Scope ............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ....3.............1 General ............................1 General ....................................................2........................ 6..............................................................`...........................2 Permanent Loads Other Than Dead Loads: P ... 6........1....................3...................................... 6.........1....................................................................... 6.........3 Permit Load Rating .....................................4 Analysis by Field Testing.................... 6.............................. 6..................3..............3......1 General ........................4.................................SECTION &LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................3....................................................................................................................................2..........1.. 6......``........................................................................................................................... 6.....3...............................2 Permanent Loads and Load Factors .............................5 Application of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations .............................7..................................................................... 6..`.....................................3 Load Factors ..........2..... 6..........2..................1 Design Load Rating ........................... 6.............................................1.10 Qualifications and Responsibilities............................8 Creep and Shrinkage: CR and SH .........................................................................2...... 6......... 6....................... 6............... 6....................2..7................................................................................................................ LISTOF FIGURES LISTOF TABLES ...3 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM ........................1.............................`.........1........ 6.........................................................3.................................... 6............ 6.4 Pedestrian Live Loads: PL ....................... 6............................. 6......1....2....8.........``-`-`...............2......`.............. 6............7 Load and Resistance Factor Rating ...................4................. 6................... 6................................................................................``............................................................... 6......................................................... ....................8....................1.........................2.......................................................................................4 LOAD-RATING PROCEDURES 6............3........................... 6.............1...................`.......................................................................1..9 Evaluation of Complex Structures .........................................................................1 Vehicular Live Loads (Gravity Loads): LL ............................................2............................5 Wind Loads: WL and WS.....................``......................................................3..2.. 6......................................................................................1..............................................4 Assumptions ........ --`.... 6........................7 Earthquake Effects: EQ .1..........2 Application of Vehicular Live Load ........4..... 6..........2 General Load-Rating Equation............................................................................................ 6......... 6.........................2............................................................... 6...... 6........ 6...............................2.................................................``...................................................... 6......2 Legal Load Rating ......................3...2................2.......7................. 6............. 6...2....................................8 Component-Specific Evaluation ............................1............3 Philosophy ............................... 6................................3............................... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS ......................`.............................................................................1 Introduction ............................................................................2..6 Temperature Effects: TG and TU.......................................................................1 General ..............................1 Decks .........................2 Substructures.................3...........`...........................2 LOADS FOR EVALUATIO N ......................3 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS .........................................6 Evaluation Methods.................................3 Transient Loads ..... 6.........1........1............................................1 Dead Loads: DC and DW .............................`--- 6-v 6-v 6-1 6-1 6-1 6-2 6-2 6-2 6-3 6-3 6-4 6-5 6-5 6-5 6-5 6-5 6-6 6-6 6-6 6-6 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-7 6-8 6-8 6-9 6-9 6-9 6-9 6-9 6-9 6-9 6-10 6-11 6-12 6-12 6-12 6-13 6-13 6-i Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale......................2 Approximate Methods of Structural Analysis .......................................

.............2 Materials...........3 Resistance Factors ..........................................................................4......................................5....5...........4 Legal Load Rating .................................................. 6-29 6..........3..........4...........................................2.....4.....................................`.................2.........2 Live-LoadFactors ...................4...........3...... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.5...................................................................................................1 Purpose .....................4............4............... 6-29 6-29 6...........................5.....................................................................3 Design-Load Rating ..............................................2.................4....................2....4 Limit States .............2 Reinforcing Steel ............4...........................................4...............3 Generalized Live-Load Factors: yL ....................................4.....5 Assumptions for Load Rating . 6.....................1 Live Loads .................................2..................2........................................................................3.....5........................................ 6.......2......4..... 6-29 6........ 6..................3......................``........................................................................................1 Live Load .....................3..... 6....1 Design-Load Rating .................................... 6-ii Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale......2 Load Factors .........5....................................5.............5.......................2.................................4 Live Load and Load Factors ............4................................................. 6......... 6-28 6..................... 6.......................... 6........5.............................. 6.............................................................................................5.2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating ........3 Condition Factor: cp...... 6....................``.. 6......`.... 6........................2............................1 Concrete ...............................1 Scope ..........................................................5............................2...........2........ 6........4..........................4............................ 6-26 6.. ..........5..3.............. 6......4................. 6...................................................................... 6................4........................................................................................ 6...................................... 6......4......5.... 6........ 6.....................4..........4...... 6..3..4............5............................4..............................4.....5 Permit Load Rating .......`......................................................................... 6-26 6........................................ 6-26 6..4............2...........1 Purpose ...................4...............`......... 6-14 6................ 6............................ 6.......................4...............................5.........4 System Factor: cp.......6 Exterior Beams ..........................................................................................``-`-`............... 6...... 6............ 6..1 Routine (Annual) Permits ...............4.2......1 Strength Limit State .......1 Background ................. 6........................2...................2 Limit States ...5................4............................................................5.3 Dynamic Load Allowance: IA4 .............................................. 6-23 6-24 6-24 6-24 6-25 6-25 6-25 6-25 6-26 6............ 6.............4...................................................................... 6.....`...............................4............4.......................... 6............2..........5...................3 Prestressing Steel ...............................2 Live-LoadFactors .....................................``................................1..4.......................... 6............. 6..4......4.........................................2 Live Loads and Load Factors...................... 6.......1 Live Load .....................I Routine (Annual) Permits ..................................5.........................2.................... ..........................................3 Permit Types ...................`--- 6-29 6-29 6-29 6-30 6-30 6-30 6-31 6-31 6-31 6-31 6-32 6-32 6-32 6-32 ............................4 Rating in Tons......................4........................................................6.............2 Live Loads and Load Factors................................3 Dynamic Load Allowance .........................................2...5........5...........................4.............5...2 Service Limit State ..........................................................2 Permit LoadRating ...... Legal Load Rating ........................................2 Special (Limited-Crossing) Permits .......4...........5.......................4......2 Purpose ................ 6...................5. 6........................2 Special (Limited Crossing) Permits .....................................4.................2...... 6...........5 Dynamic Load Allowance: IA4 ...............2..................4.........................5..4.............................. 6.......................5....................................`. 15 6-15 6-17 6-17 6-17 6-17 6-17 6-18 6-18 6-18 6-18 6-18 6-20 6-20 6.......................................4........................................................................4.........4.....4...........`.......................4........5 CONCRETE STRUCTURES ......................4.7 Continuous Spans ....................................``.4...4...................................5....

.......... 6......1 Scope ......................................5.4...............................12........................ 6-48 6-iii Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale............................2 Bearing-Type Connections ..........9.................6.............................................................5.. 6...................................2 Pins ..............................6.......................7 Minimum Reinforcement .....7 WOOD STRUCTURES .........5.5..............1 Structural Steels . 6...................... 6.............. 6.....6............................................12....6...............................................................12 Evaluation of Critical Connections .......................................... 6.....................................................................................`..... 6...........2 Composite Sections ....................5.............I Rivets in Shear ..................................7 Non-Composite Compression Members ...............................................2.................5..13 Prestressed Concrete Beams Made Continuous in the Field .......................................6 Riveted Members......................................................... 6. 6.............6.........................9................. 6............2.......................................................... 6.............................................................................6...............6........................ 6.............. 6...............................................................`.............................................................................................................2..6.................5 Riveted Connections ............... 6........................2.......................4.....................``-`-`.............................................. 6.``...........6 STEELSTRUCTURES 6-33 6-33 6-34 6-34 6-35 6-35 6-35 6-35 6-35 .............................................................12...............2 Service limit State ................... 6.............``.......................... 6..1 Design-Load Rating .................4..2 Materials..............................9......................................................... 6........................................................... 6..........................................`--- ............6........................................................ 6..........................................9 I-Sections in Flexure ............................................... 6.....................6.....................................6...............6........4 Encased I-Sections ......3 Resistance Factors ................................. 6............6... 6....................12................3 Wrought Iron ......... 6........................................9......6..................... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`...........................6.............................................`...............................`...........................1 Links and Hangers ...9......................................................3 Non-Composite Sections ........................................... 6..6...1O Secondary Effects from Prestressing...11 Concrete Bridges with Unknown Reinforcement ..........6........................................`.......6........... 6....................... Creep.................................................... 6............. 6.............................................. 6.........6....9 Evaluation for Shear........................ 6........................................................................................``..6 Tension Members ...............6................................2...................................1 Scope ..............`...................8 Combined Axial Compression and Flexure ........5.................................................................6...................................................................................9............. 6.6............................6..6.....................................................6.............................................................................................12....... 6..........7.............6................6................. 6........................6....................... 6.4 Limit States .................6............... 6............ 6.......5 Moment-Shear Interaction ..........................1 General....... 6........6..................2 Materials .......11 Box Sections in Flexure .... and Shrinkage Effects ....6.........6.................... 6........5................3 Slip-Critical Connections......................2 Rivets in Shear and Tension ...............................................2 Eye Bars ............... 6..........................6 Maximum Reinforcement ............................... 6.......6........6.........5.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 6.......... 6.............7...........5 Effects of Deterioration on Load Rating ....... 6-35 6-36 6-36 6-37 6-37 6-37 6-37 6-37 6-38 6-38 6-38 6-39 6-41 6-41 6-42 6-42 6-43 6-44 6-44 6-44 6-44 6-45 6-45 6-45 6-45 6-46 6-46 6-46 6-46 6-46 6-46 6-47 6-47 6-47 6-48 6-48 6....4........... 6...........5..............................................6..........................``.......... 6......4 Pinned Connections .........................12 Temperature............................12............12....`..............8 Evaluation for Flexural and Axial Force Effects.......................................2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating ....................................1 General....................................1 Strength Limit State .....10 Evaluation for Shear........................6...............6.......................................................

......1 LOAD ANDRESISTANCE FACTOR RATING FLOW CHART ....8.8.....6................................................. Regulatory Signs .......6........................6-1 6-iv Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..........................3 RATING OF STEEL MEMBERS --`.........``...........................................................1 RATING OF CONCRETE COMPONENTS FOKCOMPRESSION PLUS BENDING FORCOMPRESSION PLUS BENDING .....................`.........7.....................................................................`--- (SECANT FORMULA METHOD) .................``...2 6.......................`......8............8........................................................................6...............6................... ....4...........................................7..........6.....................................`..............................................5 General .... Posting Analysis ............................4.6-4 B.....6-2 B.....4 Limit States ................ C.................................................................... Speed Limits ........................... 6...................................6 Evaluation of Critical Connections ............. 6....... 6......... G D..........................8.......................................3 LIVE LOAD MOMENTS ON LONGITUDINAL STRINGERS OR GIRDERS ........6-3 B.....................................6-1 B................... 6-48 6-48 6-49 6-49 6-49 6-49 6-49 6-49 6-50 6-50 6-51 6-52 APPENDICES A.......... 6. A...6.............4 VARIATION IN MOMENT RATIO WITH SPAN LENGTH ...............7......3 Resistance Factors .......2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating .............................................6.... C................ 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .................................................`....6......... C......................................6-5 C..............6.........6-5 D.1 LRFDDESIGN LIVELOAD (HL-93) ..................................................1 6......................................2 RATING OF STEEL MEMBERS WITH ECCENTRICCONNECTIONS C.................................6........ 6......................`........................................................... 6..... (SIMPLE SPAN) B.............6-2 B... .................4 6................3 6............................ Posting Loads .........``..............................7.................................................6-1 A............... 6..................1 Design-Load Rating .........................................`................7..................................... B.......................... RATING..............2 LIMITSTATES ANDLOAD FACTORS FORLOAD A................................................................................................8 POSTING OF BRIDGES .....``-`-`...................................`.............1 ALTERNATE LOAD R A T ~ ...............................................2 AASHTO LEGAL LOADS B.......7.................................``...........................................5 Dynamic Load Allowance.............6.....6-1 C................

... Table 6-10 Yield Strength of Prestressing Steel ........`--- 6-v Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.................... Table 6-9 Tensile Strength of Prestressing Strand........................................................ Table 6-1 1 Minimum Mechanical Properties of Structural Steel by Year of Construction...................................................................... .................... Table 6-8 Yield Strength of Reinforcing Steel ........ Figure 6-2 Calculation of Posting Load ................................. 6-14 6-15 6-15 6-16 6-17 6-20 6-22 6-23 6-27 6-30 6-30 6-31 6-32 6-37 6-42 6-47 6-4 6-51 ........................................................................................................................................ .................................. Table C6-1 Approximate Conversion in Selecting <p................................... Table C6-2 tcADm Table C6-3 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM ..................................................................... LISTOF TABLES Table 6-1 Limit States and Load Factors for Load Rating .......................................................................................``................................................ 6-36 --`.............................................`...............................................................................................................`................. Table 6-4 Load Factors for Design Load: yL ...................................... Table 6-13 Adjustment Factor for Llr .``. Table 6-12 Minimum Yield Point of Pins by Year of Construction .............................. Table 6-3 System Factor: cp......................`..`....... Table 6-5 Generalized Live-Load Factors for Legal Loads: y L ..............``-`-`.`............................................. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .................. for Flexural and Axial Effects ...................``................ Table 6-14 Factored Shear Strength of Rivets: cp F ...................................................................................`.........................``............................................................LISTOF FIGURES Figure 6-1 Flow Chart for Load Rating ......................................................... Table 6-6 Permit load Factors: y L ............................................. Table 6-7 Minimum Compressive Strength of Concrete by Year of Construction . Table 6-2 Condition Factor: cp............................................................................................................`........

..``..``-`-`...Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.`.`..``.`..``.`.`..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.`--- .

. This Manual’s primary focus is the assessment of the safety of bridges for live loads (including overloads) and fatigue. These procedures are consistent in philosophy and approach of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. This Manual is intended for use in evaluating the types of highway bridges commonly in use in the United States that are subjected primarily to permanent loads and vehicular loads. It is important that Bridge Owners and evaluators recognize the vulnerabilities to these other failure modes so that a comprehensive safety assurance program may be developed for in-service bridges on a consistent and rational basis. These ratings may be used for reporting existing bridges to the NBI while new bridges designed by LRFD should be reported using LRFR. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS C6. Bridge ratings are based on information in the bridge file. Specific provisions for the evaluation of curved girder steel bridges are not included in this Manual as criteria are still being developed for LRFD curved-girder design.``..`. The vulnerability to extreme events is an important bridge design consideration but it holds even greater significance in the overall safety assessment of existing bridges. but are based on past practice.. 6-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.1 General The load and resistance factor rating procedures of this section provide a methodology for load rating a bridge consistent with the load and resistance factor design philosophy of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 6.. Study of past bridge failures indicates that failure due to hydraulics (scour/ice/debris) is the most common failure mode across the United States. flood. The methodology is presented in a format using load and resistance factors that have been calibrated based upon structural reliability theory to achieve a minimum target reliability for the strength limit state.1 contains the other rating specifications. and other complex bridges may involve additional considerations and loadings not specifically addressed in this Manual and the rating procedures should be augmented with additional evaluation criteria where required. As part of every inspection cycle.2 The service limit states are not calibrated based upon reliability theory to achieve a target reliability. Rating of longspan bridges. This Manual provides guidance to incorporate these traditional service limit states into the evaluation.``-`-`..1.``..1 INTRODUCTION 6. vessel collision.`. Methods for the evaluation of existing bridges for extreme events such as earthquake.1.`.2 Scope This section provides procedures for the rating of bridges using the load and resistance factor philosophy.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The specific load ratings are used in identi@ing the need for load posting or bridge strengthening and in making overweight-vehicle permit decisions. Procedures are presented for load rating bridges for the LRFD design loading. wind.`.. bridge load ratings should be reviewed and updated to reflect any relevant changes in condition or loading noted during the inspection. but impart very highmagnitude forces on a structure.``. and overweight permit loads. Load ratings are routinely reported to the NBI for national bridge administration and are also used in local bridge management systems. Bridges over navigable waterways with inadequate pier protection may be highly vulnerable to failure by vessel collision.`. or fire are not included herein. Extreme events have a very low probability of occurrence.SECTION 6 LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING --`.1. C6. Earthquake can also be a significant failure mode for bridges in regions considered to be seismically active.``. ice..1 There is a large inventory of existing bridges that have been rated using Allowable Stress or Load Factor methods.1. including the results of a recent field inspection. AASHTO and State legal loads.`--- 6. Guidance is provided on service limit states that are applicable to bridge load rating. Appendix D6. movable bridges.

. design. most according to older editions of the specifications.6-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.1. In rating. and the economic considerations of rating vs. In ordinary cases. the review of a permit application should not necessitate a special inspection of the bridge. material properties.`.`. The LRFD Specifications do not provide guidance on older --`. Minimizes the possibility of the evaluator making a gross error in assessing the capacity of a component or connection.1.3 Philosophy Bridge design and rating.3 The term “evaluation criteria” denotes safety and serviceability standards adopted for assessing existing bridges. All data used in the decision to adjust the evaluation criteria shall be fully documented. The LRFD design criteria based on this index were derived for a severe traffic-loading case (including the presence of 5000 ADTT). 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. To maintain this capacity.5 calibrated to past AASHTO operating level load rating.`. loads. C6.. Where the behavior of a member under traffic is not consistent with that predicted by the governing specifications. C6. This value was chosen to reflect the reduced exposure period. the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall govern. Where this Manual is silent. and the evaluation may be based on the results of the most recent inspection.. consideration of site realities.``-`-`. 6. LRFD calibration reported a target LRFD reliability index (ß) of 3. 6. Changes in existing structural conditions.1. reference is made herein to specific articles in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.4 Assumptions The load rating of a bridge is based upon existing structural conditions. Nearly all existing bridges have been designed in accordance with the AASHTO Standard Specijicationsfor Highway Bridges.4 Load rating of a bridge should not be undertaken without a recent thorough field inspection.`.1. the added cost of overly conservative evaluation standards can be prohibitive as load restrictions. rehabilitation. loads. and in some cases the evaluation criteria may be adjusted based on site conditions and/or structure conditions as recorded in the most recent inspection report. the bridge is assumed to be subject to inspections at regular intervals. The rating procedures presented herein recognize a balance between safety and economics. Design may adopt a conservative reliability index and impose checks to ensure serviceability and durability without incurring a major cost impact.``. as evidenced by a lack of visible signs of distress or excessive deformation or cases where there is evidence of distress even Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS C6.. though similar in overall approach. 0 Guidance on data collection for the purpose of load rating a bridge is provided in Article 4. not to exceed the maximum interval cited in Article 4.1.`.``.3..``.5 Application of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications This Manual is consistent with the current AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. differ in important aspects.1. or site traffic conditions could require re-evaluation.`.``.. Application of serviceability limit states to rating is done on a more selective basis than is prescribed for design in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.5.5 Judgment must be exercised in evaluating a structure. The LRFR procedures in this Manual adopt a reduced target reliability index of approximately 2.`.13. and traffic conditions at the bridge site.. and Improves bridge safety through early discovery of deterioration or signs of distress that could signal impending failure. In most cases.. Where appropriate. Bridge ratings generally require the Engineer to consider a wider range of variables than is typical in bridge design. a lower target reliability than design has been chosen for load rating at the strength limit state. material properties. and replacement become increasingly necessary. Inspection of in-service bridges is important because it: 0 Provides the condition data and other critical non-condition data necessary for evaluation.

The Manual seeks to extend the LRFD design philosophy for new bridges to the inventory of existing bridges in a consistent manner. and overload permit review. respectively.7 Bridge load ratings are performed for specific purposes. and strength of materials. load factors.``. aimed at addressing the different uses of load rating results. Material sampling.. the known behavior of the member under traffic may be used and shall be fully documented.. Load and resistance factor rating of bridges.1. Load rating by load testing.`. legal loads.`--- 6. thereby allowing its application to a large inventory of existing bridges without having to resort to their original design specifications. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. 6... 0 0 Only the first method. deviation from the governing specifications based upon.`. load and resistance factor rating of bridges.1. C6.6 Evaluation Methods This Manual provides three methods for evaluating the safe maximum live-load capacity of bridges or for assessing their safety under a particular loading condition: 0 C6. and design methods are part of the whole and should not be separated.. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Evaluation live-load models are comprised of the design live load..Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-3 though the specification does not predict such distress.`. and load tests may be helpful in establishing the load capacity for such members. and permit loads. is discussed in this section. the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications incorporate the stateof-the-art in design and analysis methods. Load testing and safety evaluation for special cases are discussed in Sections 8 and 9. bridge types that use materials and details no longer in common use. Safety assessment of a bridge using structural reliability methods is intended for use in special cases where the uncertainty in load or resistance is significantly different fi-om that assumed in this Manual. instrumentation.``-`-`.1.7 Load and Resistance Factor Rating Bridge evaluations are performed for varied purposes using different live-load models and evaluation criteria.`.`. Combining factors contained in the original design specifications with those in the current LRFD design specifications should be avoided. loadings. and Safety evaluation using structural reliability methods for special cases.``. Live load models. using the load and resistance factor philosophy. One of the purposes of this Manual is to provide guidance and data on older bridge types and materials that are not covered by the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Evaluators are encouraged to research older materials and design methods as they provide valuable insight into the behavior of the country’s older bridges. local planning and programming. This section specifies a systematic approach to bridge load rating for these load models. Specifications are calibrated documents in which the loads. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . determining load posting or bridge strengthening needs. such as: NBI and BMS reporting.. However.``.1..6 Load testing may be used as an alternative method to directly assess the load capacity of a bridge when analytical methods of evaluation are not applicable or need verification. evaluation criteria. and evaluation procedures are selected based upon the intended use of the load rating results.`.``.`.

6-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges The methodology for the load and resistance factor rating of bridges is comprised of three distinct procedures: 1) Design load rating.`. rating factors with HL-93 loads will generally be lower than previously calculated AASHTO ratings using the HS-20 loads.1 Design Load Rating C6. bridges are screened for the strength limit state at the LRFD design level of reliability.`.`.1 to this section. using dimensions and properties of the bridge in its present as-inspected condition.`. The results of each procedure serve specific uses and also guide the need for further evaluations to veri9 bridge safety or serviceability. The results are also suitable for NI31 and BMS reporting. Design load rating can serve as a screening process to identi@ bridges that should be load rated for legal loads. Design load rating is a first-level assessment of bridges based on the HL-93 loading and LRFD design standards. The rating also considers all applicable LRFD serviceability limit states... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . However.`.``.``.`--- (HL-93) RF<1 Load Posting RF<1 1 v RF 21 Strengthening Legal Load Rating RF21 b PassíFail 4 Permit Load Rating 4 No Further 4 6.. Under this check.. 2) legal load rating.1.6.7. Figure 6-1 Flow Chart for Load Rating.`. Evaluation at a second lower evaluation level of reliability is also an option. It is a measure of the performance of existing bridges to current LRFD bridge design standards. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``. and 3) permit load rating. A detailed rating flow chart is included in Appendix A.1 The LRFD design level of reliability is comparable to a traditional Inventory rating. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.. The second lower level of reliability is comparable to a traditional Operating rating. Bridges that pass the design load check (RF 2 1) at the Inventory level will have satisfactory load rating for all legal loads. for both Inventory and Operating levels.``-`-`.. A flow chart outlining this approach is shown below.1.``.`.7..

6. Heavily spalled and deteriorated concrete decks may be checked for punching shear under wheel loads. Capacity of timber plank decks is often controlled by horizontal shear.8.``. This is a third level rating that should be applied only to bridges having sufficient capacity for AASHTO legal loads..8.. Fracture-critical Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1.``-`-`.1 Decks Stringer-supported concrete deck slabs and metal decks that are carrying normal traffic satisfactorily need not be routinely evaluated for load capacity. The bridge decks should be inspected regularly to veri@ satisfactory performance. Timber decks that exhibit excessive deformations or deflections under normal traffic loads are considered suitable candidates for further evaluation and often control the rating.. 6.`. changes in column unbraced length due to scour.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-5 6.8 Component-Specific Evaluation 6.2 Examples of distress that could trigger a load rating of substructure components include: a high degree of corrosion and section loss.`. Calibrated load factors by permit type and traffic conditions at the site are specified for checking the load effects induced by the passage of the overweight truck. The results of the load rating for legal loads could be used as a basis for decision making related to load posting or bridge strengthening.. service limit states are selectively applied..2 Legal Load Rating This second level rating provides a single safe load capacity (for a given truck configuration) applicable to AASHTO and State legal loads. 6.1.8.`.1. but internal arching or membrane action.1.`. Where deemed necessary by the Engineer.1 Test data indicates that the primary structural action of concrete decks is not flexure. C6. Guidance is also provided on the serviceability criteria that should be checked when reviewing permit applications.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8.`. Liveload factors are selected based upon the truck traffic conditions at the site.`.1.``. Substructure elements such as pier caps and columns should be checked in situations where the Engineer has reason to believe that their capacity may govern the load capacity of the entire bridge.``. or columns with impact damage.. load rating of substructure elements and checking of --`. The inspection of metal decks should emphasize identi@ing the onset of fatigue cracks.2 Substructures Members of substructures need not be routinely checked for load capacity.1. There is significant reserve strength in concrete decks designed by the AASHTO Standard SpeciJications. changes in column end conditions due to deterioration..7.``. Special-emphasis inspection would entail a 100 percent hands-on visual inspection. Strength is the primary limit state for load rating.7..1.`--- C6.3 Permit Load Rating Permit load rating checks the safety and serviceability of bridges in the review of permit applications for the passage of vehicles above the legally established weight limitations.

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . When the structure being evaluated is of a type not covered in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specìjìcations.1. the analytical models should be sufficiently conservative so that member forces used in the rating are sufficient to cover any increased uncertainty in calculating load effects. should be done using the Strength I load combination and load factors of LRFD Article 3.2. such as abutments. only Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. such as suspension bridges.2 LOADS FOR EVALUATION 6. the structure may be posted for restricted speed. Evaluation in accordance with this Manual shall be performed and checked by suitably qualified engineers. all computer programs used in the evaluation must have been tested and validated. General guidance is available in this Manual and the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specìjìcations. may require special analysis methods and procedures. but other procedures must be used for the actual determination of the load rating.9 Checking of capacity is always done on a member basis regardless of how complex a structure is being checked. A licensed professional engineer with a minimum of five years of bridge design and inspection experience shall be charged with the overall responsibility for bridge-capacity evaluation.`. cable-stayed bridges. and curved girder bridges.1...10 Engineer qualifications are also subject to requirements specific to a State or Bridge Owner.`. 6. piers.10 Qualifications and Responsibilities C6.``-`-`...`. steel pier caps should receive special emphasis during inspection.`.``. The engineering expertise necessary to properly evaluate a bridge varies widely with the complexity of the bridge.4.6-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LFWR of Highway Bridges stability of substructure components.2.``.1 General Section 6... Further. The permanent load factors shall be chosen from LRFD Table 3-2 so as to produce the maximum factored force effect. 6..2 describes the loads to be used in determining the load effects in the load rating equation provided in Article 6. Main elements and components of the substructure whose failure is expected to cause the collapse of the bridge shall be identified for special emphasis during inspection. but neglecting other transient loads such as wind or temperature.`. including all permanent loads and loads due to braking and centrifugal forces.`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. Careful attention shall be given to substructure elements for evidence of distress or instability that could affect the load-carrying capacity of the bridge.1. 6.9 Evaluation of Complex Structures The computation of load-carrying capacity of complex structures. and walls.``. A multi-disciplinary approach that utilizes the specialized knowledge and skills of other engineers may be needed in special situations for inspection and office evaluation. C6.1.4.. Where longitudinal stability is considered inadequate.1. In general.``.

``. 6. Wearing surface thicknesses are also highly variable.``..25.3 Transient Loads 6.`.2.`--- I The nominal live loads to be used in the evaluation of bridges are selected based upon the purpose and intended use of the evaluation results. temperature.2.0).0 shall be applied to the secondary effects from post-tensioning. ~ D W may be taken as 1.3 Load Factors Load factors for permanent loads are as given in Table 6-1.``.2 Allowance for future wearing surface need not be provided in evaluation. secondary moments are introduced as the member is stressed. C6. and earthquake are usually not considered in rating except when unusual conditions warrant their inclusion.. If the wearing surface thickness is field measured. A load factor of 1.`. should be done only where the --`. C6.`.2.2.1 Vehicular Live Loads (Gravity Loads): LL C6.`. attachments.3.2 Permanent Loads Other Than Dead Loads: P Secondary effects from prestressing shall be considered as permanent loads.2 In continuous post-tensioned bridges..2 (Yp= 1.2..1 Dead Loads: DC and D W The dead-load effects on the structure shall be computed in accordance with the conditions existing at the time of analysis.2 Permanent Loads and Load Factors The load rating of bridges shall consider all permanent loads. in the absence of more precise information.1 Care should be exercised in estimating the weight of concrete decks because significant variations of deck thickness have been found.. cited in A6. Permanent loads include dead loads and locked-in force effects from the construction process. Environmental loads such as wind. the maximum load factor should be used.2.2. 6.. Where the permanent load increases the live load effects.``. ice.``-`-`.2.2.2. 6.6.2.2. Multiple measurements at curbs and roadway centerline should be used to determine an average wearing surface thickness.4 in combination with deadand live-load effects. utilities.`. C6.3. stream flow.`. 6. 6..`.2. specified in LRFD Article 3. Minimum unit weights of materials used in computing dead loads should be in accordance with LRFD Table 3-3..2.2.2. Where present. and thickness of wearing surface should be field verified at the time of inspection.1 The evaluation of bridge components to include the effects of longitudinal braking forces.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-7 permanent loads and vehicular loads are considered to be of consequence in load rating.2. Live-load models for load rating include: Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Dead loads should be based on dimensions shown on the plans and verified with field measurements.

2.`--- evaluator has concerns about the longitudinal stability of the structure.4.`. Roadway widths less than 18 ft. C6. State legal loads significantly heavier than the AASHTO legal loads should be load rated using load factors specified for routine permits in this Manual.3. C6. Type 3S2. State legal loads.`.``-`-`.3 Dynamic Load Allowance: Z M The dynamic load allowance for evaluation shall be as specified in Articles 6. between wheel load and edge of the roadway was used for rating by some agencies.6-8 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges DesignLoad: HL-93 Design Load per LRFD Specifications.2.4.`.`.2) should be evaluated using the same procedures and factors specified for AASHTO trucks in this Manual. if the span has sufficient capacity for AASHTO legal loads. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. distance between the wheels of a truck shall be taken to be 6. This Manual allows the use of reduced dynamic load allowance for load rating under certain conditions as discussed under Section 6.3. from the edge of a traffic lane or face of the curb... --`..``.`. The center of any wheel load shall not be closer than 2. and 6.0 ft.3.4.2 Application of Vehicular Live Load The number of traffic lanes to be loaded and the transverse placement of wheel lines shall be in conformance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and the following: Roadway widths from 18 to 20 ft.0 ft.2 In the past.4.3 In the AASHTO Standard Speclfications. Permit Load: Actual Permit Truck.``.. The design of exterior stringers in many older bridges.2. shall carry one traffic lane only.`. 6. and lane type loads).0 ft. unless noted otherwise.``. The distance between adjacent wheel lines of passing trucks shall not be less than 4.2.6.. LegalLoads: AASHTO Legal Loads (Type 3.3.`. shall have two traffic lanes.. and especially affected the rating of exterior stringers.5. each equal to one half the roadwav width. 6. may not have included a minimum live load distribution to the outside stringers. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2. especially those designed prior to 1957. The standard gage width.3.3. This deviation from design is considered overly conservative. a distance as little as 1 ft. Type 3-3. Load factors for vehicular live loads appropriate for use in load rating are as given in Table 6-1..``.5.4..3. State legal loads having only minor variations fi-om the AASHTO legal loads (see Appendix B. the dynamic load allowance was termed impact. 6.

3 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS 6. but in no case should the loading exceed the value specified in LRFD Article 3.3. C6..``.6 Temperature Effects: TG and TU Temperature effects need not be considered in calculating load ratings for non-segmental bridge components that have been provided with welldistributed steel reinforcement to control thermal cracking.``. long-span bridges.`. --`.3. 6. non-prestressed components.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .7 Earthquake Effects: EQ Earthquake effects need not be considered in calculating load ratings.2. the safety of bridges under earthquake loads may be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of Seismic RetroJitting Manual for Highway Bridges.4 Pedestrian Live Loads: PL Pedestrian loads on sidewalks need not be considered simultaneously with vehicular loads when load rating a bridge unless the Engineer has reason to expect that significant pedestrian loading will coincide with maximum vehicular loading.3..3. and other high-level bridges should be considered in accordance with applicable standards. a reduced long-term modulus of elasticity for concrete may be used in the analysis.3. FHWA-RD94-052.`.2. It is recommended that wherever feasible.3. Within a given evaluation procedure.3.8 Creep and Shrinkage: CR and SH Creep and shrinkage effects do not need to be considered in calculating load ratings where there is well-distributed reinforcement to control cracking in non-segmental.2. the evaluator has the option of using simplified methods that tend to be somewhat conservative or pursue a more refined approach for improved accuracy.``.. 6.1 Evaluation seeks to verify adequate performance of existing bridges with an appropriate level of effort.1 General Methods of structural analysis suitable for the evaluation of bridges shall be as described in Section 4 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design SpeciJications and in this section.`. 6.``. Temperature gradient (TG)may be considered when evaluating segmental bridges.3.3.6 Where temperature effects are considered.`. Pedestrian loads considered simultaneously with vehicular loads in calculations for load ratings shall be the probable maximum loads anticipated.2.2. C6.1. the effects of wind on special structures such as movable bridges. May 1995.6.2.3.7 In regions prone to seismic activity.6...5 Wind Loads: WL and WS Wind loads need not be considered unless special circumstancesjustify otherwise.. 6.2.. C6.2. However.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-9 6..`.5 Wind loads are not normally considered in load rating.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 6.``-`-`.`. C6.

approximate methods of distribution analysis as described in LRFD Article 4...2 Approximate Methods of Structural Analysis Where applicable.`. the accuracy is reduced or the formulas may not be applicable.``.`. The live-load distribution formulas can also be applied to the AASHTO family of legal trucks.`.``. The live-load factors for permit loads given in Table 6-6 have been derived for the possibility of simultaneous presence of non-permit trucks on the bridge when the permit vehicle crosses the span... Refined approaches to capacity evaluation of existing bridges can be economically justified where increased capacity is required to achieve a desired safe load capacity or permit load capability. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.2 shall be used for evaluating existing bridges..`. number of axles and axle spacings have only a small effect on the load distribution factor for flexure. Engineers using the LRFD live-load distribution formulas may find distributions for multi-lane loadings now reduced on the average by some 10 percent compared to distributions computed with simplified Slover approximations of the AASHTO Standard SpeciJcations...``-`-`..2 The live-load distribution formulas provided in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations were developed for common bridge types and dimensions.2 which is included in the LRFD distribution factors for singlelane loadings should not be used when checking fatigue or special permit loads.6. The multiple presence factor of 1.`. Unusual wheel configurations and wider gage widths may be characteristic of certain permit vehicles.`. Their validity has been verified for parameter variations within specific ranges as indicated in the tables of LRFD Article 4. and permit vehicles whose overall width is comparable to the width of the design truck.`.5 should be applied to the review of permits. --`. 6.3. It was found that the single most important parameter is gage width.6-10 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges simplified evaluation procedures should be first applied before resorting to higher level evaluation methods.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. for the HS family of trucks.6. C6. Adjustments in distributions to account for traffic volume provided in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design SpeciJcations should also not be factored into the evaluation distribution factors. Sensitivity studies of the load distribution factor to several different truck parameters indicate that most parameters such as gross weight.4. The AASHTO LRFD distribution factors were developed using the HS-20 truck model that has a standard six-foot gage width. Applying a multi-lane distribution factor to a loading involving a heavy permit truck only in one lane can be overly conservative.2.3.``. However. If the bridge or loading parameters fall outside these specified ranges. the reduction in the distributions for single-lane loading computed by the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design SpeciJcations and compared to the Slover formulas will be much greater and differ by 30-40 percent or more. The distributions for single lane are important when checking special permits or fatigue life estimates which both use single-lane distributions. refined methods of analysis should be considered. Permit load rating procedures provided in Section 6. In such cases.

the exact --`..Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-1 1 The distribution factor is generally lower for increased gage widths. 0 0 0 0 Many older bridges have parapets.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``-`-`. Varying skews at supports. Field testing (load testing) procedures described in Section 8 may be employed to ver@ the behavior of exterior girders. where load effect is proportional to the load applied. The rationale for this inconsistency is found in the “lower bound theorem” which states that for a structure that behaves in a ductile manner the collapse load computed on the basis of an assumed equilibrium moment diagram is less than or equal to the true ultimate collapse load. The stiffness contribution of these elements to bridge response should be verified by load testing.6..6.`. The level of structural participation could vary from bridge to bridge. railings. C6. Curved bridges..``. a table of distribution factors for extreme force effects in each span should be provided in the load rating report to aid in future load ratings. the theorem implies that as long as the requirements of ductility and equilibrium are satisfied.. When a refined method of analysis is used. and curbs that are interrupted by open joints.3 Refined Methods of Analysis Bridges that exhibit insufficient load capacity when analyzed by approximate methods..`.3. Additionally. Most analytical models are based on linear response.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. they may also be subjected to increased deterioration due to their increased environmental exposure.2. These bridges should be analyzed using the S/D method of live-load distribution provided in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Prestressed concrete adjacent box-beam and slab bridges built prior to 1970 may not have sufficient transverse post-tensioning (LRFD C4.`.3 Some cases where refined analysis methods would be considered appropriate include: 0 Girder spacings and span lengths outside the range of LRFD-distribution formulas. Approximate methods of analysis for exterior girders are often less reliable than interior girders due to the structural participation of curbs and parapets.`.. and bridges or loading conditions for which accurate live-load distribution formulas are not readily available may be analyzed by refined methods of analysis as described in LRFD Article 4. Exterior girders of existing bridges may have been designed for less capacity than the interior girders. Low-rated bridges.`..2. 6. the resistance models used for design and evaluation assume nonlinear response at the strength limit state.`.3. if they are to be included in a refined analysis.3. Restated in simpler terms.25 ksi) to act as a unit.1 requires a minimum prestress of 0. Permit loads with nonstandard gage widths and large variations in axle configurations.``.``. Conversely..

4.``.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Hence.``. 6. C6.4 One important use of diagnostic load tests is to confirm the precise nature of load distribution to the main load carrying members of a bridge and to the individual components of a multi-component member. The load rating is generally expressed as a rating factor for a particular live-load model.6. only bridges that pass the load rating for AASHTO legal loads should be evaluated for overweight permits. Load rating for AASHTO Legal loads is required only when a bridge fails (RF 2 1) the Design load rating at the Operating level. Use of refined analytical methods could significantly influence the repair/ rehabilitation strategy or posting load that may be governed by service or fatigue criteria. may result in significant inaccuracies for the fatigue and service limit states.1 The load-rating procedures are structured to be performed in a sequential manner.1 Introduction Three load-rating procedures that are consistent with the load and resistance factor philosophy have been provided in this section for the load capacity evaluation of in-service bridges: 0 C6.``.4 Analysis by Field Testing Bridges may be evaluated by field testing (load testing) if the evaluator feels that analytical approaches do not accurately represent the true behavior and load distribution of the structure and its components.4.. The lower bound theorem does not apply in cases where buckling may occur prior to yielding and redistribution of force effects.1 to this section).. while acceptable at the strength limit state. Procedures for load testing are described in Section 8 of this Manual. starting with the design load rating (see flowcharts in Article 6. Analytical procedures that underestimate the load effects in some locations and overestimate the effects in others.``-`-`.. using the general load-rating equation provided in Article 6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Refined analysis procedures that can properly model the relative stiffnesses of all bridge components assumes added significance when evaluating bridges for nonstrength related criteria..3.`.1.4.`..7 and in Appendix A. Similarly. as needed.`.`.`.``. 6. the lower bound theorem does not apply to these limit states.`. --`.2.4 LOAD-RATING PROCEDURES 6.. Design load rating (first level evaluation) Legal load rating (second level evaluation) Permit load rating (third level evaluation) 0 0 Each procedure is geared to a specific live-load model with specially calibrated load factors aimed at maintaining a uniform and acceptable level of reliability in all evaluations.6-12 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges distribution of internal force effects is not required at the strength limit state..`. Evaluation of the fatigue and service limit states is concerned with non-ductile failure modes and service level loads where there is little likelihood of load redistribution..3.

O Evaluation live-load factor Condition factor System factor LRFD resistance factor The load rating shall be carried out at each applicable limit state and load effect with the lowest value determining the controlling rating factor. see Article 6. 20.`. For system factors. (6-1) For the Strength Limit States: c = 9. = = = DC DW P LL I M YDC = = = - YDW - YP YL 'pc cps - c p = Rating factor Capacity Allowable stress specified in the LRFD code Nominal member resistance (asinspected) Dead-load effect due to structural components and attachments Dead-load effect due to wearing surface and utilities Permanent loads other than dead loads Live-load effect Dynamic load allowance LRFD load factor for structural components and attachments LRFD load factor for wearing surfaces and utilities LRFD load factor for permanent loads other than dead loads = 1.3. --`..0 for all nonstrength limit states. cp R.``..4. The load rating of a deteriorated bridge should be based on a recent thorough field inspection.4.. see Article 6.2.4. axial force. flexure.2. Limit states and load factors for load rating shall be selected from Table 6-1.2 General Load-Rating Equation 6.Load and Resistance Factor Ratine 6-13 6.`.2.4.`. 'p = 1..`. or shear): C6. In load rating.``.. Operational importance is not included as a factor in the load rating provisions of this Manual. Only sound material should be considered in determining the nominal resistance of the deteriorated section.1) are not included in the general load-rating equation. redundancy.e.`.85 For the Service Limit States: =fR It should be noted that load modifiers (q) relating to ductility. Where: R F = c fR = - - R. Load ratings may also be calculated using as-built member properties to serve as a baseline for comparative purposes.`.. and operational importance contained in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (Article 1.. Resistance factor cp has the same value for new design and for load rating.``.(yDW)(Dw) (YL )(LL + w '(Y.3. For condition factors.4.``.`.4.``-`-`. Also. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 RF= '- (YDC)(Dc) .)' Eq. ductility is considered in conjunction with redundancy and incorporated in the system factor cps.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1 General The following general expression shall be used in determining the load rating of each component and connection subjected to a single force effect (i..2. 'p.2. Where the following lower limit shall apply: cp...

Table 6-1 Limit States and Load Factors for Load Rating.``.4.e.1 LL Operating LL Permit Load 6.4.2...`. axial-bending interaction or shearbending interaction). Service I is used to check the 0.`.4. P (see Articles 6.`--- .5.``.2 Limit States Strength is the primary limit state for load rating. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 4 3 2 1 Inventory Bridge Type Limit State* StrengthI Steel DeadLoad DC 1. Notes: Shaded cells of the table indicate optional checks. and 6. Applicable limit states are summarized in Table 6-1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Secondary effects from prestressing of continuous spans and locked-in force effects from the construction process should be included as permanent loads other than dead loads.6.75 1.2..9F.``-`-`. service and fatigue limit states are selectively applied in accordance with the provisions of this Manual..35 Table 6-5 Reinforced Concrete Prestressed Concrete Wood * Defined in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.``. and 6.50 LL 1.6-i4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Components subjected to combined load effects shall be load rated considering the interaction of load effects (i.2 Service limit states that are relevant to load rating are discussed under the articles on resistance of structures (see Sections 6.7).. 6.3).2. C6. Fatigue limit state is checked using the LRFD fatigue truck (see Article 6.2.`.2. Desi@ Load 6 .`.25 where thickness has been field measured.`.4.1).2..``.5.1 LL - DeadLoad DW 1.2.6.`..4.`. stress limit in reinforcing steel.4..4. Load factor for D W at the strength limit state may be taken as 1.2. as provided in this Manual under the sections on resistance of structures..25 Legal Load 6.6.

o0 0.3 6. tied to the structural condition of the member.. the uncertainties and resistance variabilities are greatly increased (scatter is larger).`. accordingly. the system factors are used to maintain an adequate level of system safety.. and.4 I Fair Poor System factors are multipliers applied to the nominal resistance to reflect the level of redundancy of the complete superstructure system.`.. Part of 'p.85 The uncertainties associated with the resistance of an existing intact member are at least equal to that of a new member in the design stage. System factors that correspond to the load factor modifiers in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations should be used.2. Bridges that are less redundant will have their factored member capacities reduced. then the following approximate conversion may be applied in selecting 'pc..3 Condition Factor: cpc Use of Condition Factors as presented below may be considered optional based on an agency's load-rating practice. Improved inspections will reduce. accounts for the member deterioration due to natural causes (i. Bridge redundancy is the capability of a bridge structural system to carq loads after damage to or the failure of one or more of its members.`.`. the values specified for 'p. I( I 6.. p ' . Internal redundancy and structural redundancy that exists as a result of continuity are neglected when classifying a member as nonredundant.``.4.`--- .4.``.`. atmospheric corrosion). it has been observed that deteriorated members are generally prone to an increased rate of future deterioration when compared to intact members.2.O).05 ('p. will have lower ratings.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-15 C6. by actual field measurement of losses rather than by an estimated percentage of losses. If condition information is collected and recorded in the form of NBI condition ratings only (not as element level data). in Table 6-2 may be increased by 0. I 1. The system factors in Table 6-3 are more conservative than the LRFD-design values and may be used at the Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Structural members of a bridge do not behave independently. Table C6-1 Approximate Conversion in Selecting <p.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.4.``..4 System Factor: cp.2.e. the increased scatter or resistance variability in deteriorated members. If section properties are obtained accurately.``.. but not totally eliminate. relates to possible further section losses prior to the next inspection and evaluation. Improved inspection and field measurements will reduce the uncertainties inherent in identifying the true extent of deterioration for use in calculating the nominal member resistance. The condition factor provides a reduction to account for the increased uncertainty in the resistance of deteriorated members and the likely increased future deterioration of these members during the period between inspection cycles. but interact with other members tc form one structural system.4.. Once the member experiences deterioration and begins to degrade.. If Table 6-3 is used. The condition factor. Superstructure Condition 1 I Equivalent Member 5 I 4 or lower C6.2.. Additionally.`. Good or Satisfactory Fair Poor ~ 1. Damage caused by accidents is specifically not considered here.95 0.`. Non- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Table 6-2 Condition Factor: cpc.

85 0..85. should be equal. all the girders are almost equally loaded and there is no reserve strength available.6-16 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges discretion of the evaluator until they are modified in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijkations. Tables of system factors are given in the referenced report for common simple-span and continuous bridges with varying number of beams and beam spacings.and four. the level of redundancy may be sufficient to utilize a value of cps greater than 1. so system reserve is not possible. The aim of q. For bridges with configurations that are not covered by the tables. = 1. factored for shear.2. may be taken as 0.0 is to be applied when checking shear at the strength limit state. The internal redundancy in these members makes a sudden failure far less likely. Therefore. then cp.0. all the cp. and NonContinuous Stringers Redundant Stringer SubsystemsBetween 0. Thus. is to add a reserve capacity such that the overall system reliability is increased from approximately an operating level (for redundant systems) to a more realistic target for non-redundant systems corresponding to Inventory levels. A more liberal system factor for non-redundant riveted sections and truss members with multiple eyebars has been provided.. may be taken as 1. as shear failures tend to be brittle. System factors are generally not appropriate for shear. A constant value of cp. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . a direct redundancy analysis approach may be used. in the evaluation.O is assigned for flexure and shear..`. = 1.`. irrespective of girder spacing.``. For evaluating timber bridges.. For the purposes of determining system factors.85 i nn The simplified system factors presented in Table 6-3 shall be applied only when checking flexural and axial effects at the strength limit state of typical spans and geometries. each web of a box girder may be considered as an Igirder. Subsystems that have redundant members should not be penalized if the overall system is nonredundant. should be calibrated to reflect the brittle characteristics.`.`. A constant value of cp. An increased system factor of 0. --`.o0 All Other Girder Bridges and Slab Bridges Floorbeamswith Spacing >12ft.0 is assigned for evaluation. SuperstructureType Welded Members in Two-Girder/Truss/Arch Bridges Riveted Members in Two-Girder/Truss/Arch Bridges Multiple Eyebar Members in Truss Bridges Three-GirderBridges with Girder Spacing 56 fi.`. More accurate quantification of redundancy is provided in NCHRP Report 406. but in no instance should q. Thus. If the Engineer can demonstrate the presence of adequate redundancy in a superstructure system (Reference: NCHRP Report 406). to be nonredundant. cp. closely spaced parallel stringers would be redundant even in a two-girder-floorbeam main system.9o 0.``.95 1. be taken as greater than 1. In some instances.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. redundant bridges are penalized by requiring their members to provide higher safety levels than those of similar bridges with redundant configurations..85 for welded construction and 0.`. The design resistance. Redundancy in Highway Bridge Superstructures.. cp.`.90 for riveted construction. o. = 1.``. as described in NCHRP Report 406. is decreased to 0.0. a constant value of cp.``. Four-Girder Bridges with Girder Spacing <A I 3 cp.90 is appropriate for such members..90 0.85 o.girder systems.. For narrow bridges (such as one-lane bridges) with closely spaced three.``-`-`. In such cases. Table 6-3 System Factor: í& for Flexural and Axial Effects. Some agencies may consider all three-girder systems.

`.7).`. at a local or national level. The designload rating of bridges may be performed at the same design level (Inventory level) reliability adopted for new bridges by the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design SpeciJications or at a second lowerlevel reliability comparable to the Operating level reliability inherent in past load-rating practice.2 Live Loads and Load Factors 6.5.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-17 6.3.4. The design-load rating produces Inventory and Operating level rating factors for the HL-93 loading. No further evaluation is necessary for bridges that have adequate capacity (RF > 1) at the Inventory level reliability for HL-93.2Live-Load Factors C6.6.3.3.`.1 Purpose The design-load rating assesses the performance of existing bridges utilizing the LRFD-design loading (HL-93) and design standards.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..1 The design-load rating is performed using dimensions and properties for the bridge in its present condition.`.. The rating results for service and fatigue limit states could also guide future inspections by identifying vulnerable limit states for each bridge. specifically those vehicles significantly heavier than the AASHTO trucks.``.. The results are also suitable for use in NBI reporting.`.2 The evaluation live-load factors for the Strength I limit state shall be taken as shown in Table 6-4.6..3 Design-Load Rating 6.4.3. live-load HL-93 (see Appendix B.``.2. 6.1 Live Loud The LRFD-design.2. Service limit states that are relevant to designload rating are discussed under the articles on resistance of structures (see Sections 6.3.4.4.``. 6.. Bridges that pass HL-93 screening only at the Operating level will have adequate capacity for AASHTO legal loads.3.. 6. and 6.``. Existing bridges that do not pass a design-load rating at the Operating level reliability should be evaluated by load rating for AASHTO legal loads using procedures provided in this section. Bridges that pass HL-93 screening at the Inventory level will have adequate capacity for all AASHTO legal loads and State legal loads that fall within the exclusion limits described in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcutions.`. but may not rate (RF > I) for all State legal loads. The design-load rating serves as a screening process to identify bridges that should be load rated for legal loads. per the following criteria: 0 C6.`..4.2. --`. obtained from a recent field inspection.``-`-`. and bridge management and bridge administration.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Table 6-4 Load Factors for Design Load: y L .4. Bridges that pass HL-93 screening only at the Operating level reliability will not have adequate capaciîy for State legal loads significantly heavier than the AASHTO legal loads.4. I) shall be used.

AASHTO legal vehicles (Type 3. C6.6. Past load-rating practice defined two levels of load capacity: Inventory rating and Operating rating. 6.4.2) shall apply.4... the critical load effects shall be created by: For all load effects.`.4.6. and may fall to the equivalent of Inventory levels or below for heavily deteriorated. load model governs the load rating. The previous distinction of Operating and Inventory level ratings is no longer maintained when load rating for legal loads.3. The safe load capacity may approach or exceed the equivalent of Operating rating for redundant bridges in good condition on low traffic routes.and sitespecific data in a rational and consistent format.3 For wood components. 6.`.2. The AASHTO legal vehicles and lane-type load models shown in Appendix B. non-redundant bridges on high traffic routes.4 Legal load Rating 6..``.``-`-`. Load rating for legal loads determines the safe load capacity of a bridge for the AASHTO family of legal loads and State legal loads. applied separately).4.. It provides a level of reliability. Type 3-3. When the lane type. A single safe load capacity is obtained for a given legal load configuration.4.1 Purpose Bridges that do not have sufficient capacity under the design-load rating should be load rated for legal loads to establish the need for load posting or strengthening.4. Type 3S2. The load and resistance factors have been calibrated to provide uniform levels of reliability and permit the introduction of bridge.3.4.`--- .4.4.6.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.1 Live Loads C6. The capacity of non-redundant bridges and degraded bridges will be reduced during the load-rating process by using system factors and condition factors.6-18 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.1 Usually bridges are load rated for all three AASHTO trucks and lane loads to determine the governing loading and governing load rating.2.4).4.4.`.3).`..2 shall be used for load rating.. The single safe load capacity produced by the procedures presented in this Manual considers redundancy and bridge condition in the load-rating process.4. A safe load capacity in tons may be computed for each vehicle type (see Article 6. the equivalent truck weight for use in calculating a safe load capacity for the bridge shall be taken as 80 kips. the dynamic load allowance is reduced to 50 percent of the values specified (see LRFD Article 3. Redundancy was not explicitly considered in load rating and the Inventory and Operating ratings were generally taken to represent the lower and upper bounds of safe load capacity.2 Live Loads and Load Factors 6. corresponding to the operating level reliability for redundant bridges in good condition.4.`.`.. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1 Evaluation procedures are presented herein to establish a safe load capacity for an existing bridge that recognizes a balance between safety and economics..``. For all span lengths.2. using safety and serviceability criteria considered appropriate for evaluatiori.``. Some Bridge Owners considered redundancy and condition of the structure when selecting a posting load level between Inventory and Operating levels.4.`.4.3 Dynamic Load Allowance The dynamic load allowance specified in the LRFD Specifications for new bridge design (LRFD Article 3. C6.

the lane load may be excluded and the 0.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . designated as Type 3. A characteristic of the AASHTO family of legal loads (Type 3. vehicle weight limit of 80 kips. The federal bridge formula (Reference: TRI3 Special Report 225.2 klf combined with two AASHTO Type 3-3 multiplied by 0. Type 3-3) is that the group satisfies the federal bridge formula. The AASHTO legal loads model three portions of the bridge formula which control short. found to be an adequate basis for a notional design load in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Truck Weight Limits Issues and Options. It is unnecessary to place more than one vehicle in a lane for spans up to 200 ft.. in the Engineer’s judgment. (b) limits on axle loads (20 kips for single axles..`. Grandfather provisions in the federal statutes allow states to retain higher limits than these if such limits were in effect when the applicable federal statutes were first enacted. The objective of producing new AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications that will yield designs having uniform reliability required as its basis a new live-load model with a consistent bias when compared with the exclusion vehicles.``.0 if.75 factor changed to 1. as achieved with the HL-93 notional load model (see Appendix B6. Therefore.`.. because the load factors provided have been modeled for this possibility.. and are used as vehicle models for load rating.`. Load ratings may also be performed for State legal loads that have only minor variations from the AASHTO legal loads using the live-load factors provided in Table 6-5 for the AASHTO vehicles.4). The notional design load bears no resemblance or correlation to legal truck limits on the roads and poses practical difficulties when applied to load rating and load posting of existing bridges.. Type 3S2.`.. the combined use of these three AASHTO legal loads results in uniform bias over all span lengths. a lane load of 0. While this notional design load provides a convenient and uniform basis for design and screening of existing bridges against new bridge safety standards. critical load effects shall be created by: AASHTO Type 3-3 multiplied by 0. for span lengths greater than 200 ft.75 heading in the same direction separated by 30 f t . In addition.`..0 bias factor for all force effects over all span lengths. 34 kips for tandem axles). it has certain limitations when applied to evaluation. AASHTO legal vehicles.``. This combination load was therefore. and long spans.``. These vehicles are also suitable for bridge posting purposes. The model consisting of either the HS-20 truck plus the uniform lane load or the tandem plus the uniform lane load (designated as HL-93 loading) resulted in a tight clustering of data around a 1.`.``-`-`. and Type 3-3 are sufficiently representative of average truck configurations in use today.. Type 3S2.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 0 6-19 For negative moments and reactions at interior supports. medium. If the ADTT is less than 500.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. These vehicles are presently widely used for load rating --`. or gross. 1990) restricts truck weights on interstate highways through (a) a total.2 klf.75 and combined with a lane load of 0. it is warranted. Dynamic load allowance shall be applied to the AASHTO legal vehicles and not the lane loads. and (c) a bridge formula that specifies the maximum allowable weight on any group of consecutive axles based on the number of axles in the group and the distance from first to the last axles.`..

Load factors appropriate for use with the AASHTO and State legal vehicles are defined based upon the traffic data available for the site. In cases where site traffic conditions are unavailable or unknown..4.2. Additionally.`..80 Il 1. C6. ~~ Traffic Volume (one direction) Unknown Load Factor 1. and 6.`. not to exceed the value of the factor multiplied by 1. The generalized live-load factors were derived using methods similar to that used in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.3 Service limit states that are relevant to legal load rating are discussed under the articles on resistance of structures (see Sections 6. 6.``. Traffic conditions at bridge sites are usually characterized by traffic volume.4. ADTT and truck loads through weigh-in-motion measurements recorded over a period of time allow the estimation of site-specific load factors that are characteristic of a particular bridge site.``. Table 6-5 Generalized Live-Load Factors for Legal Loads: yL.`.3 Generalized Live-Load Factors: YL C6.40 Reduce the reliability index from the design level to the operating (evaluation) level.4. The ADTT at a site is usually known or can be estimated.``.2 Live-Load Factors This Manual provides generalized live-load factors for load rating that have been calibrated to provide uniform and acceptable level of reliability..4.. these vehicles are familiar to engineers and provide continuity with current practice. The multiple presence factors herein are derived based on likely traffic situations rather than the most extreme possible cases used in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijkations.`--- . Live load varies from site to site. Generalized load factors are representative of bridges nationwide with similar traffic volumes. 6.6. Legal loads of a given jurisdiction that are significantly greater than the AASHTO legal loads should preferably be load rated using load factors provided for routine permits in this Manual.80 I ADTT25000 ADTT = 1000 ADTT S 100 1 1.5. an increase in the live-load factor is warranted due to conditions or situations not accounted for in this Manual when determining the safe legal load. worst-case traffic conditions should be assumed.4.4.. The generalized live-load factors are intended for AASHTO legal loads and State legal loads that have only minor variations from the AASHTO legal loads.`. More refined site-specific load factors appropriate for a specific bridge site may be estimated if more detailed traffic and truck load data are available for the site.. They are appropriate for use as rating vehicles as they satis9 the major aim of providing uniform reliability over all span lengths.2 FHWA requires an ADTT to be recorded on the Structural Inventory and Appraisal (SI&A) form for all bridges. They are also widely used as truck symbols on load posting signs.``. 0 0 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 6.`. The load factor is calibrated to the reliability analysis in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications with the following modifications: 0 Generalized live-load factors for the Strength I limit state are specified in Table 6-5.`. If in the Engineer's judgment.6-20 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges and load posting purposes. The HS-20 truck may be taken as a State legal vehicle for load rating purposes..2.2.65 1.3.4. the Engineer may increase the factors in Table 6-5.2. These AASHTO vehicles model many of the configurations of present truck traffic.4. Reduced live-load factor to account for a 5-year instead of a 75-year exposure.``-`-`.7). 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`..

only the largest 20 percent of all truck weights are considered in a sample for extrapolating to the largest loading event.5. To obtain an accurate projection of the upper tail of the weight histogram. (C6-1) For the single-lane loading case. Site-Specific.``.``.``.3Y1.`.. if the Engineer deems appropriate.3. the live-load factor for the Strength I limit state shall be taken as: Eq.. Several parametric analyses indicate this reduction in beta corresponds to a reduced load factor ratio of about 0.`.`.. appropriate load factors can be derived from this information. it is reasonable to increase the load factor up to the design target beta level (or equivalent Inventory level of loading). such data should be obtained by systems able to weigh all trucks without allowing heavy overweight vehicles to bypass the weighing operation.``-`-`. In general.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. by reducing the target beta level from the design level of 3. the load factors in Table 6-5 have been calibrated to represent an equivalent Operating level of loading. by multiplying by the reciprocal of 0.75).. 1.`--- .or more than two-lane loading case.76 or 1.`. Truck weights at a site should be obtained by generally accepted weigh-in-motion technology.. A sufficient number of truck samples need to be taken to provide accurate parameters for the weight histogram.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-21 The live-load factors in Table 6-5 were determined.``... 8 0 Eq.. Therefore. in part.e. Thus.76 (i.(C6-2) where : W* = Mean truck weight for the top 20 percent of the weight sample of trucks (kips) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. When both truck weight and huck traffic volume data are available for a specific bridge site. the live load factor for the Strength I limit state shall be taken as: yL = l .`.. Live-Load Factors Consideration should be given to using sitespecific load factors when a bridge on a low-volume road may carry unusually heavy trucks or industrial loads due to the proximiîy of the bridge to an industrial site. For a two.5 to the corresponding operating level 012. according to NCHRF' Report 454. 8 [ w * + ~ ~ ) o * ] > l .

. therefore.``-`-`. However. W * and o * . It is. In design. Much of the total uncertainty about bridge loads represents site-to-site uncertainty rather than inherent randomness in the truck-loading process itself..``.`.`.``. should be substituted into the equations for the load factors.9 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. íurther investigation of site-specific loading could result in improved load rating.``.`..`--- A simplified procedure for calculating load factors suggested follows the same format used in the derivation of live-load factors contained in NCHRP Report 368. Table C6-2 fCABm Two or More Lanes 1O00 One Lane 4. WIM data on trucks should be unbiased and should capture any seasonal.5 1O0 3. if possible. the load factor may be increased rather than reduced. when estimating statistical parameters. Advances in weigh-in-motion technology have significantly lowered the cost of collecting load and traffic data. a logical candidate for closer scrutiny. Both single and two or more lanes (where present) shall be checked to determine the lower rating factor. Among the variables used in evaluation. much of the conservatism associated with loads can be eliminated by obtaining site-specific information.`..`.6-22 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges o* = Standard deviation of the top 20 percent of the truck weight sample (kips) Fractile value appropriate for the maximum expected loading eventgiven below in Table C6-2 t<mm = The measured site parameters. The reduction in uncertainty could result in reduced load factors for evaluation. Permit vehicles should be removed from the stream.5 ~~ 3.. assessing the site-specific loading will require additional load data collection. Calibration o f LRFD Bridge Design Code. The cost of additional data collection should be weighed against the potential benefit that may result from improved load ratings. weekly. In many cases. In evaluation.. For a specific bridge with a low-load rating using generalized load factors.. the uncertainty associated with live loads is generally the greatest.`. if site investigation shows greater overloads. conservative load factors are assigned to encompass all likely site-to-site variabilities in loads to maintain a uniform and satisfactory reliability level.3 1.``. or daily ..`.

.4.``.``.`..4....`. 6.. The factors are applicable to simple and continuous span configurations.2 is used for evaluation.3 The factor to be applied to the static load effects shall be taken as: (I+ M / l O O ) . The riding surface conditions used in Table C6-3 are not tied to any measured surface profiles.4.``.. the dynamic load allowance (IM)may be decreased as given below in Table C6-3: Table C6-3 Dynamic Load Allowance: ZM.``. The use of full-scale dynamic testing under controlled or normal trafic conditions remains the most reliable way of --`. or other major surface deviations and discontinuities. Condition of deck joints and concrete at the edges of deck joints affect rideability and dynamic forces induced by traffic. In the majority of bridge load tests. The 33 percent dynamic load allowance specified deliberately reflects conservative conditions that may prevail under certain distressed approach and bridge deck conditions with bumps. Inspection should carefully note these and other surface discontinuities in order to benefit from a reduced dynamic load allowance. The dynamic load allowance for the evaluation of wood components shall be reduced to 50 percent of the values specified. sags.``-`-`. Additional guidance on determining site-specific load factors can be found in the NCHRP Report 454. but are to be selected based on field observations and judgment of the evaluator. The dynamic response of a bridge to a crossing vehicle is a complex problem affected by the pavement surface conditions and by the dynamic characteristics of both the bridge and vehicle. with less severe approach and deck surface conditions. In longitudinal members having spans greater than 40 fi.`. The dynamic load allowance shall be applied only to the axle loads when the lane type load given in Appendix B.`. C6.`.3 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM The static effects of the truck loads shall be increased by 33 percent for strength and service limit states to account for the dynamic effects due to moving vehicles.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-23 fluctuations. Smooth riding surface at 20% Providing a dynamic load allowance primarily as a function of pavement surface conditions is considered a preferred approach for evaluation. and irregularities were found to be a major factor influencing bridge response to traffic loads. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The data collection period should be sufficient to capture at least 400 trucks in the upper 20 percent of the weight sample for the site. The dynamic load allowance for components determined by field testing may be used in lieu of values specified herein.6.`. Pavement conditions that were not known to the designer are apparent to the inspectoríevaluator.`.4. roadway imperfections..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.

for a limited number of trips. Depending upon the authorization..5.4 The Rating Factor (IV) obtained may be used to determine the safe load capacity of the bridge in tons as follows: Guidance on reliability-based load posting of bridges can be found in Section 6..`.5.4.``.6. Permits are issued by States on a single trip..`.`. special escort vehicles may be needed or required by State law. These procedures involve the issuance of a permit which describes the features of the vehicle and/or its load and. (6-2) RT W --`.. or annual basis. and the presence of other vehicles on the bridge.``.. or for a vehicle of specified configuration. Special permits are usually valid for a single trip only.8. Special permit vehicles are usually heavier than those vehicles issued annual permits. these permit vehicles may be allowed to mix with normal traffic or may be required to be escorted in a manner which controls their speed and/or lane position. 6.2) governs the load rating.`.4.4. multiple trip.`--- = Rating in tons for truck used in computing live-load effect Weight in tons of truck used in computing live-load effect = When the lane-type load model (see Appendix B. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. Routine or annual permits are usually valid for unlimited trips over a period of time. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. RT=RF x W Where: Eq.``.4 Rating in Tons C6. 6.4.1 Bridge Owners usually have established procedures and regulations which allow the passage of vehicles above the legally established weight limitations on the highway system.6-24 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges obtaining the dynamic load allowance for a specific bridge.`. the equivalent truck weight ( W ) for use in calculating a safe load capacity for the bridge shall be taken as 40 tons. in most jurisdictions.4.4. These cases may require field testing.``. Flexible bridges and long slender bridge components may be susceptible to vehicle induced vibrations. not to exceed one year.4..1 Background C6.`. and gross weight.``-`-`.5 Permit load Rating 6. To assure that permit restrictions and conditions are met and to warn the other traffic. axle weights.`.. which specifies the allowable route or routes of travel. Traffic safety needs should always be considered. for vehicles of a given configuration within specified gross and axle weight limits. and the dynamic force effects may exceed the allowance for impact provided.

as indicated by the evaluation procedures given in Article 6.3.5..`.. as a minimum. not to exceed one year.2 Special (Limited Crossingì Permits C6. These permit vehicles are usually heavier than those vehicles issued routine permits.3 Permit Types 6.``. 6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .5 provides procedures for checking bridges to determine the load effects induced by the overweight permit loads and their capacity to safely carry these overloads.``. Multiple-trip permits grant permission to transport overweight shipments during a 30-90 day period. Permit load rating should be used only if the bridge has a rating factor greater than 1... can safely carry AASHTO legal loads..4..1 Routine (Annual) Permits Routine permits are usually valid for unlimited trips over a period of time. including.`. and site traffic data.``-`-`. The permit vehicles may mix in the traffic stream and move at normal speeds without any movement restrictions.4.4.`.``. Single-trip permits are good for only one trip during a specified period of time (typically 3-5 days). The live load to be used in the load-rating equation for permit decisions shall be the actual permit vehicle weight and axle configuration.4.3. o Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Requiring the permit vehicle to be in a certain position on the bridge (e. Requiring the use of escorts to restrict all other traffic from the bridge being crossed.2 Permit vehicles should be rated by using loadrating procedures given in Section 6.5. Such multiple presence situations are considered in the calibration of the checking equations of both the AASHTO LñFD Bridge Design Specijìcations and the evaluation procedures given in this Manual.4.`--- Special permits are usually valid for a single trip only or for a limited number of trips.4.4. The factors recommended for evaluating permit loads are calibrated with the assumptions that the bridge. Permits operating at a higher frequency should be evaluated as routine permits.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-25 6..5.`.``.5.g.`.2 Purpose Section 6. with load factors selected based upon the permit type.4. loading condition.5. This requirement is especially evident when using reduced live-load factors for permits based on a small likelihood that there will be multiple presence of more than one heavy vehicle on the span at one time.`.`. but not limited to: 0 Upper limit of 100 special permit crossings was used for calibration purposes in this Manual.5. in the center or to one side) to reduce the loading on critical components.5. C6.O when evaluated for AASHTO legal loads.2 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.3.4.4. Single-trip permits for excessively heavy loads may have certain conditions and restrictions imposed to reduce the load effect. 6...

Permit load factors are not intended for use in load-rating bridges for legal loads..``-`-`.4.``. its axle configuration and distribution of loads to the axles. consistent with traditional AASHTO Operating ratings.5. namely. A multi-lane loaded distribution factor shall be used to account for the likelihood of the permits being present alongside other heavy vehicles while crossing a bridge. the expected number of such permit-crossings is unknown so a conservative approach to dealing with the possibility of multiple presence is adopted..2.5.2 Load Factors Table 6-6 specifies live-load factors for permit load rating that are calibrated to provide a uniform and acceptable level of reliability.1Live Load C6.2 klf in each lane. 6. The target reliability level for routine permit crossings is established as the same level as for legal loads given in Article 6.`.4.4. loading condition.`.`.4.``. 6. designated lane position.5. The live-load factors for routine permits given in Table 6-6 depend on both the ADTT of the site and the magnitude of the permit load.5.``. and when checking negative moments in continuous span bridges.4. For spans between 200 and 300 ft.4.4. and any speed restrictions associated with the issuance of the permit. and site traffic data. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. Load factors are defined based upon the permit type.7). .5.`. only the permit vehicle shall be considered present in the lane.. The loading shall consider the truck weight. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.5.4.4. Permit load factors given in Table 6-6 for the Strength II limit state are intended for spans having a rating factor greater than 1.6..`. Service limit states that are relevant to permit load rating are discussed under the articles on resistance of structures (see Sections 6.. In the case of routine permits... I Routine (Annual)Permits C 6.1 6.`--- The live load to be used in the evaluation for permit decisions shall be the actual permit truck or the vehicle producing the highest load effect in a class of permit vehicles operating under a single permit.`.6-26 0 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Requiring crossing at crawl speed (<lo mph) to reduce dynamic load allowance.4. 6.4.2. The lane load shall be taken as 0.0 when evaluated for AASHTO legal loads..4 Live Load and Load Factors 6.4.4.5.``. and 6..1 The live-load factors given in Table 6-6 for evaluating routine permits shall be applied to a given permit vehicle or to the maximum load effects of all permit vehicles allowed to operate under a single-routine permit. For spans up to 200 ft. The lane load may be superimposed on top of the permit vehicle (for ease of analysis) and is applied to those portions of the span(s) where the loading effects add to the permit load effects.. an additional lane load shall be applied to simulate closely following vehicles.

Use only axle weights on the bridge.Load and Resistance Factor Rating Table 6-6 Permit load Factors: 'yL...``. interpolate the load factor by weight and ADTT value.. When one-lane distribution factor is used. The live-load factors in Table 6-6 for routine permits must be applied together with the upper limit of permit weights operating under a single permit and the corresponding two-lane distribution factor. When the routine permit weight is above 100 kips.`.`.30 Notes: DF = LRFD-distribution factor. 6-27 2 Permit Type Routine or Frequency Unlimited Loading Condition Mix with traffic ADTT (one OF direction) >5000 Weightb u p to 2 150 kips 100 kips 1. which are close to the limit of 80 kips..`. the live-load factors are the same as those given for evaluating legal loads. the built-in multiple presence factor should be divided out.. This requirement reflects the fact that in a traffic stream. Thus. The live-load distribution analysis for routine permits is done using LRFD two-lane distribution factors which assume the simultaneous side-by-side presence of two equally heavy vehicles in each lane...`. This reduction reflects the lower probability of two simultaneously heavy vehicles equal to the permit weight crossing the span at the same instant (LRFD two-lane distribution factor assumes that an identical vehicle is simultaneously present in each lane). overloaded vehicles may control the extreme loading case when compared to permit weights. heavy. For situations where the routine permit is below 100 kips..`.``.`.80 1 Two or more 1. then the live-load factors are reduced as shown in Table 6-6. the load factors are higher for spans with higher ADTTs and lower for heavier permits.``-`-`. The calibration of these live-load factors for routine permits uses the same traffic statistics used in calibrating the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specfications as well as the evaluation factors Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. the presence of random. For routine permits between 100 kips and 150 kips.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. This condition is too conservative for permit load analysis. The live-load factors herein were derived to account for the possibility of simultaneous presence of non-permit heavy trucks on the bridge when the permit vehicle crosses the span. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.``.``.

. then the permit shall be treated as a routine permit. If an agency elects to check escorted permits at the higher Design.2 Special permits shall be evaluated using the live-load factors given in Table 6-6.35.. If tabulated LRFD one-lane distribution factors are used. but the traffic stream is supplemented by the addition of the permit vehicles being checked.`. then the 1.4. For special permits that are valid for a limited number of trips (below 100 crossings).``.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. The calibration of these live-load factors reflects some contribution from vehicles in adjacent lanes. A one-lane distribution factor shall be used for special permit review..``..0 or higher for AASHTO legal loads or the design load. The live-load factors given in this section for special permits shall only be used for spans having a rating factor of 1.5.5.`.2 of this Manual.`. 6.15 value for the permit load factor for the escorted case shown in Table 6-6 should be increased to 1.`. For single and multiple-trip special permits that are allowed to mix with traffic (no restrictions on other traffic). If the agency expects that the special permit will be used with a frequency greater than 100 crossings.4. or refined analysis.`. the live-load factors were explicitly derived to provide a higher level of reliability consistent with AASHTO inventory ratings and LRFD-design level reliability..2. The increased risk of structural damage and associated benefiucost considerations leads to higher safety requirements for very heavy special permit vehicles than for other classes of trucks.2) should be divided out.`.``. The live-load distribution shall be based on only a single-lane loaded condition. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`. The higher target reliability is justified as a very heavy special permit or superload may represent the largest loading effect that a bridge has yet experienced in its lifetime.or Inventory-level reliability. multiple presence factor.. any built-in multiple presence factor (such as a value of 1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4. A target reliability at the operating level is allowed because of the reduced consequences associated with allowing only the escorted permit vehicle alone to cross the bridge. The live-load factors in Table 6-6 should be used for interpolation between various ADTTs and weight limits. These factors shall be applied to the load effects induced by a permit load of magnitude and dimensions specified in the permit application. the probability of simultaneous presence of heavy vehicles alongside the permit vehicle is small.4.6-28 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges in Section 6.2Special (Limited-Crossing) Permits C 6.``. Such a distribution factor shall be based on tabulated LRFD-distribution factors without including any built-in.``-`-`. Further discussion of these issues and more refined live-load factors suitable for specific permitting situations not covered by Table 6-6 may be found in the project calibration report for NCHFQ 12-46. The live-load factors for single-trip escorted permits that are required to cross bridges with no other vehicles present have been calibrated to reliability levels consistent with traditional AASHTO operating ratings. statical methods where applicable.2.4.

``.6.7 When the upward LL reaction reduces the total reaction to less than 10 percent of normal downward DL reaction.`.5. During permit reviews. use a one-lane loaded condition only.1 Cores may also be taken where the initial load capacity based on design concrete strength is considered inadequate. is unknown and the concrete is in satisfactory condition. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.4.2d shall apply with the following modifications: 0 C6.5.5 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM The dynamic load allowance to be applied for permit load rating shall be as specified in Article 6. except that for slow moving (110mph) permit vehicles the dynamic load allowance may be eliminated.1 Concrete When the compressive strength of concrete. live-load distribution to the exterior beams for bridges with diaphragms or cross-frames must be checked by an additional investigation that assumes rigid body behavior of the section.5 CONCRETE STRUCTURES 6. for reinforced concrete superstructure C6.2 Materials 6. Concrete strength may have Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`..3 for legal loads.5.4. uplift may be considered to occur.``.``-`-`.2. Permit trucks of equal weights shall be assumed to be present in each lane in determining the governing distribution factor.`.2d. 6.2. 6...Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-29 6..2.5.2.6 Exterior Beams Permit load factors given in Table 6-6 are applicable to both interior and exterior beam ratings.2.4. the LRFD multiple presence factor need not be applied (the built-in multiple presence factor in the LRFD one-lane distribution factor should be divided out).`--- 6.5 apply to the evaluation of concrete bridge components reinforced with steel bars and/or prestressing strands or bars.6 In LRFD.4. the vehicle should not be permitted on the bridge.f C.. per LRFD Article 4.``.4.1 Scope The provisions of Section 6. uplift in continuous span bridges and its effect upon bearings should be considered.`. The provisions of this section combine and u n i s the requirements for reinforced and prestressed concrete.5. C6.7 Continuous Spans Closely spaced heavy axles can cause upliA in end spans of continuous bridges. Distribution of live load to exterior beams as defined in LRFD Article 4.4. For routine permits..`.2. For special permits. a multi-lane loaded condition shall be assumed.5.5.``.f : . Where a one-lane loaded condition is assumed. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. Unless the uplift is counteracted (by weights or tie-downs).5.5.6.`..4. 6.

`--- C6.`..5.`.``. Yield strengths of unknown reinforcing steel may be estimated by considering the date of construction.3 Resistance Factors Resistance factors. for the strength limit state. little effect on the capacity of flexural members. --`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .5. Grade 50 Grade60 I 60.. in the case of compression members. and unknown steel constructed during or after 1954 Rail or hard grade. the compressive strengths shown above may be increased by 25 percent.2 Reinforcing Steel Yield strengths for reinforcing steels are specified in Table 6-8. the values specified in Table 6-8 based on the date of construction may be used.. 6.3 For service limit states. Average test values should not be used for evaluation.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5. Where mechanical properties have been established by testing. cp = I .`.O.``.6-30 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges components may be taken as given in Table 6-7 by considering the date of construction. Table 6-8 Yield Strength of Reinforcing Steel.`. the axial capacity increase may be as large as the concrete strength increase.5. for concrete members. But.`. shall be taken as specified in LRFD Article 5.2.4. Where the quality of the concrete is uncertain.`.3 of this Manual.2.`. Guidance on material sampling for bridge evaluation is provided in Article 5. Table 6-7 Minimum Compressive Strength of Concrete by Year of Construction.65 standard deviations to provide a 95 percent confidence limit.. Yield Strength. 6. the nominal value for strength is typically taken as the mean of the test values minus 1. For prestressed concrete components. C6.5. specimens of unknown steel should be obtained for testing to ascertain more accurate mechanical properties.0 6....2.2. cores should be taken for mechanical property testing.. cp.3 Stress-relieved strands should be assumed when the strand type is unknown.``.``-`-`.3 Prestressing Steel Where the tensile strength of the prestressing strand is unknown.5.& 1 Structuralgrade Billet or intermediate grade. Where practical. Grade 40.

2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . and the load factors which comprise them. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Most prestressed designs are designed for no cracking under full-service loads. The load combinations..`. are specified in Table 6-1 and in these articles.`.. Table 6-9 Tensile Strength of Prestressing Strand.. Fatigue is not a concern until cracking is initiated.0 I Prior to 1963 1963 and later I 250. Rating factors for applicable limit states computed during design-load rating will aid in identifying vulnerable limit states for further evaluation and future inspections.2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating Load ratings for legal loads and permit loads shall be based on satisfjing the requirements for the strength.1 Strength Limit State Concrete bridge components shall be load rated for the Strength I load combination for legal loads.`..4. The Strength I and Service III load combinations shall be checked for prestressed concrete components.1 Design-Load Rating The Strength I load combinations shall be checked for reinforced concrete components.`.4.5.5.4 Limit States The applicable limit states and their load combinations for the evaluation of concrete members are specified for the various rating procedures.1 Service III need not be checked for HL-93 at the Operating level as Service III is a Design-level check for crack control in prestressed components.0 I C6.``. The Service I load combination of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations need not be checked for reinforced concrete bridges.5. Year of Construction Tensile Strength.and service limit states.4.``-`-`... 6.``.`.5.`. Service I is also used to check compression in prestressed concrete bridges.`--- 6. as it pertains to the distribution of reinforcement to control crack widths in reinforced concrete beams.5. ksi 232. Distribution of reinforcement for crack control is a design criterion that is not relevant to evaluation.4..&. and for Strength II load combination for permit loads. In LRFD. --`. Hence. but usually will not govern live-load capacity under service conditions.``. guided by considerationspresented in these articles. prestressed components need not be routinely checked for fatigue.``.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-31 6.`.. 6. This check may govern at prestress transfer.

During permit load rating.``. the stresses in the reinforcing bars and/or prestressing steel nearest the extreme tension fiber of the member should not exceed 0. C6.. Where computations are performed in terms of moments rather than stresses.5.5. but do not encourage..6.2. whichever applies or governs.`.5.`.4.2. Escorted special permits operating with no other vehicles on the bridge may be analyzed using one-lane distribution factors.2 (see also LRFD C6.5 Loss of concrete strength can occur if there has been appreciable disintegration of the concrete Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6.`. 6.4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.4. In the absence of a well-defined yield stress for prestressing steels.1 Legal load Rating Load rating of prestressed concrete bridges based upon satissling limiting concrete tensile stresses under service loads at the Service III limit state is considered optional.5..2 Permit 1oadRating The provisions of this article are considered optional and apply to the Service I load combination for reinforced concrete components and prestressed concrete components.5.`.2 This check is carried out using the Service I combination where all loads are taken at their nominal values.or two-lane distribution factor. as an alternate to limiting the steel stress. In this regard.. It should be noted that in design. (Whereas.2.``.2 Service limit State 6.2.`.5. LRFD distribution analysis methods specified in LRFD Article 4.5 Assumptions for Load Rating The procedures for computing load rating of concrete bridges are based upon the assumptions C6. a one.2.2) should be used when checking Service I for permit loads. Limiting steel stress to 0.2.2.4. the past practice of limiting concrete tensile stresses at service load..90 of the yield point stress for unfactored loads. It also ensures that there is reserve ductility in the member. C6. In design.``. should be used for both routine and special permits when checking Service I.I These provisions for evaluation of prestressed concrete bridges permit.2. Strength II analysis is done using distribution analysis methods prescribed in this Manual).2.4.``.6-32 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6. This check of the Service III load combination may be appropriate for prestressed concrete bridges that exhibit cracking under normal traffic.9Fy is intended to ensure that cracks that develop during the passage of overweight vehicles will close once the vehicle is removed. In other words.O is recommended for legal loads when using this check for rating purposes. For concrete members with standard designs and closely clustered tension reinforcement.. it is often easier to check limiting moments than it is to check limiting stresses. This is especially true for prestressed components where stress checks usually require the consideration of loading stages. choose to limit unfactored moments to 75 percent of nominal flexural capacity.`.4. A live-load factor of 1. it constitutes a departure from the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations. 6.. the following values of f .5. are defined: Table 6-10 Yield Strength of Prestressing Steel.``-`-`. Service I is not used to investigate tensile steel stresses in concrete components..`--- . limiting the tensile stresses of fully prestressed concrete members based on uncracked section properties is considered appropriate. the Engineer may.

Loss in reinforcing steel area at a critical location could directly affect the moment capacity as concrete beams are normally designed as under-reinforced sections.3.``. 6.. = Cracking Moment Eq.. and any reductions in area due to deterioration have been considered.6 Maximum Reinforcement The area of prestressed and non-prestressed reinforcement to be used in calculating flexural resistance shall not exceed the maximum amount permitted in LRFD Article 5..2 M.`.nc = Modulus of rupture (LRFD Article 5.18.`. Deterioration of concrete components does not necessarily reduce their flexural resistance. when warranted.`.. The actual amount of capacity reduction depends on the type of deterioration and its location. where: Mmi.. substitute Sb for Sb.5. (6-4) where: f .``.33 Mu M.`.5.3.9.5..4.7. if the ends of the reinforcing steel are properly anchored. (6-3) C6.5.3.3 Non-composite dead-load moment Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`. material sampling and testing should be considered to assess concrete strength and quality. matrix and the separation of aggregates due to chemical agents or other causes.. the material strength has been established by testing. 6.``. = Lesser of 1.1. loss of cover due to spalling does not have a significant influence on the flexural resistance..7 The equation for M. In such cases.`. C6..2. = fpb - Md.5.2 shall have their flexural resistance reduced by multiplying by a reduction factor K.6 Load rating of over-reinforced sections should utilize only the area of reinforcement not exceeding the limiting value for maximum reinforcement. Spalls on the compression side could change the internal moment-arm leading to a slight reduction in load capacity. Where beams are designed to be non-composite.1.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.2. Article 9. or.3.`--- .Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-33 that materials and construction are of good quality and there is no loss of material design strength.. or 1.6) Compressive stress in concrete due to effective prestress in the precompressed tensile zone. Effective prestress for standard prestressed members may be computed using approximate lump sum estimate of time-dependent losses as provided in LRFD Article 5.. However.``. where: Eq.7 Minimum Reinforcement Concrete members that do not satis@ the minimum flexural reinforcement provisions of LRFD Article 5.`.7. is adapted from the AASHTO Standard Specijìcations.

Composite section modulus for the extreme fiber of section Non-composite section modulus for the extreme fiber of section Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. The interaction diagram represents all possible combinations of axial loads and bending moments that could produce failure of a particular section in its current condition.5.`. C6. preferably at 0. the longitudinal reinforcement should be checked for the increased tension caused by shear. Multiple locations. in accordance with LRFD Article 5.9 Evaluation for Shear The shear capacity of existing reinforced and prestressed concrete bridge members should be evaluated for permit loads. a simplified analysis that assumes ß = 2.``.8 Evaluation for Flexural and Axial Force Effects Members such as arches and beam-columns that are subjected to a combination of axial load and moment shall be evaluated by considering the effect on load capacity of the interaction of axial and bending load effects. higher liveload distribution factors for shear. LRFD specifications may yield higher shear resistance for prestressed concrete sections at high-shear locations.. Prestressed concrete shear capacities are load dependent. In lieu of the more detailed analysis outlined in the LRFD specifications. When using the Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT) for the evaluation of concrete shear resistance.0 and 8 = 45' may be first attempted for reinforced concrete sections and standard prestressed concrete sections with transverse reinforcement. 6.. On the other hand. and the higher dynamic load allowance. a more accurate evaluation using MCFT may be performed.`. In-service concrete bridges that show no visible signs of shear distress need not be checked for shear when rating for the design load or legal loads.`--- 6.5.``.`.. The expressions for shear strength then become essentially identical to those traditionally used for evaluating shear resistance.8 The use of interaction diagrams as capacity evaluation aids is recommended..`..`.3.``-`-`. MCFT uses the variable angle (0) truss model to determine shear resistance. need to be checked for shear.8..5.``. Rating factors should be obtained based on both the moment capacity and axial capacity..1 to this section).`. with and without web reinforcement. Location where shear is highest may not be critical because the corresponding moment may be Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The MCFT is capable of giving more accurate predictions of the shear response of existing reinforced and prestressed concrete bridge members.05 points.``.9 Design provisions based on the Modified Compression Field Theory are incorporated in the LRFD specifications.5. The intersection of the line representing dead-load and live-load eccentricities with the interaction curve provides a convenient method for evaluating load capacity (see Appendix C. which means computing the shear capacity involves an iterative process when using the current AASHTO MCFT.. Where necessary. C6. Live-load shear for existing bridge girders using the LRFD specifications could be higher than the shear obtained from the AASHTO Standard Specifcations due to higher live load. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .5.`. Higher prestress levels give flatter 8 angles.6.6-34 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges = = Sbc S. Flatter 8 angles could give higher shear resistances except at regions with high moment and shear.

5.``. Knowledge of the live loading used in the original design and the current condition of the structure may also provide a basis for assigning a safe load capacity.5. The bridge shall be inspected regularly (see Appendix A. As long as the section is ductile. locations near the 0.1.4) to verifi satisfactory performance. and shrinkage effects need not be considered at the strength limit state for components that have been provided with welldistributed steel reinforcement to control cracking. temperature effects due to time-dependent fluctuations in effective bridge temperature may be treated as long-term loads. such changes in strain are not expected to cause failure.`.5. The secondary moments are combined with the primary moments to provide the total moment effect of the post-tensioning. --`. Also contributing to the need for checking multiple locations along the beam is the fact that the stirrup spacings are typically not constant.6 STEEL STRUCTURES 6.``.10 Reactions are produced at the supports in continuous spans under post-tensioning loads.13 Prestressed Concrete Beams Made Continuous in the Field The capacity of the mild steel reinforcement over the piers should be checked for the strength limit state as it could control load ratings for this type of structure. and shrinkage are primarily strain inducing effects.12 Temperature. creep.1 Scope The provisions of Section 6..Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-35 quite low..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. with a long-term modulus of elasticity of concrete reduced to onethird its normal value.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``-`-`.`. 6.`. 6. creep. C6.5. C6. Where temperature cracks are evident and analysis is considered warranted.2. 6. Creep.`. Typically. and Shrinkage Effects Temperature.10 Secondary Effects from Prestressing Secondary effects from prestressing shall be considered as permanent loads with load factors as cited in Article 6.``..12 Temperature.11 Concrete Bridges with Unknown Reinforcement A concrete bridge for which the details of the reinforcement are not known...5.6.2. 6.5.6 shall apply to the evaluation of steel and wrought-iron components of bridges.2.. 6. need not be posted for restricted loading if it has been carrying normal traffic for an appreciable period and shows no distress..``.25 point could be critical because of relatively high levels of both shear and moment.6. C6. giving rise to secondary moments in the girders. but vary.`.11 Bridge Owners may consider nondestructive proof load tests to establish a safe load capacity for such bridges..5.`.

`.6. Table 6-11 Minimum Mechanical Properties of Structural Steel by Year of Construction.. In the absence of material tests.6-36 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.. Instead.6. the strength used should be the guaranteed minimum value as specified for the grade of steel shown.`. it is possible to determine the minimum yield and tensile strengths to be used for evaluation by reviewing the designation specification.`.``..6. In cases where the initial evaluation suggests load capacity inadequacies.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. high-strength eyebars. forged eyebars.. and cables vary depending on manufacturer and year of construction.`.`.. the ß factor of 0. Mechanical properties of eyebars.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . or there is doubt about the nature and quality of a particular material.2. the Engineer should carefully investigate the material properties using manufacturer’s data and compilation of older steel properties before establishing the yield point and tensile strength to be used in load rating the bridge. Average test values should not be used for evaluation. the mechanical properties can be verified by testing.3 of this Manual.2.2b. I i Year of Construction Prior to 1905 Minimum Yield Point or Minimum Yield Strength Fy ksi 30 Minimum Strength.``. The nominal values for yield and tensile strength are typically taken as the mean test value minus 1. The resistance factors account for the fact that the mean strength of the actual material supplied usually exceeds the minimum specified strength.2 Materials 6. C6... Mechanical properties of the material should be determined based on coupon tests.1 When checking ductility requirements for steel sections as per LRFD Article 6. Actual values of yield and ultimate tensile stresses reported on mill certificates should not be used for evaluation.``. --`.``-`-`. When information from records is not available.`.4.10.65 standard deviation to provide a 95 percent confidence limit. Fu ksi 60 1905 through1936 1 I I ~ Where it is possible to identify the designation (AASHTO or ASTM) and grade of the steel from available records. microstructural and chemical analyses and hardness testing are helpful in classifying the material..1 Structural Steels The minimum mechanical properties of structural steel given in Table 6-1 1 may be assumed based upon the year of construction of the bridge when the specification and grade of steel are unknown.``.`.9 specified for 36 ksi steel would also apply for 33 ksi steel. Guidance on material sampling for bridge evaluation is provided in Article 5.

This is an optional requirement. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3 For service limit states.3 Wrought Iron When the material designation is unknown for wrought iron. the yield strength may be selected from Table 6-12. the minimum tensile strength.``. --`.`--- 6.2.. for the strength limit state.6.2.5 36 6.3 Resistance Factors Resistance factors.6. shall be taken as specified in LRFD Article 6. Table 6-12 Minimum Yield Point of Pins by Year of Construction. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . F.6. Fu.``-`-`.. Members that do not satisfy the infinite fatigue life check may be evaluated for remaining fatigue life using procedures given in Section 7 of this Manual.`. based on the year of construction...0. ksi 25.4..6. cp = 1. C6.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-37 6.`.`.4 Limit States The applicable limit states and their load combinations for the evaluation of structural steel and wrought iron members are specified for the various rating procedures. Fy. coupon tests should be performed to confirm the minimum mechanical properties used in the evaluation.6...``.6.6.1 Design-Load Rating Strength I and Service II load combinations shall be checked for the design loading.4. The load combinations. should be taken as 26 ksi.5.`.`.``. are specified in Table 6-1 and in these articles.``. Year of Construction Prior to 1905 1905 through 1935 1936 through 1963 After 1963 Minimum Yield Point.. and fatigue limit states computed during the design load rating will aid in identifying vulnerable limit states for further evaluation and future inspections. cp.`. Live-load factors shall be taken as tabulated in Table 6-1. In situations where fatigue-prone details are present (category C or lower) a rating factor for infinite fatigue life should be computed. C6. Where practical. for steel members. 6.1 Rating factors for applicable strength. service. and the load factors which comprise them.2.. should be taken as 48 ksi and the minimum yield point.2 Pins If the material designation for pins is unknown.`.4. 6.

.`. Serviceability checks for evaluation need not be as stringent as in new designs as there is less uncertainty in traffic loads and the exposure period is reduced.2 Sewice limit State --`.``.2. including negative flexural regions of continuous spans 0.6.4.. with the Service II distribution method being more conservative when the two-lane distribution is applied.`.6.`.6. Also.2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating Ratings for legal loads and permit loads shall be based on satisQing the requirements for the strength. in conjunction with the service limit state control of permanent deflection of LRFD Article 6..6.6.``..`.`. Some Bridge Owners have restricted legal loads by posting bridges to control permanent deformations that might result from very heavy unauthorized or illegal overloads.2 Service II load combination check.. As the load factor prescribed for Service II limit state check for permit loads was based upon = 0. Load Factor design and evaluation procedures require the service behavior of steel bridges to be checked for an overload taken as 3 D L times the design load.4. the actual truck weight is available for evaluation. C6.1 Strength Limit State C6.4.1 Steel bridge components shall be load rated for the Strength I load combination for legal loads. f R in Eq.6.2.. and reduced load factors established through reliability-based calibration (see Table 6-6). reflect a more liberalized approach to applying Service II checks for evaluation versus design.. The level of reliability represented by this serviceability check is unknown. During an overweight permit review. Live-load factors shall be taken as tabulated in Table 6-1.`.10.4. for composite sections. The flange stresses in bending shall not exceed the limiting stresses specified in LRFD Article 6.`.`--- Load factors for the Strength Limit state are given in Table 6-5 and Table 6-6.2. guided by the considerations discussed in this article. shall apply.2 for composite and non-composite sections. This would lead to different methods of live-load distribution analyses for the Strength II and Service II limit states for special permit loads.``. and for Strength II load combination for permit loads..``-`-`.95 Fy. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .80 Fyf for non-composite sections where: Fyf = Yield stress Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. It is important to note that the live-load factors for Service II limit state were not established through reliability-based calibration. The Strength II limit state check for special permits use one-lane distribution factor with the multiple presence factor divided out. 6. past performance of the bridge under traffic conditions is known and is available to guide the evaluation.5.6-38 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6. compared to load-factor design and rating. The Service II limit state check should be done using the LRFD distribution analysis methods as described in LRFD Article 4. 6. It is not considered likely that unauthorized or illegal loads will obey posted load restrictions.10.2.2.5. but were selected based upon engineering judgment and expert opinion.4.``.and service limit states.(6-1) shall be taken as: fR fR = The reduced load factors for Service II.

..`..`. This can also be applied to the rating of existing bridges.. In evaluating eyebars with significant section loss in the head.``. For eyebars and pin plates. and reduced fatigue resistance. The stress limitation of O. Deterioration of lacing bars and batten plates in built-up tension members may affect the load sharing among the main tension elements at service loads.``.`. stress concentrations and eccentricities induced by asymmetrical deterioration may be neglected when estimating the tension strength of members with moderate deterioration. Effects of corrosion include section loss.. for the negative moment region of composite spans with longitudinal reinforcement has been found to be conservative. a simplified approach to evaluating the effects of localized corrosion is to consider the yielding of the reduced net area as the governing limit state.6. movements and pressures. the built-in conservatism in the distribution analysis is considered appropriate.`. Escorted special permits operating with no other vehicles on the bridge may be analyzed using one-lane distribution factors for Service II. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6. the critical section is located at the pin hole normal to the applied stress.``-`-`. unintended fixities. the yielding of the reduced net section in the head should be checked as it may be a governing limit state. Uniform reduction in the cross-sectional area of a tension member causes a proportional reduction in the capacity of the member. Compression Members with Section Losses Due to Corrosion a) Uniform Corrosion --`.. It is reasonable to assume that any bridge that has been in service for some years would have undergone the shakedown process. At ultimate load yielding will result in load redistribution among the tension elements and the effect on capacity is less significant.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-39 fitting to load-factor operating level serviceability rating. Continuous span bridges are allowed to shake down and respond to subsequent overloads in an elastic manner.`.`.8Fy.``. Corrosion is the major cause of deterioration in steel bridges. C6. Due to their self-stabilizing nature. Since localized corrosion results in irregular localized reductions in area.``.5 Effects of Deterioration on Load Rating A deteriorated structure may behave differently than the structure as originally designed and different failure modes may govern its load capacity.. 6.5 Tension Members with Section Losses Due to Corrosion Corrosion loss of metals can be uniform and evenly distributed or it can be localized.`..`--- Local Effects-The susceptibility of members with reduced plate thickness to local buckling should be evaluated with respect to the limiting widthhhickness ratios specified in LRFD Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. The Autostress design method places no restriction on the maximum stress due to negative moment at overload.

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . or 213 of the slenderness ratio of the member.`. Effects of eccentricity may be neglected for eccentricity ratios under 0.``. where e is the load eccentricity in the member caused by localized section loss.``. If these values are exceeded. is proportional to the reduction in cross-sectional area.. Appendix C.25. Overall Eflects-Most compression members encountered in bridges are in the intermediate length range and have a box-shape or H-shape cross section. It has been determined that moderate deterioration of up to about 25 percent loss of the original cross section of lacing bars and --`.. c is the distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber in compression of the original section.`. for moderate deterioration.6-40 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Article 6.`.. Localized corrosion along the member can cause changes in the moment of inertia.2. 1 limits the slenderness ratio of the portion of the flange included between the lacing bar connections to not more than 40.. Moderate uniform corrosion of these sections has very little effect on the radius of gyration. therefore. Approximate analytical solutions for the buckling resistance of built-up members with deteriorated lacing and batten plates can be formulated using a reduced effective modulus of elasticity of the member.. Corrosion of lacing bars and batten plates reduces the shear resistance of the built-up member and.4.``. b) Localized Corrosion Deterioration at the ends of fixed-end compression members may result in a change in the end restraint conditions and reduce its buckling strength.. The effects of eccentricities can be estimated using the eccentricity ratio eclr2.`. Localized buckling of a main component can result because of loss of lateral bracing from the deterioration of the lacing bars.``..``-`-`. AISC LRFD Manual o f Steel Construction. may be used to evaluate the local residual compressive capacity.`. c) Built-up Members with Deteriorated Lacing BarsBatten Plates The main function of lacing bars and batten plates is to resist the shear forces that result from buckling of the member about an axis perpendicular to the open web. Asymmetric deterioration can induce load eccentricities.. given in NCHRP Report 333.`. 16.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.9. a reduction in its overall buckling strength may result.1O. The reduction of compressive resistance for short and intermediate length members. They also provide lateral bracing for the main components of the built-up member.`. and r is the radius of gyration of the original section. AASHTO Standard SpeciJications (1 996) Article 1O.

.`.`. A conservative approach to the evaluation of tension and compression flanges with highly localized losses is to assume the flange is an independent member loaded in tension or compression.``.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8. Either the elastic or plastic section modulus shall be used.1 Design of pin and hanger connections assumes free rotation at the pin.`. When the beam is evaluated with respect to its plastic moment capacity.1 Links and Hangers The following provisions are given for the evaluation of pin-connected tension members other than eyebars: 1) The net section through the pin hole transverse to the axis of the member shall be 40 percent greater than the net section of the main member. Flexural Members with Section Losses Due to Corrosion Uniform Corrosion The reduction in bending resistance of laterally supported beams with stiff webs will be proportional to the reduction in section modulus of the corroded cross-section compared to the original cross-section. The reduction in web thickness will reduce shear resistance and bearing capacity due to both section loss and web buckling. The loss in shear resistance and bearing capacity is linear up to the point where buckling occurs. Local and overall beam stability may be affected by corrosion losses in the compression flange. failure modes due to buckling and out-of-plane movement that did not control their original design may govern...``.6.`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``. 6. All other web holes should be analytically investigated to assess their effect.6 Tension Members Members and splices subjected to axial tension shall be investigated for yielding on the gross section and fracture on the net section as specified in LRFD Article 6. Build-up of Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. The fatigue life of the hangers could also be reduced.``... as long as the resistance to local failure is satisfactory. as appropriate.6..6.`. the plastic section modulus for the deteriorated beam may be used for both localized and uniform losses... C6.``-`-`. Localized Corrosion Small web holes due to localized losses not near a bearing or concentrated load may be neglected.6.`.6. When evaluating the effects of web losses.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-41 batten plates has very little effect on the overall member capacity. Accumulation of dirt and corrosion developed between the elements of the pin and hanger assembly could result in unintended partial or complete fixity of the pin and hanger connection.`--- 6. Very large in-plane bending stresses in the hangers and torsional stresses in the pins could be expected from rotational fixity.

1 4.2 Eye Bars The following provisions are given for the evaluation of eyebars: The section of the head through the pin hole transverse to the axis of the member shall be 35 percent greater than the section of the body.``-`-`.5 2. corrosion products between the hangers and web or gusset plates could cause out-of-plane bending in the hangers.3 1.1.5 1.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.6.`.4. In the event that the net section at the pin does not conform to 1) or 2) above. the section of the body used for rating purposes shall be reduced proportionately so that the limits are met.o 1.1 1. This Manual specifies factors that allow for the reduced strength of battened compression members.o d = Depth of member perpendicular to battens Built-up compression members (LRFD Article 6.`..-Center-to-Center of Batten Plates u p to 4d 6d 1Od 2d 1..3) are generally connected across their open --`.6.. Existing columns with any significantly higher eccentricity. 6.9.7 1.4. the net section of the member shall be reduced proportionately for rating purposes.1 incorporate an out-of-straightness allowance of L A 500 for imperfections and eccentricities permissible in normal fabrication and erection.2 1.4.2 should be classified as slender elements and subject to a reduction as given in AISC LRFD Manual of Steel Construction.3 1.o 2.``.`.``.6.8 1.4. for additional guidance on damaged members.``.0 1.2) shall be evaluated as specified in LRFD Article 6.`. Member elements not satisfying the widthíthickness requirements of LRFD Article 6. These factors result in increased slenderness ratios to be used with the LRFD-column formulas.3 1. I Actual I Llr ~~~~~ Spacing .`..3 1. Failure modes not routinely considered in the original design may need to be considered during evaluation.9..8 1.. Column resistance equations in LRFD Article 6.``.2 1.`. The batten plates in a compression member resist shear through Vierendeel action. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..7 Non-Composite Compression Members The nominal compressive resistance of noncomposite columns that satisfy the limiting widthíthickness ratios (LRFD Article 6. The section of the head beyond the pin hole taken in the longitudinal direction shall not be less than 75 percent of the section of the body away from the pin hole.4. 6.6-42 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges The net section back of the pin hole parallel to the axis of the member shall not be less than the net section of the main member away from the pin hole. Guidelines for Evaluation and Repair of Damaged Steel Bridge Members. C 6. Appendix B.9. as in impact damaged truss verticals.6. Table 6-13 Adjustment Factor for Ur. Evaluators should consult NCHRP Report 271..o I 40 80 120 160 200 2.1 1.9.3 1. may be evaluated by first calculating the resulting moments and then using the interaction formulas for axial forces and moments. In the event that the section at the pin does not conform to 1) or 2) above.7 Compression member elements should meet limiting widthhhickness ratios such that local buckling prior to yielding will not occur.9.

2. which may be approximated by the single-step moment magnification method given in LRFD Article 4.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. shall be determined using the interaction equations specified in LRFD Article 6..... Compression members having equal end eccentricities are conveniently analyzed using the secant formula.``. A rating approach using the interaction equation is given in Appendix C. C6. --`.2.5.6.``. perforated cover plates. An advantage inherent in this method is that rating factors can be computed without having to first determine M.``.`.`. (Mr must be known to apply this method.2).8 Load rating of such members should consider second-order effects.8 Combined Axial Compression and Flexure The load rating of steel members subjected to axial compression and concurrent moments. This approach is applicable to members assumed to be pinned at the ends and without lateral loads on the member.`. Secant formula is used to include the first and second order bending effects to produce a magnified axial load (dead and live) that would produce a constant stress over the cross section equal to the peak stress in an eccentric member. . the gravity axis of the section may not coincide with the working lines.9.i)] 6. but provides an interaction equation for the design of members with combined axial loads and concurrent moments. Pin connected compression chord members in truss bridges are a common example of this type.`.6.6. Adjusted Llr (batten plate both sides) ß =Actual Llr x factor Adjusted Llr (batten plate one side) = Actual Llr x [ 1 + 112 (factor . To allow for the reduced strength of batten plate compression members only..3..``-`-`.2.`. the forgoing factors shall be reduced 50 percent. For compression members having a solid plate on one side and batten plates on the other.3). resulting in an eccentric connection.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-43 sides using either stay plates in combination with single or double lacing. the actual length of the member shall be multiplied by the adjustment factor given in Table 6-13 to obtain the adjusted value of Llr to be used in computing the column slenderness factor h. such as arches and beam-columns. which can be difficult to do for nonstandard truss sections (see Appendix C.. or batten plates. an axial load magnification factor may be applied to rate the member as a concentrically loaded member with an equivalent load.) As an alternative to analyzing axial compression members with eccentric connections as combined compression-flexure members.`.6. In compression members with asymmetrical sections (such as truss chords). 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The LRFD specification does not utilize the secant formula.2b (see Appendix C.6. Rating compression members via an interaction equation can be somewhat tedious as an iterative approach may be required to establish the governing rating..`.2.

10.6.4 is written in the form of a flowchart.6 need not be considered during evaluation..6. The categorization of flexural resistance as that of a compact or non-compact I-section is based upon web slenderness.9 I-Sections in Flexure 6. The fatigue requirements for webs specified in LRFD Article 6.3 Load tests of slab-on-beam bridges without mechanical shear connectors have shown that limited composite action exists due to the bond between the deck slab and beam.`.3.`.1 LRFD Article 6.`--- C6. The constructibility requirements for composite sections specified in LRFD Article 6.``.10.9.1 General The flexural resistance of I-sections at the strength limit state. Fifth Edition. Guidance on this topic may be found in Guide to Stability Design Criteria for Metal Structures. If slenderness limits are violated using this assumption then the actual flange stress can be calculated.10.2 Composite Sections The calculation of elastic stresses at a section shall consider the sequence of loading as specified in LRFD Article 6.6-44 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.2 depend upon the compressionflange stress due to factored loading. Web-slenderness limits specified in LRFD Article 6. The load rating of such bridges should consider the behavior and resistance of compression members with elastic lateral restraints. All permanent loads other than the self weight of steel.0) may be assumed. and the compression flange bracing requirements need not Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS C6.10.6.10. --`.`.1. the compression flange stress due to factored loading may be assumed equal to the yield stress of the flange.2 need not be considered during evaluation.. As a conservative first step.3. deck slab. 6.``-`-`.`. For the purpose of determining this flange stress and the resultant web slenderness limit.1.``.6. shown schematically in LRFD Figure C6.... is specified in LRFD Article 6.9.``. Pony trusses and through-girder bridges may have their compression chordflange braced with intermittent lateral restraints in the plane normal to the web (such as truss verticals or knee braces). John Wiley & Sons.2.3 Non-Composite Sections Compression flanges of sections where the deck is not connected to the steel section by shear connectors in positive flexure may be assumed to be adequately braced by the concrete deck. and compression-flange bracing requirements..4-1 and Figure C6.`. 6.. The interface between the slab and beam should be inspected to Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .10.4.10.1.6.9. These requirements are specified in LRFD Article 6.``.4.10..lb. compression-flange slenderness. For evaluation.9.`.3.9. the full factored live load (RF = 1. unshored construction shall be assumed unless indicated otherwise in the bridge documents. whether the sections are compact or non-compact. and any stay-in-place forms may be assumed to be carried by the long-term composite section. as defined in LRFD Article 6.4-2.10.6.10.

--`.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-45 be checked where the top flange of the girder is fully in contact with the deck. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..75 q f F .4 Encased I-sections constructed without shear connectors may act compositely with the concrete deck due to the bond and friction between the concrete and steel. 6. or separation along the steel-concrete interface is evident. and miscellaneous composite members.`.and fatigue-limit states. box-girders.3. the encased Isection may be assumed to act as a composite section at the service. from the rivet line to the plate edge. C6.``.`.1. C6. due to corrosion of the top flange or other causes.``-`-`. shall be reduced by the momentshear interaction factor R as specified in LRFD Articles 6. and the spacing of the rivets.`.7.5<p. November 1998-Number 234.``.10.6 Riveted Members The moment capacity of riveted sections and sections with holes in the tension flange should be limited to My. LRFD equations for compressive resistance would be conservative for riveted construction since the riveted members should have much lower residual stresses. Net section failure should also be checked.. This is dependent upon the yield to tensile ratio of the steel.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4. For riveted compression members. as at interior supports of continuous spans.9. 6. The degree of composite action varies depending upon the magnitude of loading.`. and physical condition of the interface.6. If no sign of cracking.3.3a and 6. Manualfor Bridge Rating Through Load Testing..`.1). LRFD criteria could be used for older riveted sections if blt ratios are satisfied. rust.. 6.10. degree of encasement of beam flanges. The encased I-section may only be considered composite at the strength limit state if sufficient shear transfer between the steel I-section and the concrete can be verified by calculation. Guidance on evaluating composite action in slab-on-girder bridges without mechanical shear connection can be found in NCHRP Research Results Digest.6. The Engineer should check the blt between rivet lines.6.10.6..6..9.``. This reduction due to flexure-shear interaction is applicable where Mu > 0.`.9.Mp for compact sections or where f. verify that there is no separation.5 Moment-Shear Interaction The shear resistance of stiffened interior web panels subject to the simultaneous action of high moment and shear. > 0.6.3b. 6.`. it has not been fully documented that complete plastification of the cross section can be achieved prior to fracture of the net section of the flange (see LRFD C6.4 Encased I-Sections Encased I-sections are partially or completely encased in the concrete deck..``.9.10 Evaluation for Shear Shear resistance at the strength limit state is specified in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specìjìcations for I-sections.9..6 At sections of flexural members with holes in the tension flange.7. for non-compact sections.

`--- ..1 General External connections of non-redundant members shall be evaluated during a load rating analysis in situations where the evaluator has reason to believe that their capacity may govern the load rating of the entire bridge.2 and 6.2.2 shall apply.12.11.`.2. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6. Evaluation of critical connections shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of these articles.3 See Table 6.6.10. Non-redundant members are members without alternate load paths whose failure is expected to cause the collapse of the bridge. respectively.11 Fatigue requirements for webs specified in LRFD Article 6.6-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6. 6.4 Pinned connections are used both in trusses and at expansion joints of truss and girder suspended spans.`.12.3. Provisions of LRFD Article 6.`.``.13. Pins are short cylindrical beams and shall be evaluated for: 1) bending. and 3) bearing.1 1.11.12 Evaluation of Critical Connections 6.`.6. It is common practice to assume that connections and splices are of equal or greater capacity than the members they adjoin. C6. and for constructibility requirements in LRFD Article 6. Box sections shall satis@ the limitations specified in LRFD Articles 6.1.`.12.. 6.11.6.6. 6. for flexural moment. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. For guidance on box girder bridges with large skews. 6. and tensile resistance at the strength limit state.12. see LRFD C6..1 External connections are connections that transfer calculated load effects at support points of a member. C6.12.6. or axial force due to the factored loadings at the point of connection.12.``-`-`.6.6.1.7.1.1. C6.2. for positive and negative flexure.2.1 1.2 See Table 6-1 for load factors..12.3 Slip-Critical Connections High-strength bolted joints designed as slipcritical connections shall be evaluated as slipcritical connections.``.``.6.1 and for bearing as specified in LRFD Article 6.6. shear. Slip-critical connections shall be checked (at the Operating level when checking for HL-93) for slip under the Service II load combination and for bearing. With the introduction of more accurate evaluation procedures to identi& and use increased member load capacities. need not be considered during a load rating analysis. C6.33 where the condition of the faying surface is unknown.1 for load factors..``. = 0. it becomes increasingly important to also closely scrutinize the capacity of connections and splices to ensure that they do not govern the load rating.1.12.6.11 Box Sections in Flexure The flexural resistance of straight steel multiple or single box sections composite with a concrete deck shall be as specified in LRFD Articles 6.1 and 6.6.7.2. C6..`.1.6.2 Bearing-Type Connections Bearing-type connections shall be evaluated for the strength limit state (at the Operating level when checking for HL-93). The friction value shall be based on a value of K..4 Pinned Connections Pins shall be evaluated for combined flexure and shear as specified in LRFD Article 6.2.1 1S.6.1..`.2. shear. 2) shear.

The alignment of adjoining members relative to the pin could have a significant effect on the load capacity of the pin as the movement of a member changes the point of application of the member force on the pin.Load and Resistance Factor Rating --`. 1 1 Rivet Type or Year of Construction Constructedprior to 1936 or of unknown origin (pF ksi Constructedafter 1936but of unknown ASTM A 502 Grade I ASTM A 502 Grade II I 19 -1 25 30 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Eq.12.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .) The following values may be used for (pF : Table 6-14 Factored Shear Strength of Rivets QF.6..`.. 6.12.5 Riveted Connections Riveted connections shall be evaluated as bearing-type connections. I Rivets in Shear The factored resistance of rivets in shear shall be taken as: (pR = CpFmA. This is especially important on bridges without spacer collars between individual components at a pin.5 Factored resistance values for rivets are based on AASHTO Standard Specijìcations Article 10.5.56..`.12.6. The pin size should be measured in the field to ascertain any reduction due to corrosion and wear.`.`.``.``.. (6-5) where: (pF m = = = 4 Factored shear strength of rivet (kips) The number of faying surfaces Cross-sectional area of the rivet before driving (sq. 6.. in.``.`--- 6-47 Pin analyses should be performed during the load rating analyses of pin connected bridges because the pins may not necessarily be of equal or greater capacity than the members they adjoin.1...6. C6. The relative positions of all members that connect to a pin should be ascertained in the field.`..``.``-`-`.

6.7...7. field identification and grading may be done based on visual appearance.4.4.4.1 Scope The provisions of this section apply to the evaluation of wood bridges constructed of sawn lumber or glued laminated timber. To obtain values for species and grades not included in the LRFD articles.... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The resistance of beams not continuously braced in the lateral direction should be reduced in accordance with LRFD provisions (LRFD Article 8..7 WOOD STRUCTURES 6.``.1. Fu may be taken as 46 ksi.`. When the type of timber is unknown.`.67 Tensile strength of rivet = = = F.``.`..``. Plans and other relevant contract documents should be reviewed to determine the species and grade of wood. For rivets of unknown origin.4.`.2 Materials The base resistance and modulus of elasticity of existing timber bridge components in satisfactory condition may be taken as given in LRFD Articles 8.4 Limit States The applicable limit states for the evaluation of wood bridges shall be taken as specified in Table 6-1 and in these articles.2. local experience.1. Sampling for testing may be done where more exact information is required.6. 6.3 Some older timber bridges may not have the roadway deck continuously attached to the beams.7. 6.7. 1997 Edition may be performed using conversion factors specified in LRFD Table 8-2.1.3 and adjusted for actual conditions of use in accordance with LRFD Article 8.`.2).`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. C6.4 and 8.`. Southern Pine and Douglas Fir are the more common types of timber used in bridge construction. which correspond to the most common conditions of use for timber bridge components.2 The tabulated values for base resistance and modulus of elasticity are based on wet-use conditions and a two-month load duration..3 Resistance Factors Resistance factors (cp) for the strength limit state shall be taken as given in LEWD Article 8.2 may be applied to evaluation if the bridge superstructure was observed to exhibit excessive flexing under normal traffic.2.7. The material properties given for new construction may need to be adjusted for conditions such as weathering or decay.7.2.4 Deflection control on timber components as specified in LRFD Article 2.2.`. and grade description requirements. C6. This is an optional requirement.5. C6. --`.5. based on the Engineer’s judgment and experience. grade marks. a direct conversion of Allowable Stress Design Values in the National Design Specification for Wood Construction.``.6-48 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges where: = ru cp Shear due to factored loading Tension due to factored loading 0.``-`-`. 6. 6.7.

and for Strength II load combination for permit loads. etc. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The bridge should be inspected at regular intervals to veri@ satisfactory performance. and that such spans show considerable distress (e. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. C6. using the guidelines in this Manual.8 POSTING OF BRIDGES 6. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`--- 6.`. whereas bridge posting is a policy decision made by the Bridge Owner. deflections.) before severe damage and collapse actually occurs. the likelihood of overweight vehicles.7.`.``.1 Field experience and tests on reinforced concrete bridges (T-beam and slab bridges) have shown that there is considerable reserve capaciîy beyond the computed value..g.3 and 6. 6.4. Bridges not capable of carrying a minimum gross live-load weight of three tons must be closed.5 for steel and concrete components.8. and the enforceability of weight posting.``.`..1 General Weight limitations for the posted structure should conform to local regulations or policy.5 Dynamic Load Allowance The Dynamic Load Allowance for the evaluation of wood components shall be reduced to 50 percent of the values specified in Articles 6.8. Split rings and shear plates may be concealed between wood members.`.`.``.4..5. 6.`.7. 6.``-`-`.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6.`. cracking. A concrete bridge need not be posted for restricted loading when it has been carrying normal traffic for an appreciable length of time and shows no distress.7. These significantly increase the shear strength of bolted connections. This general rule also applies to bridges for which details of the reinforcement are not known.4. spalling. Bridge inspection and rating are engineering-related activities.2 Legal load Rating and Permit load Rating Wood bridge components shall be load rated for the Strength I load combination for legal loads.``.. the Owner should consider the character of traffic. C6.7.7. Bridge posting should not be confused with bridge-load rating. Sometimes a probe may be used to locate them. A Bridge Owner may close a structure at any higher posting threshold.6 External connections of non-redundant members are considered critical connections..6 Evaluation of Critical Connections Critical connections of timber bridges shall be evaluated for shear at the strength limit state. When deciding whether to close or post a bridge. Available records should be consulted to veri@ their presence....4.1 Design-Load Rating Rating factors for the design-load rating shall be based upon the Strength I load combination.4.

Any overload allowance or safety margin should not be used as a justification for subverting legal posted signs. Where the RF is governed by the lane load shown in Appendix B.0. but the gross weight of the State’s legal vehicle shall be substituted in the posting equation.3 Posting Analysis The decision to load post a bridge should be made by the Bridge Owner based on the general procedures as set forth in this Manual and established practices of the Bridge Owner.(6-7) shall be taken as 40 tons.``-`-`.6.2 Posting Loads When the maximum legal load under State law exceeds the safe load capacity of a bridge. Though there is variation among the States with respect to the type of signs preferred for posting bridges. The statistical distribution of gross vehicle weights will be markedly different for a posted structure with a greater percentage of vehicles at or exceeding the posted limit compared to numbers exceeding the legal limit on an unposted bridge. C6. most States use either a single weight-limit sign or a three-vehicle combination sign.. A vehicle could satisfy both the posted gross and the individual axle Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2 The wide varieîy of vehicle types cannot be effectively controlled by any single-posting load. then the following equation should be used to establish the safe posting load for that vehicle type: (26. then that vehicle type should not be allowed on the span (see Figure 6-2).`. traffic characteristics..3 at which the bridge must be closed was derived based on several factors which change the uncertainties of the safety of posted bridges compared to unposted situations.6-50 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.`.. This causes a conservative selection of posting loads relative to the numerically calculated rating factor and is intended to cover the following variables: 0 W Safe Posting Load =-[(RF)-0.3 The safe load capacity for an existing bridge established using load rating procedures provided in this Manual represents an upper bound for posting loads.7 where: Eq. The following guidelines may be of assistance to authorities responsible for establishing posting weight limits.``. 6.`. The lower limit of RF = 0. When States use their own legal loads which are different from the AASHTO legal loads. (6-7) RF W = = Legal load rating factor Weight of rating vehicle When the R F for any vehicle type falls below 0.. and 3-3 adequately model short vehicles and combination vehicles in general use in the United States. The three vehicles: Type 3. When RF falls below 0. The dynamic load allowance increases as the gross weight of a vehicle decreases and this increase is reflected in the posting curve.3] 0.3 may also in some cases be similar to existing bridge closing levels based on Inventory levels of stress. The three AASHTO legal loads used in the load rating are also appropriate for posting purposes. the bridge need not be posted.3 for all three AASHTO legal trucks. then the span should be considered for closure. and condition of the bridge so that further consideration of these factors during posting would not be necessary. The distribution of gross vehicle weight to individual axles may change as the gross legal weight decreases.8.3. (6-7) may be used for the posting load.3 and 1.O.`.. An allowance for potential overloads is contained in the posting curve presented herein..8.``.8.2. A single-posting load based on a longer combination would be too liberal for almost any span combination. particularly for short-span bridges. The rating factor of 0. The rating factors obtained for the AASHTO vehicles and lane-type loads are used below to develop posting loads for single and combination vehicles.``. The posting graph in Figure 6-2 provides posting loads which drop off more quickly than does the rating factor.8. then the value of W in Eq.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS ... 3S2. A single-posting load based on a short truck model would be too restrictive for longer truck combinations. When the rating factor (RF) calculated for each legal truck (AASHTO vehicle) is greater than 1. Eq. restrictive load posting may be required. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT 0 --`. It reflects superstructure redundancy.`.``.`.`. When for any legal truck the R F is between 0.

8 0.`..5 0.0 POSTING LOAD Where: W = Weight O f Vehicle ( A A S r n Legal Load) Fig..9 xw 1.8.``.`. When a decision is made to close a bridge. signs and properly designed. 3 0..`.``..7 0. Signs and barriers should meet or exceed the requirements of local laws and the applicable sections of the MUTCD. 6. 6-2 Calculation of Posting Load..3 O 0.``. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. If pedestrian travel across the bridge is also restricted.Load and Resistance Factor Rating 6-51 combination limits and still cause a load effect in excess of that assumed in the rating factor calculation which uses a standard axle distribution.``-`-`.7 0.2 0 ..`.``. and should be established in accordance with the requirements of the agency having authority over the highway. 6 0. Bridge closure signs and barriers should be inspected periodically to ensure their continued effectiveness. 1. structurally sound traffic barriers should be erected to provide adequate warning and protection to the traveling public..`.9 4 u o 0.4 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The reliability level inherent in the posting curve is raised at the lower posting loads to achieve reliability targets closer to design Inventory levels rather than the evaluation or operating reliability characteristic of other practices in this Manual. adequate measures to prevent pedestrian use of the bridge should be installed. This acute load distribution on the axles has been incorporated in the posting curve.o Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.4 Regulatory Signs Regulatory signing should conform to the requirements of the Manual on Uniform Trafic Control Devices (MUTCD).`..`--- 0.4 0.5 0 .`.1 0.

``.``. and type of traffic... lower speed limits will reduce impact loads to the extent that lowering the weight limit may not be required. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`...`. Consideration of a speed posting will depend upon alignment.8. general location.`..``.. A speed posting should not be considered as a basis for increasing the weight limit in areas where enforcement will be difficult and frequent violations can be anticipated. --`..6-52 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 6.``..5 Speed Limits In some cases.`.`.`.`. volume.`.

6.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . A. b...6-I Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.APPENDIX A.0 LOAD TESTING 4 SITE-SPECIFIC LOAD FACTORS DIRECT SAFETY ASSESSMENT f RF21.`..`..`--- 1 r n I CHECK AT c OPERATING INVENTORYLEVEL RELIABILITY NO RESTRICTIVE POSTING REQUIREDQ MAY BE EVALUATED FOR PERMIT VEHICLES RF>l.1 LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING FLOW CHART e START DESIGN LOAD CHECK :-I_II_?> RF< 1 .O 1 EVALUATION LEVEL RELIABILFY I RF4.`.0 c - * AND/OR REPAIRREHAB NO PERMIT VEHICLES POSTING REQUIREDb MAY BE EVALUATED ?-For AASHTO legal loads and state legal loads within the LRFD exclusion limits.O L LEVEL RELIABILITY AASHTO OR STATE LEGAL LOADS (GENERALIZEDLOAD FACTORS) RF21 .For AASHTO legal loads and state legal loads having only minor variations ftom the AASHTO legal loads.`.0 t i 71 HIGHER LEVEL EVALUATION (OPTIONAL) REFINED ANALYSIS RF<1.`.``..`.O 1 --`.``.`.``..``...

6.`--- A.6-2 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``. the built-in multiple presence factor should be divided out. DF = LRFD distribution factor. Service I is used to check the 0.`. Table 6-4 Generalized Live Load Factors for Legal Loads: yL.25 where thickness has been field measured.4.6.`.1). Fatigue limit state is checkedusing the LRFD fatigue truck (see A.``.`.`. Use only axle weights on bridge..6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9 F. stress limit in reinforcing steel.`.. Shaded cells of the table indicate optional checks.``. Load factor for DW at the strength limit state may be taken as 1. Table 6-6 Permit Load Factors: I TrafficVolume I Load I Note: Linear interpolation is permitted for other AD7T.`. interpolate the load factor considering also the ADTTvalue..`..``-`-`.2 LIMIT STATES AND LOAD FACTORS FOR LOAD RATING * Defined in the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.. For routine permits between 100 kips and 150 kips.APPENDIX A.``. When one-lane distribution factor is used... --`.

6 4klf ADDITIONAL LOAD MODEL FOR NEGATIVE MOMENT AND INTERIOR REACTION (REDUCEALL LOADS TO 909b) I DESIGN LANE! LOAD = 0.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . --`..APPENDM B.``.1) 8 INDICATED CONCENTRATIONSARE AXLE LOADS IN kips DESIGN TRUCK = 72 kips (36 tons) AxieNo.`..`--- B.. 1 2 28.``.6-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.`.6.1 LRFD DESIGN LIVE LOAD (HL-93) (LRFD 3.`.0' TO 44.6..`.0' 3 i 1 I Ill 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i DESIGN LANE LOAD = 0.`.`.``.64 klf Figure B..64 kif 2 5 2 5 DESIGN TANDEM = 50 kips (25 tons) Hlr1Hllll1lii DESIGN LANE LOAD = 0 .6-1 LRFD Design Live Load (HL-93)..``-`-`.``.

39 11.6-2 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6-2 Type 3 Unit WEIGHT = 50 kips (25 tons).61' * --`.1' 54.``-`-`.0 1 4 .`. 5 57 k ] Figure B.0' - 7.2 AASHTO LEGAL LOADS a) AASHTO Trucks-Apply for all span lengths and load effects 1 6 AxleNo.9 16. = CENTER OF GRAVITY 1 1 1 ..1' 1 1 . 15..`--- Figure B.0 - 19.0 11 I I 3.63 m e 3S2 Unit WEIGHT = 72 kips (36 tons).``. B.39' - e 22.4.`. 5 11.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.``.`..`. Axle No. 1 ' 15.6-4 m e 3-3 Unit WEIGHT = 80 kips (40 tons)..5 22.0 .9' L c c Figure B. 4 i 30.39 41.``.. 0 ' .9 23.6. 5 15.G. 1 0 1 5 .`. 5 1 5 . 1 H H 15.0 I 1 5 .0 4.0 -_ 18...`.0 -00 I I 15.APENDIX B.0 17 17 INDICATED CONCENTRATIONSARE AXLE LOADS IN kips C..

``..``.`.0 54.``.0' i -F 4.0' I I 1 1 4.0' 4.`...0' 15.2 (continued) b) Lane-Type Legal Load Mode&-Apply for spans greater than 200 ft..0' 15.0 I 4. = 0.0' 16.0 1.2 k l f c) Lane-Type Legal Load ModekApply for negative moment and interior reaction for all span lengths.0' 16. 30.`--- - 15.0' F 40' 54. and all load effects. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.`.6-3 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 15.0' L E G A L L A N E W E i G H T I f t .`.``. --`..`..0 1 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l i l i l l l i l i -I B.0' 150' i 16.6...APPENDIX B. 15.`.0' 4.``-`-`.

.`... B..`.3 LIVE LOAD MOMENTS ON LONGITUDINAL STRINGERS OR GIRDERS (SIMPLE SPAN) Table B.`...`.``.``.6.`.``-`-`. per Lane with 33 percent IM.APPENDIX B..6-4 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6-1 Live Load Moments in kip-ft.``..`.``.

.8 0.`--- O .APPENDIX B.6-5 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.u u 2 1..2 O I l .``.4 VARIATION IN MOMENT RATIO WITH SPAN LENGTH Simple Span Maximum Moment Caused by the Exclusion Vehicle Population Simple Span Maximum Moment Caused by Each Load Model Moment Ratio = O .``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`..= Exclusion Vehicle Population AASHTO Legal Loads Exclusion Vehicle Population HL -93 Figure B.6.`..``.`.`.``.4 .6 - ii 8 b .2 1 0. B.= .`. 4 0.6-7 Variation in Moment Ratio with Span Length.... 1 w .`.``.`..

`.``.``..`.`.``.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`..``.`..`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``-`-`.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`......

6. M u Figure C..Axial Capacity . using as-inspected section properties.Factored MDL Factored MLL IM + Axial RF . compute the live load eccentricity (e.6-1 --`.`. 5 ) Read the ultimate moment and axial capacities from the diagram...`.`.6-1) 1) Develop the interaction diagram..``.`..``..1 RATING OF CONCRETE COMPONENTS FOR COMPRESSION PLUS BENDING STEPS FOR OBTAINING RATING FACTORS (see Fig. 6 ) Moment RF = Moment Capacity . 4) Continue from Point A with the live load eccentricity to the intersection with the interaction diagram.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6-1 Axial Plus Bending Interaction Diagram for Concrete Structures. = Mal&).``-`-`.C. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 3) Using the factored live load moment and thrust for the rating live load..APPENDIX C.``.Factored PDL Factored Pu LL el= P M LL DL e2= P DL M Ultimate Capacity t I Ultimate Moment.``. C.`. 2) Point A represents the factored dead load moment and thrust.`. by computer or manual methods.`..

`.2&M.2.``.2.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .5. e =o for rating the correct p.`--- C. Mu 11.3.. --`.APPENDIX C.``-`-`.``. -+-9Mrx this an equality e p....`.2 & LRFD A4...9.2 RATING OF STEEL MEMBERS FOR COMPRESSION PLUS BENDING Combined Axial and Flexural Strength I Limit State for Steel Moment Magnification-Beam Columns LRFD A6. = If Moment or stress magnifier for braced mode deflection ->0.O.`.6..2b 6.(6-16) Substituting: Where: 6.``.`.0 RF will make LRFD Eq.`.0 c m 1- P D L + RF X x &+IM 9% Moment magnifier may be approximated by assuming R F = 1 .6-2 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. cp% YD 21.=- cm 1-..``.P.

``.`--- An iterative analysis could be used for improved accuracy. C.``..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.. P.``-`-`.`. < 0.2 P..O) 6.``. -+24 M" I l .. (6-15) Where: (for RF = 1. P. An iterative analysis could be used for improved accuracy.6-3 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. = 1YD c l n Pm + YL PLL+iM CPP. If.`.`.O for rating the correct RF will make this an M... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. equality LRFD Eq.`..`..`.

`.``. The following example shows the impact on load rating when the end eccentricity is increased from O in.`. The LRFD specifications. Pin connected compression chord members in truss bridges are a common example of this type. The LRFD beam-column equation with the moment magnification approach could also be used to evaluate compression members with only end eccentricities and no transverse loading..`. as an iterative approach may be required to establish the governing rating. an axial load magnification factor may be applied to rate the member as a concentrically loaded member with an equivalent load.. The axial load magnification factor is given by: e = Eccentricity of connection from working line of member A = Area of member s = Section modulus of the member about the axis of bending caused by the eccentric connection for the extreme fiber of the member in the direction of the eccentricity L = Length of the member between connections p . As an alternative to analyzing axial compression members with eccentric connections as combined compression-flexure members (LRFD A6.. = Factored axial load (dead load + live load) E = Modulus of elasticity I = Moment of inertia of the member about the axis of bending caused by the eccentric connection Any set of consistent units may be used.``-`-`. to 1 in. like most modem codes does not utilize the secant formula. but provides an interaction equation for the design of members with combined axial loads and concurrent moments.. end eccentricities may be neglected if eclr’ is less than 0..``. Generally. resulting in an eccentric connection.`.`--- . This approach is applicable to members assumed to be pinned at the ends and without lateral loads on the member. This process is a more lengthy approach as the beam-column method is a general approach applicable to a variety of situations. C.`. Rating compression members using an interaction equation is somewhat tedious.9.APPENDIX C. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.25. The secant formula is used to include the first and second order bending effects to produce a magnified axial load (dead and live) that would produce a constant stress over the cross section equal to the peak stress in an eccentric member.3 RATING OF STEEL COMPRESSION MEMBERS WITH ECCENTRIC CONNECTIONS (SECANT FORMULA METHOD) In compression members with unsymmetrical sections (such as truss chords) the gravity axis of the section may not coincide with the working lines. secant formula method indicates that the secant formula is simpler to use and would give comparable results.2. Limited investigation of the LRFD method vs.``.``..`.2).. Compression members having equal end eccentricities are conveniently analyzed using the secant formula.6.6-4 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..

e = 1 in. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 kip = 5716.6-1.1 + 1.85 x 1. 21" x $2" L5 x 3l/2It x 3/8'1 --`.``.``.0 x 0. bottom = 376.25~558.' L PDC E = 29000ksi I.26 (RF = 1.`.25 x 1.`.0 in.G.of Member 1l-4 I 71 ---..159 RF= 0.3kip 6.1 kip PD.25 x 1.76fore = O inExample6.8 in! C. II i i I \ L3l/2" x 3l/2" x 3/8" -- -7i -- PL.1+ 1 .159 x 558. 2 5 ~ 3 9 .9 x 1906.1 -1.3 in? S ...``-`-`.159 ~ 3 9 .6-5 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1 R F = 1. Member forces calculated assuming centerline of pin to be concentric with center of gravity of top chord..`. = 1.`..Example rating using mial load magnification: Section based upon member in Appendix A Example 6 but with the pins assumed to be 1 in eccentric in the negative y coordinate.75~231.. = 300in.``.159 x 231.4kip cL+. = 39.M = 231.. A = 55. 4 1.`. = 1.) C. 4=1151. = 558.`.``.`.75 x 1..`--- P.

`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.``.``-`-`.``...`..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.\ Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.`..`.`...``..

1 ALTERNATE LOAD RATING D.2 Substructure Consideration Careful attention should be given to all elements of the substructure for evidence of instability. D.`. To maintain this capacity. This Manual provides a choice of load rating methods.6. load ratings at operating and inventory levels based on the load factor method can also be calculated.``.`.. should be checked to ensure that they have at least the capacity of the lowest rated superstructure member.`. design calculations.APPENDIX D.6. Load ratings at operating and inventory levels using the allowable stress method can be calculated and may be especially useful for comparison with past practices.6. Load rating requires engineering judgment in determining a rating value that is applicable to maintaining the safe use of the bridge and arriving at posting and permit decisions.... The adequacy of the substructure should be based on information from as-built plans.``. As part of every inspection cycle. including piers and abutments. Bridge Owners should implement standardized procedures for determining the load rating of bridges based on this Manual.6-1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Evaluation of the conditions of a bridge’s substructure will in many cases be a matter of good engineering judgment.. it is assumed that the bridges are subject to competent inspections as often as the existing conditions of the structures require.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.1 GENERAL Bridge load-rating calculations provide a basis for determining the safe load capacity of a bridge.``-`-`. If such information is not available. D. bridge load ratings should be reviewed and updated to reflect any relevant changes in condition or dead load noted during the inspection.``.`. the substructure should be assumed to be adequate if it is judged by the D. inspection results.1. Bridge load-rating calculations are based on information in the bridge file including the results of a recent inspection.1.`.6. When such information is available. Similarly. and that sound judgment will be exercised in determining an appropriate safety margin. and other appropriate data. construction plans.`.1 Assumptions The safe load capacity of a bridge is based on existing structural conditions.`. which affects the load-canying capacity of a bridge. Each of these rating methods is presented below. the substructure elements.``.`--- ...

``.6-2 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. there are some cases where judgment must be exercised in making an evaluation of a structure and the safety factor may be adjusted based on site conditions and/or structure conditions as recorded in the most recent inspection report. However. consideration should be given to the types of vehicles using the bridge routinely.`.6. reference is made to specific articles in the AASHTO Standard Specijkations for Highway Bridges.5 Nonredundant Structures There may exist in a structure critical components whose failure would be expected to result in the collapse of the bridge. the safety factors to be used should be taken from this Manual.`.1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . which may be of substandard grade or where the material is weathered or otherwise deteriorated.6.. This determination most commonly applies to timber.3 Safety Criteria In general. In determining the safety factor for a bridge.`--- D.6 Load Rating for Complex Structures This Manual is intended for use in rating the types of bridges commonly in use in the United D. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.. deviations from the controlling specifications based on the known behavior of the member under traffic may be used and should be fully documented. However.4 Application of Standard Design Specifications For all matters not covered by this Manual.6. Diagnostic load tests may be helpful in establishing the safe load capacity for such members.``. Every effort should be made to minimize hardships related to economic hauling without jeopardizing the safety of the public.1..``..``.1..`.. D.`. For ease of use and where appropriate.Engineer to be stable after examining the alignment.`. the current applicable AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges (AASHTO Standard Specifications) should be used as a guide.`.1. Special considerations of these nonredundant components may be required in load rating the structure..6. In this situation. All data used in the determination of the safety factor should be fully documented. D.. there may be instances in which the behavior of a member under traffic is not consistent with that predicted by the controlling specification. D.``-`-`. condition and performance of the substnicture elements over time.

1 Inventory Rating Level The inventory rating level generally corresponds to the customary design level of stresses but reflects the existing bridge and material conditions with regard to deterioration and loss of section.3.3. D.``.`.2 Operating Rating Level Load ratings based on the operating rating level generally describe the maximum permissible live load to which the structure may be subjected. which can safely utilize an existing structure for an indefinite period of time. --`..`..`. two methods for checking the capacity of the members are provided in this Manual.. requires special analysis methods and procedures.6. The engineering knowledge and skills necessary to properly evaluate bridges may vary widely depending on the complexity of the bridge involved. D. Load ratings based on the inventory level allow comparisons with the capaciîy for new structures and. but more complex procedures must be used for the actual determination of the load rating..6.3 RATING LEVELS Each highway bridge should be load rated at both inventory and operating levels. D. The computation of the load-carrying capacity of more complex structures. therefore.2 QUALIFICATIONSAND RESPONSIBILITIES The individual charged with the overall responsibility for load-rating bridges should be a licensed professional engineer and preferably have a minimum of five years of bridge design and inspection experience.States. curved steel girder bridges.6. General guidance and direction is available in this Manual.``. arches.4 RATING METHODS In the load rating of bridge members.`..``..`. D. the Allowable Stress method and Load Factor method.``-`-`.`.6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . results in a live load.``. Allowing unlimited numbers of vehicles to use the bridge at operating level may shorten the life of the bridge.`.6-3 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. continuous trusses. and those bridges with variable girder depth and spacing. cable-stayed bridges..`--- D..6. The specialized knowledge and skills of other engineers may be needed to ensure proper evaluation. D. such as suspension bridges.

The live load effect on the member (see Article D.6.7. The rating factor multiplied by the rating vehicle in tons gives the rating of the structure (see Eq.a.`.`.``. The dead load effect on the member (see Article D. the dead load effect on the noncomposite section and the dead load effect on the composite section need to be evaluated when the Allowable Stress method is used.5 RATING EQUATION D. The latter is found by taking the limiting stress of the material and applying an appropriate factor of safety.2 Load Factor (LF) The Load Factor method is based on analyzing a structure subject to multiples of the actual loads (factored loads). which reflect the uncertainty inherent in the load calculations.`.6.`. Factor for live load (see Articles D.3).4.6. Factor for dead load (see Articles D.5.6. vertical shear force..`.2 and D.`.5.3).4.``.5. The capacity of the member (see Article D.D.1 Allowable Stress (AS) The allowable or working stress method constitutes a traditional specification to provide structural safety..1).6. The actual loadings are combined to produce a maximum stress in a member.7.`.6. which is not to exceed the allowable or working stress.6-2).1 General The following general expression should be used in determining the load rating of the structure: Eq.2).``-`-`. axial stress. For composite members..6)..6.. The rating is determined such that the effect of the factored loads does not exceed the strength of the member.6-4 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. (D. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6.6.``. D.6..4). Typical “load effects” used by engineers are axial force. D.= A2= The rating factor for the live load-carrying capacity. In the equation above “load effect’’ is the effect of the applied loads on the member.6.6-1) where: RF= c = D = L = I = . The impact factor to be used with the live load effect (see Article D.2 and D.5. D.5..7. shear --`.`--- D. Different factors are applied to each type of load. bending moment.``.6.

and bending stresses.6.6-5 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. make a determinaD.`. D..17 and for operating level. All physical features of a bridge which have an effect on its structural integrity should be examined as discussed in Section 3. Note any damaged or deteriorated sections and obtain adequate data on these areas so that their effect can be properly evaluated in the analysis. the “capacity” of a member to resist such a load effect may be determined (see Article D. = 1.6.`--- = = Bridge member rating in tons Weight (tons) of nominal truck used in determining the live load effect (L) The rating of a bridge is controlled by the member with the lowest rating in tons.2 Allowable Stress For the allowable stress method. 4 = 1.3).6). For inventory level.3.`.O in the general rating equation.`. with the higher value for C used for the operating level. concrete deteriorated. The determination of the nominal capacity of a member is discussed in Article D. Where steel is severely corroded.3 and 4 varies depending on the rating level desired.2..5.5.`.stress. A. Once the “load effect” to be evaluated is selected by the engineer. The capacity (C) depends on the rating level desired. The Rating Factor (RF)may be used to determine the rating of the bridge member in tons as follows: RT = (RF)W where: Eq..6..`.``.6. = 1.5. 4 = 2.6. and for the capacity when force or moment is chosen for use in the basic rating equation.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. or timber decayed. The rating of an older bridge for its load-carrying capacity should be based on a recent thorough field investigation.6..3 Load Factor For the load factor method.. D. D.O and 4 = 1.4 Condition of Bridge Members The condition and extent of deterioration of structural components of the bridge should be considered in the computation of the dead load and live load effects when stress is chosen as the evaluation approach..`.``.6-2) RT W --`.``-`-`.6. The nominal capacity C is the same regardless of the rating level desired (see Article D. A.``. (D.6.

5. in addition to the physical condition. Size.6.`.``. Also. the rating method.``-`-`.`. and relative location of bolts and rivets through tension members should be determined and recorded so that the net area of the section can be calculated. bends. nicks. Such defects will have a great effect on the load-carrying capability of a member and may be the controlling factor in the load-caving capacity of the entire structure.``. but should be determined in the field otherwise. D. The Bridge Owner is responsible for selecting the rating method.5 Bridges with Unknown Structural Components For redundant bridges where necessary details. Load tests may be helpful in establishing the safe load capacity for such structures. D.1 General The nominal capaciîy to be used in the rating equation depends on the structural materials. Also. number. Nominal capacities based on the Allowable Stress method are discussed in Article D. such as reinforcement in a concrete bridge. The method used should be identified for future reference.`.``.`.. Determine if deep pits.6 NOMINAL CAPACITY Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Lowering load capacities below those otherwise permitted or other remedial action may be necessary if such conditions exist..`--- . threaded members such as truss rods at turn buckles should be checked to see if the rod has been upset so that the net area will be properly calculated.6.6-6 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS CD. The effective area should be adjusted for rivet or bolt holes in accordance with the AASHTO Standard Specifications.6. This information will normally be taken from plans when they are available.6.. a physical inspection of the bridge by a qualified inspector and evaluation by a qualified engineer may be sufficient to approximate inventory and operating ratings.6..`. or other defects exist that may cause stress concentration areas in any structural member..6. The effective area of members to be used in the calculations shall be the gross area less that portion which has deteriorated due to decay or corrosion...``.`.2 and those based on the Load Factor method are discussed in Article D. examine the connections of compression members carefully to see if they are detailed such that eccentricities are introduced which must be considered in the structural analysis. are not available from plans or field measurements.3.6.6.6. D.6 NOMINAL CAPACITY (C) D. or kinks in compression members should be measured carefully.tion of the loss in a cross-sectional area as closely as reasonably possible..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. and rating level used. Any misalignment.

6-2 gives the allowable operating stresses for structural steel.`. the allowable stresses should be fixed by the Engineer. then rational strength of material formulae should be used consistent with data and plans verified in the field investigation. In KL = = 75 percent of the total length of a column having riveted end connections. given in Tables D..``. allowable stresses should be taken from the applicable “Date Built” column of Tables D..6-7 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.D.. To provide a 95 percent confidence limit.2. forged eyebars.6-2 are the corresponding formulae based on given in Table 10. The formulae for the allowable bending stress in partially supported or unsupported compression flanges of beams and girders.6-2 is to be used for an operating rating. the inventory. When situations arise that are not covered by these specifications.. the Engineer should carefully investigate the material properties using manufacturer’s data and compilations of older steel properties before establishing the yield and allowable stresses to be used in load rating the bridge.6-1 and D..`. Allowable stress and strength formulae should be those provided herein or those contained in the AASHTO Standard Specifications.6. The nominal yield stress. which treat the lateral torsional buckling of a beam as flexural buckling of the compression flange.6-4 in the Manualfor Condition Evaluation of Bridges give the allowable inventory and operating stresses for bolts and rivets.6-2.. and should be substituted for the basic stresses given herein. If the investigation of shear and stiffener spacing is desirable. In the absence of material tests.6-1 and D. This does not reflect the true behavior of a beam.000.``. A beam may reach Mp with unbraced lengths much greater than zero.1A of the allowable Stress Design portion of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.1 Structural Steel Standard coupon testing procedures may be used to establish the nominal yield point. is also shown in Tables D.6.`.5 percent of the total length of a column having pinned end connections.``.`.6-1 gives allowable Inventory stresses and Table D. the tables provide. D8.``-`-`. The modulus of elasticity ( l i ‘ ) for steel should be 29. 87. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. The previously used formulas are inelastic parabolic formulas. per sq. where appropriate. When nonspecification metals are encountered.`. coupon testing may be used to determine a nominal yield point.2 Allowable Stress Method In the Allowable Stress method.2. based on field investigations and/or material testing conducted in accordance with Section 5. and yield stress values. Table D. The properties to be used for determining the allowable stress capacity for different materials follow.6. the effective length (ZCL) may be determined in accordance with the AASHTO Standard Specifications or taken as follows: CD.65 standard deviations.6.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . or operating levelallowable stress. the capacity of a member is based on the rating level evaluated: inventory level-allowable stress.6-2. Mechanical properties of eyebars.6.000 lb. F. For compression members.6-1 and D.1 Structural Steel The allowable unit stresses used for determining safe load capacity depend on the type of steel used in the structural members.``..`--- D.. high-strength eyebars. The flexural capacity is reduced for any unbraced length greater than zero. When the bridge materials or construction are unknown.32. Deviations from the AASHTO Standard Specifications should be fully documented. This is a very conservative approach for beams with short unbraced lengths. operating. in. When information on specifications of the steel is not available. The equation in Table D.6-1 is to be used for an inventory rating and the equation in Table D. and cables vary depending on manufacturer and year of construction.6. such investigation may be based on the AASHTO Standard Specifications. For convenience. the nominal yield point would typically be the mean coupon test value minus 1.`. Tables D.`.6-3 and D.

D..``.``-`-`.6-3 and D.7Y0.275 F. The previous specification equation gives higher values than the new specification for large unbraced lengths.``.`. in terms of an allowable stress.. the new specification gives higher allowable stress values. which allows the determination of allowable stresses for all unbraced lengths. the influence of the moment gradient upon buckling capacity is considered using the modifier C. The previous specification is unconservative in this range. has 1.`. Both graphs show that.32.`..`. They are currently used in the AISC LRFD Specifications and other specifications throughout the world.55. The new formulas have no upper limit.3B and 10. J.addition.. They are also being used to design and rate steel bridges by the Load Factor method.. This limit is the slenderness ratio when the estimated buckling stress is equal to half the yield strength or 0. web. The difference is due to the inclusion of the St. This is a significant contribution to the lateral torsional buckling resistance of rolled shapes.``. Many floor stringers will have unbraced lengths beyond this limit. The new specification gives a much higher capacity than the previous specification. the formula neglects the St. Revisions are proposed to Tables D. which contain the allowable inventory and operating stresses for low-carbon steel bolts.`. The lower figure shows a similar comparison for a plate-girder section.32.32. labeled section 3. negative values of the allowable stress can result.``. The values for the operating rating correspond to the inventory rating values multiplied by the ratio of 0..`--- .6-3 are based on the values given in Table 10. The corresponding values for low-carbon steel (ASTM A 307) bolts in Table D.. for smallunsupported lengths. The higher values result from the fact that there is an immediate reduction in capacity versus unsupported length in the previous specification. The previous formulas must also be limited to the values of Z/b listed. For highstrength bolts (Table D. The new figures on page D.6-8 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6-22 show a comparison between the specification formulas and the previous specification formulas for two sections. particularly older “I” shapes. in the new formulae. in the proposed specification.`.5 x 16-in. Venant torsional stifTness of the cross sections. flanges and a 5/16 x 94-in.3C) in a separate item.`. The top figure compares results for a W18 x 46 rolled section.6-4). 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. If the formulas are used beyond these limits.. Venant torsional stiffness.6-4 of the AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation o f Bridges. rivets..3A of the Standard Specifications. In addition. The specification formulae are based on the exact formulations of the lateral torsional buckling of beams. the revised values for inventory rating correspond to the proposed Allowable Stress design values that were suggested for incorporation into the AASHTO Standard Specifications (Tables 10. and high-strength bolts.

.= 2.0.6. coupon tests should be performed to c o n f m material properties used in the rating.2.6-1 and D.2..6-9 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6.``.`.8 4.12 at inventory level = 1.3 1.6.`.S.1 and6.2. when used as shown below: Battens (Typ) --`.``.o 1. In using the AASHTO Standard Specifications (Article 10. the foregoing factors shall be reduced 50 percent. perforated cover plates..5 1.o 1.``. CD..3 1.7 2.3 2..``. and battens.70 at operating level D.8 1.6. the actual length of the member shall be multiplied by the following factor to obtain the adjusted value of Llr to be substituted in the compression member formulae discussed in Articles6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 1.2 1.2 Wrought Iron Allowable maximum unit stress in wrought iron for tension and bending: Operating = 20. D..2Batten Plate Compression Members To allow for the reduced strength of batten plate compression members.6-2.o 1. This article covers the use of batten plates only.S.1.000 psi and 14.1 1.6.36).2.`.0 2.000 psi inventory = 14.I )] D. the allowable compressive axial stress (Fa) and the allowable compressive bending stresses (Fbx and Fby) should be based on Tables D.1.2 1..`.o 1.`--- 160 200 Factor Spacing Center-to-Centerof Batten Plates Upto2d 4d 6d 1O d 1. Typical connections include stay plates in combination with single or double lacing.`.`.6.``-`-`.6.1. 6. Adjusted L I r (battenplate both sides) =Actual L Ir x factor Adjusted LI r (battenplate one side) =Actual L l r x [I + 112 (factor.1 Combined Stresses The allowable combined stresses for steel compression members may be calculated by the provisions of AASHTO Standard Specifications as modified below or by the procedure contained in Appendix AI 1 of the Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges. The safety factor (F.3 d = depth of member perpendicularto battens For compression members having a solid plate on one side and batten plates on the other.6.2Batten Plate Compression Members Built-up compression members are generally connected across their open sides.6. Actual Llr 40 80 120 CD.6.1.600 psi Where possible.000 psi depending on material test results.1..2.2 Wrought Iron Allowable maximum unit stresses in wrought iron for tension and bending at the inventory level should be between 10.2.5 1.) to be used should in computing the Euler buckling stress be as follows: (e’) F.3 1.2.1 1.`.

.6.`.2.. intermediate.``-`-`.6.`--- Stresses(psi) Operating Rating 25.500 36.000 50.900 1.000 1.900 10 1. These will ordinarily be used without reduction when the condition of the steel is unknown: Inventory Rating Structuralor unknown grade prior to 1954 Grade 40 billet.500-2.000 24.000 28.6.4 Concrete CD.`.000 3. A’. 0.15) or be based on the articles below.2.2.2. (See Article 4.000-4..000 32.4) results in D.3 Reinforcing Steel The following are the allowable unit stresses in tension for reinforcing steel.D.2 Columns The determination of the capacity of a compression member based on the AASHTO Standard Specifications (Article 8.000-3.4 Concrete Some guidance on the ultimate strength (k’) of concrete may be obtained from compression testing of cores removed from the structure.900 1.`.000 6 The value of n may be varied according to the above table.400 800 1.`.6.6.or unknown grade (after 1954) Grade 50 rail or hard Grade 60 --`.000 18.500 3.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .15.. in.`.200 15 2.000-2. When the ultimate strength (A’) of the concrete is unknown and the concrete is in satisfactory condition.6.000 or more 2.000 20.000 40.`.``..000 20.000 The following maximum allowable bending unit stresses in concrete in lb/sq. may be determined from the following table: A’ Year Built Prior to 1959 After 1959 (psi) 2.6.``..6.3) Unit stresses in concrete may be determined in accordance with the Service Load Design Method of the AASHTO Standard Specifications (Article 8..``.``.900 4. may be used: Compression Due to Bending L’(psi) Inventory Operating L’’ois9 Level Level n 2.4.000 Yield 33..6-10 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.000 D.500 12 3.000 60.600 2.400 8 5.200 1.

`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6.. (D.2.5)...6-4) Compression.. ' Eq..`.3-0.``.=O.3Lf (1. The following simplified approach establishes the maximum operating level capacity: Maximum safe axial load in columns at Operating rating: P = f ..an inventory level capacity. +LAS where: Eq.4..`. (D. may be taken as 1.55f . = 1.``.. 3 e where: d = Distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement D.03LID) L D = = Eq.`.6-11 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. and a more detailed calculation of the allowable shear stress can be made using: v. f. (D.=0. The operating level shear strength in beams showing no diagonal tension cracking may be found as follows: (Total Unit Shear) = (Shear Taken by Steel) + (Shear Taken by Concrete) or v=vs +v.6-3) P = = = = = f.``.`. A . in which LID is greater than 12: f.15. (D. in which LID is 12 or less: f . Yield strength of reinforcing steel Area of longitudinal reinforcing steel = Compression.6-6) The allowable shear stress carried by the concrete.(Vd/M) I 2 .``. short columns. A.25fi+1. A.`.6. v.' --`.`--- Eq. Allowable axial load on column Allowable unit stress of concrete taken from 6-3 or 6-4 Grossareaofcolumn Allowable stress of steel = 0.600p.``-`-`.3fi. f .3 Shear (Diagonal Tension) The inventory level shear strength should be determined in accordance with the Service Load Design method of the AASHTO Standard Specifications (Article 8.6-5) Unsupported length of column Least dimension of column 0. long columns.3s..

= = Reinforcementratio = AJ(b.6.6.5 Prestressed Concrete As in design.`. The Engineer may use the more rigorous approach in ACI-530-88.33 to provide an operating level allowable stress as shown in Eq.6.6. First E is reduced by dividing by 2.6.`. D.`. Allowable operating level stresses for masonry are not included in this Manual.6.``./M shall not be taken greater than 1.3.2.R. the rating of prestressed concrete members is a combination of strength (Load Factor Method) and serviceability requirements (Allowable Stress Method)..`.2. v. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT \ . Mortar used to bind the individual masonry units should be classified in accordancewith ASTM C 270.6 Masonry Stone. These values are conservative and constitute a lower bound for allowable masonry stresses.3. Then the Euler allowable stress is multiplied by 1. (D. and clay brick masonry structures should be evaluated using the allowable stress rating method. The criteria for rating prestress concrete members is presented under the Load Factor Method in Section 6. (D.6. The quantity V.`.6-12 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. concrete.66 for solid timber members according to the National Design Specifcations for Wood Construction published by the National Forest Products Association. Allowable inventory unit stresses for timber columns should be in accordance with the CD. D.. Article 6. Where severe diagonal tension cracking has occurred. These are minimum values and may be used in the absence of more reliable data such as the results of a prism test conducted in accordance with ASTM E 447.``. Reinforced masonry construction may be evaluated using the allowable unit stresses for reinforcing steel. b.6.5 Prestressed Concrete Rating of prestressed concrete members should be based on the criteria presented under Article 6.`.6.6-7).. The condition of the masonry unit and mortar should be considered when assigning an allowable stress. as an alternative.74.2.6.``-`-`.7 Timber Determining allowable stresses for timber in existing bridges will require sound judgment on the part of the Engineer making the field investigation..3.6-7) is based on the Euler long-column formula with two adjustments as follows. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. and an appropriate allowable stress in the masonry. The allowable inventory level compressive stresses for masonry assemblies are shown in Table 9..o.. This corresponds to a safety factor of 1.6.2.6.1. Masonry components should be evaluated at the inventory level.``. D. CD.``. should be considered as zero and all shear stress should be taken by the reinforcing steel..6 Masonry The allowable stresses for evaluating masonry structures are based on the AC1 empirical method (see AC1 530-88).2.3.6.2.6. (i) Inventory Stress The inventory unit stresses should be equal to the allowable stresses for stress-grade lumber given in the AASHTO Standard Specifications. CD.6..`--- D.6.2.7 Timber (2) Operating Stress Eq.d) Width of the web Note: M is the moment acting simultaneously with the shear force V at the section being considered.

applicable provisions of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.. (Ud.6.`. Different methods for considering the observable effects of deterioration were studied.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Allowable operating stress in pounds per square inch of cross-sectional area of simple solid columns should be determined by the following formulae but the allowable operating stress should not exceed 1.33 times the values for compression parallel to grain given in the design stress table of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.`. reinforced concrete.`. between points of lateral support of simple columns Least radius of gyration of the section in inches For columns of square or rectangular cross section.`.6.``..6-8) where: d = Dimension in inches of the narrowest face The above formula applies to long columns with (Iíd) over 11.33 for the grade of timber used.`. For short columns.3 Load-Factor Method Nominal capacities for members in the proposed guidelines are based on the AASHTO Standard Specifications contained in the load-factor section..``-`-`. Reduction from the maximum allowable stress will depend upon the grade and condition of the timber and should be determined at the time of the inspection..6.``.. (D.`.6-7) where: P = A = E = I r = = Total load in pounds Cross-sectional area in square inches Modulus of elasticity Unsupported overall length. The most reliable method available still appears to be a --`. D. (D. or corrosion. P 4. D. this formula becomes: P 0.`. Nominal strength calculations should take into consideration the observable effects of deterioration. and prestressed concrete should be the same as specified in the load factor sections of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.``. such as loss of concrete or steel-sectional area. in inches.6-13 CD...3 Load Factor Method Nominal capacity of structural steel. loss of composite action.. use the allowable design unit stress in compression parallel to grain times 1.33 times the allowable stresses for stress-grade lumber given in $e current AASHTO Standard Specifications. but not greater than 50.6.4ûE -A (Zíd)’ Eq.) not over 11. This resistance depends on both the current dimensions of the section and the nominal material strength. (2) Operating Stress The maximum allowable operating unit stresses should not exceed 1.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8E -- A (l/r)= Eq.

reduction in the nominal resistance based on measured or estimated losses in cross-sectional area andor material strengths. The capacity of structural steel members should be based on the load factor requirements stated in the AASHTO Standard Specifications. yield strengths should be taken fi-om the applicable “Date Built” column of the tables set forth in Article 6.`.6. When specifications of the steel are not available.6.``-`-`.1 Structural Steel The yield stresses used for determining ratings should depend on the type of steel used in the structural members. D.000 50.6. A. The capacity (C) for typical steel bridge members is summarized in Appendix C .``.000 40. The operating rating for friction joint fasteners (A 325 bolts) should be determined using a stress of 21 ksi. D. should be taken as 1. bolts.. The following are the yield stresses for reinforcing steel. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1..`..Allowable fatigue strength should be checked based on the AASHTO Standard Specifications.``. Appendix C contains formulas for the capacity (C) of typical reinforced concrete members..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2. coupon testing may be used to determine yield characteristics.65 standard deviations..000 36. Yield Point Reinforcing Steel Unknown steel (prior to 1954) Structural Grade Billet or intermediate Grade and unknown after 1954 (Grade 40) Rail or Hard Grade (Grade 50) Grade 60 F.``.. The operating rating for welds. At the present time.6. The area of tension steel at yield to be used in computing the ultimate moment capacity of flexural members should not exceed that available in the section or 75 percent of the reinforcement required for balanced conditions. and A. Special structural or operational conditions and policies of the Bridge Owner may also influence the determination of fatigue strength.16).`..``.3. load-factor methods for determining the capacity of timber and masonry structural elements are not available.3.6-14 --`..000 D.`.57 should also be considered. The capacity of concrete members should be based on the strength requirements stated in AASHTO Standard Specifications (Article 8.6. the overload limitations of Article 10.000 60.`.`.`. and rivets should be determined using the maximum strengths from Table 10. (Psi) 33. For beams.0 in the basic rating equation. When nonspecification metals are encountered. The nominal yield value should be substituted in strength formulas and is typically taken as the mean test value minus 1.2 Reinforced Concrete ..56A in the AASHTO Standard Specifications.

More stringent allowable stress values may be established by the Bridge Owner.33.15..6-8). may choose to limit live loads to those that preserve the .6fc-(Fd +F. (D.6.``.6-7) results in Eq.. Additionally at inventory level.``.`. substituting d/J12 for the radius of gyration (Y) in Eq. that is prescribed relationship between (pMnand M for a new design. when $Aln < 1.. The limitation on the maximum stress of prestressing steel at the operating level to 0.`. (D. A summary of the strength and allowable stress rating equations is presented at the end of this section. the rating must consider the allowable stresses at service load as specified in Article 9.2.``-`-`.1 of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Rating Equations: Inventory Rating: Concrete Tension CD. The use of this option necessitates an adjustment to the value of the nominal moment capacity $Mn. This equation may also be found by multiplying Eq.18. (D.6. While there is no reduction in the flexural strength of the member in the event that these provisions are not satisfied.2. both the strength at ultimate and the allowable stress criteria at the transfer and in-service conditions must be satisfied.) 11 Prestressing Tension Steel D.6-13) andEq.33M. In situations of unusual design with wide dispersion of the tendons.. a Owner. but should be used to ensure sufficient reserve ductility in the prestressing steel.3..D.17 of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.3 Prestressed Concrete In the design of prestress concrete members. the operating rating might further be controlled by stresses not to exceed 0. prestressed concrete members used in bridge structures will meet the minimum reinforcement requirements of Article 9.`.``.’--(Fd 1 +F.. by 1.``. as part of the flexural rating. Typically.2 of the AASHTO Standard Specifications.3.`.`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`--- RF= 0.. the nominal where k is the moment capacity becomes (k)($)(Mn). The strength design is based on factored loads and the flexural capacity of the section computed in accordance with Article 9. For square and rectangular columns. should be established in accordance with the strength requirements of Article 9.8fJ .4f.6.(F.6. larger of: 1.6-15 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. + F.6-14) from the AASHTO Standard Specifications.90 of the yield point stress in the prestressing steel nearest the extreme tension fiber of the member. ) 2 Concrete RF= 4 Compression RF= 0.17 of the AASHTO Design Specifications. Thus.`.2Mcr. + F .3 Prestressed Concrete The rating of prestress concrete members at both inventory and operating level.90 of the yield point stress is not a design requirement. (D. +<) 11 Concrete Compression 0. used in the flexural strength rating equations. + F .

``...`.`.6-16 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. (D. Both moment $Mn and shear $Vn should be evaluated.`.`..6-1).``-`-`..20 of the AASHTO Standard Specifications. = Unfactored dead load moment or shear = Unfactored prestress secondary moment or shear = Unfactored live load moment or shear = Prestressing steel yield stress = Impact factor . i +4 ) Flexural and Shear Strength Flexural and Shear Strength RF= 4 Prestressing Tension Steel where: RF A’ = Rating factor = Concrete compressivestrength 6 f l = Allowable concrete tensile strength.``. = Unfactored dead loss stress = Unfactored stress due to prestress force after all losses = Unfactored stress due to secondary prestress forces = Unfactored live load stress including impact = Nominal strength of section satisfiing the ductility limitations of Article 9.3D+S) 1.`--- factor of 3 f i may be applicable.18 and Article 9..3D + S ) 2. effects of dead load.17L(I + I) $Rn-(1.`.3L(I + I ) 0.RF= RF= $Rn-(i . D.(Fd F. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. The actual effect of each load relative to the allowable stress or capacity should be considered in the rating equations through using appropriate signs. prestress force.`.7 LOADINGS This section discusses the loads to be used in determining the load effects in the basic rating Eq. and secondary prestress forces are subtracted from the allowable stress or capacity.15 of the AASHTO Standard Specifications. A 4 4 D S L fY* I Note: In the rating equations. or this allowable stress may be zero. as provided by Article 9. D...96‘ ..``.6.

2 Truck Loads The live or moving loads to be applied on the deck for determining the rating should be the Standard AASHTO ?HS? loading.``.7.``.``.6-1) should be the HS20 truck or lane loading as defined in the AASHTO Standard Specifications and shown in Figures 6.7.`.. stresses in the deck do not control the load rating except in special cases.D. the portion of the dead load acting on the noncomposite section and the portion acting on the composite section should be determined. For composite members. Other loadings used by Bridge Owners for posting and permit decisions are discussed in Section 7. fewer trafic lanes than specified by AASHTO may be considered. D.7. and the transverse placement of wheel lines should be in conformance with the current AASHTO Design Specifications and the following: Roadway widths from 18 to 20 feet should have two design lanes. particularly on bridges built prior to 1965. it is more likely to have a train of light-weight vehicles than to have a train of heavy-weight vehicles. When conditions of traffic movements and volume would warrant it. D.2. D...2.2 Rating Live Load The live load to be used in the basic rating Eq.`.`. (2) = Roadway widths less than 18 feet should carry one traffic lane only. Care should be exercised in estimating the weight of concrete decks since significant variations of deck thickness have been found.6.7. The calculation of bending moments in the deck should be in accordance with AASHTO Standard Specifications..`. Live loadings should be centered in these lanes.`--- ...6.1 Dead Load (O) The dead load effects of the structure should be computed in accordance with the conditions existing at the time of analysis.6. This makes it necessary to consider more than one vehicle in the same lane under some conditions.`. each equal to one-half the roadway width.6. (D.2.2 of the Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges.`.. Nominal values of dead weight should be based on dimensions shown on the plans with allowances for normal construction tolerances.7.6-17 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS CD. The number of traffic lanes to be loaded. D.6.1 and 6.``-`-`. That is. Minimum unit weight of materials to be used in computing the dead load stresses should be in accordance with current AASHTO Standard Specifications. Wheel loads should be in accordance with the current AASHTO Standard Specifications. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.1 Wheel Loads (Deck) In general..2.``. vehicles should be spaced at distances of 30 feet clear or more . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.7. The approximate overlay thickness should be measured at the time of the inspection.2 Truck Loads The probability of having a series of closely spaced heavy vehicles of the maximum allowable weight becomes greater as the maximum allowed weight for each unit becomes less.in the same lane to produce maximum load effect when the safe loading per vehicle or vehicle combinationsis less than 12 tons. For example.7.`.

6.6.5 Deflection Live load deflection limitations should not be considered in load rating except in special cases. and similar situations require a vehicle to substantially reduce speed in crossing the structure. AASHTO Standard Specifications..7.`.``.5 Live Load Effects (L) Live load moments in longitudinal stringers and girders may be calculated using the moment table.4 Impact (I..`.``.`. D.7. CD. --`. Impact should be added to the live load used for rating in accordance with the current AASHTO Standard Specifications.6 Longitudinal Loads The rating of the bridge members to include the effects of longitudinal loads in combination with D.`. but in no case should it exceed the value given in AASHTO Standard Specifications.2.4 Sidewalk Loadings Sidewalk loadings used in calculations for safe load capacity ratings should be the probable maxi: mum loads anticipate& Because of site variations. D. D.7. However.. for live load moments produced by the HS20 load. The operating level should be ' considered when full truck and sidewalk live loads act simultaneously on the bridge. The option exists to substitute field measured values. specification impact may be reduced when conditions of alignment.6.3 Lane Loads The Bridge Owner may use the Standard AASHTO HS lane load for all span lengths where it may result in load effects which are greater than those produced by the AASHTO standard HS truck.2. These values represent a possible combination of diverse circumstances.7.2.6.3 Distribution of Loads The fraction of live load transferred to a single member should be selected in accordance with the current AASHTO Standard Specifications..D.``-`-`...6.7..`..``.6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .7.6. This loading case should be evaluated based on the operating level.``.6-18 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.7. enforced speed posting.2.7. Loadings should be placed in positions causing the maximum response in the components being evaluated.`. Appendix A. D.6.`.`--- D.4 Sidewalk Loadings The probability that both the full truck and full sidewalk live loads would act simultaneously on the bridge is quite low. or those determined from advanced structural analysis methods based on the properties of the existing structure. D. the determination of loading to be used will require engineering judgment. analytically calculated values.

6.`. the structure may be posted for restricted speed. However. the effects of wind on special structures such as movable bridges.7. In addition.7. suspension bridges.7..7.. This specification permits the investigator to use either the relatively simple methods of the AASHTO Standard Specifications or the more complex analysis procedures described in AASHTO Standard Specifications.5 Ice Pressure Forces caused by ice pressure should be considered in the evaluation of substructure elements in those regions where such effect can be D. To evaluate the resistance of the structure to seismic forces.7.. Seismic Design of the AASHTO Standard Specifications. CD.7. For seismic retrofitting of bridges.6. may be used.7. on seismic design..6.7. the methods described in Division I-A.1 Wind Lateral loads due to wind normally need not be considered in load rating.dead and live load effects should be done at the operating level.`.. If facilities and trained personnel are available.``.4 Stream Flow Forces caused by water movements should not be considered in calculating the load rating.6. and other high-level structures should be evaluated. Where longitudinal stability is considered inadequate. D.`.6. remedial action should be considered if these forces are especially critical to the structure’s stability.2 Earthquake Earthquake loads should not be considered in calculating load ratings or in determining live load restrictions.7 Environmental Loads The rating of the bridge members to include the effects of environmental loads in combination with dead and live load effects should be done at the operating level.``.7.``-`-`.7.3 Thermal Effects Stresses caused by thermal changes should not be considered in calculating load ratings except for long-span bridges and concrete arches. D.7..`.6. D.`. Division I-A..``.6-19 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6. D.`.7. seismic loads must be considered. D.`. longitudinal loads should be used in the evaluation of the adequacy of the substructure elements.`--- . However. the multimodal spectral method of analysis is recommended to provide more thorough and credible results.2 Earthquake Bridge Maintenance Engineers may be called upon to evaluate existing structures for their capacity to resist earthquake forces.``.7. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.. D.

.`--- Unbraced Length-ft.`. If these forces are especially important..`. W18~46-Fy= 36 ksi Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..``. then corrective action should be recommended..`. the input data file should be retained for future use.`.``-`-`.``.`. material and load test data.``.significant. D.8 DOCUMENTATION OF RATING The load rating of a bridge should be completely documented in writing. all supporting computations. such as field inspection reports. including all background information.6..6-20 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. and a clear statement of all assumptions used in calculating the load rating.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. D. If a computer model was used.`.``.`. \ 10 34 c1) bo 60 Unbraced Length-ft.

`.``.``-`-`..`--- 2 b 0 O m O O O O " N b 0 2 N b 2 m O O 3 O O 0 O m o? o . 3' " O D.`..``. O O 0 N O 8 m O 8 N O 2 O O O 8 m 2 + o 0 O o m O O 0 2 0 O O O 0 " 5 2 N 5 0 .`...``.`...`.6-21 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..O O 2 N O z m O O 0 N vi O F r i O 2 m O 2 N O 8 m --`.`.``.`.

``..`.``.`.`.`.3 x) 3 3 2 N - 3 3 N i 3 2 3 3 3 T 3 io m 9 .l - 8 < io m 3 3 5 2 O u 3 3 m o R m W 9 m io cci % 9 O u VI 3 ? O 2 9 O VI 9 O u 'E: ô z- 1 5 3 a oo 2 2 2 4' 3 s QL 8 3 u- $ fi CA n t¿l D.`--- .`....``.`...`...6-22 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.``-`-`.

.`. 8 fa % * .O V ? O O m m 0 - r i vl 0 io N + C A E Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.`.``-`-`..rd & 'E 4- 9 % A o v.`--- E U 4- O O O 0 ..``..- 5 a e 8 m N 3 N .`.`.``.. m VI 3 io o vl 0 8 8 o c M P g F O O O " N P O E O o i - 0 - m vl 3 N fi l ..`.`.O O O t i - 3 d 2 d 0 " 3 i P B o U s O O 8 d 8 z m O 0 ." 'c! O 2 8 D.6-23 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. io O z" m O ..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.

.`.``. hl O O 2 W O 2 N o 2 II 2 ri % cr.`.``.``-`-`......6-24 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . --`..`.``.`..`--- s x 2 B u" Ai .`.9 3 5: wl P D.`.``.O d O 8 d 8 0.`.

``.`.``..``-`-`.`.. m N 0 m N m z P 4 O O 0 m N o s O é P i c c c O O O " O O 0.`.. W 0 " 0 " m m m m m O O O O 8 m 8 m 8 W 8 W vi " ? O $ " v! o D.`--- ...``.O O O O 0 .6-25 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. 3 N 3 N 8 W r N i O O O ' 0 " 3 O 0 .`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..``.`..`.`.

..`.`--- ...`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``...`.`.``.D...`.6-26 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``-`-`.``.`.

`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.P O 0 .``...`.6-27 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``-`-`...`--- .``.`... C < d F O t x m I F -O N cf c O 2 N O 4 N d O * N O 2 : 2 i E r i D.`.``.`.`..

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. i i - I D..`--- O O v O O Y U O N U a û 8 " : 3 O QI O -E m 3 m " O O 00 N m N ? 9 3 2 cc U Q 3 e d m U b w N 3 O O O 3 m O N 0 " N m 2 Y 5 rr. O 3 4 o II o " i . ?\o x 3 3 N 2 ic.``.`.``.. .- C o . I .. O 0 1 O c ic.`.`..``.6-28 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 2 cj O s 2 2 5 V d . m.`... U QI r: 3 O m 3 2 N m m i 2 O 3 O U m 4 4 3 s w m 0 Yi.``. O E C * m O 0 N m O N 'E P ô b.`.z s 7 3 O O O U 2 I d m 8 m --`.``-`-`.`.c d aï * ti 8 G i7 8 v1 B ..- '5 s b 2 E L1 " ..

``.``.`....`.`.. rvi m P 0 O vi O o vi x) --`....m o b 8 3 3 o D.``. vi O O ' " .`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT B .`.`.6-29 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. m d 0. W p' 2 2 W 3 O O 3XI " . 2 3 3 .`.``-`-`.3 O O v i W d 3t - m r- '". m m 3 d 3 3 - O O 0 - t N - m vi 5 d O O O 0.``.. vi m 3 3 3 9 O O ' " .`--- O P N ka E & 69 .

. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.`.`--- .`..``..``-`-`..``.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.`.`.`....``.``.

`..``..``-`-`.`..O O 8 m 8 v O O v? m I 0 PI v O O 3 d 8 io O O 0.`..`..``..`--- D.``.`.6-3 1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 3 ? W d d O O vi m 'c? v d O O 3 P 3 W --`..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``..`.

.``-`-`.`.....6-32 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`..``.O 4 ? II t?' k B '5 D..`.``.`--- .`.``..`.`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.

D.`.`.``.``-`-`.6-33 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..``.`..`.`..`..`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.`....``.

.`... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``..6-34 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.brn Nrn 0...``.`--- ..``.``.`.`..``-`-`.`.`.`.`.- rnb h 1 4 " VI VI VI VI VI "' D.

....``....................................................................``-`-`.....`--- .................................7-6 7-i Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..............6 Acceptable Remaining Fatigue Life .................................. 7-i 7-i 7-1 7-1 7-1 7-2 7-2 7-2 7-3 7-4 7-4 7-4 7-4 7-5 7-5 7-5 7-6 7-6 7-6 7-6 7-7 7-7 7-7 7-8 7-8 7-8 7-9 ...............................................................................2..............................2....2............... LISTOF FIGURES Figure C7-1 Lifetime Average Truck Volume...............................2...................................I .....................................................................................................................and R ................................................ 7.............. 7....... 7...........................``.....................1 Calculating Estimated Stress Ranges ..3 Retrofit the Bridge .........................2...................... 7..................2....................................2.................... 7.1.........................2. 7..................2...........2 Recalculate the Fatigue Life ..... 7... 7-3 Table 7-2 Resistance Factor for Evaluation. Minimum or Mean Fatigue Life.............................2................. 7............................. .......`.. For an Existing Bridge ................................. LISTOF FIGURES LISTOF TABLES ........2....2......2...........................................2......................7.............. ................ .....2...........................2...2...4 FRACTURE-CONTROL FOROLDER BRIDGES REFERENCES .. 7.............................................................................................5.....2...............................1 For the Determination of Evaluation or Minimum Fatigue Life ......................1 General.................SECTION 7: FATIGUE EVALUATION OF STEEL BRIDGES TABLE OF CONTENTS ...............4 Infinite-Life Check .....I Through Accepting Greater Risk ........... RSt...............................5......``...............................2............2......................................`...........................................7 Strategies to Increase Remaining Fatigue Life...............3 DISTORTION-INDUCED FATIGUE EVALUATION ............. 7.................................2 Estimating Stress Ranges ............. 7.........................................`......... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.....................................`................7............................... 7...2 For the Determination of Mean Fatigue Life .......................................2.2...................................2................... 7....................... 7.. 7...................7.... 7.............................`.......... 7..................2 LOAD-INDUCED FATIGUE-DAMAGE EVALUATION 7........2................................. 7................................. 7..............................2.................... 7.................................................................................`..... 7....2 For the Determination of Mean Fatigue Life ......................2......................................1 Application ........... 7......1 LOAD-INDUCED VERSUS DISTORTION-INDUCED FATIGUE ...........................5 Estimating Finite Fatigue Life ...................1 General ........... RR ........................2 Estimating the Number of Cycles per Truck Passage ..................... 7.........................................2 Through More Accurate Data ...1 For the Determination of Evaluation or Minimum Fatigue Life ...................``...`...................2.... 7...........7.... R ...............................................2...............2...... LISTOF TABLES 7-6 Table 7-1 Partial Load Factors.............2 Measuring Estimated Stress Ranges ..............3 Determining Fatigue-Prone Details .......2............

..`.``.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.``..`.`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``..`.`..``-`-`..``..

or other elements of rolled shapes. Only bridge details which fail the infinite-life check are subject to the more complex finite-life fatigue evaluation. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . These “plates” may be the individual plates which comprise a built-up welded.`.3 of the AASHTO LñFD Bridge Design Specijìcations (1998). --`.. The Guide Specifications referenced NCHRP Report 299 for considering “fatigue due to secondary bending stresses that are not normally calculated. bolted or riveted plate girder. the list of detail categories to be considered for load-induced fatigue-damage evaluation. If the detail passes the check.2. far beyond the scope of a typical bridge design or evaluation.. Load-induced fatigue is that due to the inplanes stresses in the steel plates that comprise bridge member cross sections.. both main and secondary members.`. Distortion-induced fatigue is that due to secondary stresses in the steel plates that comprise bridge member cross sections.`.1 The previous most comprehensive codification of fatigue evaluation of steel bridges.``.1 Application Article 7. The traditional approximate methods of analysis utilizing lateral live-load distribution factors have encouraged bridge designers to discount the secondary stresses induced in bridge members due to the interaction of longitudinal and transverse members. is specified in Article 6.``. These stresses can only be calculated with very refined methods of analysis.2.1 LOAD-INDUCED VERSUS DISTORTIONINDUCED FATIGUE Fatigue damage has been traditionally categorized as either due to load-induced or distortion-induced fatigue damage.. c7.2. or may be the flanges. least refined stress-range estimate.2 LOAD-INDUCED FATIGUE-DAMAGE EVALUATION 7. and illustrative examples of these categories are shown in Table 6-3 and Figure 6-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijkations (1 998).`.`. Except for the case of riveted connections specified below. 7. Detailing to minimize the potential for distortion-induced fatigue. C7..2.4 and the finite-life calculations of Article 7.. explicitly considered only load-induced fatigue damage. Cumulative fatigue damage of uncracked members subject to load-induced stresses shall be assessed according to the provisions of Article 7.``..6. no further refinement is required.``. AASHTO (1990).2 includes two levels of fatigue evaluation: the infinite-life check of Article 7.1 The initial infinite-life check should be made with the simplest.5..`. These secondary stresses are minimized through proper detailing. The stress-range estimate for the infinite-life check should be refined before the more complex procedures of the finite-life fatigue evaluation are considered. such as connecting transverse connection plates for diaphragms and floorbeams to both the compression and tension flanges of girders.2.” NCHRP (1987). webs. These in-plane stresses are those typically calculated by designers during bridge design or evaluation.`.`--- 7-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`.SECTION 7 FATIGUE EVALUATION OF STEEL BRIDGES 7. the Guide Specijìcations for Fatigue Evaluation o f Existing Steel Bridges.1.

`--- 0 Uncertainty associated with analysis.. a more complex fracture mechanics approach for load-induced fatigue-damage evaluation is required instead of the procedure specified herein. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. AASHTO (1990). Further. is the stress range due to a single truck in a single lane on the bridge.``. For new design. This increase in fatigue life for evaluation purposes is appropriate due to the redundancy of riveted members.2.`. given in Table 6-3 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specrfications (1998). summarized in Table 7-1 and described in Articles 7. 7.``. either measured or calculated. represented by the analysis partial load factor.2 The stress range.`..2. the majority of the fatigue life has been exhausted and retrofitting measures should be inititated. summarized in Table 7. The 0. or 75 percent of the calculated stress range due to the passage of the fatigue truck as specified in Article 3.`.2. unless otherwise specified. and Uncertainty associated with assumed effective truck weight. represented by the truck-weight partial load factor. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 Calculating Estimated Stress Ranges Two sources of uncertainty are present in the calculation of effective stress range at a particular fatigue detail: 0 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. and Af = Measured effective stress range.``.2. or a fatigue truck determined by a truck survey or weightin-motion study.. Generally.fl =R N C7.1 and 7...2. the increased certainty is reflected in lower partial load factors. where: R.2. The partial load factors specified in Article 7.`.``-`-`.1.1-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges The base metal at net sections of riveted connections shall be evaluated based upon the requirements of Category C. the base metal at net sections of riveted connections is specified to be Category D. which is highly redundant internally. If cracks have already been visually detected. the expense and trouble of a fracture mechanics analysis may not be warranted. = The stress-range estimate partial load factor.2. R.4 of the AASHTO LñFD Bridge Design Specifications (1998).`.. Category C more accurately represents cracking that has propagated to a critical size. 7.2 Estimating Stress Ranges The effective stress range shall be estimated as: (4f>.75 applied to the calculated stress range due to the passage of the LRFD fatigue truck represents the load factor for live load specified for the fatigue limit state in LRFD Table 3-1.`. upon visual detection of fatigue cracking...2 were adapted from the Guide Specifications for Fatigue Evaluation o f Existing Steel Bridges.``.. As uncertainty is removed from the evaluation by more refined analysis or site-specific data..1.2.2.6. This represents the first cracking of a riveted member. instead of the Category D specified for new designs.`. R. calculated as Rs&..

= 0.``.0 If the e\ffective truck weight is estimated through a weight-in-motion study at.``.95 otherwise..``.2. = 1.``. R.``-`-`.1.. R.. otherwise. Rsb and R.6. or near.1 For the Determination o f Evaluation or Minimum Fatigue Life In the calculation of effective stress range for the determination of evaluation or minimum fatigue life. the stress-range estimate partial load factor shall be taken as the product of the analysis partial load factor and the truck-weight partial load factor: If the effective stress range is calculated through refined methods of analysis. = 1..`.`. = 0.`.`.0 --`. R.. 7-3 7..3 of the LRFD Bridge Design SpeciJications. the bridge. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`..`..AASHTO (1998).`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale... as defined in Article 4.Fatigue Evaluation of Steel Bridges Table 7-1 Partial Load Factors: R.95 R.`..2..

.o. and stress range.1 For the Determination of Evaluation or Minimum Fatigue Life C7.``.. shall be taken as 0. The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijîcations (1998) assume that the maximum stress range is twice the effective stress range.. as specified in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijîcations (1998).2. for the determination of evaluation or minimum fatigue life.85.3 The multiplier of two in the equation represents the assumed relationship between maximum stress range and effective stress range.2.2.`.2.2.7-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 7.`.O.2..2 For the Determination o f Mean Fatigue L$e In the calculation of effective stress range for the determination of mean fatigue life. 7.2.2 Field measurements of strains represent the most accurate means to estimate effective stress ranges at fatigue-prone details. the stressrange estimate partial load factor shall be taken as 1... fatigue damage need only be evaluated if. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 1.2.. The effective stress range may be estimated through field measurements of strains at the fatigueprone detail under consideration under typical traffic conditions. R. Thus.`. specified in Article 7. a multiplier more than two should be considered. The effective stress range shall be taken as the cube root of the sum of the cubes of the measured stress ranges..2. If the effective truck weight is significantly less than 54 kips.``.3 Determining Fatigue-Prone Details Bridge details are only considered prone to load-induced fatigue damage if they experience a net tensile stress. the multiplier of two in the equation should be reconsidered based upon the discussion of Article C7. as given in: where: yi A$ Where field-measured strains are used to generate an effective stress range.``. (Af )tension ’ fdead-load compression = The stress-range estimate partial load factor.`.2 For the Determination o f Mean Fatigue Life Where field-measured strains are used to generate an effective stress range. 2Rs where: R.2.`.2.2.2. the stress-range estimate partial load factor.2 Measuring Estimated Stress Ranges C7. = The particular 7.2. When measured stress ranges are used to evaluate fatigue life..``.2.2..2. R.2. = Percentage of cycles i t a particular stress range. shall be taken as 1.`.``-`-`. for a measured effective truck weight greater than 54 kips a multiplier less than two would be appropriate. for the determination of mean fatigue life.2 and summarized in Table 7-1. It is unlikely that the maximum stress range during the service life of the bridge will be captured during a limited field-testing session.`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. at the detail under evaluation. therefore means to extrapolate from the measured effective stress range to the maximum stress range must be used. the stress-range estimate partial load factor. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1. Similarly.`--- 7.

`. 7. and the estimated annual traffic-volume growth rates. the present age of the bridge. or mean fatigue life as given in Table 7-2 A = Detail-category constant given in Table 6-5 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specijìcations ( 1 998) = Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 3 C7. (ADTT)S.`. minimum. shall be determined as: Y= RRA 365n(ADTT). As such.`. in years. in other words.Fatigue Evaluation of Steel Bridges (Afltension = Factored tensile portion of the stress range due to the passage of a fatigue truck. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . means of estimating the evaluation fatigue life and the mean finite fatigue life are also included to aid the evaluator in the decision making. g . C7.2.2. This corresponds to the minimum expected fmite fatigue life of this article. represent the variability of the fatigue life of the various detail categories.2.2.5.. if the maximum stress range is less than the threshold.1 Much scatter.1 General Three levels of finite fatigue life may be estimated: The minimum expected fatigue life (which equals the conservative design fatigue life). exists in experimentally derived fatigue lives.2.2.5.``. A through E’. and fdeah-load compression = Unfactored 7-5 compressive stress at the detail due to dead load.. For design. the probability of failure associated with each level of fatigue life --`.``.`.`--- 0 The total finite fatigue life of a fatigue-prone detail..~)’ where: RR Resistance factor specified for evaluation.5 Estimating Finite Fatigue Life 7. [(ADT7)sL]presenl.``. 2 ( A n .0 ( A n e f ( A f l T H = The constant-amplitude fatigue threshold given in Table 6-7 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (1998) otherwise.. The resistance factors for fatigue life.`.. a fatigue-prone detail will experience infinite life if all of the stress ranges are less than the constant amplitude fatigue threshold.`.. a conservative fatigue resistance two standard deviations below the mean fatigue resistance or life is assumed. then: Y where: =-> ( A n m m= The maximum stress range expected at the fatigue-prone detail. 7.2. which may be taken as 2. the multiplier of two in the equation for ( AAmar should be reconsidered based upon the discussion of Article C7..``. and The mean fatigue life (which equals the most likely fatigue life). from the present average number of trucks per day in a single lane. When measured stress ranges are used to evaluate fatigue life. Figure C7-1 may be used to estimate the average number of trucks per day in a single lane averaged over the fatigue life.`.5. The evaluation fatigue life (which equals a conservative fatigue life for evaluation)..4 Infinite-Life Check If: (A?). Limiting actual usable fatigue life to this design life is very conservative and costly. specified in Table 7-2. the total fatigue life shall be estimated as specified in Article 7.. or variability.2.``-`-`.4 Theoretically. a. As the stress-range estimate grows closer and closer to the actual value of stress range..((AS).2.

...``.. ..0 1. .o O . The minimum and evaluation fatiguelife curves are two and one standard deviations off of the mean fatigue-life S-N curves in log-log space.. --`..2..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...`.``-`-`.. -.`. Thus.5 l.5 2... -.. .`. 16 percent.``.<.`..... ..`. -.. .`.._ . and mean fatigue lives. 10 20 30 40 50 PRESENT AGE OF THE BRIDGE.6'1'4'2 Of life as specified in the Bridge OeSign Specifications (1998) ( AAef = The effective stress range as specified in Article 1. -. the partial resistance factors for mean and evaluation fatigue life are calculated as raised to the power of twice and one times the standard deviation of the log of experimental fatigue life for each detail category.7-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges n = Number of stress-range cycles per truck passage estimated according ... ..5..``.2. - .-. A (Y EARS) (A D n ) SL SL1 PRESENT = Lifetime Average Volume = Present Volume Fig. respectively. evaluation... and 50 percent for the minimum. .. 3.`. = Average number of trucks per day in a single lane averaged over the fatigue 3. ..to Article 7. .2 approaches 2 percent.2 (ADTI). . respectively.___ _- .....0 2.. C7-1 Lifetime Average Truck Volume for an Existing Bridge.``. respectively.

7 Strategies to Increase Remaining Fatigue Life 7. Minimum or Mean Fatigue Life..3 may be applied to enhance the fatigue life.6 Acceptable Remaining Fatigue Life The remaining fatigue life of a fatigue-prone detail is the total fatigue life.. it is uneconomical to limit the useful fatigue life of in-service bridges to the minimum (design) fatigue life.7. minus the present age of the bridge.``.7..2 Estimating the Number of Cycles per Truck Passage The number of stress-range cycles per truck passage may be estimated (in order of increasing apparent accuracy and complexiîy): Table 7-2 Resistance Factor for Evaluation.``-`-`.``. as determined through Article 7.Fatigue Evaluation of Steel Bridges 7-7 7.`.5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- 0 0 0 Through the use of Table 6-6 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Speci.`. Through the use of influence lines.2. or By field measurements.fications (1998).2 and 7.7. C7.`..2. If the estimated remaining fatigue life based upon the evaluation fatigue life is deemed unacceptable. Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..2. a fatigue life approaching the mean fatigue life can be used for evaluation purposes if the additional risk of fatigue cracking is acceptable.2. RR Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..5. 7..2.``.1 General If the remaining fatigue life is deemed unacceptable.2.`. the strategies of Articles 7.`.1 Retrofit or load-restriction decisions should be made based upon the evaluation fatigue life.`.`. 7.``.2.7..2. In general.

3 DISTORTION-INDUCED FATIGUE EVALUATION Distortion-induced fatigue is typically a lowcycle fatigue phenomenon.2.2.5. --`. or The number of cycles per truck passage. 7. relatively few stress-range cycles are required to initiate cracking at distortion-induced fatigue-prone details..3 Retrofit The Bridge If the calculated fatigue life is not ultimately acceptable.2.2..2.6. the actual fatigue life may be increased by retrofitting the critical details to change the detail category and thus increase the life.2 Recalculate the Fatigue Life 7.2.2.2.2 Through More Accurate Data The calculated fatigue life may be enhanced by using more accurate data as input to the fatigue-life estimate.`. is no longer possible. This strategy is based upon achieving a better estimate of the actual fatigue life. In other words. the evaluation life of Article 7.7.``. through improved input. If the evaluator is willing to accept greater risk of fatigue cracking due to: 0 0 0 Long satisfactory fatigue life of the detail to date.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``-`-`.3 In certain cases.``.`. 0 The average daily truck traffic (ADTT). in lieu of more costly retrofits. Sources of improvement of the estimate include: Effective stress range or effective truck weight.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .7. c7. decreased inspection interval.g. 7.1 Through Accepting Greater Risk In general. owners may wish to institute more intensive inspections.7. C7.3 Distortion-induced cracks have even been discovered on bridges prior to being opened to traffic.7-8 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 7. 7. This strategy increases the actual life when further enhancement of the calculated life.2.. A high degree of redundancy. to assure adequate safety.7.. and/or Increased inspection effort.`..``..2. L the remaining fatigue life may be determining using a fatigue life approaching the mean fatigue life of Article 7.`..5 is used in determining the remaining fatigue life of a bridge detail according to Article 7. Distortion-induced fatigue is a stiffness problem (more precisely the lack thereof) versus a load problem. If the remaining fatigue life is deemed inadequate. Restricting traffic to extend the fatigue life is generally not considered cost effective.``. e. the appropriate option to extend the life should be determined based upon the economics of the particular situation..7.`.

Without destructive material testing of bridges fabricated prior to 1978 to ascertain toughness levels.`.``.`..`--- . not the stress range as is the case with fatigue...`..``... and warrant immediate bridge closure. However.4 FRACTURE-CONTROL FOR OLDER BRIDGES Bridges fabricated prior to the adoption of AASHTO’s Guide Specifications for FractureCritical Non-Redundant Steel Bridge Members (1978) may have lower fracture toughness levels than are currently deemed acceptable.``-`-`. may be deemed insensitive to distortion-induced cracking.e. existing bridges which have experienced many truck passages.``. An even lower value of fatigue life.`. may be appropriate. a fatigue life estimate greater than the minimum expected fatigue life is questionable.Fatigue Evaluation of Steel Bridges 7-9 As such.``.. if uncracked. to guard against fracture. Older bridges probably have demonstrated that their fracture toughness is adequate for their total stresses.`.`. 7.4 Fracture of steel bridges is governed by total stress. i. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. propagating fatigue cracks in bridges of questionable fracture toughness are very serious. c7. even under heavier permit loads. A rehabilitation of a bridge of unknown fracture toughness which may increase the deadload stress must be avoided.. the dead-load stress plus the stress range due to the heaviest truck that has crossed the bridge..`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.

. Fatigue Evaluation Procedures for Sfeel Bridges. F.. Moses.`. DC..``.`--- . 1990. 1998. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Transportation Research Board. and Raju. 1987. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.`.7-1O Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges REFERENCES AASHTO. Second Edition. 1978.`.`. Washington. Guide Specifications for Fatigue Evaluation of Existing Steel Bridges.. Guide specifications for Fracture-Critical Non-Redundant Steel Bridge Members.``. Washington.. Washington. AASHTO. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. DC..``.`.G. Washington. DC.. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Oficials.`.``... DC. C. AASHTO. Schilling.S. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``-`-`. NCHRP Report 299. K.

.........2 Approach ......1 Introduction...3 Deteriorated or Damaged Members ............................................. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ....................................................................................8..................................4 Participation of Secondary Members ........ 8..........................................2 Load Distribution ................8........................................ 8............................................................ 8.............................5 LOAD TESTMEASUREMENTS 8.........3 Application of Diagnostic Test Results .................................................................................................................................................... XPA ................................................................`............................................... 8........... 8....3 BENEFITS OF NON-DESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTS ...........`....................................`...............3 Target Proof Loads ..............................................................................8..........................................................``......................``..................................................2........................... 8.........5 Dynamic Load Allowance...................................................``...................2 Approach .5 Participation of Nonstructural Members ...........3 Vibration Tests.............................1...............................3.6 Portion of Load Carried by Deck .........................................................................8...........................1 Weigh-in-Motion Testing ............3.........2.........................6 WHEN NOT TO LOAD TEST .....................................3.....................................................2 Dynamic Response Tests ......................... 8............................8.... 8..8................... 8.................................. 8.......2........3...................................2..........................................3......3.............................2 Proof Tests .........................SECTION &NONDESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTING TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTOF TABLES .........2...... 8............3.......................1 Introduction........................................................ 8................................................2 Application of Target Live-Load Factor..................................................... 8..3..............3 Load Capacity and Rating.2 Classification of Nondestructive Load Tests....................................................................8.................................... 8............................... 8................................... 8-1 8-1 8-1 8-1 8-1 8-2 8-2 8-2 8-3 8-3 8-3 8-3 8-4 8-4 8-4 8-4 8-5 8-5 8-5 8-5 8-6 8-6 8-6 8-6 8-7 8...2.......................................................................................................3............... 8-11 ............................................................................................................... 8........................``-`-`.........2... 8............ 8.............. 8...........................`.....1 Unknown or Low-Rated Components...................................................1 General .............................................1 INTRODUCTION ..................................4.............. 8.......................... 8-8 8-8 8-8 8.......... 8.................... 8................................................................................1 Introduction............ 8......... 8..........1 Static Tests ...............3........... 8....................................4.... 8.. 8..8.................7 BRIDGE SAFETY DURING LOAD TESTS.......................................4 TYPES 8..... 8... 8............... 8...............................`--- 8-8 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-9 8-10 8-11 8-11 8-12 8-12 8-12 8-14 8-15 8-i Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3................8.................................................2............1 Diagnostic Tests............3.............8..8.......2 Unintended Composite Action .............................`...................................2................. 8......................4....................8 LOAD RATING THROUGH LOAD TESTING ............................3....1 Determining K .............................. OF NON-DESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTS ........3 Proof Load Tests ...........................1.......... 8................................2 Diagnostic Load Tests .....................................................................3 Unintended ContinuityiFixity .4..........................................`........3........................ 8........................ ...........``........2......................2...................3.... 8........................................4 Fatigue Evaluation...........2 FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY OF BRIDGES......................4...1...................... 8..............8................................................1 General ................2 Dynamic Tests ........ 8..1.........4...........................................4.............................................8.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................`............2.........................1 Selection of Target Live-Load Factor .......................................... --`..........................2................... 8..............

...................... Table 8-3 Values for k o 8-14 8-15 ........`.............................``.....................................................................`.............................................. 8..................... 8-ii Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale....................................................``.. LISTOF TABLES a.............................. ...................................`.`...`--- 8-16 8-16 A........`................1 GENERAL LOAD-TESTING PROCEDVRES ......................... 8-11 Table 8-2 Adjustments to X p ............................. APPENDIX --`......``-`-`..`.................................8....9 USE OF LOAD TEST RESULTS IN PERMIT DECISIONS ..................................................................................10 SERVICEABILITY CONSIDERATIONS ......``........8-i Table 8-1 Values for K.....`........................``............ 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ....8....

and include certain modifications necessary to ensure consistency with the load and resistance factor load-rating procedures presented in this Manual. Dynamic tests may be performed to measure modes of vibration. Load testing may be further classified as static load tests and dynamic load tests...`.2 FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE LOAD-CARRYING CAPACITY OF BRIDGES 8.``.SECTION 8 NONDESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTING 8..``-`-`.`.`.``..`. Manual for Bridge Rating Through Load Testing. load tests are used to verify the performance of new bridges compared to design predictions. 8.1 General Load testing is the observation and measurement of the response of a bridge subjected to controlled and predetermined loadings without causing changes in the elastic response of the structure.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . C8.1 General The actual performance of most bridges is more favorable than conventionaltheory dictates. November 1998-Number 234.1 INTRODUCTION 8. Load tests can be used to verify both component and system performance under a known live load and provide an alternative evaluation methodology to analytically computing the load rating of a bridge. 8.2 Classification of Load Tests Basically. The intensity and position of the load may be changed during the test...`.1 The procedures outlined in this section for the nondestructive load testing of bridges were developed in NCHRP Project 12-28(13)A and reported in NCHRP Research Results Digest.. two types of load tests are available for bridge evaluation: diagnostic tests and proof tests. dynamic load allowance. When a 8-1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. A static load test is conducted using stationary loads to avoid bridge vibrations. Proof load tests are mostly performed as static tests.1.``. Diagnostic tests are performed to determine certain response characteristics of the bridge. Literally thousands of bridges have been load tested over the last 50 years in various countries. Proof tests are used to establish the maximum safe load capacity of a bridge. where the bridge behavior is within the linear-elastic range.2.1. In some countries. Diagnostic load tests may be either static or dynamic tests. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.1. and to obtain load history and stress ranges for fatigue evaluation.``. The aim of this section is to emphasize the use of load testing as part of bridge load-rating procedures. frequencies. or to validate analytical procedures or mathematical models. its response to loads.`. A dynamic load test is conducted with time varying loads or moving loads that excite vibrations in the bridge. the distribution of loads.

.2.2. The unintended composite action contributes to both the strength of a girder bridge and its ability to distribute loads transversely..3 Unintended Continuity/Fixity Simply supported bridges are assumed to be supported on idealized rollers that do not carry any moment..`--- .``. such as: diaphragms.4 Participation of Secondary Members Secondary bridge members are those members which are not directly in the load path of a structure. load test behavior and stress values taken at working loads or lower not be arbitrarily extrapolated to higher load levels. provided the horizontal shear force does not exceed the limiting bond strength between the concrete deck slab and steel girder flanges. Thus.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. Frozen bearings could also result in unintended arching action in the girders to reduce the applied moments at mid-span by a significant margin.`. 8.`. tests have shown that there can be significant end moments attributable to the continuity provided by the deck slab at stringer-to-floorbeam connections and to frozen bearings.``.`.. lateral bracing Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. cross-frames. as test loads are increased and approach the maximum capacity of the bridge.``. Several factors not considered in routine design and evaluation could affect the actual behavior of bridges. it is important that for noncomposite steel bridges. Advantage can be taken of unintended composite action in fatigue evaluation computations provided there is no observed slippage between the deck and stringer flange under normal traffic. it may be beneficial to the Bridge Owner to take advantage of some of the bridge's inherent extra capacity that may have been ignored in conventional calculations.`.2 Unintended Composite Action Field tests have shown that a noncomposite deck can participate in composite action with the girders in carrying live load. However.. However.. 8.`. slippage can take place and composite action can be lost..`. For load-rating purposes.2. resulting in a sudden increase in main member stresses. 8. it may not be justified to extrapolate the results of a load test done at moderate-load levels when such restraints are detected during the test.8-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges structure's computed theoretical safe load capacity or remaining fatigue life is less than desirable.``-`-`.. Load testing is an effective methodology to identiq and benefit from the presence of certain load capaciîy enhancing factors as outlined below. It is quite possible that the enhanced behavior attributable to unintended continuity and frozen bearings would not be present at extreme load levels.

In some instances. 8.`. stresses... and nondestructive load tests may provide a more realistic safe service liveload capacity.`..2.``. if necessary. and barriers. and deflections may be affected by the stiffness contribution from nonstructural members such as railings.`.. theoretical rating calculations may result in a low live load requiring posting of the rated bridge. there may be a portion of the load carried directly by the deck slab spanning between end supports of the bridge. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . In other cases.``. and generally improve its load rating. the make-up of the bridge members andíor the members’ response to loading cannot be determined because of lack of existing as-built information. parapets. secondary members enhance the load-carrying capacity by increasing the stiffness of the bridge.`. into the main load-cawing members.6 Portion of Load Carried by Deck Depending on the bridge span and the thickness of the deck. Advantage can be taken of the effects of secondary members provided that it can be shown that they are effective at the designated service load level.1 Unknown or Low-Rated Components Load tests may provide sufficient data to establish safe. it is important that their contributions be considered in comparing the bridgetest-load response with the calculated response.``-`-`. 8. In some bridge types.``.2.. The deck may.3 BENEFITS OF NON-DESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTS 8. and to a lesser extent by the curbs and utilities on the bridge. 8.``.Nondestructive Load Testing 8-3 members.`.3.. live-load levels for older bridges.5 Participation of Nonstructural Members Load distribution.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. however. not be able to carry significant amounts of load at higher load levels so that any portion carried during the diagnostic test should be determined and transferred back. Since the stiffness contribution from such members cannot be relied upon at the ultimate load condition.`. and wind bracing.. Existing bridges that have been strengthened over the years may not be accurately load rated due to the unknown interaction of the various elements of the repaired structure in supporting live loads. thus alerting the Bridge Owners to speedy action to reinforce or close the bridge. --`. In some instances.. Nondestructive load tests can help evaluate the performance of such a bridge. the test results may indicate that the actual safe service live-load capacity is less than computed.

3.``..`. In addition. which have been found to be a major cause of distress in steel bridges and can lead to cracking of components and eventual failure.2 Load Distribution An important part of the rating equation concerns the distribution of the live loads to the main loadcarrying members of the bridge and to the individual components of a multi-component member..`--- ..4 Fatigue Evaluation In assessing the remaining fatigue life of steel bridges. both the range of stress and the number of stress cycles acting on a member need to be evaluated. Measured stresses can be used in place of computed stresses in making remaining life assessments. especially in the case of heavily deteriorated bridges.`. test results could reveal if the components share the load equally as is assumed in the analysis. Field load testing can provide data for both of these parameters. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`. The range of live-load stress is influenced by the enhanced section modulus evidenced by most beam and slab sections. A major aim of diagnostic testing is to confirm the precise nature of the load distribution. These factors are known to generally result in conservative approximations of the actual distribution. in design and rating.3. stress spectra may be obtained for distortion-induced stresses. field load testing serves as a powerful tool to identify existing behavior. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 8. such as truss chords.8-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 8..``. In a multicomponent member.`. 8. Typically..3.`.`.``-`-`.``. Measured dynamic load allowance may be used in place of code-specified value in load-rating calculations.`. Dynamic load allowance is influenced primarily by the surface roughness of the deck and approaches.``. In such cases. the load distribution to main supporting members is based on design distribution factors. distribution.3. 8.5 Dynamic Load Allowance Design dynamic load allowance is generally conservative for most spans.3 Deteriorated or Damaged Members It is often difficult to analyze the effects of observed deterioration or damage on the loadcarrying capacity of the bridge and on load. The use of full-scale dynamic testing under controlled or normal traffic conditions remains the most reliable and cost-effective way of obtaining the dynamic load allowance for a specific bridge....

. cross-section contributions.g.`.. candidate bridges are limited to those bridges for which an analytical load-rating model can be developed. redundant spans. Thus.4. During a diagnostic load test. or (2) the bridge exhibits the onset of nonlinear behavior or other visible signs of distress..``.4..1 Static Tests --`.1. Loads should be applied in increments and the bridge monitored to provide early warning of possible distress or nonlinear behavior. influence of damage and deterioration.2 Proof Tests In this form of field load testing.1 Diagnostic Tests Diagnostic load tests are employed to improve the Engineer’s understanding of the behavior of a bridge and to reduce uncertainties related to material properties.. boundary conditions. and observations are made to determine if the bridge carries these loads without damage. Bridges that are candidates for proof load testing may be separated into two groups. etc. Bridges with large dead loads compared with the live Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.`--- 8.Nondestructive Load Testing 8-5 8. Bridges for which analytical methods of strength evaluation may significantly underestimate the actual strength (e.`.``-`-`.) are candidates for diagnostic load testing.1..`. Diagnostic load tests include the measurement of load effects in one or more critical bridge members and comparison of the measured load effects with that computed using an analytical model (theory). The calibrated analytical models are then used to calculate the loadrating factors. 8.``. the applied load should be sufficiently high to properly model the physical behavior of the bridge at the rating load level. a bridge is subjected to specific loads.`..`.4 TYPES OF NON-DESTRUCTIVE LOAD TESTS 8. and other similar variables. Caution is required to avoid causing damage to the structure or injury to personnel or the public.``. The first group consists of those bridges whose make-up is known and which can be load rated analytically.. proof testing will in fact require careful preparation and experienced personnel for implementation. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Proof load testing of “known” bridges is called for when the calculated load ratings are low and the field testing may provide realistic results and higher ratings. The proof test is terminated when: (1) a predetermined maximum load has been reached. spans with boundary conditions different From assumed idealized behavior. effectiveness of repair.``. Although simple in concept. Diagnostic tests serve to verify and adjust the predictions of an analytical model..4.

under normal traffic or controlled conditions using test vehicles. and to a lesser extent by the bridge frequency and the weight and dynamic characteristics of the vehicle..``. 8.2.2. A variety of vehicle Spes. Bridges that are difficult to model analytically because of uncertainties associated with their construction and the effectiveness of repairs are also potential candidates and beneficiaries of proof load testing. Such WIM techniques could provide data on vehicle arrivals. The second group consists of “hidden” bridges. weights. 8.`.`.4.1 Weigh-In-Motion Testing The actual site survey of truck weight spectra and volume can be determined by weigh-in-motion systems (WIM).4..`.`.4. speeds. The WIM data can be utilized to provide a precise site-specific load model and can also be utilized in fatigue evaluation.`--- loads are also suitable candidates for proof load testing. . those bridges which cannot be load rated by computations because of insufficient information on their internal details and configuration.2.2 Dynamic Response Tests Dynamic response tests. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.``.2.8-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 8. Dynamic load allowance is influenced primarily by the surface roughness of the deck and the bridge approach. WIM systems utilize axle sensors and other measurement systems which make use of the bridge as the scale.``-`-`. and speeds of passing vehicles.. Many older reinforced concrete and prestressed concrete beam and slab bridges whose construction and/or design plans are not available need proof testing to determine a realistic live-load capacity..2 Dynamic tests preferably should use heavy test vehicles since load rating is governed by heavy vehicles with much lower dynamic impact effects.3 Vibration Tests Vibration tests are used to determine bridge dynamic characteristics such as frequencies of Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4. and determine axle and gross loads.`. can be performed to obtain realistic estimates of the dynamic load allowance and live-load stress ranges that can be used in load rating and fatigue evaluation calculations.`..2 Dynamic Tests 8. The dynamic load allowance may be estimated from the peak dynamic strain and the corresponding peak static strain for vehicles on the same path or transverse position on the bridge. and positions should be considered in estimating the appropriate dynamic load allowance.``.``.4...`. C8. A representative estimate of the dynamic load allowance can be obtained from statistical analyses of measured values.. Many of these parameters are difficult to quantiq without the use of full-scale dynamic testing. axle configurations.

.`.`. and their accuracy is usually sufficient for load tests. Optical methods include laser methods and other surveying tools that can be used when higher accuracy is required.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . They can be used to monitor both static and dynamic displacements..`. and damping. mode shapes. Electrical methods include displacement transducers such as Linear Variable Differential Transformers (LVDT) that transform displacement to a proportional change of electrical voltage. The measurement of end rotations can establish the extent of end restraint at bearings. The elastic curve for a bending member can be developed by measuring rotations along the length of the member. Different types of gages are available for steel and concrete structures. The locations should be selected so that the analytical model can be validated.``..`--- Rotation Measurements Mechanical tiltmeters can be installed on beam webs to monitor beam rotations.``-`-`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`... Vibration tests may be conducted by means of portable sinusoidal shakers.``. Preliminary calculations may be needed to estimate the range of the measurements as well as the best locations for the instrumentation. 3) relative or absolute rotation of bridge components. mode shapes.Nondestructive Load Testing vibration. optical.``.`.`.. and 4) dynamic characteristics of the bridge. sudden release of applied deflections. Measurement of Dynamic Characteristics Accelerometers are used if the modal frequencies. and damping ratios are to be obtained. Careful selection of gage characteristics is required to optimize gage performance for specified environmental and operating conditions..5 LOAD TEST MEASUREMENTS Load test instrumentation is used to measure the following: 1) strain (stresses) in bridge components. C 8 . 8-7 8. Dial gages are mechanical devices that are easy to set up and monitor. Accelerometers are usually placed at mid-span and quarter-span points to determine first and second Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. the Engineer must determine the goals of the test and the types and magnitude of the measurements to be made. Earthquake response is strongly influenced by bridge frequency and damping. 5 Strain Measurements Strain sensors are usually attached on critical members to monitor response. Vibration testing can sometimes be used to evaluate defects and deterioration as they affect the vibration characteristics. The most common sensors for field measurement of strains are electrical resistance gages (bonded or welded). Displacement Measurements Three methods of monitoring displacements are mechanical. strain transducers (clamped or anchored). and acoustic strain gages. and impulse devices such as hammers. and electrical.`. Prior to conducting a field test. 2) relative or absolute displacement of bridge components. sudden stopping of vehicles by braking..`. The principal results of a dynamic response test may be the bridge natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes as well as damping values.

`. as compared to the values predicted analytically. 0 0 8. consideration should be given to safety of the public. Load tests may be impractical because of access difficulties or site traffic conditions. According to calculations.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..1 Introduction cam General load testing procedures are contained in the appendix to this section. the bridge cannot sustain even the lowest level of load. Bridge load testing should not be attempted by inexperienced personnel.`. The Bridge Owner and evaluators must be aware of the risks and their consequences. A major part of the evaluator’s responsibility is in determining how much of any potentially enhanced load-cawing capacity observed during the load test. traffic disruption.`. Common sense.``-`-`. For additional guidance.. good engineeringjudgment.`...``.8 LOAD RATING THROUGH LOAD TESTING 8. 8. evaluators should consult NCHRP Research Results Digest No. In assessing the risks.`.8-8 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges longitudinal mode shapes. and on either side of the bridge to determine torsional mode shapes.`--- Diagnostic and proof load tests can be employed to improve the evaluator’s understanding of the behavior of the bridges being tested and to identify and quantify in a scientific manner their true inherent reserve capacity.8. Pretest evaluation shows that the load test is unlikely to show the prospect of improvement in load-canying capacity. and sound analytical principles are not to be ignored. could be reliably utilized in establishing the bridge load rating. and possible load posting.``.6 WHEN NOT TO LOAD TEST The following conditions could render a bridge an unsuitable candidate for load testing: The cost of testing reaches or exceeds the cost of bridge strengthening. 8.`..7 BRIDGE SAFETY DURING LOAD TESTS An element of risk is inherent in all load testing. 234. possible structural damage. This section outlines methods and procedures for the application of nondestructive load tests in the load rating process and translating the results of the bridge load tests into bridge load ratings. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. .. safety of personnel. There is a possibility of sudden failure (shear or fracture).`..``.

Further.`. The following articles present a method for extrapolating the results of a diagnostic load test. then an extrapolation to load levels higher than those placed on the bridge during the test may be feasible. 234. the bridge should be rated analytically using procedures contained in this Manual.2. a diagnostic load test can be used to validate an updated analytical model.`.. = The rating factor based on calculations prior to incorporating test results (Eq.. Noncomposite structures which show no evidence of composite action under the test load should be evaluated based on noncomposite section factors. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.8. including observations made during the placement of the test vehicle on the bridge.`.``-`-`.8. (8-1) RF.8.8. K = Adjustment factor resulting from the comparison of measured test behavior with the analytical model (represents the benefits of the field load test... If the Engineer is satisfied that the model is valid. where: = Wcx K Eq. This section provides guidelines for modi9ing the calculated load rating for a bridge based on the results of a diagnostic load test. (6-1) should be used.3 The appropriate section factor (area..`.2 Approach As long as a bridge exhibits linear behavior.= The load-rating factor for the live-load capacity based on the load test result RF. Analytical evaluation of composite action in slab-andgirder bridges without mechanical shear connection and the reliability of composite action found by a diagnostic test is discussed in NCHRP Research Results Digest No.Nondestructive Load Testing 8-9 8.2. if any) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. section modulus) to be used in calculating RF..2.`.``. The following equation should be used to modi9 the calculated load rating following a diagnostic load test: C8. the full composite section as defined by the LRFD specifications should be used unless observations during the test indicate slippage at the deck-girder interface.. 8.1 Introduction Prior to initiating a diagnostic load test.``.2. It is thus important that the test load be placed at various positions on the bridge to determine the response in all critical bridge members.`. Observed enhancement to the section factor resulting from unintended composite action needs to be critically evaluated.``.8.3 Application of Diagnostic Test Results A major part of diagnostic testing is the assessment of the differences between predicted and measured responses for subsequentuse in determining the load rating of the bridge. should be determined after evaluation of the load test results. RF. 8.`. For composite structures with shear connectors.`--- .2 Diagnostic Load Tests 8. The procedures outlined in this section will enable the Engineer to re-examine the theoretical values and adjust these ratings to reflect the actual performance of the bridge obtained from the diagnostic test results. the magnitude of the test load must be sufficiently high so that there is little likelihood of nonlinear behavior at the anticipated service-load levels.``..

8.33W where none was intended.. In general: Eq.``-`-`... then actual response of the bridge is more severe than that predicted and the theoretical bridge load capacity may have to be reduced. The following general expression should be used in determining Ka : Eq. Using the procedures given in NCHRP Research Results Digest No. Kb = Accounts for the understanding of the load test results when compared with those predicted by theory Without a load test.1 The Adjustment Factor ( K ) is given by: K=l+K. Diagnostic load test does not specifically address the fatigue limit state.2..xK..`.``. Member appropriate section factor (area.) resisting the applied test load The intent of “Can member behavior be extrapolated to 1. etc. section modulus. Generally. if any. 234. (8-4) where: L SF E = Calculated theoretical load effect in member corresponding to the measured strain E . On the other hand. If K > 1. Normally this would be established by calculation but proof testing would also be acceptable... at its position on the bridge which produced E . K = 1.`. 2. = Maximum member strain measured during load test E.) See C8. Examples of typical calculations which could be performed to check this criterion include: 1.``.33W?” in Table 8-1 is to provide some assurance that the structure has adequate reserve capacity beyond its rating load level (W). Ka may be positive or negative depending on the results of the load test..`.33W and determine whether there is linear behavior of the components of the structure.`. and consideration of the section factor (area.2.3.3.3.`. if K < 1 .2.8-10 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 8. However. then K = 1 also. at the time of the test it may be necessary to measure stresses at fatigue sensitive details to determine if fatigue cracking is possible.8.``. etc. after a load test X is not equal to one.8.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. (8-2) Ka = Accounts for both the benefit derived from the load test. If the load test results agree exactly with theory.`. section modulus. The model could be based on the LRFD specifications or a three-dimensional computer model. Load the analytical model with 1.``.1 Determining K C8. = Corresponding calculated strain due to the’ test vehicle. where: Eq. determine whether there is composite action at 1. then response of the bridge is more favorable than predicted by theory and the bridge load capacity may be enhanced.`. (8-3) where: E . Member modulus of elasticity = = --`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .

`. pages 46-47. whereas Kb = 1 means that the test measurements can be directly extrapolated to performance at higher loads corresponding to the rating levels.``-`-`.8. Kb = O reflects the inability of the test team to explain the test behavior or validate the test results.. 234. the factor KO represents the test benefit without the effect of unintended composite action.3 Proof Load Tests 8.``.`.5 The factor Kb should be assigned a value between O and 1..0 to indicate the level of test benefit that is expected at the rating load level.`--- 8-11 The theoretical strain E. (See example in NCHRP Research Results Digest No. Table 8-1 provides guidance based on the anticipated behavior of the bridge members at the rating load level. 8.3. Kb takes into account the analysis performed by the load test team and their understanding and explanations of the possible enhancements to the load capacity observed during the test..Nondestructive Load Testing --`..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. the load test team should consider the items below and reduce Kb to account for those contributions that cannot be depended on at the rating load level.. J J J J J O O J 0. A proof test “proves” the ability of the bridge to carry its full dead load plus some “magnified” live load.. In particular..`.``. and the relationship between the unfactored test vehicle effect ( T ) and the unfactored gross rating load effect (W).) For noncomposite sections.`..`. resulting from the test load should be calculated using a section factor which most closely approximates the member’s actual resistance during the test.``.`. A Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1 Introduction Proof load testing provides an alternative to analytically computing the load rating of a bridge.8.

The proof load test is usually terminated when either of the following occurs: 1.1 Selection of Target Live-Load Factor Ca.3.8.3 or as specified by the Bridge Agency. --`. The proof test load factors are calibrated to provide the same safety targets implicit in the calculated ratings using load and resistance factor rating procedures. The proof loads provide a lower bound on the true strength capacity of the components and hence leads to a lower bound on the load-rating capacity.3. represents the target live-load factor (applied to the test load) needed to bring the bridge to a rating factor of 1. The desired live load plus the appropriate margin of safety is reached. Upon load removal.I X.`. the structure should again be inspected to see that no damage has occurred and that there are no residual movements or distress.8. Loads must also be moved to different positions to properly check all load path components. A satisfactory proof load test usually provides higher confidence in the load capacity than a calculated capacity. and component strengths.2 Approach During a proof load test. in particular the possibility of bridge overloads during normal operations as well as the impact allowance.0.8.`. These remaining uncertainties should be considered in establishing a target proof load. ..`. If the test safely reaches this level of load. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 8. Usually.``-`-`.`. However.3. Only the live load is factored Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS A proof test provides information about the bridge capacity including dead-load effect. are not measured during the test.3.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 2. such as buckle patterns appearing in compressive zones in steel or cracking in concrete. This is done to provide a margin of safety in the event of an occasional overload during the normal operation of the bridge.0. 8. other uncertainties.``....3.8-12 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges larger load than the live load the bridge is expected to cany is placed on the bridge. The test loads must provide for both the rating vehicles.3. namely the legal rating plus impact allowance ' .`.``.``.8.. The bridge response exhibits the start of nonlinear behavior or other visible signs of distress..3 Target Proof Loads 8.`. then the rating factor is magnified by the factor A 1. The load factor may be as described in Article 8. and a load factor for the required margins of safety. the loads are applied in steps so that the response of the bridge under each load increment can be monitored for linear elastic behavior and to limit distress due to cracking or other physical damage. live-load distributions.. including the dynamic load allowance.3.8.``.`. the loads must be incremented and the response measured until the desired load is reached or until the test is stopped for reasons cited below..

`. however. A similar increase in test load shall be considered for any structure without redundant load paths. Any of these adjustments may be neglected. then increase X. For most situations. Each of these adjustment quantities is presented below. For spans with fracture-critical details. shall be increased by 10 percent in order to raise the reliability level to a safer level. as given in Table 8-2. (8-5) R. 2.`.. for strength based on test Eq.`.. the live load factor X. before any adjustments are applied is 1. if the posting and permit policies of the agency already include allowances for these factors.`. If one-lane load controls response.`--- .Nondestructive Load Testing 8-13 during the proof test. that should be considered in selecting a live-load test magnitude to achieve a rating factor of 1. and in this instance the permit load vehicle plus dynamic load allowance should be magnified by X.``.40 ( L + I ) + D .. 1.. In this case the corresponding permit load factors given in Table 6-6 should be used. The dead load is assumed to be the mean value. ) is obtained. The following are some of the adjustments to X . Several site conditions may have an influence on the load rating. the live-load factor applies to a test with loads in two lanes. (8-5) and (8-6) are equivalent because the strength value obtained from a proof test is more reliable than that obtained solely by analytical methods. After XPA (the adjusted X . = 1. by 15 percent.`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.40. The 1..O.. This value was calibrated to give the same overall reliability as the level inherent in the calculated load capacity.o.40 factor on live loads may be reduced if the purpose of the test is solely to verify a rating for a permit load. R. to account for such conditions..``. (8-6) calculation The reliability levels associated with Eq... This increase is consistent with overload statistics generated for the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specìjìcations. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. = yL ( L +Z) + yD D .``-`-`. Higher proof loads may also be warranted to incorporate ratings for permit vehicles. The recommended base value for X.`. These factors are included herein by making adjustments to X. for strength based on Eq.`.``.``. this value is multiplied by the rating load plus dynamic load allowance to get the proof-load magnitude that is needed to reach a rating factor of 1.

3.``.`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``. A five percent reduction in test load may be taken if an in-depth inspection is performed.``..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale... larger values may be selected by the Engineer as deemed appropriate. and if the calculated rating factor exceeds 1. 4. xpA Applying the adjustments recommended above leads to the target live-load factor The net percent increase in X p (E percent) is found by summing the appropriate adjustments given above. 8.8.`. The test in this instance is performed to confirm calculations.`. can be reduced by five percent.`. Increase X.`.. Table 8-2 Adjustments to x. that is..3. Reduction in test load is warranted for bridges with reduced traffic intensity.8-14 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges 3. Then: xpA. If the structure is rateable. The target proof load ( LT ) is then: where: LR = The comparable unfactored live load due to the rating vehicle for the lanes loaded --`.``. by 10 percent for structures in poor condition (NBI Code 4 or less) to account for increased uncertainties in resistance and future deterioration..0.`.. X .`.2 Application o f Target Live-Load Factor. )I Consideration I 1 Adjustment +15 Y o +IO % ~~ I (1 (1 Bridges in Poor Condition ~~ ~ One-Lane Load Controls Nonredundant Structure Fracture-CriticalDetZPresent In-Depth Inspection Performed Rateable..O ADTTS 1000 1 +10 % 1 +lo% -5 Y o -5 Y o -10 Y o . there are no hidden details.``-`-`. 5.u il I ADTT< 100 I -15% I The adjustments described above should be considered as minimum values. Existing R F 1 1.

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3..``. OP = XPA C8. a minimum of two lanes should be loaded concurrently.`. The first-stage loading should not exceed 0.25 L ...2 = Factor which takes into consideration how the proof load test was terminated and is found from the Table 8-3 Table 8-3 Values for ko.88 I If the test is terminated prior to reaching the target load.`.`.``-`-`.3.`--- The target proof load L should be placed on the bridge in stages.3.3 Load Capacity and Rating At the conclusion of the proof load test.8.. (8-9) should be the load just prior to reaching the load causing the distress which resulted in the termination of the test. The operating level capacity OP is found as follows: kOL.3. applied to the bridge is known.3.. XpAshould not be less than 1.3 If there are observed signs of distress prior to reaching the target proof load and the test must be stopped.8.`. then the actual maximum proof live load must be reduced by 12 percent by means of the factor KO. with the response of the bridge to the applied loads carefully monitored.``. = The target live load factor resulting from the adjustments described in Article 8.`. to be used in Eq.8. ~~ I Terminated Reached Target Load Reached Distress Level ko 1 . k.. For multiple-lane bridges. Smaller increments of loading between load stages may be warranted.``.Nondestructive Load Testing 8-15 IM = Dynamic load allowance XpA= The target adjusted live-load factor In no case should a proof test load be applied that does not envelop the rating vehicle plus dynamic load allowance. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. 8.`..o0 I 0.. particularly when the applied proof load approaches the target load. and the second stage loading should not exceed 0.2.3. the actual maximum proof live load L .5 L. Eq.`. (8-9) where: X .3 nor more than 2. the load L .``.This reduction is consistent with observations that show that nominal material properties used in calculations are typically 12 percent below observed material properties from tests. --`.

the results of the bridge load test. 8.`.9 USE OF LOAD TEST RESULTS IN PERMIT DECISIONS Load tests may be used to predict load capacity for purposes of reviewing special permit loads which exceed the normal legal levels. then test results should be used to predict the response of the bridge to the permit vehicle.. the position of the loading.. = 8. W. if the test is a proof load..``. stress ranges.`.. These tests should be carried out using a load pattern similar to the effects of the permit vehicle. can be extrapolated to provide a basis for the review of requests for permit vehicles. is the rating factor times the rating vehicle weight in tons.`. (8-10) LR(1 + ZM) The operating capacity.`.``. Special consideration should be given in the interpretation of the tests and the review of the permit load calculations to the following: 1) Will other traffic be permitted on the bridge when the permit load crosses the structure? 2) Will the load path of the vehicle crossing the bridge be known in advance. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. in tons. and the possible presence of random traffic on the bridge when the permit vehicle crosses the bridge..``. Careful pretest planning should be used to establish the needed response measurements for the purpose of evaluating the serviceability of an existing bridge.`.. possible dynamic effects. The same modifications and reduced use of any enhancementsin capacity observed during the test shall apply to the permit evaluation in the same way as discussed with the rating computation.10 SERVICEABILITY CONSIDERATIONS Load testing is primarily geared to evaluating the strength and safety of existing bridges..``.``-`-`.`. Similarly. whether diagnostic or proof. A safety margin will also be needed to account for variations in weight of the permit trucks. and can it be assured? 3) Will the speed of the vehicle be controlled to limit dynamic impact? and 4) Will the bridge be inspected after the movement to ensure that the bridge is structurally sound? Based on these considerations.. If a diagnostic test has been performed. Load testing could also provide live-load stresses. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . it is necessary that the load effects of the test vehicles exceed the permit effects.`.8-16 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges The rating factor at the operating level (Wo) is: OP Eq.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. and live-load deflections that could assist in the evaluation of fatigue and service limit states when these limit states may have been deemed to be of consequence by the evaluator.

At this stage.``.`. 3) Planning and Preparation for Load Test Careful planning and preparation of test activities are required to ensure that the test objectives are realized.``. which could usually be done without closing the bridge to traffic. the bridge should be unloaded immediately and the deflection recovery recorded. Step 6 . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`. Load-deformation response and deflection recovery at critical locations should be monitored to determine the onset of nonlinear behavior.. and establishing the final load rating for the bridge.`.. 1) Inspection and theoretical load rating Development of load test program Planning and preparation for load test Execution of load test Evaluation of load test results Determination of final load rating Reporting Inspection and Theoretical Rating Prior to load testing. Step 2. evaluating the results of the load test. 5) Evaluation of Load Test Results At the completion of the field load test and prior to using the load test results in establishing a load rating for the bridge. and test objectives. The choice of either the diagnostic or proof load test method depends on several factors including type of bridge. availability of equipment and funds. instrumentation is selected. --`. a thorough evaluation of the physical condition of the bridge by a field inspection should be carried out. At this stage.. preferably with the bridge closed to all vehicular and pedestrian traffic.`. all with due regard to safety considerations..1 GENERAL LOAD-TESTING PROCEDURES The steps required for load rating of bridges through load testing include the following: Step 1. The loads should be applied in several increments while observing structural behavior.. the load effects to be measured are identified.. The actual load test may then be conducted. Step 5 . bridge condition.. and test loadings are defined. and position of the test loading are selected based on the type of bridge and the type of test to be conducted. The magnitude. Step 7. Once any nonlinearity is observed.`. The procedure to interpret the test results should be determined before the tests are commenced so that the instrumentation can be arranged to provide the relevant data. Measurements of strains. These are necessary for use as the base condition for planning and conducting the load test and to ensure the safety of the bridge under the test load. To ensure that accurate and reliable data is obtained during the test. configuration. 4) Execution of Load Test The first step in the execution of a load test is to install and check the instrumentation. Step 4.`.``. displacements. a determination should be made as to whether load testing is a feasible alternative to establishing the load rating of the bridge.`.Non Destructive Load Testing A. the type of test(s) to be performed. Step 3.`--- 2) Development of Load Test Program A test program should be prepared prior to commencing with a load test and should include the test objectives.``. level of risk involved. the reliability of the load test results should be considered in evaluating the overall acceptability of the test Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.8. availability of design and as-built details.``-`-`.. personnel requirements are established. predicting the response of the bridge to the test loading. results of preliminary inspection and rating. followed by a theoretical load rating (where feasible) in accordance with the procedures described in Section 6. and related criteria. it is important to assess the response of the bridge to repeated load positions and to account for temperature variations during the load test. The analytical model developed for the theoretical rating will also be used in establishing the target test loading required.8-1 APPENDIX A. and rotations should be taken at the start of the bridge load test and at the end of each increment.

.``-`-`.. 7) Reporting A comprehensive report should be prepared describing the results of field investigations and testing. and should also consider factors which cannot be determinedby load testing. --`.`.``.. description of test loads and testing procedures..8.``.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..2 for Diagnostic Tests and Article 8.`. 6) Final Load Rating The determination of a revised load rating based on field testing should be done in accordance with Article 8.`. It is important to understand any differences between measured load effects and those predicted by theory.`. theoretical rating. and final load rating calculations. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . The rating established should be consistent with the structural behavior observed during the load test and good engineeringjudgment. but are known to influence bridge safety.`.`. This evaluation is generally performed in the office after the completion of the load test.``.8-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges results..``.8. and may also contain recommendations for remedial actions.. types and location of instrumentation.. The report should include the final assessment of the bridge according to the results of the load test and rating calculations.A.3 for Proof Tests.`.

........................................................``..........SECTION 9-SPECIAL TOPICS TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTOF TABLES ...3 HISTORIC BRIDGES LISTOF TABLES Table 9-1 Allowable Compressive Stresses for Evaluation of Masonry.......................................``............................................................................................ 9....1.......... 9...........................................................2 Method of Analysis ................................................................................. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ........................................................................................................................ 9-2 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`........................ 9-3 9...........................................`.........`....2 Reliability Analysis ........`............1...................... 9..1 Scope ............... SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES .................................``..`...................``.1........................................ 9-5 9.........1 EVALUATION OF UNREINFORCED MASONRY ARCHES.....2........................ 9.......`.....................`......................1 General ....... 9.............................``-`-`.............................................................................................................2............ 9-4 ................3 Allowable Stresses in Masonry ..2 DIRECT 9-i 9-1 9-1 9-1 9-1 9-2 9-3 9..................................................................`--- 9-i Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale................................4 Evaluation of Results ....... 9....1......................................................

`.`.``..``.--`.``.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``-`-`..`... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ....`.`.`.``.

three types of failures are generally investigated: 1) overturning of two adjacent masonry units of the arch. Concrete Compression 0.1.1.`. 2) sliding or shear failure.2 Method of Analysis Internal stresses of masonry arches are usually analyzed by regarding the arch as an elastic redundant structure.``.050 ksi Compression See Table 9-1.``.``..1.21 fi where fi = modulus of rupture 0. C9.1 General The predominant type of unreinforced masonry bridge is the filled spandrel arch. Keeping the resultant within the kern will ensure that no part of the arch is subjected to tension. and 3) compressive failure of the masonry. When evaluating masonry arches. In classical arch analysis.``-`-`. 9.`--- 9. Other Masonry Materials Tension Shear O (no tension) 0.1.`.``.`.4f 0.2 Failure due to crushing of the masonry material is not common. based on limitation of the tensile and compressive stresses developed in the extreme fiber when axial and bending stresses are combined.. --`. and ashlar or rubble stone masonry. 9-1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.. and on failure modes due to instability.. brick.3 Allowable Stresses in Masonry The allowable stresses in masonry materials are as follows: A.SECTION 9 SPECIAL TOPICS 9.. Mortar used to bind the individual masonry units should be classified in accordance with ASTM C 270.`. the stability of the arch masonry units is ensured by keeping the line of resistance (or the resultant of the moment and thrust at a given point) within the middle third of the arch ring (or within the kern)...`. The total load-cawing capacity of an unreinforced masonry arch should be evaluated by the Allowable Stress method.1 EVALUATION OF UNREXNFORCED MASONRY ARCHES 9.0316 (ksi) Tension Shear B.`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Materials may be unreinforced concrete.

350 0.``. ksi Allowable Compressive Stresses gross cross-sectional area.`.115 0. sand-lime or concrete brick: 8. CompressiveStrength of Unit. unless the bridge construction specifications show otherwise.`--- C9.`. is performed. The values given are minimum values and may be increased if suitable testing.100 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..1.5 Grouted masonry.225 Solid masonry or solid concrete masonrv units: 3. of clay or shale.1 40 0.4 Classical analysis of filled arches tends to greatly under-estimate their true capacity.``.4 Evaluation of Results There may be instances in which the capaciîy of the arch based on approximate analysis methods may be inadequate or the behavior of the arch under traffic is not consistent with that predicted by evaluation.5 2.115 0.140 0.``. Mortar should be assumed as Type N.225 O.0 0. In --`...4 0...100 0.9-2 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges Construction.160 0.o 7.100 0.`. 140 1. 0. ksi Type M or S Mortaf Type N Mortar" I Solid masonry of brick and other solid units of clay of shale.075 I 0.120 Il 1.1.0 or greater 2.`.200 O.2 units: 2. Condition of masonry materials should be considered in assignment of allowable stresses..200 0.`.. The filled arch is a very complex structure composed of both the arch ring and the surrounding fill..075 0.0 1.`. such as ASTM E 447.``-`-`.300 0.225 0.060 Il 0. A rigorous solution to Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 9.``.`.0 or greater 4. 160 0. gross area.055 Stone ashlar masonry: a Mortar is classified in accordance with ASTM C 270.115 0.0 or greater ~ _______ ~ 0.

``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Direct use of risk analysis in bridge assessments should be carried out only by engineers familiar C9. ice. There is little benefit to be gained in using the direct assessment procedure in lieu of the more conventional load and resistance factor format when the safety index and statistical parameters are the same as those assumed for the calibration of evaluation factors provided in this Manual.1 It is important to note that structural risks of the type reflected in the LFGD specifications and this Manual are notional values that do not include risks due to human error. establish the load capacity of masonry arches should consider the soil-structure interaction.. Department of Transport.`.`. In filled arches. etc.`. Bridges with material properties or levels of deterioration markedly different from those considered herein.2 DIRECT SAFETY ASSESSMENT OF BRIDGES 9. load tests or more refined analysis may be helpful in establishing a more accurate safe load capacity. and failure modes ignored by the evaluator or technologically poorly understood.`.``. the passive restraint of the fill is sufficient to greatly limit the distortion of the arch under live load. UK.. A number of simple empirical methods and computer-based analysis methods have been developed to assess masonry arch bridges in the United Kingdom. 9. the following situations may exist which could lead an agency to consider a direct use of reliability methods by the evaluating Engineer: Bridges whose live loading characteristics differ markedly from the descriptions contained in this Manual. Bridges for which a variety of threats such as wind.`. including the effects of lateral earth pressure.. Details of these methods are contained in The Assessment o f Highway Bridges and Structures. where a significant portion of the bridge stock is said to consist of masonry arches..Special Topics 9-3 these situations.. Direct risk assessment of a bridge may be useful when the Bridge Owner is using such risks as part of an overall Bridge Safety Management System.``. Classical arch analysis neglects the effects of lateral earth pressure on arch behavior.``... For bridge evaluation.1 Scope An alternate evaluation procedure that allows a direct use of reliability indices (ß) in the bridge rating process is included for use on a project-specific basis where such an approach is warranted.2.2. Bridges with significantly different economic consequences than the typical spans considered in this Manual.. must be considered simultaneously. A large portion of the composite stiffness of the arch and fill is due to the restraint of the fill..``. gross negligence. earthquake.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`. BD 21/97 & BA 16/93.

(9-2) (v.. and professional judgments. +: V L RF= R - i’] -D - Eq. ß = Target safety index Standard Deviation Mean Mean Value Nominal Code Value As defined in Section 1: cov Bias = = Eq. manner.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.. given these statistical factors..``. (9-1) allows a direct solution of rating factor given the mean values of resistance. The resistance variable is intended to cover natural variability of materials..``. C9.2 Advanced reliability formats may be applied in a similar. v. dimensions. --`. dead load. respective coefficients of variations..``. fabrication uncertainties.`. (9-1) 1 Ln g ß= Eq.``. The fabrication factor includes geometry.`.. Each random variable term must be considered separately to provide their bias and COV. the safety index for the component may be calculated directly from Eq. albeit iterative. The material factor represents properties such as strength and modulus of elasticity.2 Reliability Analysis A first order reliability format is proposed as given below: Rexp[-ß(V. and target safety index.2 )? where: L = Mean live-load effect D R = Mean dead-load effect = = = - Mean resistance COV of resistance COV of total-load effect v. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. live load. + v. The professional factor pertains to the method of analysis and calculation of component strength and how tests or advanced analysis procedures compare with such calculated predictions.2.`. (9-2).``-`-`.`.`.`.9-4 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges with the basic methodology of structural reliability technology.2.. and section modulus.`. 9. Alternatively.

`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.. For applications not covered by this report.. The goal is to avoid having Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.. A limited database of statistical parameters appropriate for use in direct safety assessment of bridges is given in NCHRP Project 12-33. The statistical parameters of the dead-load variable must reflect both the uncertainty of the weight of the materials and the uncertainty of the calculations of the dead-load effects on the component being checked. and analysis variations-must be reflected in the statistical parameters of the resistance variable R .. for example. repair.``.Special Topics 9-5 These three variables-material. regulations and procedures.`.``. A model for multiple presence of heavy vehicles on the bridge span is also needed to obtain superposition influences. and it may be in a master database and/or have been entered into the State’s BMS database.`.``. This means that all work needs to be done in compliance with the applicable Federal. The live-load variable should include a number of factors: the truck weight distribution. Many types of bridges.. have been determined to be historic for their technological significance. and it offers guidance on why the bridge is noteworthy. They require consideration of the historic significance of the bridge when developing maintenance. Historic bridges.`. 1993).. 9. The criteria establish a measure of consideration to evaluate which bridges have the significance and integrity to be determined historic and thus worthy of preservation. such as rail lines or parkways.`. and/or rehabilitation methodologies. evaluators must develop statistical parameters based on tests or analyses.`.. This information is frequently part of the bridge record. dimensions and load distributions to the axles. fabrication.``.. and often State. Other bridges are historic because they are located in historic districts or are associated with historic transportation routes. dynamic allowance uncertainties. Historic bridges are defined as those that meet the National Register of Historic Places’ criteria for evaluation.3 HISTORIC BRIDGES Most states have undertaken historic bridge surveys to identify which of their bridges that were built more than 50 years ago are historic. from stone arch and metal truss bridges to early continuous stringer and prestressed beam bridges. just as all other National Register-listed or eligible resources.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Calibration o f LRFD Bridge Design Code (Nowak. and load distribution uncertainties. are affected by Federal laws intended to strengthen the governmental commitment to preservation. The survey data may also contain useful information about original design details. Historic bridge survey information is generally maintained by the State Department of Transportation.

``..`.``-`-`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.`. Because historic bridges require demonstrated consideration of ways to avoid adverse effects.. encompassing the relevant parts of this Manual. Both offer approaches for considering ways to upgrade structures while maintaining their historic fabric and significance.``. evaluations should be complete....`.`..``. Strengthening should be done in a manner that is respectful to the historic bridge. and they are available from the National Park Service Preservation Assistance Division or the State historic preservation office.`.. --`. Guidance on how to develop successful approaches for working on historic bridges can be found in The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and The Secretary ofthe Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties 1992..`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Non-destructive testing methods should be considered to verify components and system performance. and any replacement should be in-kind where feasible. Repair rather than replacement of original elements should be considered.9-6 Manual for Condition Evaluation and LRFR of Highway Bridges an adverse effect on the historic bridge.

Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge Interior Beam A-33 A3 I Simple Span 17 fi.`--- ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES Table of Contents Bridge Summary Example Al Span Simple Span 65 ft..`.. A. 6 in.`. Diagonal.``-`-`. Four-Span Continuous 112 ft..``.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...`.. Bottom Chord. Single Span 175 fi.`.1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Simple Span 94 fi.`.`.``.. 10 in. Simple Span 80 ft..APPENDIX A Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. Vertical Interior and Exterior Strips Intermediate Floorbeam and Main Girder Interior Beam I I Design Permit A-109 Design Legal Design Design Permit Strength I Strength I Strength I Strength I Service III Strength II Service I A-125 A-133 A-155 Simple Span 70 ft. 140 ft. I Tvoe Composite Steel Stringer Bridge (Interior and Exterior Stringers) Rated Members Interior and Exterior Stringer I Loads Design Legal r Permit Design Legal Permit Design Legal Design Limit States for Evaluation Strength I Service II Fatigue Strength I Service II Strength II Service II Strength I Strength I Strength II Service I Strength I Service III Strength II Service I Strength I Strength I Strength I Strength I Strength II Strength I Page A-3 A2 Simple Span 26 ft. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Interior Girder A-49 Timber Stringer Bridge Welded Steel Plate Girder Bridge Interior Girder A-75 A-83 112 ft.``.``. 8 1f4 in. ~ Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Two-Girder Steel Bridge Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge Top Chord. Simple Span 21 ft. 140 fi.

`.`.`.`...``.`...A-2 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`...``-`-`.``..`.`--- .``..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.

Noncomposite: W33 x 130 & PL 518 in. superimposed dead-load stresses are carried by the composite section using a modular ratio of 3n. Distance to C.56) .26in? I =6699in! J 4 3 3 x 130 + (tPL 'PL (17.563..7in? 14. from bottom of section to centroid - Y = I.. = 6699+38.58 in. the non-composite steel stringer must support its own weight plus the weight of the concrete slab. 1994 AASHTO MCE.71 in.`.10.3 13)(6. Live load plus impact stresses are carried by the composite section using a modular ratio of n.`.02 s . (LRFD A 6.lb).``.`--- A-3 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. t f =0.175)( 38.``.`.47y +6..26+ 6.`.71 --`.0 in? 19. =0..1. Section Properties: In unshored construction.3..40)2 I. the concrete is transformed into an equivalent area of steel by dividing the area of the slab by the modular ratio.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA 1 Simple Span.`. For the composite section.56 y = 14. $ = 11. The as-built section properties are used in this analysis as there is no deterioration. =-8293 . x 10 112 in. To account for the effect of creep.26) + (0. = 8293 i n ! 8293 S.. Steel StringerBridge 1 Example A l GIVEN: Simple Span Composite Steel Stringer Bridge Evaluation of Interior and Exterior Stringers Span: Year Built: Material: 65 ft. t. 38. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. A =38.51 in..56(14. = = 436. 1964 A 36 Steel Fy = 36 ksi &' = 3 ksi Condition: Riding Surface: ADTT (one direction): Skew: Note: No deterioration (NBI Item 59 = 7) Member condition information not available Minor surface deviations (Field verified and documented) 1000 O degrees Same bridge as in example B1.``.`.26(2.G.855 in.``-`-`.

.``.`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .A o a I I 0 1 - I 4 7‘ ~ 1 8 n d a I l l 11 I I I I l l l I rl * x Cu O0 r3 u l 1 I l I / o \0 I I l I - I V .``-`-`.`.`--- A-4 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`..`.``.... Steel Stringer Bridge a c d .`..``.z 4 - 1 0 1 4 --`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.. I I l l I I I I I I I l I w _ I 110-.``.`.

8 in.``.`.``..`.. = 6699+(38. = 92.``.i2 ?~ S..9 < fC"<3.78 in.25)(37. x 87 in.175)(38. (17.26)(11.40)2 +(6. x 10 1/2 in..26)+ (0.56+(88/9 x 7. PL 5/8 in.56)+ (88/9 x 7.25)(12) +1/2( 11.`.35) = - Transformed Slab Y 38.1 = 195 in..`. 88/11 = 9.. or 1/2bf top iii) S i) 1/4(65)(12) ii) (7.`. =22677in! i n (.`--- = 3 ksi 2.25) x (8.`.``.27)2 + (s8/9)(7'25)3 +(88/9 x 7. n = 9 Typical Interior Stringer: Short-Term Composite (n): W33 x 130.3 13)(6. controls For --`. = = 4412 in? 22677 Section Modulus at top of steel A-5 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.33)(12) Modular Ratio (n): fcf LRFD 4. 7 1/4 in. = 88 in.25 Z .6.NCHW 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA l Simple Span. Steel Stringer Bridge Composite Section Properties: Effective Flange Width Minimum of: i) 1/4(L) ii) 12. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``-`-`.2.6.77)2 12 Z .56)(28.`.0 t.51) iii) (7. +greater of: t..6.25) 7.26+6. & Conc..

) 65 ft. = o.) (0. 12 =16326in? 16326 = = 1458 in? 11.34)2 +(6.20 =-16326 .O6) (6 percent increase for connections) Cover Plate: (0. from bottom of section to centroid = 6699+(38.25 in.5 in..INTERIOR STRINGER 1. Steel Stringer Bridge 3. Y = y (17.o14 kip/fi..)(0.``.490 kcf /144)(1.25)(37. (7..56)(22.664 kip/ft.`--- - b) Composite Section-Short STOPsteei - ~BOT - c) Composite Section-Long STOP steei ‘BOT - DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS . Components and Attachments DC a) Non-Composite Dead Loads: OC.175)(38.3 725 in? --`.06)(38 fi.) = 0.3 13)(6..56) + (88 / 27 x 7. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . + I.35) 38.26)+ (0.26)(5. 88/(3 x 9) = 3.52 in? SUMMARY OF SECTION PROPERTIES AT MIDSPAN a) Steel Section Only ~BOT 436 in? 563..)(l.``.`.26 in. Stringer: (O. x 87 in.33 fi..52 in..``. 130 kip/ft. S.7 in? Term n = 9 4412 in? 793 in? Term 3n =27 1458 in. & Conc.``-`-`.`.725 Section Modulus at top of steel Section Modulus at bottom of steel s . 22.`.625 in. = 0.138 kip/ft.21) I. A-6 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.56 + (88 / 27 x 7.`. PL 5/8in. x 10 1/2 in.`.``.`. 7 1/4 in.25) = 22.150 kcf) 12 Deck: (7.26 Long-Tenn Composite (3n): W33 x 130.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.`..)(10.26+ 6.

Railing: Assume 0.062 kip/fi. = 0..1 All permanent loads on the deck are uniformly distributed among the beams.14) LIVE-LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR I.)(7... VDC.9 ksi LRFD Eq. x 12 in.`.244 kip/fi.)(l. x 19 in. Steel Stringer Bridge Diaphragms: (3)(O. (4. 4 beams = 0. Wearing Surface DW = O STRINGER LRFD Table 4-4 LRFD Eq.6. Total per stringer = 0.) ) ( 0 ..`.``.`.`.000 ksi + C0V.= 27 kip @ Bearing b) Composite Dead Loads OC2 LRFD 4. Longitudinal Stifhess Parameter Kg K g = -E (B I+Aeg ED 2) ED = 33.000(~. @ Midspan @ Bearing = 0. MDC2 = = 8 kip 2. Compute Live-Load Distribution Factors (Type ( u ) cross section).33 ft.01 kip/ft.`. = 0. Curb: (i ft.``-`-`. (5-5) & --`.831 kip/ft.``.5 10 0 in. Parapet: kcE)( 2 curbs 4 beams ) = 0.831 (625) ..O427kip/ ft.2.~ = 33000(0.)'.06) 65 ft.150 kcf) 144 ( 2 parapets)=o.``.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.)]( 0.. [( 6 in.1 .``.`.`.145)'...5 = 3155. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .020 klf t 2 Total per Stringer 0'244(65)2 8 129 kip-ft.`--- Es BEAM = 29.015 kip/ft.PL A-7 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.172 kip/ft. 144 )( = 18 in.

46 :..9)(8293+44. 9 6 7 ) 0 i = 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.36 +-25 = 0.767 (:5)20 (:ST? A-8 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.36+- S 7.6 ( 5 ~ ( 0 .82 x 22..4 =44. =0..use g .. =0.626 > 0.``.767 > 0.2 + -12 :.653 =0.33 25 = 0.253 = 0..82 in? =U2 (7.`.02 = 22. 0 7 5 + ( 5 ) 0.`.``.`.652) = 287 493 in.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.2+ L733 12 =0.46 Two or More Lanes Loaded: = 0 . = 0.`..25)+19..`.use g . a) Distribution Factor for Moment g.`.``-`-`. Steel Stringer Bridge I A = 8293 i n ! eg Kg = (29000/3155.``.967 12 x 65 x 7.626 b) Distribution Factor for Shear One Lane Loaded LRFD Table 4-1 1 gv 1 =0..`--- .``. LRFD Table 4-6 Kg 12LtS One Lane Loaded: - 287493 = 0.653 Two or More Lanes Loaded g v .65 in.

Compute Maximum Live Load Effects.``.5 kip-fi..51 in.5 kip Governs VLL+IM= 20.``. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. bf = 11. Treat the bottom flange and the cover plate as one element. = 1521.855 in..33 102.) = 3 1.58 in.7 x g.`.626 = 952.`. Governs 762.``. LRFD Table 3-6 = = b) Maximum Design Live Load Shear at beam ends Design Lane Load Shear Design Truck Shear Tandem Axles Shear = = = = 20. a) Maximum Design Live Load (HL-93) Moment at midspan Design Lane Load Moment Design Truck Moment Tandem Axles Moment IM = 33% MLL+rM = = = 338 kip-ft. = 0.33 1521.-2 (0.`--- VLL+IM = 102.``-`-`.767 = 78.9 kip DISTRIBUTED LIVE-LOAD MOMENTS AND SHEARS Design Live-Load HL-93: MLL+IM = 1521.`.`.8 kip 61...``.9 kip COMPUTE NOMINAL RESISTANCE OF SECTION AT MIDSPAN Locate Plastic Neutral Axis PNA: tf = 0.9 x gv = 102. Steel Stringer Bridge II..7 kip 48.855 in.56 in? (PL 5/8 in.) Web Depth: D = 33. x 10 1/2 in. Cov. P1 Area Ap = 6.6 kip-fi.`.`. 338 + 890 x 1.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleAl Simple Span.8 kip+61.. t. A-9 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...7 x 0.39 in.7 kip x 1. 89Okip-ft.10 in. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .7 kip-fi.`.9 x 0.

5)(0.625) = 0.85h’ befl t.855)+(10.`...3+655. =36~31. = Fy D t. = 0.``.1 7.``. CLASSIFY SECTION Following the I-Sections in Flexure Flowchart (Section is consideredto be Constant Depth) LRFD Fig. = F y b f t f = 36 x 11.855) + (10.5 1)(0.6..8S5)(0.0 x 88 x 7.`.4-1 LRFD 6..4=1600.56) = 590. = 0.9 kip The PNA lies in the slab.1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``.9 = 1600.1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2 a) Check web slenderness: Since PNA is in the slab..39~0.`.1 kip<< =Fy(bftf+Ap) =36(11. the web slenderness requirement is automatically satisfied.9 kip P. u) is required to 2x 1626.85 x 3.25 y = 7.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.40 in? (i 1.855 = 354.51 x 0.``-`-`..`--- 7”dT3-P w -sx d s pNA P.855 + = 2 (1 1.`.4 kip =1626.4+590. only a portion of the slab (depth = balance the plastic forces in the steel beam.625)( 0..13 in.25 = 1626.`.4 kip r: pC+Pw+4 =354. Steel Stringer Bridge 4 Y =(11.5)(0.4.10.`.5 1)(0..`.724 in.625)=16..855) 2 + (10.51)(0..855+6.``. C6.51 x 0. (from top of tension flange to centriod of flange and cover plate) PLASTIC FORCES LRFD Appendix -P A A.5) (0.3 kip dt P . A-10 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.10.58 I +p V = 655.

`.`..4 x 16.2.`.25 = 301 1.5 = 4.55 in.dc+ Pwdw + P.4 x 32.0.55+655.``.3.`. 5Mp . .855 = 0..724 in.`--- 16. - MP = x 1626.45 < 5 4. Steel Stringer Bridge For composite sections in positive bending.7.67+590.855 +31.2a asDp >D' M.9( 7. =[- 4 Eds + P.92 The section has adequate ductility.73 7. d.25 -7... Web: d W = (ts -y)+t..725 + 7.2.855 = +-31. is the distance to the centroid of the bottom flange and cover plate from the top of the flange) = 32. - Tension Flange: dt = (ts -y)+tc +D+-tt = 2 0.9 x 3. Nominal Flexural Resistance M.7'13 2 2 = 3-56 in..2a - + 33.1.67 in.25 .25 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span. The section is compact.92 in.1 LRFD 6. D' =y = 7. = (I.4.25 =0.13)+.1.. +-D 2 = (7.`.25 -7.39+- (0.`.d.``.``-`-`.73 in.`.3 x 0.13)+0. the remaining stability criteria are automatically satisfied.5+th] LRFD 6.7 kip-fi..4.3 & Appendix A.739 =fj(d+. LRFD 6.13)+0. The plastic moment Mp is the sum of the moments of the plastic forces about the PNA. Dr .. ) P D' D =-7'13 .56+354. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .85My .``.``. PLASTIC MOMENT ME Moment arms about the PNA: Slab: Compression Flange: - d S y .10.0.y - C t )+2 2 = (7.6.85My = 4 + 0. b) Check Ductility Requirement.724 2 (7.39 2 --`.10.M p 4 A-1 1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.10.

08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . in LRFD C6.29.3 2.3 -- D tw then V. M y = FyS alternatively: M y = (36)(793) = 28548 kip-in.7.`.7 kip-ft.1.25 x 29+1430. =1. 725 793 = 1430.``..5 X 3011.2 Where M4.``-`-`.75 in. 0.25 x 439+1..580 = 360. no stiffeners.`.25 x 439 x 12 1. D .`--- 36 MAD MY MY = 17168 kip-in. LRFD 6. Total Depth .`.2. Nominal Shear Resistance VE W33 x 130 LRFD 6.7 = 2140.4.6...75 x 0.7 kip-ft.85 x 2140. Approximate method allowed for calculating M..7-0. kips 6..``.7 + 0.``.``.10.58 x 36 x 29. (6-1) Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.75 .58 Fyw D t. M y = 2378.46 .3 GENERAL LOAD-RATING EQUATION Eq.`.`.7-3011.2 (Flange thickness) = 3 1.7 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`...10.7 kip-ft.10.85 x 2140.46 J--69.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.7 4 = 2877...8 kip-ft. M D 2 .=2.`.580 51.2 = 0.and MAD are moments due to factored loads: 1.8>-=51. Web Depth clear of fillet = 29.`.2 & Appendix A.2a 4 Mn .39 in.-= t.2 Rolled section. = 0. Steel Stringer Bndge Yield Moment of a Composite Section M y : Assume bottom flange reaches Fy before top flange.4.3.25 x 129 x 12 MAD + +563. =MDC. +MDC.

25)(27 + 8) (1.75 Table 6-1 (1.25 1.25)(439 +129) (1..35 = 2.29 b) Operating Level LOAD DC LL Flexure: RF 1.2 6.`.``.2.35 =1. NBI Item 59 = 7.= 1.`.(1.``.0)(1..30 x 1.6) =1. cp.2.``-`-`. c) SystemFactor <p...0)(360.6.0)(2877. = 1.(1.2.3 6.4.75) (78. 9. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.0)(1.4.O for flexure and shear b) Condition Factor 9.`.``.``..0 No member condition information available.69 1.1 a) Inventory Level LOAD DC LL Flexure: R F = LOAD FACTOR 1.75 = 2.4.8) ..30 = Shear: R F (1..3).35 Table 6-1 Shear: R F A-13 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4.`..97 LOAD FACTOR 1.3 6.9) = 2.29 x 1.4.0)(1. DESIGN LOAD RATING A) Strength I Limit State 6.`.25 1.75)(952.`--- .4 1.75 =1.0)(1.`.O Mulit-girder bridge (for flexure and shear) LRFD 6. Steel Stringer Bridge EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit States) a) Resistance Factor cp <p = 1.NCHRF' 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.

2 ksi = foc.2b LRFD 6.`.`.8)-1.21 b) Operating Level YL . Steel Stringer Bridge ComDare to HS20 Ratings-Load Inventory Factor Method (see 1994 AASHTO MCE) RF .O for non-hybrid sections fR =0.3 1 (flexure) 2..(1.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A 1 Simple Span.``-`-`.14 = 11.17 (75 1) = 1.0 x 1.19 (flexure) Operating RF 6...17 = 1.7 725 = 9.`.42) =1.0 YD = 1.3)( 14.`.``.0 x 6 = 34.2 Checking the tension flange as compression flanges typically do not govern for composite sections.``.`.3. Table 6-1 = 1.`.3.4..42) RF= = 1.2 .10. ..5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.0 RF= 34.10.1 B) Service II Limit State a) Inventory Level Allowable Flange Stress fR = 0.3 = 2.48 ksi Table 6-1 34.439 x 12 129 x 12 563.95 x 1.3(439 +129) 2.`.la fD .35 + 2. fDC.2-(1.``.0)(11.4.0)(11..58 A-14 --`..O for tension flanges = 1.0)(2877.O)( 14.48) (1 . Rb Rh = 1..(1.48) (1.95 Rb Rh FJlr LRFD 6.31x 1.6.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4.10. + LRFD 6.

) = 15% + (32 kip) (4. LFRD 3.4.55)+(88/9 x 7. from bottom of flange I . must consider fatigue.00 Table 6-1 Composite section properties without cover plate.. .862 kip-in. = 5. The 38 ft. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..967) = 6. long partial-length welded cover plates on the tensions flanges are category E at the weld termination since the cover plate thickness = 5/8 in.1 Using Influence lines.`.44 =1.`.6.`.6.67) 11. A-15 --`.25) = 29.967 kip-in.725) (38.07)2 9 Live Load at Cover Plate Cut-Off (13.``.69 fi.2.`. fdead-load compression = 6..46 fi.44ksi 793 Inventory Level R F = Operating Level RF 34.) + (8 kip) (1. = (1.19 =1. the detail may be prone to fatigue.65 in.11.`.19~1.(Af )temion > fdead-loadcompressjon .`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.25)(36.) = 497 kip-fi.O in.26) (13. Steel Stringer Bridge Compare to HS20 Serviceabilitv Ratings-Load fLL+IM Factor Method =751x12 -11.4. < 1.(7.`.5 ft.25) (7.26)(16.XAx Y= XA . compute RF for fatigue load for infinite life.``-`-`. fR = ( W T H YD YL = 0. LRFD Table 3-6 MLL IM MLL+IM = (32 kip) (10.`. between 32 kip axles.10)2 + (9) .NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span..3 : .15) (5.99 C) Fatigue Limit State Determine if the bridge has any fatigue prone details (Category C or lower).67 = 1. from centerline of bearing) Fatigue Load: Design truck with a spacing of 30 ft...251)~ 12 88 +(7.26)+(88/9 x 7..``.1 LRFD Table 6-3 o @ cover plate end.1.. 7.(38.2 . If 2 R. = 6699 + (38.``.48 (1.56 fi.``.75 = 0.

`.0XAAff)= 2.0(0.383)(6862) = 2638 kip-in.2 --1 (0.2 = 0.1.66 < 1.1.383 Distributed Live-Load Moment g MLL+IM Fatigue Load Stress Range AfLL+IM = (0.84 ksi LRFD 6.75)(4.2.`.85 (1000) = 850 LRFD Table 3-5 A-I6 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.42) (@)TH = 3.`.46) - 1.W3.0. =- 2628 577 at the cover plate weld Infinite-Life Fatigue Check R S C I Rst R S The detail does not possess infinite fatigue life per LRFD new bridge standards. LRFD 3.56) (AfLL+IM)m (2.84 Y= 365 RR A (ADTT)..`--- = 4.5 ksi for Detail Category E LRFD Table 6-7 7.`. = 1.O 6.6.5. CALCULATION OF REMAINING FATIGUE LIFE Finite life determination Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. ((Af y 7.3b LRFD 3. Remove multiple presence factor from the single-lane distribution.``.. Steel Stringer Bridge Load Distribution for Fatigue The single-lane distribution factor will be used for fatigue.4 Table 7-1 1..4 R fl F = ( AfLL+IM 1=-4’5 ..`..4.``.1 ADTT (one direction) = 1O00 ADTT.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example AI Simple Span.1.2.O stress range by simplified analysis = 1.6.``. = 0. Evaluate remaining fatigue life using procedures given in Section 7 of this Manual.56 ksi Nominal fatigue resistance for infinite life (@)TH = 4.``.5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. x R..42 ksi = 6..`.O truck weight per LRFD Specifications = R.`.0 = AAff = (Rs)(yL)(AfLL+lM)= 1..``-`-`.1...

.42)3 =111 years Remaining life = Y .O) (884) (3..`. kip-ft.04)(850) = 884 Figure C7-1 for Category E evaluation life. RR A n = 1.``.``.1 3.3 Table C6-3 MLL = gkíLL+rM = 660.5 491.5. Live Load: AASHTO Legal Loads-Type g. 6.`..6. Shear ratings have not been illustrated. LEGAL LOAD RATING Note:The Inventory Design Load Rating produced rating factors greater than 1. Steel Stringer Bridge Using a two percent growth rate and age of 35 years (1999-1 964) ADTT multiplier = 1.25 6..`--- A-17 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. C7.O (with the exception of Fatigue). The load rating computations that follow have been done for illustrative purposes.`. = 0. Table 7-2 LRFD Table 6-5 LRFD Table 6-6 Y - 1.NCHRF' 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.2.4.04 Lifetime Average ADTTSL = (1.`..3S2.626 = 20% 6.3-3 (Rate for all 3) Z M The standard dynamic load allowance of 33 percent is decreased based on a field evaluation verifying that the approach and bridge riding surfaces have only minor surface deviations or depressions.3(11 x 10') 365 (1.1.3 1) Strength I Limit State Dead Load DC : yDc = 1.`.4. Type3 Type3S2 707.2 Appendix A.3 = 11 x lo8 ksi3 = 1.`.``-`-`.4.2 53 1.. (The probability of failure associated with evaluation life = 16 percent. y L = 1.2.7 496. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .`.current age = 111 years .) 2.60 Table 6-5 --`.0 - simple span girders with L > 40 ft.1 Table 6-1 ADTT = 1O00 Generalized Live-Load Factor for Legal Loads.``.6.4...7 kip-ft.35 years Remaining = 76 years The remaining evaluation life is 76 years.``.2 Type3-3 654. This indicates that the bridge has adequate load capacity to carry all legal loads within the LRFD exclusion limits and need not be subject to Legal Load Ratings.6.

Escorted) A-18 6..6.33 ksi No posting required as RF > 1.`.2.2 ksi = fDC.`.0 Table 6-1 fR fD 129 x 12 .2 3.17 Type3-3 7. Summary Truck Weight (tons) RF Safe Load Capacity (tons) Type3 25 2.(1.. = 1.4.8).44 2. ADTT (one direction): 1O00 From Live-Load Analysis by Computer Program: Undistributed Maximum Undistributed Maximum 1) Strength II Limit State YL MLL = 2127.2.80 (Reference: 1994 AASHTO MCE) 2) Service II Limit State YL 6.3(fLL+IM Type3 ) Type3S2 8.68 RF = 2.2 .25)(439 + 129) Type3 2... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.1 Table 6-6 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.439 x 12 +-=11.9 kip-fi.``.`.6. Escorted) Permit Weight: 220 kip The permit vehicle is shown on page A-23.2 YD = 1.51 2.`.04 2.. Steel Stringer Bridge Flexure: RF= RF= (1.17 78 Type3-3 40 2.76 Compare to Load-Factor Ratings for 3S2 Inventory Operating RF = 1.``-`-`.7 725 ksi R F = 34.4.``.11.33 58 Type3S2 36 2. PERMIT LOAD RATING Permit Type: Special (Single-Trip.6)(MLL+iM) Type3S2 Type3-3 2.0)(1.48 1..35 fLL+IM = = RF 7.0)(1.O.55 2.0)(2877.48 563.`--- .``.`.73 (1. VLL = 143..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.5 kip = 1.3 = 34.``..`.6. +fDC.`.15 (Single-Trip.35 94 6.4.

4. a one-lane distribution factor can be used as the permit crosses the bridge with no other vehicles allowed on the bridge at the same time.0)(1.2) = 978.`.9) (0.0 OK MLL+IM Flexure: Shear: RF = (1 . minor surface deviations) = 1.0 kip-ft. minor surface deviations) 6.`.15)(93. This check is based on past practice and does not use the one-lane distribution with permit load factors that have been calibrated for the Strength II permit rating.O) (14..53 A-19 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.383) (1.2 (Optional) R F = Z M YL fR fD fR-fD Y L (fLL+IM ) Table 6-1 = 20% (no speed control.5 Distributed Live-Load Effects: =(2127.0 YD = 1.48 ksi Live-load effects for the Service II permit rating of vehicles that mix with traffic are calculated using the LFWD distribution analysis methods. IM =0.NCHW 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.2 multiple presence factor.4.5.46 11.0)(11.3) .``.544 = 20% (no speed control.7) > 1.5.`.0 =2.``.4.93 > 1.2. VLL+IM = (143. Steel Stringer Bridge Use One-Lane Distribution Factor and divide out the 1..0 kip-ft.5) (0..15)(978.`.`.``-`-`.`--- g.0)(2877.544) (1.2 ksi = 11.4.8) -(I . = 0.0)(1..2 = 0.0 = 34.25)(439+ 129) RF = (1.48) (1.. For escorted permits.20) = 93.``.20) = 978.`.9) (0.2 = 0.2-(1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`..2. = 11736 kip-in.2 = 0.383 --`.383) (1. gm1 6.383 R F = 34.8) = 1..(1.4.0)(360.25)(27 + 8) (1.653/1. gm C6.6.7 kip (i.6..``.0)(1.0) = 1.0)(1.2 (m= 1.2 has been divided out) MLL+IM = (2127.94 2) Service II Limit State OK 6..

``.``.`.`.`--- ... Steel Stringer Bridge -?- U I n o 3 r- U A-20 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.``.``-`-`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.`..`.`....``..

`..7 in? 14.`. = = 440.2.26) + (0. cor?trols be =1/2 (88in.``. n = 9 Short Term Composite (n): W33 x 130.``-`-`.8 in? Section Modulus at top of steel 19.6.``. = 8569.. A-2 1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`--- Section Modulus at bottom of steel Effective Flange Width 1/2 Interior be + minimum of: be LRFD 4.26+ 7. overhang = 12 in.)+12in. Modular Ratio (n): LRFD 6.4 in. 7 1/4 in. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .875(14.9 I fc < 3.lb f .0 t. x 55.6.875 - y = 14...`.10. or 1/4 bytop i) ii) iii) i) ii) iii) 118 (65)(12) = 97.26(2.`.30) (38. and Conc. from bottom of section to centroid I. --`.. Section Properties Noncomposite: W33 x 130 & PL 314 in.5 in.3.`.22 in.`. = 6699+38.=56in..41 in....375) (7.875) 38.``.0)(7. x 10 112 in.89)2 +7. +greater of: overhang 112 t.51) = 46..8 in! 8569 8 S.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.1.`.04)2 I.5 in. =-8569'8 = 594.44 s.``.25)+1/4(11. PL 314 in. x 10 1/2 in.41 Composite Section Properties: Barrier is not known to be structurally continuous. Steel Stringer Bridge Evaluation of an Exterior Stringer Same given information as for interior stringers. 5619 = 6.6.1 1/8 L 6. Y = (17. (6. ' for = 3 ksi 2.

26) + (0..5 in.78)’ + I.30)( 38.375)( 7. & Conc.07 in.875)(19. 7 114 in...81 in.07 - (17.22 Y = (17.``.`--- Sb =-20893 .25)1 + s.81 Section Modulus at bottom of steel Long-Term Composite (3n): W33 x 130.25)1 12 = 14664 in.875) +[TI( \ I %25)(37. Steel Stringer Bridge Transformed Slab I_6.``. = = 1065 in? 13. 56/27 = 2.``.26 + (7.375) (7..730 in? 20.``-`-`.26) + (0. = 6699 + 38.04 Section Modulus at top of steel --`. x 10 112 in.`. from bottom of section to centroid I . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .875) (25.``...`.`.43)2 [$)(7.26)(2.7 in.8 in? ‘TOP ‘BOT - 594.875) + Y = - y = 20.77 Section Modulus at top of steel Section Modulus at bottom of steel Sb =-..70)2 $)(7.2599 in? 8.`. from bottom of section to centroid I .30) (3 8. = 6699 + (38.`. PL 518 in. [ + (7.08 in.4 14664 S. 12 I.475) y = 25.809 in? 25.`. = 20893 in. x 55..3 n = 9 b) Composite Section-Short Term STOPsteei = 2599 in? 809 in? c) Composite Section-Long Term STOPsteei = 1065 in? ~BOT - 3n =27 ~BOT - 730 in? A-22 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. H- 2.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.4 =-20893 .08 SUMMARY OF SECTION PROPERTIES AT MIDSPAN a) Steel Section Only 440.`.

3 kiplft.``.`. 0. Steel Stringer Bridge DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS-EXTERIOR I.0427)( ?](i Diaphragms: 0..`.``-`-`.06) - 65' Total per stringer 0.77 + . (same as interior) MDC2 vDC..20 For S +de = 7. the multiple presence factor. .017 kip/ft. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT g.482 > 0. m = 1.`--- Two or More Lanes Loaded: de e = 0.423 kip/ft.`.) = 0.586 kip/ft.`.`.5857) b) Composite Dead Loads: OC.``.77 9. Stringer: (same as interior) - 4 x40 = Cover Plate: 13... = AtMidspan At Bearing MDc.(0. = (0. Compute Live-Load Distribution Factors a) Distribution Factor for Moment One Lane Loaded: Lever Rule STRINGER LRFD Table 4.`.0 kip = 129 kip& = 8 kip II. o O g... .13 For one lane loaded. 0.626) = 0.8 x 5 ..38 8 (3)(0.0.436 A-23 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. 8 =(0. Wearingsurface DW = LIVE-LOAD ANALYSIS-EXTERIOR I. < 8 fi. Components and Attachments DC a) Non-Composite Dead Loads: OC.``.33 ft. one wheel is acting upon the girder LRFD Table 3-4 --`..1 g. = 19..+ O ft. Deck: STRINGER (i +y)( () : - O.77) (0.``.008 kiplft. VDC. 150 kip/ft..NCHFV 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A í Simple Span.e ginterior . .138 kip/ft.5857)(65)2 = 309.

= g.`--- NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A 1 Simple Span.541 Governs g.436 LRFD Table 4-12 Two or More Lanes Loaded: g = e gintenor e = 0 .595 Special Analysis (2 Lanes) = 0.436 c) Special Analysis for Exterior Girders with Diaphragms or Cross-Frames Roadway Layout: two 11.l l r ) = 0. (C4-4) x2 1 R=-+ (1 1x6) = 0.767) = 0.`.. = 0. Steel Stringer Bridge b) Distribution Factor for Shear gv One Lane Loaded: Lever Rule g.595 1 Lane = 0.``-`-`.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.6 10 gv2 = (0.`..495) = 0.67)2 + ( .672 +(-3.2(0.13 e LRFD Eq.``.541 SUMMARY OF DISTRIBUTION FACTORS FOR THE EXTERIOR GIRDERS Moment g.436 2 or More Lanes = 0.``..541 Shear g. Governs A-24 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.5 ) ) (11' +3...`.6)(0. = 0.`.595 Two Lanes Loaded: 2 R=-+ (1 1)(6 + ( . 1 Lane = 0.595 Special Analysis (2 Lanes) = 0.``.l l y ) gspecial = 1.436 2 or More Lanes = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...67)2 + ( .486 Special Analysis (1 Lane) = 0..672 +(-3.495 (112 +3.460 > 0.`..kwide lanes NL R= Nb NL + xext Nb ' ' LRFD Table 4-8 & Table 4. 6 + 5 = 0..460 Special Analysis (1 Lane) = 0.``.

``..75) = 17. Steel Stringer Bridge II. VLL+IM = 102.51)(0.`.875 in.``. 4 = (1 1.``.4 kip-R.72 in? Y (1 1. = (102..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span. 7.``-`-`..``.595) = 61. 0.. (from top of tension flange to centriod of flange and cover plate) A-25 --`.2 bf cov. = (152 1.5)(0. x 10 1/2 in. 8 5 5 ) e + (10.58 in.7 kip/fi. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9) (0.5)(0.`.`.) Treat the bottom flange and the cover plate as one component.7) (0.784 in. 11.`.51)(0.`. 102.2 kip COMPUTE NOMINAL RESISTANCE OF SECTION AT MIDSPAN LocatePNA D tf t W - 3 1.`.855 in..9 kip x g..51 ) ( 0 .5)(0.75) --+ ""7 L ) = 0.855)+ (10.855) + (10.595) = 905...855+ L t (1 1.9 kip DISTRIBUTED LIVE-LOAD MOMENTS AND SHEARS Design Live-Load HL-93 MLL+IM = VLL+IM- 1521.7 x g . 0. PL Ap - (PL 3/4 in. Same as for interior girder Midspan: Bearing: Mu+rM = 1521.39 in.75)(0.51 in.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Compute Maximum Live-Load Effects for HL-93.

``.00 OK PLASTIC MOMENT MD Moment arms about the PNA A-26 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.0) (56) (7. b) Check Ductility: Dp = t.2 For composite sections in positive bending the remaining stability criteria are automatically satisfied. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . C6.. Steel Stringer Bridge PLASTIC FORCES LRFD Appendix A A..10.4+637.855 + 7..2a +y - = 7.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al Simple Span.739 = 8.00 in. +th 7.``.``.4-1 LRFD 4.85f.3 +1 354. + Df = P( d + t .`... +Ps r.9 ( 33. r.`.855) = 354.`. +pc > p. D P D’ =-= 8’oo 4.10. =Fy(bf t f + A J = 36 (1 1.5 ) =0.4.93 in..`.85 + 7.25) +P W i$ = 1035.10.62 > 1.``.`. = (36) (3 1.’ be# t. from top of flange CLASSIFY SECTION Following the I-Sections in Flexure Flowchart (section is considered to be constant depth).2. = Fy bf t f = (36) (i 1.25 0.3 = 0.`--- LRFD Fig. +Pw < P.``-`-`. : . + P.85 (3.1 P.58) = 655.93 1. LRFD 6.`.3 kip P. --`.`.8 kip The PNA lies in the top flange 655.5 )=4.739 in.3kip 4 P.51 x 0. =0..39) (0.6.. = Fy D t.25 7.1.6.4. = 0.51) (0.4 kip r. The section is compact.8-1035. a) Check web slenderness: Since PNA is in the top flange the web slenderness requirement is automatically satisfied.875) = 637.

Assume bottom flange reaches Fy before top flange.2.8 1)+ (637.3)(4.4) (15.7'25 +0. = t.``. Web: dw = -+tc D 2 - -y ..39+0.36) + (655.ds+Pwdw+ptdt 24 354'3 (0. = + 0.M p 4 LRFD 6..1-1 I+ (1035.2962 + (i.724 = 32.10..3)( 12) Mm M Y 594.85My .784 = 0.739 -- 2 Tension Flange dt = 15.7 = 1722 kip-ft.31'39 + 0.``-`-`.4.`.855 .3 kip A-27 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.10.3. Steel Stringer Bridge Slab: .739 -- 2 = 4. = 2962 kip-A.`.739 +31. MP =-[(.855 -0.6.0. 36 . Classification and Resistance same as for interior.2a M..2 Yield Moment of a Composite Section M y .25)(309. V.85(2160) 0.739r] = 2(0... Nominal Shear Resistance V.`. 809 MAD =20668 kip-in.`.855) [ -'I LRFD Table A.23 in.1.0.739)2 + (0.6.855-0.2 & Appendix A. = M D C .8) (32. -y+D+0.`.-y) +P. Nominal Resistance M..`.NCHRF' 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A 1 Simple Span. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.`--- = 35548 kip-in.81 in.85My 4 LRFD 6.25) (129)(12) +-Mm 730 = 2160 kip-ft. = 360.)'+(t.``. + MAD M n 5 (2962).(1.`.``.36 in.62) 4 4 = 2787 kip-ft.85 (2160). as Dp > D ' 5Mp -0.. + MDc2 - + (1.23) --`.

75)(905...0 No member condition information available.0)(1. Steel Stringer Bridge GENERAL LOAD-RATING EOUATION 6.2 6.``.`--- A-2 8 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. DESIGN-LOAD RATING A) Strength I Limit State a) Inventory Level LOAD DC LL Flexure: RF = LOAD FACTOR 1.3)-(1.35 --`.83 Shear: RF =3.4.3 6.``.41 Shear : R F = = 3.2) Table 6-1 = 1.4 Multi-girder bridge 6.4. cpc = 1. System Factor cp..4.25)(309.`.75 1.1 1.`.0 LRFD 6.25 1. = 1.75 1.0 for flexure and shear Condition Factor <p.4.`. NBI Item 59 = 7.5..0)(278) -(1.0)(1.25)(19+8) (1..0)(1.2 EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit State) Resistance Factor cp cp = 1.`.05 b) Operating Level LOAD DC LL LOAD FACTOR 1..95 1.75 (1.05x= 3..4) (1.``.4.2.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span.0)(1.3+129) (1.`.``.75) (61.`.0)(36O.``-`-`.3 6.2.35 Table 6-1 Flexure: RF = 1..35 1.6.25 1.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .4.41 x = 1.

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA l

Simple Span, Steel Stringer Bridge

B) Service II Limit State

6.6.4.1

a) Inventory Level Allowable Flange Stress
f R

= 0.95 Rb R, Fyr

LRFD 6.10.5.2

Checking the tension flange as a compression flange typically does not govern for composite sections.
'b

= 1.O for tension flanges = 1.O for non-hybrid sections = 0.95 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 36 = 34.2 ksi = fDC, fi DC,
-

'h
fR

LRFD 6.10.4.3.2b LRFD 6.10.4.3. la
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

fD

(309.3) (12)

fD

= 6.24
fLL+IM YL

594.7 730 + 2.12 = 8.36 ksi

+ (129)(12)

=

(905.4) (12)

809 =1.30

= 13.43 ksi

=1.0

Table 6-1

R F =

34.2 - (1.0)(8.36) 1.3(13.43)

=1.48

b) Operating Level Table 6-1 34.2 - (1.0)(8.36) (1 .O) (1 3.43)

R

F

=

RF

=1.92

C) Fatigue Limit State Calculations not shown. See calculations for interior girders.
2.

LEGAL LOAD RATING Note: The design load check produced a rating factor greater than 1.0 for the Inventory Design Load Rating. This indicates that the bridge has adequate load capacity to carry all legal loads and need not be subject to load ratings for legal loads. The load rating computations that follow have been done for illustrative purposes. Shear ratings have not been illustrated.

6.6.4.2

A-29
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l Simple Span, Steel StringerBridge Live Load: AASHTO Legal Loads-Type g,
=

3,3S2,3-3 (Rate for all 3)

Appendix A.6.1

0.595

IM= 20% The standard dynamic load allowance of 33 percent is decreased based on a field evaluation certifiing that the approach and bridge riding surfaces have only minor surface deviations or depressions.
Type3 Type3S2 707.2 504.9 Type3-3 654.5 467.3 kip-ft. kip-ft. 6.4.4.3 Table C6-3 6.6.4.2.1

MLL = gMLL+rM =

660.7 471.7

1) Strength I Limit State Dead Load DC :

yDc = 1.25

Table 6- 1

ADTT = 1000 Generalized Live-Load Factor for Legal Loads, y L = 1.60

Table 6-5

Flexure: RF =

(1.0)(1.0)(1.0)(2787)- (1.25)(309.3 + 129)
(~J~)(MLL+~M

Type3

Type3S2 2.77

Type3-3 2.99 6.6.4.2.2

R F = 2.97
2) Service II Limit State
YL
fR

= 1.3 = 34.2 ksi
= 8.36 ksi

YD

= 1.0

Table 6-1

- MLL+IM ~ 1 2
fLL+IM

809 Type3 Type3S2 7.49 2.65 Type3-3 6.93 2.87 ksi

fLL+,Lf

= =

7.00 2.84

RF

No posting required as R F > 1.0.
Summary Truck : Weight (tons) Type3 25 2.84 71 Type3S2 36 2.65 95 Type3-3 40 2.87 115 6.6.4.2 Special (Single-Trip, Escorted) 220 kip

RF
Safe Load Capacity (tons)

3. PERMIT LOAD RATING
Permit Type: Permit Weight:

A-30
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

fD

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example Al

Simple Span, Steel Stringer Bridge The permit vehicle is shown on page A-20.

ADTT:

1 O00

From Live-Load Analysis by Computer Program: Undistributed Maximum Undistributed Maximum

MLL,= 2127.9 kip-fi. V,, = 143.5 kip
6.6.4.2.1
Table 6-6 6.4.5.4.2.2

1) Strength II Limit State
= 1.15
YL

Use One-Lane Loaded Distribution Factor and divide out the 1.2 multiple presence factor.

gspeciai

= 0.595

(special method for rigid torsional behavior governs, see A-27)

LRFD 4.6.2.2.2d
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Distributed Live-Load Effects:
MLL+IM

~ ( 2 1 2 7 . 9(0.496) ) (1.2) = 1266.5 kip-ft.
= (143.5) (0.496) (1.2)

VLL,,

= 85.4 kip

Flexure: RF

=

(1.0)(1.0)(1.0)(2787)- (1.25)(438.3) (1.15)(1266.5)

RF
Shear: R F

=1.54 > 1.0 OK (1 .0)(1.0)(1.0)(360.3)- (1.25)(27.0)
=

(1.15)(85.4) =3.33 > 1.0
(Optional) OK

RF

2) Service II Limit State

Z M
YL

= 20% (no speed control, minor deviations) =1.0 YD =1.0 = 34.2 ksi

Table 6-1

fR fD

= 8.78 ksi

C6.6.4.2.2
Live-load effects for the Service II permit rating of an escorted permit are calculated using the same one-lane-loaded procedures as for the Strength II rating.
A-3 1
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A l

Simple Span, Steel Stringer Bridge
gm1
= 0.496

MLL+IM = (2127.9) (0.496) (1.2) = 1266.5 kip-fi. = 15198 kip-in.
- MLL+IM - 15198
fLL+IM

----sb

809

= 18.8 ksi

R

F

= 34'2-8'78 = 1.35 > 1.O l.O(l8.8)

OK

Summary of Ratinv Factors
EXAMPLE A l INTERIOR GIRDER

EXAMPLE A 1 INTERIOR GIRDER

A-32
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span, Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge

Example A2
GIVEN:

Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge Evaluation of an Interior Beam

span: Year Built: Materials Concrete Reinf. Steel Condition: Riding Surface:

26 ft. 1925

fc’ = 3 ksi
unknown fy
No specific member deterioration noted. NBI Item 59 = 6 Field verified and documented: Smooth approach and deck 1850 O degrees

ADTT (one direction): Skew:
Note:

Same bridge as in example B2,1994 AASHTO MCE. BEAM LRFD 4.6.2.2.1

DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS-INTENOR

Permanent loads on the deck are distributed uniformly among the beams. 1. Components and Attachments Structural Concrete: 6 in. ~ 6 . 5 2ft.+1.25 f t . x 2 ft.+2

DC

x (0.150 kcf)
1 Railing and curb 0.200 kip/ft. x 2 Total per beam DC 1 =- x 1.002 x 262 MDC 8
VDC

= 0.902 kip/ft.

= O. 1O 0 kip/ft. = 1.o02 kip/ft. = 84.7 kip-A.
= 10.8 kip

12

2.

Wearing Surface

DW
YDW

6.2.2.3
= 1.25

Thickness was field measured. 51:’)(22 Asphalt Overlay: -

(

A.)(0.144 kcf)
= 27.9 kip-ft.

M,,

= - x 0.330 x 262

1 8

12

1
A-33

= 3.6 kip

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span, Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge

P
N
N

+
Q

1 1 9 1 2

i UZIT z
Q

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

V

F

A-34
Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Shple Span, ReinforcedConcrete T-Beam Bridge

LIVE-LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR BEAM

I.

Compute Live-Load Distribution Factor AASHTO LRFD Type cross section Longitudinal Stiffness Parameter Kg K~ = n ( r + A e g 2 )
n

LRFD Table 4-4 LRFD Eq. (4-14)

=1.0 1 = - ~ 1 5 ~ 2 4 =17280in? ~ 12 =15~24 1 =-(24+6) 2
= 360 in?
= 15 in.

I
A
eg

Kg =1.0 (17280+360~15~)
= 98280 in.4
Kg

-

-

12Lt;

98280 12 x 26 x 63

= 1.46

Distribution Factor for Moment g, i) One Lane Loaded:
gmi

LRFD Table 4-6

=0.06+
= 0.565

ii) Two or More Lanes Loaded:
gm2

= 0.075

= 0.075

+( &)”” [5) +[Er [
0.1

(:r %r
A-35

12Lt,3

(1.46)O.l

= 0.703 > 0.565

: . use

gm

= 0.703

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

(1’4’ p’( y’
;6

(1.46)o.i

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span, Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge Distribution Factor for Shear i) One Lane Loaded:

gv

LRFD Table 4-1 1

gv1=

S 25.0 6.52 = 0.36+25.0 = 0.621
= 0.36+--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

ii) Two or More Lanes Loaded:

gv2

12 6.52 ( 6 ; ) " ' =0.2+-12 = 0.709 > 0.62

:.use II.

gv

=0.709

Compute Maximum Live-Load Effects a) Maximum Design Live-Load (HL-93) Moment at Midspan. Design Lane Load Moment Design Truck Moment Tandem Axles Moment
-

54.1 kip-ft. 208.0 kip-ft. 275.0 kip-fi. (Governs) LRFD Table 3-6

-

IM
MLL+rM

=33% = 54.1+ 275.OX 1.33
= 419.9 kip-ft.

b) Maximum Design Live-Load (HL-93) Shear at critical section on page A-42. DISTRIBUTED LIVE-LOAD MOMENTS Design Live-Load HL-93
MLL+IM

= 419.9 x O. 703
= 295.2 kip-ft.

COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE

4

Compute Effective Flange Width

be

LRFD 4.6.2.6.1

Effective Flange Width Minimum of: i) ii) iii) 1/4(L)
t, + greater of: t, or 112 bf

S
A-36

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

.7 LñFD 5.61 in.2 M.`--- A-31 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.61-- ( 1*i4):2 - = 493.. Governs .34in.`.7. 4 h 4 =h ..9) = 874.39 in.33~(1. = 1..`..3.~ 2 6= 6.. (5-19) b) Compute Distance to Neutral Axis c . + No Good --`.25~84.89 x 33 26.2 + 1. Therefore.25X27.25 = 78.``.4kip-ft..4 kip-ft.3.``-`-`. 12 t.3.90x493.`.34~0.1 kip-ft.1 kip-ft. or 1.``.89~33 0.5 ft.33 Mu = <prMn = 0.`.``.85 fc’ ß b = 6.7 1.3. SpacingofBeams = 6x12+6.85~78 = 1. = 30 in.``. (9 .5. behavior.85 = 1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .3 kip-ft.0~0.7. < 6in. MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT Amount of reinforcement must be sufficient to develop Mr equal to the lesser of: 1.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span.7/8 in? Bars) Table 6-1 b fY C = 33 ksi (unknown steel) - 6. = 444.`.25 in. Distance from bottom of section to CG of reinforcement.. LRFD 5. > 444.3 & LRFD Eq. .89 in? A S = 9 (7/8)2 = 78 in. a = cß = 1. = 26.39 in. Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge i) ii) iii) 1 = 78in. 5 Y = 3.`.. LUD Eq. Assume rectangular section behavior. Use be = 78 in.85~3.33 Mu Mr 1) 1. (5-25) 6.2.y = 30 in. there will be rectangular section ’ The neutral axis is within the slab. +Web Thickness = (12x6+15) Avg.2 - = 6.`.14in. 4 = 87 in. C - A s fy 0.75~295.

6 LRFD Eq.`.`. < 444.9. 6 = 1099 kip-in..416~2643 1. = 91.52 in.' ) = 54133 i n! = 30 in..42 c The section has sufficient ductility. de c 1...34 --0.48 in. = ds = 26.34 in.``.61 A-38 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.y = 9. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6 kip-ft.G. OK 6. 2 ~ 9 1 . = 2643 f.2Mcr = 1 .``.``.`--- 1 I Yt sbc = C ( I .`.6 = 110 kip-fi.24 in. 20.`.``-`-`. .S 0.3 fi = 0.61 in.42 de 26... 24 " The section meets the requirements for minimum reinforcement. +A.1 kip-fi.24 &Ö = 0. (5-26) de c = 1.``. 54133 -= = 20.`.05 < 0.2. MAXIMUM REINFORCEMENT Minimum ductility (maximum reinforcement)is assured by placing limits on the neutral axis depth. . = 0.5.52" C..`. LRFD 5. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.416 ksi MC.48 0..4.

5dv< d.33)(41. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .`.2.9 (26.7)(0.95 in.`.72 (30.95 in.`. Conservatively. as the greater of the remaining criteria to reduce required calculations.`--- A-39 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.8...`..``-`-`.9 kip Governs VTANDEM VTR. we will take d.95 +4/2 = 25.`.3.6kip VDW = --`. Assume 8=45" 0.0kip Total Live Load Shear = (1.5 d.61) 0. d.``.4 kip VLAN€ = 7. from face of support.``.) = 41..8.9 Critical section for shear: d.95 in.8 kip 3.95 in.7 kip = 44. Effective Shear Depth: Maximum of: distance between resultants of the tensile and compressive forces i) ii) iii) 0.0 = 62. = 41.709) Dead Load Shears: VDC 1 12 = 10. ((25-9) M n As& + Apsfps This quantity depends upon the transfer and development of the reinforcement.60 in.5kip Distributed Shear = (62. = 21. Unknownfy + 33 ksi LRFD 5.95 in. Critical section for shear @ 23. cot 8 = (0.``. = 23.`.72 h LRFD Eq. Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge COMPUTE NOMINAL SHEAR RESISTANCE Stirrups: #5 bars @ 9 in.. from centerline of bearing.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span.5) (26.. 0 d.``.2 LRFD 5.. = ii) iii) 0.. Bearing pad width = 4 in.04) (cot 45) = 0.9 de 0. Maximum Shear at Critical Section Near Support (25. Calculate shear at 23. use d.9) + 7..0) = 23.`.

O Multi-girder bridge (for flexure and shear) 0.95) = 39.4.2. NI31 Item 59 = 6..3 b) c> --`.`.0 8 = 45 vc = (0.``.``.9 kip GENERAL LOAD RATING EQUATION 6. = 1.4.`--- System Factor cp.`.3+53.25 Thickness was field verified. =0.2 Eq.0316)(2)43.`.O for flexure and shear Condition Factor cp..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span.`.75 6.`.2.3 A) a) Inventory Level LOAD DC DW LL LOAD FACTOR 1. DESIGN LOAD RATING Strength I Limit State 6.4. cpC LRFD 5.0316ßflb.5.. (6-1) EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit States) a) Resistance Factor cp 0 = 1 .. v.3 kip v..9 = 93.95)cot45 9 = 39.25 1. (5-68) (form= 90") LRFD Eq.4 1.``.4. (0. 1.0 (15)(23.2kip =53.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .dv LRFD Eq.0 No member condition information available.``-`-`...6136)(33)(23. 6.1 Table 6-1 A-40 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.4.``. = 1. (5-69) Simplified Approach: ß = 2.5.4.1 6.. Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge Resistance: v.`.

59 ( 1 .85 x 1. 2 5 ) ( 1 0 ..35 Table 6-1 Shear: RF 1.`.5. 9 0 ) ( 4 9 3 . Tension in the longitudinal reinforcement caused by moment-shear interaction (LRFD 2000 5.. 2 5 1. 2 ) ( 1 .``...5)has not been checked in this example.``.75)(295.8.``. 0 ) ( 0 . A-41 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.7)+ ( 1 .25 1 . 7 5 ) ( 4 4 . 0 ) ( 1 . Example 3 demonstrates a case where the shear rating must be performed at multiple locations along the length of the member.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span. Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge F1exure:RF Shear: RF ( 1 . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.75 = 0. b) Operating Level 6.`. In-service concrete bridges that show no visible signs of shear distress need not be checked for shear during design-load or legal load ratings.`--- . 2 5 ) ( 2 7 .. 0 ) ( 0 . 5 ) = 0. 4 ).76 1.75 =OS9 x 1.35 = 1.``-`-`.. 0 and 8 = 45" in this example are simplified assumptions of ß= 2 conservative for high shear-low moment regions.85 = The shear rating factors for Design Load Rating are calculated for illustration purposes only.[ ( i . Example 3 includes demonstrations of this check.`.`. The . 9 ) ] (1..35 = 0.`. 8 + 3 . 6 ) = ( 1 .`. 0 ) ( 1 .25)(84..`.``.10 Note: The shear resistance using MCFT varies along the length. 9 ) ( 9 3 .2) = 0.9 LOAD DC DW LL Flexure: RF LOAD FACTOR 1.3.

Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge Compare to HS20 Ratings .NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span.1 145.9)] (1..o9 1 Type 3-3 1.47 (Ref: 1994 MCE.4.88 RF=1. kip-ft. gMLL+IM = 188. load ratings for legal loads should be performed to determine the need for posting.703 6.`.Load Factor Method Inventory Operating R F = 0..27 RF = 1..``.`.65)(MLL+.1 L =26ft.4.. A-42 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`.1 ADTT = 1850 Generalized Live-Load Factor: Flexure: RF = y L = 1.4 176.04 No posting required.`..4.25)(84. Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.2.``. 9 0 ) ( 4 9 3 ..0 for flexure. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2.25)(27.5. 4 ) [ ( I .4.4.65 Table 6-5 ( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . = 0.`.0 169.3S2.``.`. Example B2.0 kip-It. Type 3 Type 3S2 1.`.2 Type 3-3 155.3-3 (Rate for all 3) g .7)+(1...`. Type 3 MLL = Type 3S2 181.) IM = 33% C6.5.3 Even though the condition of the wearing surface has been field evaluated as smooth. the length of the flexure members prevents the use of a reduced IM.) No service limit states apply to reinforced concrete bridge members at the design load check.2 Note: Since the Operating-Level Design Load Rating produced RF < 1. 0 ) ( 0 . LEGAL LOAD RATING 6. (L<40 It.2 A) Strength I Limit State 6.4.`--- 2.``. Live Load: AASHTO Legal Loads-Type 3.

9)(493.1 1850 ADTT (one direction): Load Factor yL: 1.`. = 0 .`.2.2 --`.``-`-`.5.77 Use One-Lane Distribution Factor and divide out the 1.3 kip-fi.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span.17 = 1.17)(133..518 1. 6 2 1 x L = 0.75 5000 .`.0.3(84.2.4)-1.`--- A-43 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge COMPARE TO LOAD FACTOR RATINGS FOR TYPE 3 Distributed ML+*= 133.27 51 3. Multiple-Trips.O4 26 Type3S2 36 1.3 = 1.1) = 1.85-1.2 1 1.5 IM=33% ( L < 40 fi.`. ADTT (one direction): 1850 6.`.565 x .``.7 + 27.9) = InventoryRF' (2.``.1O00 1850. = 0.2 g.2 multiple presence factor.1 kip-fi.... (0. = 52.``..1O00 Table 6-6 y L = 1.`..4..72 I No service limit states apply to reinforced concrete bridge members at the legal load check.O9 39 Type3-3 40 1.) Undisiributed Maximum MLL VLL = 347..``.471 A 6. A) Strength II Limit State 6. gm..`. PERMIT LOAD RATING Special.75 yL -1.O3 x Operating R F 1.4. Summary Truck: Weight (tons) RF Safe Load Capacity (tons) Type3 25 1.03 2.5. no speed control Permit Type: Permit Weight: 175 kip The permit vehicle is shown on page A-47.4.6 kip at Midspan at 26 in.4.

`...``.`.``-`-`.`.`.`.`--- . Reinforced Concrete T-Beam Bridge L I O 3 4 A-44 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span...``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`..`..``..``..

.7)-(1.3kip-ft.4.``.2 Unfactored moments: MDc + MDC Nominal flexural resistance: Mn (use nominal.``-`-`. = 0. W" = RF..2. was determined by the simplified approach.`..75M.4 kip-ft.518)(1. < 437.`.6) 0.2kip = ( 1 .`.6)(0..6) (1.4.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Exampie A2 Simple Span. 2 5 ) ( 1 0 .370.2. 9 ) ( 9 3 . 0. 8+3. + MDW + Mu+. --`. B) ( 1 .3 b) Refined check using 0. 2 )-( 1 .``.75M .`.33)= VLL+IM = (52..5. 0 ) ( 0 ..0 OK 6...0 NoGood M.703 Distributed Live-Load Effect MLL+IM= (347. MDc a) Simplified check using 0. 0 No Good 6. 9 ) ( 4 9 3 ..`. = 493. 4 ) . 0 ) ( 0 . No Good 0.4.6kip-ft. Since V.2.3)(0.: = 324.33) = Flexure: W ' - 217.75 M.: MDC + MDW . C6. 7 7 ) ( 2 1 7.3)(0.2. 0 ) ( 1 . g .' = (347.5.2 Use the distribution factors that were used for the design and legal loads.7kip-fi.`..03>1.``.4= 370.86<1.6kip-ft.25)(84.9f.2.33) = 84.3kip-ft.9) ( 1 .2.2) = 1.5.7kip-ft.77)(36.9 Shear: Shear evaluation is required for Permit Load Ratings.1 Moment Ratio = --=0.=112.703)(I .M 437.2 (Optional) Table 6-2 Service I Limit State C6. not factored resistance) + MLL+IM = 437.5. 0 ) ( 1 .75x 493.``.25)(27.(1.. Reinforced ConcreteT-Beam Bridge Distributed Live-Load Effect Mu+.9 kip-ft. An elastic model of the cracked concrete section with transformed steel is used to calculate the stress in the reinforcement due to the Service I loads.. = 0. 36.`. The Service I moments act upon the cracked section to produce stress in the reinforcement. it is not dependent upon the vehicle.79 < 1 . MDW = 27.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.471)(1.1 kip-ft. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .

t.29000 -9.76)’ 12 (5261 -U)’ = 3 1926 in. = 15 in.t w ) x t s ) +(n xAs)(ds + ( L x t. =1 8 2 0 f i =1 8 2 0 m = 3152 ksi = 29000 ksi LRFD C5.1 For permanent loads at the Service limit states.] y -: A-46 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.89 in..`.61-5. (within the slab) I X y +(be x T) +(n x As)(ds 1 x 78 X 5..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .)[.`.`.`.`.+(9 x 6. (within the beam) Z = I 1 -(be 12 .75 in.. ReinforcedConcrete T-Beam Bridge E.2.76) .``. d S Assume neutral axis is within the slab.``.763 +(78 x 5..``.89)(26. --`..`--- For n = 9 1 =-be 12 =-3 - y=5.) x ts3+((be .NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span. (outside the slab) T-section behavior for the stress due to permanent loads: For 2n = 18 y = 7.7..``-`-`.3 For 2n = 18 y = 7..61 in.2 3152 usen=9 LRFD 5.``.76 in. = 6. = 6 in. use an effective modular ratio of 2n .4-1 E S n .`.’ =26.9 in.4. be S t W t A S = 78 in..

.4.``.88 ksi = 8. = 0.``.``.`.2.. The truck also has an RF < 1. ReinforcedConcrete T-Beam Bridge 1 . =9 x = 23.76) 31926 112.NCHFV 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A2 Simple Span. 32.4 No Good No Good Stress Ratio = fR = 29'7 = 0.7 < 32..``-`-`.`.7 x 12 x (30 .5. fR = 32.0 f..50 ksi fD f.2.`--- A-47 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5 .90 x 33 ksi fLL..`.88+8.9 x 15) ( - = 56090 in? 1 6.O under flexure..5. Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE A2 INTERIOR BEAM --`.``.90 f.`.61-7.4 ksi = 29. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..93 7 3 +(18 x 6.50 = 0.`.2 Stress in the extreme tension reinforcement: 324.9)' + (7.1 5 ) ~ 6 ~ +((78-15)~6) 7.9-- + -x 15 x 7.`.92 < 1.7 ksi 29.5-7.6 x 12 x (30-2..`.4 Some improvement versus the simplified check but not enough to allow the permit if this optional check is applied..( 7 8 .2.9) =1 8 ~ 56090 = fLL+IM + f.89)(26. = 23.

``.`.`.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.``..`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`..`.... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...``.`.`.``.`.

NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA3 Simple Span.0 ksi (Deck) f...4..+ 6 in. x 0. over center 40 ft.03 x lo6 Transformed Width = 102 in.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 10 are debonded over the last 12 ft. GIVEN: Span: Year Built: Materials: Concrete: 80 ft..``. at the critical section for shear. Low-Relaxation Strands 32 prestressing strands.89 4.) 1985 f. and at a change in stirrup spacing for shear..’ = 5 ksi (P/S beam) f. on each end #4 @ 9 in. + greater of either t. 270 ksi.`. The example member contains debonded tendons to illustrate how this affects the rating at the two shear locations.``-`-`.`..1 1/4(L) 12 t.``..`..’ = 4.89 = 90.2. (Governs) E.`. NBI Item 59 Code = 6 Condition: Riding Surface: Minor surface deviations (Field verified and documented) ADTT(one direction): 5000 Skew: O degrees Effective Flange Width Minimum of: i) ii) iii) be LRFD 4. Modular Ratio n = LRFD 5.6.4 A-49 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5 in.. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Example A3 --`.60 x lo6 = 0..+1/2~20 8 fi.8 in. Stirrups: #3 @ 12 in.’@ 3. over end 20 ft.``. or 1/2 b.`--- Simple Span Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Evaluation of an Interior Girder Note: This example illustrates rating an interior prestressed concrete girder at Midspan for moment.= 4 ksi (P/S Beam at transfer) Prestressing Steel : 1/2 in. 4 in. = 102 in. diameter.6. S ii) iii) 8o fi. Compression Steel: six #6 Grade 60 No Deterioration.x12 = 240 in.2. = 33000 (y)’. 2 x 8.``.`.`. =112 in. (Total Length = 81 ft..

.``.``.`.G..``.``-`-`.`. 26" - TYPE 4 GIRDER EXAMPLE A3 A-50 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`...`.`..`. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bndge i- 20" #6 rebars Y 6" --`.``.`--- #4 at 9" over end 20' #3 at 12" over center 40' I 9'l 32 stramds 1/2" diameter 10 strands debonded up to 12' C.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span. of 32 strands 3..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...75" i c ..

``.`..`.`. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge n l Cu A-5 1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.`...``.``.NCHRF' 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.``.`....`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..`..

925 kip/ft.`. = 8909 in.3 S. x 1/4 RDc2 = 10 kip 1 MDc2 = .`--- = 17..73 in.. = 0.. = 0.`.``.`. 15+ haunch 12 Total per Girder OC. = 1. = O.``-`-`. S.471 in.3 2) Composite Section: IcOmp = 730. Concrete Barriers: 2 x 0.4 Uses full slab thickness of 8 1/2 in.``.. MDc.90 kip/R. 8 II.5 x O.x 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation anci Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .3 (Bottom of Beam) DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR GIRDER I. --`. Components and Attachments a) DC OC.``.306 in.`..25 x 802 = 200 kip-fi. =76 kip 1 = 1520 kip-R.4 6 = 24. = 0. Non-Composite Dead Loads Girder Self Weight: Diaphragms: 8. = . R.`. 150 kip/fi. A-52 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.x 1.`. Wearing Surface At Midspan DW 2. 12 4 Overlay thickness was not field measured.203 kip/ft.822 kip/R.5 1 Asphalt Overlay: -x 27 x 0. S. = 10542 in.= 0.144 x .`.5. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge SUMMARY OF SECTION PROPERTIES 1) Type 4 Girder: A = 789 in? I = 260741 in......500 kip/R.5 Slab: -x 8.90 x 80’ 8 At Midspan b) Composite Dead Load OC. Use -yDw = 1.25 kip/fi.

= 1.28 1 2 x 8 08 ~s 3 a) Distribution Factor for Moment g .514 (::T (880 - (2.12 (260741+789 x 34.. LRFD Table 4-4 K. One Lane Loaded: gm1 LRFD Table 4-6 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``..``. Compute Live Load Distribution Factors (g).075 + (Er (gr (2. 1 8 At Midspan LIVE-LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR GIRDER I.203 x 80? = 162 kip-fi. ..`.514 use g . + ts/2 8.28)O.x 0.345.52*) = 1.yb +haunch e..I Two or More Lanes Loaded: = 0.03 x lo6 = 1.724 > 0. AASHTO LRFD Type k cross section Longitudinal Stiffness Parameter K .52 in..``.`. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge R .5 2 K . = n (Z+Aei) n = 4.06+ = 0.``-`-`.l = 0.4 I = 260 741 in.050 in.724 A-53 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.`--- =0.`.4 e..`. = . = (54-24... =8. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . =0.73)+1+= 34. = girder depth .12 kip M.60 x lo6 A = 789 in.4 Kg -- - 12 Lt: 1345050 = 2.`.12 3.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span..28)O.``.

``.``.. (Governs) LRFD Table 3-6 Distributed Live Load Moment at Midspan MLL+IM = 2054.`..7 kip-ft...`. a) Maximum Design Live Load (HL-93) Moment at Midsvan = 5 12 kip-ft. Compute Maximum Live Load Effects. COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE AT MIDSPAN LRFD Eq. = 2054.``-`-`. (5-16) K = 0.36+ 25 = 0.28 for low-relaxation strands f ..``.849 > 0.8 x 0.2 +(g]-[3 = 0.8 kip-R. I A 4 = 33% MLL+IM = 512+1160~ 1.8 x g.36 + - 25 8..849 II. ] [I = 0.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . d.`.`. Design Lane Load Moment = 1160 kip-R.11 = 0.70 use gv = 0. =27Oksi = distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the prestressing tendons A-54 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge b) Distribution Factor for Shear One Lane Loaded: gv1 gv ” 3 LRFD Table 4.50 = 0.``.70 Two or More Lanes Loaded: gv2 = 0..724 = 1487.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2 + ( .33 = 2054. Design Truck Moment Tandem Axles Moment = 950 kip-fi..

75 in.2.3.``-`-`.0X 0.4ksi --`.2 270 0.75-= 6244. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .75 = 59.3.2 1.5.896in.75in.’ APs =32 x 0.. distance from bottom of girder to centroid of prestressing d. < t..75 = 4.2 f .4kip-fi.``.`--- ( 1 Nominal Flexural Resistance (Midspan): LRFD Eq. =pic a LRFD 4.39in.7. equal to the lesser of 5.896 x 264.75 4. assume rectangular section behavior. = 270 1-0..896x 59. = distance from the neutral axis to the compressive face To compute c. = 4. = 8. A-55 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.O) (6244.`.``.85 X 4. = 0.2.896x 270 LRFD 5.39 = 3.85 x 102 x 0. (5-19) = 4.73 in.7.39 = 264.4kip-fi.``. c = (54+1+8. = (1 .153 b f .85 = (Effective Flange width of Deck) (Deck Concrete Strength) 4.85 x 5.4 59. c =102in.... the rectangular section behavior assumption is valid. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge y = 3.5)-3.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span. ‘ ß.3)i 6.`.5 in.28x 4.33 Mu MR = q M ..0ksi =0. (5-25) = 4.) C LRFD Eq.4) = 6244.`. [ 3.`. (Neglect any nonprestressed reinforcement.7. Therefore.`.`..28x 59.7 LRFD MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT Amount of reinforcement must be sufficient to develop M .``.`.2 MCror 1.

25 (1520+200)+1.98* .75 (1487. -789 + E. nc ('bc/'b -I) Modulus of Rupture f .A Re2 M e I I Initial Prestress = 0. +f p b ) 'bc .822 x 80' 8 = 657.`. eccentricity of PIS strands from CG of beam f .9...33 (1.5&Ö = 3644 ksi PES -3644 .Md.D 9 f. = 0...95 ksi A-56 --`.``-`-`.``.NCHW 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.3 kip-ft.674. (6-4) LRFD 5.9.`.75 for low-relaxation prestressing strands LRFD Table 5-7 E: = (0. > 6244.wpR.257+ 1.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.635 = 2.1 a> Loss Due to Elastic Shortening LRFD 5.6 x i 2 x 20.296 ksi =28500ksi = 33000 ( I V ~ ) ' . Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bndge I) 2.4.5.4.0.145)'.2..x 0.7)+1.5 (162)) = 6645.3a -. No Good MC^ = (f.4 LRFD C5.4 kip-fi. 991.73. .`..``.536 ksi Eq.98 26074 1 260741 = 1.4 x 20. .2.4 =33000 (0.6 kip-fi.4 991.`. ~ ~ LRFD 5.4.. 1.``.`.657. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.2.24 f i = 0. E..+ i .153 =991.2 LRFD 5.75 = 20.2. e = 24.33 M u=1.``.28500 x 2.4.6 Ppe =-+- Ppe 'b e A Determine Effective Prestress Force Ppe Ppe = Apsfpe Total Prestress Losses fpe = AfpEs + AfPn .75 x 270 ksi) 32 x 0.4.4 kip M D = Moment Due to Self-weight of Member at Section of Maximum Moment (Midspan) 1 = .24 fi = 0.3. A&Es = Initial Prestress -Total Prestress Losses LRFD 5.296 = 17..5.`.98 in.

95+33.9. A.0 LRFD Table 5-12 LRFD Eq.83-6.`.`.4b LRFD Eq.`.= 6.536+2. = 1.75 x 270-45.510 ksi + 17471 M.15 = 157.0-6.510)--1500 12 = 3448..98) 789 10542 = 2.75 x 270-45.2 x M . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..8 f p u=216 fpY =0. + A.5.5.670..83 ksi [ ( x 1.4. (5-97) Assumed t = 1 day f p j =0.``. =243 AfpR.5..4.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. f . = O = 1.`.71 The minimum reinforcement check is satisfied.4b LRFD Table 5-2 LRFD 5..4 ksi Ppe = r0.0 PPR-6.153 = 770.4)(20. 5 ( :y i - 1) [Mr = 6244...9 kip-fi.``.15 5.``.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span..1 Total Prestress Losses = AAEs+ AfpTL .5. =(0.9.9 = 4138.9.41 > [1.``.15 ksi fpe = Initial Prestress -Total Prestress Losses = 0.63 = 45.`. OK 6.0 PPR For P P R = +6..0 c) Relaxation at Transfer AfpRI LRFD 5.`. (5-8) A. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge b) Approximate Lump Sum Estimate of Time-Dependent Losses AfPz for I-Girders Time-Dependent Losses LRFD 5.5.0-0.06::'0)]+6.151 32 x 0.3 6.0 AfpTL = 33 1.AfPH = 17.9 f .`.63 ksi LRFD C5.0 = 33. f .``-`-`.7 A-57 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.9.4 K Substitute in: .2 x 3448.4 -- (770.

`. de = d. - d P A.$ = (32-10) (0..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span. a high assumption is conservative.5. debonded end region.6 LRFD 5...39 in.`. COMPUTE NOMINAL SHEAR RESISTANCE AT FIRST CRITICAL SECTION Note: Article 6.58 in.72h LRFD 5.3.``-`-`. d. be within the 12-fî.68 in. f.. by inspection.82 in. A-5 8 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.39 -= 0. 6. b + KA.68-- 2..9 The first critical section will. Shear calculations shown here for HL-93 are for illustrative purposes only. a =2.07 < 0.0ksi (deck) distance from bottom of beam to 22 strand centroid = 3. = 59. c = 3.`--- .3. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge MAXIMUM REINFORCEMENT Minimum ductility (maximum reinforcement) is assured by placing limits on the neutral axis depth.. d.``.2 LRFD 5. = (54 + 1 + 8.58 = 58. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..3. = 59..`.82 = 59. Cot 8 from the face of support.`. 2 For establishing the critical shear section assume: 8 = 30°.4 in.75 in.153) = 3.``. Shear calculations have been performed to the LRFD 2000 Interims.85 A’ß.``.``.5 d.4.3.`. Maximum of: i) ii) iii) distance between resultants of the tensile and compressive forces 0. Shear Location Critical section for shear near the supports is the greater of d.8..9de 0.`.42 de 59. Effective Shear Depth d.8. c = A P S fP fPU 0. or 0.75 OK The section has sufficient ductility.9 of this Manual does not require a shear evaluation for the design load and legal loads if the bridge shows no visible sign of shear distress. Ten strands have been debonded at the ends. C c .5.1 -I 0.366 in? b = 102 in.7.04 in.42 d e c = 4.2.’ = 4.5).

`. 3 3 = 100. (25-19 fi.3 kip 33% = 100. Transverse reinforcement provided at critical section: #4 vertical stirrups at 9-in. cot 0 = (0.' Area provided 2 ü4 = 0.0316 fig JY 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.8.+v... V = (1. . 5 ~ 8 0 -64.`.5) (d.37 + LRFD 5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . (5-66) --`.`.``.4/12) + = 74.0 as straight tendons are provided LRFD Eq.5 kip = VUNE Total Shear Distributed .5 kip = 6.`. Bearing Pads) Distance from centerline of bearing to critical shear section: = 58. = 64.`.4 in. = 0. Prestressed ConcreteI-Girder Bridge 0. 6 in.4 LRFD Fig.11. .5 4 =0. Distance from face of support to centerline of Bearing = 6 in.5 kip x 0.90 0. the full value of the shear resistance. Transfer Length 60 strand diameters = 30 in.``. (1241.. Minimum Transverse Reinforcement LRFD 5.4 kip 58.. < 64.4 in. V .`.8 kip (Governs) 22.V . =v.`.0815 in.3 kip Dead Load Shears: .87dv < d.``-`-`.2.. = 5.4 in.`--- Critical section for shear near the support is at 64.4 in.. from centerline of Bearing (within the debonded length).20) ( 0 .25) ( 0 .0815 in. spacings.40 in? > 0.5 d.9 kip COMPUTE NOMINAL SHEAR RESISTANCE v.) (cot 30") =0.+v.V + VmucK~ 1 . As the section is outside the transfer length..``.4/12) = (0.. fpo is used in calculating MAXIMUM SHEAR AT CRITICAL SECTION NEAR SUPPORTS V T A m E M V U N E IM - 45.' A-59 OK Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 5 ~ 8 0 -64..``. .849 = 85.

9 kip Factored Shear V.4)(cot 45) 9 = 151. LFWD Eq..+y = 66.`. for likely improved shear capacity.9 a) SimdifiedApproach 8 = 45" ß = 2.`.0 Concrete: V. d.. A-60 --`. 4= y 2~0. (5-68) for = 90" These equations are based on the Modified Compression Field Theory (MCFT) and require the determination of ß and 6 by detailed analysis.``.39 in.25) (74.0+151. V .`. = ((0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . if necessary.``.196 = 0. d.' = (0. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge V.5) (6.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.``.0316 ß f i b .`. A simplified analysis using 8 = 45' and ß = 2. = 0....``-`-`.``.03 16 ß f i b . LRFD Eq. 0 ) m (8) (58.8 kip Maximum distributed shears at critical section (HL-93 Inventory Loading) VLL+IM = 85.`.39) (60) (58.03 16)(2 .`. = 58.8 kip Total Nominal Shear Resistance vn =V.75) (85.. d .8 kip + No Good Try MCFT approach.5...0 may be utilized for an initial evaluation before resorting to the MCFT. = 8 in. Effective Web Width: Effective Shear Depth: b.5) + (1.0 kip # 4 @ 9 in. (5-69) C6. = (1.4) = 66.9) = 252.8 = 217.8 kip > 217.5 kip VDW = 6. = 0.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3 kip VDC = 74.3) (1.`.4 in.

12 At First Critical Section for Shear (64.``-`-`.``.5 (1.4) 5 .8. = 518.`. xMLL+cM = 0.8.25) (430.2 LRFD Fig.4.``..12 V fC ( I 0.601 ..5.25) (5.25 OK fct v .724x518.37) (80 .-=0.37) = 40.99 LRFD Eq..2) +(I . MUNE MLL+IM Distributed Moment: g. (5-65) K-cp vp cp 4‘4 252‘8 =0.0.9)( 8) (5 8.601 ksi (O .`.``. M.`. from centerline of Bearing) Live Load Moments: %RUCK = 293.0.10) From Table 1: (row 3.4 in.6 kip-ft.0.3.. (5-70) LRFD 5.38 = 375. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge b) MCFT Approach (using LRFD 2000 Interim) Shear stress on the concrete v = LRFD Eq. = 128. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . Dead Load Moments at First Critical Section for Shear: M.2 --`.7) =1255.3 kip-fi.. I .. = 0.203) (5.37) (80-5..: ß = 2.90+0. row 3 of Table 1) LRFD 5.`...O <0.``.5 (0. = 0.9 kip-fi.. column 2) 8 = 21.9” Calculate E.125.`--- A-61 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..3.10 x (E.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA3 Simple Span.`. Factored Moment: Mu = (1.=0. 5-19 & LRFD Table 5-5 Assume E.2 kip-ft.37) = 430..7 kip-fi.`.2 kip-fi.6) + (1 3 0 ) (40.`. x 1000 I .4. Following the approach in the LRFD Shear Design Flowchart and Table 1 .75) (375.3 kip-fi.

. (5-72) =-0.7 x 270 = 189 ksi l2 Z Q 1255'9 + (0.153 = 3.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.(3.``. (5-69) Calculate V.017 x Assume E.366) (189) A dV.9")-(3.`.4) = 94. I -0.4 2((4030)(441)+(28500)(3. : V.8 by simplified method) A-62 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.0316ßebV d.75 kip y = %f#" cote S (0.366) (189) 58. = (0.0316) (2.0 . column4) 0 = 23. (row 3. - 2(28500) (3.`. is negative.366)(189) 58.366in.``-`-`.5)(252.5)(252. it must be recalculated including concrete stiffness.87 : E.``.024 x low3 e assumed E.75 + 345.9 + (0.8)(cot 21. (5-68) LRFD Eq. = 0. > assumed&.4 2((4030)(441)+(28500)(3.9 = 440.9")-(3. l 2 1255. 3 3 ~1 0 ....7 E.8)(cot 21.5)(252.7" ß = 2.`.* EX 12x1255'9 + (0.7").366)) LRFD Eq. 5 O OK LRFD Eq..`. Ac = Area below hl2 = (8)(26) + 112 (8+26)(9) + (10)(8) = 441 in..`--- .2 = 0.39)(60)(58.366) = .87)&(8)(58.366)) = -0.8)(cot 23.10 x I O FromTable 1: Calculate E.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.4)(cot 23.~ If E..7 kip (versus 2 17..7 ") 9 = 345.``.7 fpu = 0.`. PrestressedConcrete I-Girder Bridge APS fP0 = 22 x 0.``.9 kip Total Nominal Shear Resistance V" = y + \ = 94.

0) 0.9 T = 578.``.4) = 79. from centerline of Bearing) Effective Shear Depth.4. at the parabolic growth in strand capacity from fpe at the transfer length to f development length.213 x 157. from end of beam. T = 354.`. I.. Id = (f... = 0.. 3.1 LRFD Eq.11. Development Length. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8.5 ft..4. = 60 strand diameters = 30 in.`.957 x 0.0 kip " .4 ... = 14.`. The section at 64. LRFD 5.957 x f .`.`.5(280.8 kip - > 2 =-= <p V (1255'9)(12) + -252*8 0. 26 in.+30 in. is based upon 32 strands. Use a .`--- ( 2528 280.73in.1 1.957f .``.73 in.3 LRFD 5. developed strand stress = 253 ksi = 0.366 =782. T. < 20 ft. from centerline of Bearing) and the development length (79. LRFD 5.9 F. tensile capacity on the flexural tension side of the member.``-`-`. x APs = 0.9 x 270 x 3..``. OK debonded length = 12 ft.8.`.4.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span. 73.8kip > T = 578kip OK COMPUTE NOMINAL SHEAR RESISTANCE AT STIRRUP CHANGE (20 ft. from centerline of Bearing). (5-136) LRFD 5. The 20 effective strands at the critical shear section are bonded over the full length of the beam. All 32 strands are bonded at: 12 ft. T.957 x 0.. (5-74) cp v.3.1 1.. from end of beam.1 Transfer Length.9 use 280.11.4 A-63 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. taking into account any lack of full development of that reinforcement.5 LRFD 5.73 in.9 kip 0.`.9 --`. is greater than or equal to the force T ..213fpe) db = (264.4 in. x APs= 0. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Check Longitudinal Reinforcement (LRFD 2000 Interim): T d"cp LRFD 5. from centerline of the bearing is between the transfer length (30 in.. .9)) cot 23. + check transfer length 60 strand diameters = 30 in.411.5 LRFD Eq.``.7" (58. d.3..

30 in.2 OK 4 Simplified Approach Concrete: Effective Web Width: Effective Shear Depth: o = 45” ß = 2.`. from centerline of Bearing) VLL+IM= 75. (from page A-54) d.72 h If we base d. + Apsfps LWD Eq.’ --`.22 in.``. = then: Mn including the effects of development A s f .9 de > 0.``-`-`.``.2.22 in.`.8. = 2 (0. = 0. ((25-9) d.849 = 64.``. = 57. (8) (57..3. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.`.1 1) = 0. .`. > 0. = 58.``.`. .2 > 0.113 in. Steel: # 3 @ 12 in. b.4 kip HL-93 loading . O ) $ Ö = 66.1 kip Minimum Transverse Reinforcement LRFD 5...5 Area provided 2 # 3 = 2 (0.`.0 V.. = 38 +5 = 43 kip = 4. d .5 . a = 3. = 57.75 = 59. on d. MAXIMUM SHEAR AT STIRRUP CHANGE (20 ft. = ((0.. = 8 in. V .0 kip A..0316 ß f i b v d.1 10) = 0.89 in.`--- A-64 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.73 in..03 16)( L .89 in. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge L de = h - 5= 63.9 kip g. = 0.75 in.89) v. Distributed V V .NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span..

Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge y.``.002 2 (28500) (4. = (0.6 kip = 129.25 (1290) + 1.6) cot 8 -(4.7 + 1.`--- A-65 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.cp vp = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .0.414 ksi cpbyd. = 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.8.3092 x cot e . (0..1 kip vu = 1.0828 < 0.9)(8)(57.2 f PO = 0..896)(189) 57.`.89)cot 45' 12 63.= Y.89) LRFD Eq.`.5(172. (5-65) v .3.724) (1613) = 1168 kip-fi.414 -= 0...4) -t 1 5 (43) Try MCFT Approach.4 + 63.7fpu = 0. LRFD 5.75 (1168) 3840 kip-fi.`..896 in.75 (64.7 x 270 = I89 ksi Ex = (12)(3840) +0.3.8.``-`-`.`.7 kip Total Nominal Shear Resistance: K = y+y.1) = 172.25 f. (C5-19) & LRFD Table 5-5 LRFD 5. (0.896) E.4.6 . b) MCFT Approach (using LRFD 2000 Interim) Shear stress on the concrete: v = vu 172.``. MDC + 150 = 1290 kip-fi.. 1.`.``.' 5 OK At Stirrup Change MLL+IM - 1613 kip-fi.`.22)(60)(57.4635 x 10-~ --`.89 I 0. (4.``. = 65.2 LRFD Fig.100 (2nd row) Aps = 32 x 0... MDW 122 kip-fi. 1140 gmMLL+.4.0828 5 0.5 (122) Following the approach in the LRFD Shear Design Flowchart and Table 1: - V ff = 0.0.153 = 4.`.2 M u + 1.

0 + 124. lo = 0. (5-69) V.25) ß = 2.9 x 270 x 0. + = 90..885fps T. I 0.. strand stress = 234 ksi = 0. their development length is doubled.5 in.89)(1.4 ksi).73 = 159.4. = (0. = (0. (6-1) EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit State) a) Resistance Factor cp cp = 1.3.3 fi... = (0.`.``. = 264.25 x 10" From Table 1: E.4.4635 lov3 The calculated E .0) 0.1' = 1049. x 1000 I 0.89) (cot 27. 159. LRFD 5. = 25.``-`-`.`--- LRFD Eq. OK Calculate V.4 LRFD V.0 for flexure cp = 1.1 A-66 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.9 x 270 x 0.`.9 (124.0316)(2.0 kip y = V. (E.1" .5 in. : V . column 6) x 8 = 27.75 (row 2..1 i ..5 T = (3840)(12) +("-OS (57.`.2.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.153 x22) = 1095.22)( 60)(57.75)&(8)(57.``.89) = 90.153 x 10) + (0. Id = 2 x 79.`.8.9 for shear LRFD 5..`. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Assume E. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.2 kip OK GENERAL LOAD RATING EOUATION 6.1 O ) 12 = 124.7 kip > T = 1049.4))cot 27.0. (5-68) .``..3092 x low3Cot 27.141 x = 0.`.4 kip Check Longitudinal Reinforcement: 5. Using a parabolic increase from transfer length. > 20 ft.5. As a portion of the remaining 12 strands are debonded.`.4 kip LRFD Eq.885 x 0.4. = 214.3 + i 2 fi.2 Eq. is less than the assumed but not too conservative.``.2 kip The 20 fully bonded strands are fully developed at this location (f.

75 R F = ( 1 . 2 5 ) ( 7 4 . 0 ) ( 1 .`..62 --`.``. Multi-girder bridge 'p.. = 1 .4. 9 ) ( 2 1 7 . Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge b) Condition Factor <p.5.O 1. 0 ) ( 0 .. 9 ) ( 4 4 0 .4 No member deterioration. 0 ) ( 1 .48 The shear rating factors for Design Load Rating are calculated for illustration purposes only.75)(85. 5 ) ( 1 6 2 ) ] (1. 0 ) ( 1 . 2 5 ) ( 1 5 2 0 + 2 0 0 ) + ( 1 .`.``-`-`.`. from centerline of Bearing) 1) Simplified Approach R F = 2 ) MCFT ( 1 . 4 ) [ ( 1 . 7 ) [ ( 1 .96 Shear at Stirrup Change (20f t .4in. DESIGN LOAD RATING A) Strength I Limit State 6.75)(1487.``.3) = 0. 9 ) ] (1.4.25 1 S O Overlay thickness was not field measured.``. 5 0 ) ( 6 .4. 0 ) ( 0 .O 6.3 6. In-service concrete bridges that show no visible signs of shear distress need not be checked for shear during design load or legal load ratings.1 a) Inventory Level LOAD DC LOAD FACTOR Table 6-1 DW LL Flexure at Midwan 1. 5 0 ) ( 6 .3 6.. = 1 .2. 0 ) ( 6 2 4 4 .3) = 1.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .75)(85.5)+ ( 1 .`.25)(74.`. 1. <p.9 Shear at First Critical Shear Section (64.`..4. from centerline of Bearing) 1) Simplified Approach A-61 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. 5 ) + ( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . 9 ) ] (1.``.. 6.7) = 1.5.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.. 8 )-[(1.`--- R F = ( 1 . NBI Item 59 Code = 6 c) SystemFactor 'p..

For rating. 2 5 ) ( 4 3 . The longitudinal steel yield check is not expressed as a rating factor.25 1S O 1. The force effects in the table are distributed and factored. It is recommended here that such ratings be performed at least at intervals of 1/20 the span length in addition to points of special interest. The following table illustrates the results of an evaluation for shear and moment along the length.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. the change in the rating factor using MCFT will not be linear with the change in the live load factor. these checks are required to be satisfied at each cross section in the LRFD specification. The checks performed for minimum and maximum reinforcement will also vary along the length. 4 ) [ ( 1 .92 Prestressed concrete shear capacity is load dependent.``. 9 ) ( 2 1 4 . This example has illustrated the calculation for the shear rating factor with the longitudinal yield check at the first critical section for shear and at a stirrup change.35 = 1.35 RF Shear: 1.I 1.`.. 9 ) ( 1 2 9 .i ) ] (1.`. 0 ) ( 1 . A systematic evaluation of the shear and longitudinal yield criteria based on shear-moment interaction should be performed along the length of the beam.`. 0 0 ) ( 0 . 7 5 ) ( 6 4 . 4 ) = 1.75)(64.4) 0. Therefore.18 b) Operating Level LOAD DC DW LL Flexure at Midspan: LOAD FACTOR Table 6..``.`. 0 ) + ( 1 . The maximum shear effects at each location are used with the maximum moment effects. Flexure rating should be checked at maximum moment sections and at sections where there are changes in flexural resistance.`. The longitudinal stress ratio given in the table is the nominal resistance divided by the factored load. 1 ) ] ( 1 .. A-68 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.48 x 1. the results have a small variation. not the moment effects resulting from the specific shear load placement. 0 ) ( 0 ..50 2) MCFT R F = ( 1 . 0 )+(i .. 5 0 ) ( 4 .75 ~1. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge R F = = ( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 .``. 5 0 ) ( 4 .. The Operating Design Load Rating for shear is not illustrated here.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.. it is not certain that these two locations govern for the Strength I limit state.`--- .`.``-`-`. The rating factors in the table corresponding to the demonstration calculations are in bold.`. 2 5 ) ( 4 3 . Due to the variation of resistances for shear along the length of this prestressed concrete I-beam. As the automated calculations use slightly different rounding and the more refined calculation of effective shear depth.``. 1 ) [ ( i . it is considered sufficient to perform the checks at the maximum moment location.

``..``.`.``.`..``-`-`...`..`.`--- .. " . i - cd Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS A-69 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.``. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge a .`.- M F9 o E .`..`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.

.....`.`--- I E+RF Moment +RF Shear +Long. stress ratio - O I I l I A-70 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`... PrestressedConcrete I-Girder Bridge Design Load .`.``.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.`.`.``.STRENGTH I Inventory Ratings for Example 3 t --`..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.``-`-`.`.

.87 ksi = 0.(1.9.11 ksi Totalf D = 1. therefore the legal load ratings do not need to be performed and no posting is required. 6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . Single-Trip..`.2 = 0.4.``.2.935 .`.`.4..`.510 ksi (page A-56) Allowable Tensile Stress = 0.7 x 12 17471 2.``-`-`.8)(1.4. Mix with trafic.5 A-7 1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. ADTï (one direction): 5000 Permit Type: From Live Load Analysis by Computer Program: Undistributed Maximum MLL = 2950.``.``..4 6.935 ksi Dead Load Stresses: .`.98) R F = (0.`.17 fLL+IM = = 1.1 PERMIT LOAD RATING Special.19 = 0.``.425 = 2. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge B) Service III Limit State (Inventory Level) 6.98 ksi Live Load Stress: 1487..3.4. LEGAL LOAD RATING Inventory Design Load Rating RF > 1. No speed control Permit Weight: 220 kips The permit vehicle is shown on page A-20.0)(1.1520 x 12 + fDC fDFV 10542 162 x 12 =17471 200 x 12 17471 = 1.02) = 1..4..1 Flexural ResistancefR = fpb fpb + Allowable tensile stress effective prestress = Compressive stress due to = 2.425 ksi fR = 2.`--- 6.510 + 0.`. 3.0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.19 fi & LRFD 5..5.02 ksi 2.5 kip-ft. --`.

.`--- A-72 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5.5.79 > 1..0)(1.4.5)(162)] (1...`.9 kip 6.2.5)(110. = 0.4)-[(1.1 yL VLL+IM (Permit) = 127.20) = 110.4.`.5)(1515. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge Undistributed Maximum V.70 x -=0.9)(440.4 kip-ft.0)(0.428)(1.2 1 g.69 > 1. Must be recalculated if permit values are greater.I Table 6-6 6..514 x -=0.``.`.0) (1.``-`-`. 1 1.2 multiple presence factor.`.9)(0..50 Use One-Lane Distribution Factor and divide out the 1.1 --`.00)(1. = (157. b) Shear (Using MCFT): R F = (1.50)(6.``.2 6.2 IM = 20% (Riding surface condition verified by inspection: Minor Deviations) gml = 0.4) = 1.4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.4. yL VLL+IM (HL-93) = 146.5 kip a> Flexure: at Midspan R F = (1.``.5.7) -[(1.428 = 157.M= (2950.0)(1.0)(6244.0 OK 6.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span.583 1. A) Strength II Limit State LoadFactor y L = 1.9 Shear evaluation is required for Permit Load Rating. VLL+.0OK + (1...7)] Shear resistance taken from HL-93.25)(1520+ 200) +(1.`. Acceptable and conservative as long as Mu and Vu for HL-93 are both 2 Mu and Vu for permit..2.5)(0.5) = 1.5.25)(72.5 Maximum Live Load Effect: MLL+.20) = 1515.``.`.583)(1.

f .`.4 . + M.2 in.4. + MLL+IM = (1520 + 200) + 162 a) Simplified check using O.4.5)(0..4.4kip-fi.9(0.4 kip-fi.9 = 996.2.4 = 4445.4 kip-fi.4 = 4683. = 0..3 kip-fi. not factored resistance) 0. Stress due to moments in excess of the cracking moment acts upon the cracked section. (use nominal.5. A-I3 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.75 x 6244. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge B) Service I Limit State (Optional) 6.``-`-`.75 in. h n = 90.) = 0.2. = 0. = 0.3448.6.7 ksi MCr = 3448.2. C6. Section Properties for the Cracked Composite Section: --`.. + MLL+IM 4445.. Assume neutral axis is in the slab.2) = 2563. outer strandy = 2 in.896in..``.5 in.`.0 OK Moment Ratio = M.``.9 Fp. Aps = 4. -4683‘3 .4 b) Refined check using 0. = 6244. The moments up to the cracking moment cause stress in the reinforcement equal to the effective prestress. + MDw + Mu+IM .5.9 kip-fi.4 ksi (previously calculated) M.Mcv = 4445.05 > 1.9 x 270) = 218.. OK 0. + M.8 in.`. (previously calculated) Effective prestress: [0.. g .724)(1..2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- b.724 6.75 M .9fy Calculate stress in outer reinforcement at Midspan.`..2 LFWD distribution analysis methods as described in LRFD 4..2 y = 3. 75 M.2 = 7 Alrom = 35.45...``.75 x 270 .9(0.5. Nominal flexural resistance: + 2563.``..2 M. > 4445..1.75 M . = 63.2 should be used.5 kip-fi.4 kip-fi.`. M.1 Distributed Live-Load Effect: Mu+IM = (2950. = 0.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span..2.`.9 F.151 = 157.4.

O9 II --`..5 -2.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A3 Simple Span..2) (63.6=200.43)2 = 108121 in...7ksi OK All permit checks for an interior girder are satisfied.6 ksi 108121 Stress in the reinforcement at Permit crossing Service I: f. = 157.79 Stress Ratio=] .. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .5)(12)(63.``-`-`.3..6.`.0 -6.8)(6.5 .17 I I 1.`.`.`. I -7( 996.``.69 1.`--- Service II Fatigue A-74 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.8)(6.``..0ksi<fR =0.4 Stress beyond the effective prestress (increase in stress after cracking): = n-My f. Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridge = Icr -(90.92 1.4+42.``.43)3 1 +(90.18 Permit Load Rating I I Strength11 Y Strength1 I Flexure I Shear Flexure Shear I I I I 1.9Fy=218.43) = 42.47 I 1.75 .``. Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE A3 INTERIOR GIRDER Limit State Design Load Rating Inventory I Operating 1.43)(?] 12 +(35..`.

.. 0.``.050 144 Total per stringer Say 1 MD.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span.`.`. NBI Item 59 Code = 6 Unknown condition Two Lanes 150 O degrees Same bridge as in Example B3 1994 AASHTO MCE. Distribution Factor for Moment and Shear A-75 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``-`-`.19 kip-ft.83* 8 = 2. 0.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 1930 1967 southern Pine No. CHECK MOMENT CAPACITY DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR 1. 10 in.`.029 kipíR. 2 No deterioration.022 kipíft.x 0. Components and Attachments 16 4 Deck -x .050 12 12 Stringer: 6x14 x 0.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.`.055 x 17..055 kip/A. LRFD Table 3-3 DW = O STRINGER LIVE LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR I. = . 0.``.``. Wearing Surface STRINGER DC = = = = 0..``.`.. PARTIAL. 2. Timber Stringer Bridge Example A4: GIVEN: Timber Stringer Bridpe Evaluation of an Interior Stringer Span: Year Built: Year Reconstructed: Material Condition: Riding Surface: Traffic: ADTT (one direction): Skew: Note: 17 ft.`...051 kip/ft.x 0. CROSS SECTION I.

7 ii) Two or More Lanes Loaded ..M = 0.`.`.`.``-`-`.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span.. (8-7) --`.7 kip-ft.`.7 .``. I.165 = 227. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT LRFD Eq. DISTRIBUTED LIVE LOAD MOMENTS Design Live-Load HL-93 gxA4.5 % A4LL+IM = 25. Timber Stringer Bridge AASHTO LRFD Type I cross section i) One Lane Loaded g.3 =0.20 II.`.5 One Lane Loaded Governs g = 0.0 kip-ft...``.18 < 0.3 Nominal Resistance M.. =-=h/2 1372 1412 = 196 in. 142.4 + 173.16/12 -= 0.20~227.-S LRFD Table 4-4 LRFD Table 4-5 6..4 kip-ft.``.0 = 45.20 6.20 7..16/12 = 0.T A-76 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5~33% =16.0 kip-ft. 173. Compute Maximum Live Load Effects a) Maximum Design Live Load (HL-93) Moment at Midspan Design Lane Load Moment Design Truck Moment Deign Tandem Moment I A 4 = = = 25.`.+. .2... = Fb S C. Governs LRFD 3.`. COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE Section Properties for Stringers: s.4 kip-fi.6.`--- .``.0~1.

4 Fb = (3.. 2 Size Factor: C .`.4. = (3..2.02 6 x 14 stringers (value in LRFD Table 8-7 for Width = 14 in.``-`-`.4.85 for Flexure cp = 0.25 LL 1.`.0 Good Condition System Factor cps cps = 1.) are present at the Bearings.0 Plank Deck LRFD 8.4. = 1. x 14 in.0 for flexure and shear in timber bridges b) 6. = 1. = 1.0)(h) = 54.`.4.75 for Shear Condition Factor cpc cpc = 1.4.3 ksi Southern Pine No.2.0) = 3.`. = 1.7.) Moisture Content Factor: Deck Factor: C .4...75 --`.``.4. C .02) (1.O LRFD Table 8-1 LRFD Table 8-7 LRFD 8..9 kip-ft. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . DESIGN LOAD RATING A) Strength I Limit State 6.0) (1.5.`.3 6.4.3 c.4 1.36 ksi Nominal Resistance: Mn = Fb s c.36)(196)(1.``.`--- Table 6-1 A-II Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2. Timber Stringer Bridge The stringers are continuously braced by the deck and diaphragms (6 in..`.1 a) Inventory Level LOAD LOAD FACTOR DC 1. (6-1) LRFD 8.0 Fb = Fbo C F c h t CD Fbo = 3. GENERAL LOAD RATING EQUATION 6.``..2 Eq.2 a> Resistance Factor cp cp = 0.``. and Thickness = 4 in.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span..3 c) 6.`.4.3) (1.

6x1.71 Table 6-1 COMPARE TO HS20 RATINGS-ALLOWABLE Inventory Operating STRESS METHOD R F = 0.``. Governs .5 ñ. (4-16) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.) a) Dead Load Shear V D C = -(0.``.20 Governs VmE L L + M I Total Shear V Distributed = 8.25)(2.165 = 44..55 x 1. Timber StringerBridge Flexure: RF= (1.426 kip b) Live Load Shear (HL-93) VTmDEM R .7 Place live load to cause maximum shear at lesser of: --`.0x0.=1.`.0) (1.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .11 (Flexure) (Flexure) SHEAR (HORIZONTAL SHEAR) Critical Section for Live-Load Shear is at a distance d=14in..`--- i) 2) 3 times the depth = 3 x 14 = 42 in.8 kip for Horizontal Shear Vu = 0.`.`.46 ft.35 = 0..``.17 fi.60 VLu) + VLD] A-78 LRFD Eq. COMPUTE MAXIMUM SHEAR AT CRITICAL SECTION (14 in.7 kip = 3.4) = 0.7+34.80 R F = 1.50[(0.`..`.19) (1.055)(1.25 LL 1.85)(54.0) (0.055) 1 (17. = 3. = 1.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span..17) 2 = 0.75)(45.`.9) -(i .``.x 17.6 kip = 25...0 kip = 44.55 b) Operating Level LOAD LOAD FACTOR DC 1.83 1 4 1 4 = 4. from face of support LRFD 8.35 1. T V = 34.17 fi..of span length = .83)-(0.75 Flexure: RF = 0.``-`-`.7 kip = 3.

.35 No service limit states apply.45) = 0.2.02) (1.`--- maximum vertical shear at 3d or L/4 due to wheel loads distributed laterally as specified herein (lups) VLL+IM = 8... one line of wheels is assumed to be carried by one bending member.81 = 10.2.50[(0.`.o0 1.``.0)(0.3) (1.o0 (0. = = maximum vertical shear at 3d or L/4 due to undistributed wheel loads (kips) For undistributed wheel loads.1) -(i .``.25)(0. Timber Stringer Bridge V.300 ksi 1.75)(17.87 1.6x1.15 kips - VLL = 0. A-I9 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``-`-`. (8-1) LRFD Table 8-1 DC LL Shear R F LOAD FACTOR 1. 2 LRFD Eq.45 kips COMPUTE NOMINAL SHEAR RESISTANCE Fvbd 1.60 x 20.67 x -= 0..0) (1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.`.o2 1.5 a) Inventory Level LOAD Southern Pine No.``.165)/2 = 20.306 ksi (0’306)(6)(14) = 17.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span.15) + 8. vTmDEM LRFD 4.`.0) 0....6.426) (1.0)(1.1 kip 1..`.75)(10.``.2a - 2 VLD = =(34.`.5 Fvo ‘F LRFD Eq.`.(1..25 1.75 .67 b) Shear RF Operating Level = 1.8 kips . (8-14) ‘M ‘D 0.75 0.

. kip-ft.Load Factor Flexure: RF Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.0)(1.`--- 119.45 = A) Strength I Limit State Dead Load DC: Load Factor ADTT = 150 Live .1 IM = 0..0)(0.24 A-80 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.3-3 (Rate for all 3) 6.9 25.90 = 1. Type3 VLL ShearRF - Type3S2 6.4.5 x 33% = 16.7.``.32 RF = 1.`.19 Type 3-3 1.`.0)(1.85)(54.2.19) (1.0 27.7 Table 6-1 Table 6-5 = (1.`..5 fi.``.5 X33% = 16.75)(17.2 1. 6.`.1)-(1.5 Type 3S2 108.9)-(1. (34.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A4 Simple Span.426) (1.25)(2.4.4.85 5.0)(0.3S2.65 = (1.25 = 1..`.. LEGAL LOAD RATING Live Load: AASHTO Legal Loads-Type g = 0. Timber Stringer Bridge COMPARE TO HS20 RATJNGS-ALLOWABLE Inventory Operating STRESS METHOD RF RF = 0.``.45WLL) Type3 Type3S2 1.20 6.5% Type 3 MLL ¿ZMLL+IM= - 6.4.4 3.20 IM = 0.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..22 (Shear) (Shear) 2. g = 0.4 22.) with Live Load Placed to Cause Maximum Shear Effect at 3..55% The distributed live load is calculated in the same manner as demonstrated for the design load check.9 kip-ft.`.09 SHEAR CAPACITY Live Load Shear at Critical Section (14 in.``-`-`.`.4 Type3-3 98.45)(MLL+IM) Type 3 Type 3S2 1.``.36 Type3-3 1S O RF - 1.24 Type3-3 6.25)(0.7.

.``..67 0.`.`.87 T3 1.o9 1.`..`--- AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA4 Simple Span. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.``-`-`.19 43 Type 3-3 40 1.32 53 RF Safe Load Capacity (tons) Summary of Rating Factors Limit State Strength I Flexure Shear Design Load Rating Inventory Operating 0.24 Legal Load Rating T3S2 T3-3 1.19 1.``.`.O9 27 Type 3S2 36 1.`..71 0..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.`.36 1.55 0.50 A-8 1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.32 1...``.. Timber Stringer Bridge Summaw Truck: Weight (tons) Type 3 25 1.

--`...`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`.`.`.`.....``.``.`.`..`..`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.

..140 fi. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Example A5 Four-Suan Continuous Welded Plate Girder Bridge Evaluation of an Interior Girder Note: This example demonstrates the rating calculations for a continuous plate girder for the design load.140 ft.6 2719. 5 L I ' I span1 pier 1 4 SPA 2 span 4 - Pier 3 - BRIDGE ELEVATION SKETCH WITH RATING LOCATIONS GIRDER BRACING 1) Cross Frames Spaced at 18 ft.63 i (in. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9 1606. Girder Section ProDerties Region (see sketch on page A-85) Area (in? ) 54..6 1189. and a permit load.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6 * * * A B C D E F G H --`..`. ...`.4L V @0 .``-`-`.`.63 98. 2 in.`.63 54.. .6 1884.. Ratings have been performed only at critical moment and shear locations.63 66. 2) Stiffeners Welded vertical intermediate stiffeners at 5 fi.``.``. GIVEN: Span Lengths: Year Built: Material: Condition: Riding Surface: ADTT(one direction): Skew: 112 fi.`.") 42540 58038 42540 68550 100965 68550 42540 58038 A-83 s (in?) 1189.9 1884. ' = 3 ksi No Deterioration Not field verified and documented 5500 O degrees +M -M span 3 Pier 2 +M @ 0. legal loads.9 1606. spacing.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA5 Four-Span Continuous.63 74. 4 in. at piers.`. elsewhere.``.6 1189.112 fi.``. Spaced at 24 fi.63 54. 1965 (HS20 Design Load) Non-composite Construction Fy = 32 ksi f .63 66. .63 74.

--`.122 kip/ft.``.. 0..066 kip/ft. 2. 16 in. F1.734 kipift.125 in..12 kip/ft.150) x 5 = 0.125 in. 16 in.01 1 kipíft.``.458 kipift.4375 in.150) Haunch Stay-in-place forms Average Girder Self Weight: ( 3 ( 0 .7)(0. 70 in. Bot.`. 1. F1. LMC Overlay: 1 (32. Say DW = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 0.(7. = = 0.`.``..3 1O kip/ft..`--- 1.125 in.125 in.224 kipift. 1. = 0. 16 in.``. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Girder Sections at Ratinn Locations Web Web Region Depth Thickness -B Top Flange Top Flange Width Thickness 16 in. Width Thickness 16 in. DECK: . = = 1. 0.125 in. 0. A-84 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. COMPONENTS AND ATTACHMENTS: DC Permanent loads on the deck are distributed uniformly among the beams.`.`.125 in. 1. WEARING SURFACE: D W Overlay thickness was not field measured.833)(0.50 kip/ft. E H 70 in. = 0.`.4375 in.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. 1 1/4 in.4375 in. 0. 70 in. 2.015 kip& = 0.`.`. DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS-INTERIOR GIRDER Since the girders are noncomposite all dead loads act upon the steel section. 16 in. 1. 4 9 0 ) Web Stiffeners Diaphragms Parapet Weight per girder Total per girder Say DC (:i) = 0.. Bot.``-`-`. 2... = 1.098 kiplft.

`.``.. Steel Plate Girder Bridge 37'-6" 32'-8" -~d c (TYP.``..``..`.`.) 7 --`.``-`-`...1O"z3 1'4" - CROSS SECTION NTS 112'-O" t- SPAN 1 - 140'-O" 4 SPAN 2 GIRDER ELEVATION NTS A-85 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.`--- 7l/2 It SLAB 11/2"LMC OVERLAY 4 SPACES @ 7'.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``..AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.`.`..

) Maximum Shear left of Pier 1 (1 12 ft.8 kip VDw = -8..6 kip-fi.8 ft.5 kip Negative Moments at Pier 1 MDc M.) VDc = -106.`..9 i n ! Kg = 9~58037..`.6kip-ft.) MDc = 1119.`--- For noncomposite construction eg = O I = 58037. LIVE LOAD DISTRIBUTION FACTORS AASHTO Type A cross section I..`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9 kip-fi.2557. = -204. MDw = 89.`.. Maximum Negative Moment at Pier 2 (252 ft. = . Maximum Positive Moment at Span 2 (@ 0.6 kip-ft. = 98.``. Steel Plate Girder Bridge DEAD LOAD EFFECTS Continuous beam analysis results: Maximum Positive Moment at Span 1 (@ 0.``.) MDc Mhy = 1236..``.``.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.9 = 522341 in? (Region B and Region H) K 52234 1 L12Lt: 1 2 x 112(7.`. POSITIVE FLEXURE AND SHEAR TO THE LEFT OF PIER 1 Span 1 (same for Span 4) LRFD Table 4-4 --`.4L = 44.92 A-86 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5)3 = 0.`.8kip-fi....2 kip-ft.5L = 182 fi.``-`-`.`.

A-87 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. = gm2= 0. (0.``. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Weighted Average of Kg may also be used.`.``-`-`....`.U S H T O Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example AS Four-Span Continuous.833 25 = 0.`.2+ -7. but distribution factor is not overly sensitive to K g . = 0.O - = 0.`.5L of Span 2) .803 For checking Vleft of Pier 1 (1 12 f t .8 ft.92)'" = 0.``.5 7.92)O.06+ 7.`.414 g . for Pier 1.`. L = (140 + 1 12) / 2 = 126 ft.560 For checking + M at 182 A.833 9. Interior girder gmi = 0.833 gmi ( 7 ( 7. ) .075 + g.2 (-r(-r 7.36 + For checking + A 4 at 44. L = 140 ft.2+-12 (3q.``.833 ( 7353T 12 = 0.`.833 ) x r (0.`--- g . II. (0.673 gv2 = 0. for center pier (Pier 2) as adjacent spans are both 140 ft.833 112 (0..l = 0.36+25 = 0.4L of Span 1) 7.075+ = 0.``.. NEGATIVE FLEXURE Use Kg based on the section properties of the Pier section...673 gv = gv2 = 0. into the distribution factor equations.803 > 0.594 S gv1 = 0.414 = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT LRFD Table C4-1 --`..594> 0. Span 2 and Span 3: Substitute L = 140 ft.

`.0 x 1.594) (2708.``. = 33% = 841.``-`-`.1= 908686 n e. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .33 = 2708.``.402 = 0.. into the distribution factor equations.`.`. LIVE LOAD EFFECTS Continuous beam analysis results: I.1 i n ! = 9~100965.588 > 0. I Kg --`...`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. = 1404.3 kip-fi. = 0.0 kip-fi. = n ( I + A e g2 ) =9 = O noncomposite section = 100965. Maximum Positive Moment at Span 1 (620. = (0..833 140 (1.`--- (Region E) Interior girder 140 g. Governs = 1108.833 7. = gm2=0.0+ 1404. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Pier 2: K.``. IA4 MLL+IM g m X MLL+IM 6.`.4L) a) Design Live-Load (HL-93) Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem = 841.3 A-88 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.282)O.. = 0.O kip-fi.`.2..7kip-fi.``.3) = 1608.075 + (~)""(-r 7.4..588 Pier 1: Substitute L = 140 fi..0 kip-fi.604 For checking -Mat Pier 1.l For checking -A4 at Pier 2..402 g .3. g.`. = 0.

= = = g .5 kip-ft.4) 1552.33 6.2 kip-fi.5L) a) Design Live-Load (HL-93) Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem IM MLL+IM = = = 903. Steel Plate Girder Bridge b) Legal Loads (use only truck loads as span length < 200 ft. III.``. The LRFD and LRFR recognize the possibility of more than one truck in a lane causing the maximum force effect. Governs IM 33% = 1259.1 kip-ft..594) (1639.`.6 x 1.`.560) (2772.8 kip-ft..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.4 kip-fi.4 kip-ft.3 unknown riding surface condition = 1639.2 x 1. x M ~ ~ = (0. MLL+IM = (0. 1230.6 kip-fi. (0.6 kip-fi. 0. Maximum Negative Moment at Pier 2 Live-load analysis for negative moment and reactions at interior piers in a continuous bridge requires the consideration of an additional lane-type load model.. A-89 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.) 1) 2) 3) Type 3 Type 3S2 Type 3-3 IM MLL+IM gm X = = = 1011. 1232. xMLL+IM = = 33% 903. The influence line for moment at Pier 2 is shown in the following figure along with the governing load placement for the design load case.`.33 MLL+IM = 1674. 1234.1 kip-fi.8 kip-ft.1 kip-ft. Governs 1109.7 kip-fi.`.``.`. II. the legal load case and the permit load case.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..`. Governs = 33% = 1232.33 2772.6) ~ = 937..8 kip-fi.4.. 1259.560) + ~ (1674.5 + 1405. Maximum Positive Moment at Span 2 (@.``-`-`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. b) Legal Loads (use only truck loads) 1) 2) 3) Type 3 Type 3S2 Type 3-3 = = = = 1012.4) = 973..5 kip-fi.4.``.1 x 1. 1405.2 kip-fi. g.``.`.

1 Design Loading 90%HL-93 Truck 90%HL-93 Tnick Legal Loading 75%T3-3 I 30' 1 75%T3-3 Permit Loading Permit influence Line for Moment Over Center Pier (Pier 2) with Desim..5.2..`.4.`.``.`--- .``.``.4.4. Legal.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..4.`.1 6..``-`-`.`.1 6. and Permit Loading (shows lane-type loading) A-90 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..4..`. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Live-Load Models and Placement: Design Load Legal Load Permit Load 6.``.3..`..`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example AS Four-Span Continuous.

33 = -2579 kip-ft.``.588) (-3392) = .9 kip-fi.``. Maximum Negative Moment at Pier 2 a) --`..33) .``.744.`.33) = -1065kip-fi.33) = -3392 kip-fi. Governs = -1291. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 kip-fi. = = Type 3 (-582.. b) Legal Loads (truck loads and lane-type load) 1) 2) 3) 4) Type 3 Type 3S2 Type 3-3 Lane Type Load Axle Loads Uniform Load = -582.33) -1142 kip-ft.`.2203 kip-fi..1 x 1.`.0 X..8 kip-fi..9 kip-fi.`.9 kip-fi. ( . IM Lane Load + Design Truck Lane Load + Tandem Axles 0.9) -2150. = (0.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. = -612. = -1790.``-`-`.33)+(-433.0 kip-fi.1 kip-fi.`--- Design Live Load (HL-93) Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem Double Trucks = -1388 kip-fi. 1.6 kip-fi.33 = .1 2 9 1 .9 x 1..1994.9(-1388-1790.`. Governs = -3392 kip-fi.9 (Lane Load + Double Trucks) = 33% = -1388-895.. (-858.6 x 1.8 x 1. 0 ~1.0 kip-fi. = -1388-612.``. = -433..`. Steel Plate Girder Bridge III.5 kip-ft. = -800. = 0.`. Governs Type 3-3 = = Lane-Type Load = = A-9 1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. = -858. Type 3S2 = (-800.5 x 1. I M = 33% is applied to axle loads only.5 kip-fi. = -895.

7 973.) 1608.0 kip --`.9 kip-fi.588) (.7 kip-fi.7 kip-fi.``-`-`.9 kip -68.5 -1264.``..0) = -72. (0..29 -0.803) (.0 kip-fi.6 -11..2 kip b) Legal Loads 1) 2) 3) Type 3 Type 3S2 Type 3-3 = = = -48.8 (ksi) 12.6 LIVE LOAD HL-93 Legal Load HL-93 Legal Load HL-93 Legal Load (kip-fi.4L S (in. Z M ~ + I M = 33% = -90.33 -144.6 MDw fDC fDW (kip-fi.`.2.5 kip 33% -53.55 1606.3 x 1.7) (1.``.`.60 7.00 MDc (kip-fi.`. Maximum Shear at Pier 1 (Left of Sumort) a) Design Live Load (HL-93) Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem = = = = = = Z M VLL+IM g m X VLL +IM = = -53.``.. Governs 6.7) .7 1552.80 -5.1 Note: Lane-type load is not required when checking shear.6 -2558.3 kip Governs -49..9 kip-fi. Steel Plate Girder Bridge MLL+IM gm x M u + I M = = -2150.33) = (0. -67.90 3) Span 2 @ 0.`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.4.8 -1994.9 (ksi) 9.9 .`.67.) 1236.0 1119.90.67 IV.27 -8.2150.36 0.9) -1264.6 -204.`.3 kip g.116.4.5 937.24 @si) 0.. = GIRDER BENDING STRESSES AT CRITICAL SECTIONS Mu+IM fLL+IM LOCATION 1) Span 1 @ 0.4) 1606.02 7.6 8.8 89.58 11.`--- = (. XVLL+IM A-92 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .7 kip (0.68.74 2) Pier 2 2719.) 98. -63.`.803) (-144...``.

.1762. it is conservatively specified that the maximum moments and shears from the moment and shear envelopes be used in the interaction equations.7 x 1. Steel Plate Girder Bridge CONCURRENT MOMENTS AT PIER 1 Note: The maximum moment at Pier 1 could be used here and might be more convenient..`.604) (. (0. “. gm X MLL+IM = = Maximum (Envelope) Moment a) Design Loads (HL-93) = -1300.3280.10. (load the Ist. at this location there is a significant difference between the two.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA5 Four-Span Continuous. (92 percent increase in the coincident moment to the maximum moment for HL-93 and 170 percent increase in the coincident moment to the maximum moment for the Legal Loads.8 kip-fi.5 kip-ft.`--- IA4 MLL+IM 33% (-542.0 kip-fi. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . b) Legal Loads Type 3-3 = . depending upon the user’s software for continuous beam analysis.7kip-fi. (location that caused the shear) Design Truck IA4 = 33% MLL+IM = -1288-312.7. = = = (location that caused the shear) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.” Coincident Moment a) Design-Loads (HL-93) = -1288kip-fi.7) (1.1 states for design. For convenience.604) (.0) = -1981.``.`. gm x MLL+IM = (0.33) = -3280. As the loading model will be a single vehicle for the coincident moment versus a two-vehicle-per-lane loading for the maximum moment.`..`. x A4LL+IM = 33% 0.7 x 1. 2nd.33) -721.9 (-1300.5 kip-fi.``.``-`-`.`.5) = -1029. = (0.0 kip-fi...) LRFD C6.1 kip-ft.7 kip-ft.. IA4 MLL+IM g . = b) Legal Loads Negative Flexure Load: A-93 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`...33 = -1704.``.7 kip-ft.0-1762.``.604)(-1704.542.0 kip-ft. and 4th spans) = Design-Lane Load Double Trucks .721..8) -436. (loading the first and third spans) Design-Lane Load = -3 12.

(Web Depth) 2 1 = . The section is not compact. D 35 2 cp=2x-.``-`-`. 7 7 [ .406.`--- A-94 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE OF SECTION CLASSIFY SECTION (For Moment Capacity of Positive and Negative Sections) Noncomposite symmetric section: LRFD 6.4375 3.2 160>113.``..AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.``.. = stress in the compression flange due to the factored loading under investigation (ksi) is conservative and can be used initially and refined only if --`.1 159.`.`.3. symmetric section in.``.10.76 E = 3.3.7 x 1.7) = = = -1 177. LñFD = -(WebDepth) = = 35 1 2 1 70 -x 2 6..0 kip-ft. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Axle Loads Uniform Load IM MLL+IM g. LRFD 6. Oc = = Depth of web in compression in the factored elastic range for a noncomposite.1 159. Check to see if it qualifies as noncompact.10.3 kip-fi.``./% = i 13.. x MLL+IM . -406.`.2 The sections fail the check for web compactness.160 tW 0.`.7 kip-fi..1. Assuming that fc=F’ necessary.604) (-1948.33) + (. = (0. (5-4) 1 .2 a) Check web slenderness for compact sections. = 33% = (..7kip-fi.X 70=35 in.3) = -1948. b) Check web slenderness for section proportion limits. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .10.`.2 tW 2< 6 .`.`. 2 f.76.4.. symmetric section LñFD Eq...2 D C P = Depth of web in compression at the plastic moment for a noncomposite..

4 2tf E 1.1.4..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. In negative flexure region (not considering the optional Q formula): 6. =FF =32 ksi Dc 35 2 --2~-=160 W t 0.``.`.38 JLE = 1. 18 fi.3 LRFD 6..7 2~1..9 L b = rt Distance between points bracing the compression flange. 2 in.1 1 < 1 1.`. Steel Plate Girder Bridge Use f. = 218 in.38/32/= 29000 0..4375 1601203.38 LRFD 6.1.``-`-`.6.125 The compression flanges are not slender..10.4375 2% = 2 x 35 = 160 W t 0. Bracing is satisfied.7 2x2.`.`--- ..4375 = 11.``.`.) - A-95 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. in positive flexure regions the compression flange is continuously braced by the deck even though the section is noncomposite. c) Check compression flange bracing for noncompact sections.76 < 1 1.``..8 OK - d) Check compression flange slenderness for noncompact sections.125 The compression flanges are not slender.`.7 At the positive flexure locations: bf -- 2tf 16 = 7.9..`. At negative flexure region: bf -- 29 16 = 3. Radius of gyration of a notional section comprised of the compression flange of the steel section plus one-third of the depth of the web in compression taken about the vertical axis (in.10.`.``. -I bf 1.

0~1.1 LRFD 6.10.``-`-`.10.`.31 in.`. for Compression Flanges LRFD 6.0~32...o.``.4 FE=% Rh Fd For homogeneous sections.4 in. 218 < 228.125 x 163 + 1 12 x 0.`.4.`. 7 6 . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4.. = = 1. = 1.4 The positive and negative moment sections are noncompact.`.``.4375 = 39.76 q 4 % E = 1 x 70 x 0. For tension flanges. Flexural Resistance LRFD 6. / F = 173.1.3. LRFD Figure C6.10.4.5 a) Check web slenderness for compact sections.1 in? + 1 x -r 4.`. Determine Load Shedding Factor.0 ksi for both tension and compression flanges in the positive and negative moment regions.10.10. Rb shall be taken as 1.`.3.``..76 x 4..314% = 228.4.3. (same as previous) A-96 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.125 x 16 rr 1.`--- = 5 .0 = 32..10.O for the compression flanges F.. Compression flange bracing is satisfied.2.4-2 and LRFD 6.4 160 5173.. Rb .4 OK Rb = 1.O.4 in! A C = 2.43753 = 725.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.2a 2 C = 160 tW D yb --`.4. Steel Plate Girder Bridge = *YC -x 2.2b LRFD 6. Rh shall be taken as 1.``. ODtional 0 Formula Method for Negative Flexure The section in negative flexure can also be classified considering the optional Q formula.

125 E 2*52 J --`.`.``.7 A = 98.`.4375 .``-`-`. 7 7 g and -I bf 2.`--- = 2.`.4.Lb [ = 18 fi.2 ry = 3.124-0. 2Dcp .52 tW 2tf for a symmetric noncomposite section Dcp=Il2 D=35 in. [41.765 2~2. 2 in.) A-97 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.52 c ~ 29000 =21. = 218 in. Steel Plate Girder Bridge b) Check web slenderness for section proportion limits.``.765 521....10..4.0759 .84 in.`.4375)3= 1 : 1451 i n ! LRFD 6. Mi = the lower moment due to the factored loading at either end of the unbraced length (kip-in. )+ -(70)(.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous.1.`.10..4375 tw 160 1203.5 d) Web and Compression Flange Slenderness Requirements for Q formula: LRFD 6.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``..2x35 -160 0.10.33 F y 1 3 2 0. (same as previous) c) Negative flexure and no longitudinal stiffeners.4.63 in.33 e) OK Lateral Bracing Requirement Lb I 0.8 3I 6 .1. LñFD 6...8 OK -_ bf 2tf - l6 =3.`.`. p 3.1..

382 2'f 3. 0 7 550256 9 ( ~ ) ] (3.5 0.2. A-98 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. = 7227.``.0 .``.4375)(32)(:)] 2 Mp = 95622kip-in. M. M.2.76.4.0 Classify the section for calculating LRFD Eq.4. LRFD Eq.`.7 = 292.7 in.10.``-`-`. Steel Plate Girder Bridge For Strength I and the Design Inventory (HL-93) Loading: M i@ 233 fi.125)(32)(35+?)+ (35)(.9 kip-fi.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. 6. 1 2 4 .411 LRFD Eq.3-6 M p = 95622 kip-in. 6.`.2..5.`. (Mpier = -6986 kip-fi.``.10.3-5 OK --= 30...5 11.3 For symmetric section: Qp = 3..) = [(16)(2.=50256 kip-in.``.`.`.2.. OK --`..4.`--- The optional Q formula can be applied to find the flexural resistance of the negative moment region over the center Pier.`. 6.5 Qll /$ ell. = .. 10 in...84)(29000) 32 218 .3-4 bf . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .10..4188 kip-ft. by Q formula for the negative moment region: LRFD 6.10. L~ s [ 0 .5 i - 30S =2.`.5 292.

AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge

Comparing to Moment Resistance using F ,:

M , = SxF, = 2719.6~32

= 87027 kip-in. = 7252.3 kip-fi.

For this case using the Q formula would result in a slightly lower resistance for the Design Inventory Loading. Resistance by the Q formula could be recalculated for other loads. Resistance based on F , will be used for rating factors.

6.4.2
GENERAL LOAD RATING EOUATION

Eq.6-1

EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit State) a) Resistance Factor <p (p=l.O for flexure and shear Condition Factor 9, Cp, =1.0 No deterioration SystemFactor <p, q, =1.0 Multi-girder bridge LRFD

6.5.4.2 6.4.2.3 6.4.2.4

b)

c)

1 .
A)

DESIGN LOAD RATING
Strength I Limit State

6.4.3 6.6.4.1

a)

Flexure at Span 1,0.4L:

Inventory

RF

= =

(1 .O)(1 .O)(1 .O)(32)- (1.25) (9.24) -(1.5) (0.74) (1.75)(12.02) 0.92 Governs
= =

Operating

RF

1.75 0.92x 1.35 1.19

Governs

b)

Flexure at Span 2,0.5L:

Inventory

R F =

Operating

RF

( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . 0 ) ( 3 2 ) ( 1 . 2 5 ) ( 8 . 3 6 ) ( 1 . 5 ) ( 0 . 6 7 ) (1.75) (1 1.60) = 1 . 0 1 1 . 7 5 = 1.01x 1.35 = 1.31
A-99

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge

c)

Flexure at Pier 2:

Inventory RF

Operating RF

(1.0)(1.0)(1.0)(32)-(1.25)(11.29)-(1.5)(0.90) (1.75)(8.80) = 1.07 1.75 = 1.07~1.35 = 1.39
=

6.6.4.1
B)
Service II Limit State (Calculated for Illustration,doesnot govern for noncomposite, noncompact sections as discussed later)

LRFD
6.10.5.2
fR

= 0.80 Rb Rh Fy,

for noncomposite sections

Rb and Rh were previously determined to each be 1 .O

= O 3 0 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 32
= 25.6ksi
YD
YL

Table 6-1

= yDc = yDw = 1.0 = 1.3
=

for Inventory for Operating

1.0

a)

At Span 1,0.4L:
=

Inventory. RF

25.6-(1.0)(9.24 + 0.74) (1.3X12.02) 1.30 1.00x 1 .o0

=

l.oo

Operating RF

=

= 1.30

b)

At Span 2,OSL:
=

Inventory RF

25.6-(1.0)(8.36 + 0.67) (1.3X11.60) = 1.10

Operating RF c) At Pier 2:

= 1.10 x

1'30- 1.43
1 .o0

Inventory RF

=

25.6-(1.0)(11.29+0.90) (1.3) (8.80) = 1.17
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

A-100

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous,Steel Plate Girder Bridge Operating RF
= 1.17 x le30 - 1.52

1.o0

As seen here the Strength I rating factors govern over the corresponding Service II rating factors. This is a true statement for all noncomposite, noncompact steel beams. During normal ratings the Service II rating factors do not need to be calculated for the Design Load Rating when the steel beam is both noncomposite and noncompact. This is true in both LRFD and LRFR.
2.

LEGAL LOAD RATING
The Design Load Ratings at the inventory level were not all > 1.0. The Design Load Ratings at operating level were all > 1.O. If a state (or owner) allows legal vehicles that exceed the AASHTO legal loads then load ratings with the State legal vehicles will be necessary. Legal Load Ratings using the AASHTO legal loads are demonstrated for illustration.

6.4.4

A)

Strength I Limit State

6.6.4.2.1 Table 6-5

ADTT
YL

=%O0 = 1.8

a) Flexure at Span 1,0.4L: Type 3-3
fLL+IM

= 7.27 ksi

R F = (l.O)(l.O) (1.0)(32)-(1.25) (9.24)-(1.5)(0.74)
(1.8) (7.27)
=

1.48

Governs

b) Flexure at Span 2, O X :
Type 3-3
fLL+IM

= 7.00 ksi

R F =
=

(1.O)(l.O)(l.O)(32)-(1.25)(8.36)<1.5) (0.67) (1.S) (7.00) 1.63

c) Flexure at Pier 2: Lane-Type Load
fLL+IM

= 5.58 ksi

R F =

( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . 0 ) ( 1 . 0 ) ( 3 2 ) ( 1 . 2 5 ) ( 1 1 . 2 9 ) ( 1 . 5 ) ( 0 . 9 0 ) (1.8)(5.58) = 1.65

A-101
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Type 3-3 is governed for the positive moment locations and the Lane-Type Loading is governed for the negative moment location. The rating factors will be demonstrated using only the governing loadings. (See table of girder bending stresses on A-92.)

AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges
Example AS Four-Span Continuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge

B)

SERVICE II Limit State
fR

6.6.4.2.2 for noncomposite sections

= 0.80 Rb Rh F y r

LRFD 6.10.5.2

Rb and Rh were previously determined to each be 1.O

=O30 x 1.0 x 1.0 x 32
= 25.6 ksi

Table 6- 1
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

a)

At Span 1,0.4L:

(Type 3-3 truck governs)

R F =

25.6 -( 1.O) (9.24+0.74) (1.3)(7.27)

= 1.65
b) At Span 2, OSL: (Type 3-3 truck governs)

R F =

25.6 - (1.0)(8.36+ 0.67) (1.3)(7.00) =1.82 (Lane-Type Load governs)

c) At Pier 1:

RF=

25.6- (1.0)(11.29 + 0.90) (1.3) (5.58)

= 1.85
SHEAR EVALUATION Maximum shear at Pier 1 (see previous calculations) LRFD 6.10.7 Fig. C6.10.7.1-1

VDc
VD,

= 106.8 kip ~ 8 . kip 5

Vu+,M = 116.2 kip (HL-93) Vu+,M = 72.3 kigType 3-3)
Shear Resistance at Pier 1 Spacing of vertical stiffeners
= 5 ft. clc

Web depth: D = 70in. = 5.83 fi. 3 0 = 3 x 70 in. = 210 in. = 17.5 fi. As transverse stiffener spacing is less than 30, the interior web panels are considered stiffened. LRFD 6.10.7.1

A- 102
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge

Interior Panels of NoncomDact Sections
f, =

LRFD 6.10.7.3.3b

maximum stress in the compression flange in the panel under consideration due to the factored loading (ksi) (See A-93 for concurrent moments.)

Coincident Loading for HL-93 at Pier 1: distributed Mu+IM
= -1029.5 kip-ft.

fu+IM
Inventory Operating

= (-1029.5)(12)

/ (2719.6)

=

-4.54 ksi

f, f,

= 1.25 x = 1.25 x

11.28

+

1.50 x 0.90 + 1.75 x 4.54 = 23.4 ksi
=

11.28 + 1.50 x 0.90 + 1.35 x 4.54

21.6ksi

for Type 3-3 at Pier 1: distributed Mu+IM
= -436.0 kip-ft.

fLL+IM = (-436.0)(12) / (2719.6) = 1.92 ksi

f , = 1.25 x 11.28 + 1.50 x 0.90 + 1.8 x 1.92 = 18.9 ksi
Maximum Moment Loading for HL-93 at Pier 1: distributed MLL+IM
= -1981.lkip-fi.

fLL+IM = (-1981.1)(12) / (2719.6) = -8.74 ksi
Inventory Operating

f,

= 1.25 x 11.28

+ 1.50 x 0.90 + 1.75 x 8.74 = 30.7 ksi + 1.50 x 0.90 + 1.35 x 8.74
= 27.2 ksi

f , = 1.25 x 11.28

for Negative Flexure Load at Pier 1: distributed MLL+IM
= - 1177.0 kip-ft. = -5.19 ksi = 24.80ksi
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

fLL+IM = (-1177.0)(12) / (2719.6) f,
= 1.25 x 11.28

+

1.50 x 0.90

+ 1.8 x 5.19

Classifv the shear caDacitv. 0.75 'pf Fy = 0.75 x 1.0 x 32.0 = 24 ksi

LRFD 6.10.7.3.3b

A-103
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example AS Four-Span Continuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge

For Coincident Loads f, < 0.75 <pf Fy

No moment-shear interaction.

LñFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3b-1

VP

= 0.58 FP Dtw

LñFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3a-4

= O S 8 x 32 x 70 x 0.4375
= 568.4 kip

Determine C
k

=5+-

5

LRFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3a-8

where do = stiffener spacing = 60 in.
c

If
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

-<1.10 D
W t

E

then, C = 1.0

LñFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3a-5

D =70 = 160 tw

0.4375

1.10 -=1.10

E

29000~11.81 \ j Y = 1 1 3 . 8

160 > 113.8 FAIL

If

LRFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3a-6

::4

1.38 -=142.8 160 > 142.8

FAIL

A- 104
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5

Four-Span Continuous,Steel Plate Girder Bridge If ->1.38 D
tW

E

TRUE

then, C =

LRFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3a-7

C

- 1.52

-ÏZ(

29000 x 11.81 32

Vn

=

vp e+0.87 (1- C)

1

0.87 (1- 0.635)

V"
vr

= 498.0 kip = <9v Vn = 1.0 x 498.0 = 498.0 kip

For Maximum moments at Pier 1, fu > 0.75<9 Fy interaction.

There is moment-shear

Calculate the shear resistance for the HL-93 inventory level.

Vn

0.87 (1 - C)

LRFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3b-2

R

= 0.6+0.4

Fr -fu Fr - 0.75 ~p f Fy

LRFD Eq. 6.10.7.3.3b-3

fu

= 30.7 ksi

R

= 0.6

+ 0.4

= 0.665

i

32-0.75~32 32-30'7

1
A- 105
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS

Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

AASHTO Manud for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges
Example A5 Four-SpanContinuous, Steel Plate Girder Bridge
r

V"

= 0.665 x 568.4 0.635+

0.87 (1- 0.635)

= 331.2 kip

I
LRFD 6.5.4.2 6.4.2.3 6.4.2.4 6.4.3 6.6.4.1

= 1.0 x 331.2 = 331.2 kip

(33 percent decrease in shear resistance from 498.0 kip using Coincident Concurrent Moments)

Shear Rating at Pier 1:

9, = 1.00

cp, = 1.00

cp, = 1.00
1. A)

DESIGN LOAD RATING
Strength I Limit State Inventory Shear:

Using the Maximum Concurrent Moments

RF

- (1.0)(1 .0)(1.0)(331.2)-(1.25) (106.8)-(1.50) (8.5)
(1.75)(116.2)

= 0.91
Operating Shear: 2. A)

RF

= 0.91 x

1.75 = 1.18 1.35

Using same R as Inventory. 6.4.4 6.6.4.2.1

LEGAL LOAD RATING
Strength I Limit State

(Type 3-3 Governs)

= 1.42
Note: 3.

R could be recalculated for Legal loads resulting in a higher resistance and rating.
6.4.5
--`,`,``,,``,``,`,`,,``,`,,,,``-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---

PERMIT LOAD RATING
Permit Type: Routine bridge may be evaluated for permits Legal Load RF > 1.O Permit Weight: 220 kips The permit vehicle is shown on page A-20.

.-.

6.4.5.2

A-106
Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale, 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT

4.594 0..2 21.1 g.``.3 3884.4.6 MLL+IM (kip-fi.``-`-`.Steel Plate Girder Bridge ADTT (one direction): A) Strength II Limit State LoadFactor y L = 1.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..4..6 1606.2 kirdfi.33)(0.29 8.M u + I M Pier 1: VLL+IM = (3775. span1 + M span2 g m gm gm - 0.3 10.2 Table 6-27 6. Max V lefiof Pier 1 = 190.) 2982.5L : S (in? 1606.4 fLL+IM fDC fDW (ksi) 22.67 Nominal Flexural Resistance F.560) = (2621. = 203.``.8)(1.`.6 kip + 433.604 Lane load (0.90 0.6 2719.33)(0.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous. = 2893. g m Permit Max+M Mm+M NegM at span1 = span2 = Pier2 = 3775.`.`.`.4.24 11.0 2893.`.5 6.4L : Pier 2: Span 2 @ 0.5. the flexural resistance for this bridge A-107 --`.0) (0.588) = 2305..8 NA NA 433..560 +M Neg M Pier 2 Max V Pier 1 0.4 kip-ft.8 2621.9 No Z M for Lane load.1 6. This makes many of the section During load rating.6 (ksi) 9.4.5.803 0.33)(0. This is conservative as Fyris the upper bound of f.36 (ksi) 0.6)(1.6 kip-fi.1 IM = 33% (riding surface condition is unknown) Use the Multi-Lane Loaded Live Load Distribution Factors.74 0. Therefore..``.3)(1.4.8 x 1. used in the slenderness checks can initially be set equal to Fyr.6.5.594) = (3884.6 NA Distributed Load Effects with Z M Span I:+ M L L + I M Span 2: + Mu+lM Pier 2: .2. f.30 5500 6. classification checks load independent.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..``.588 0..`.803) = 2982.6 2305.`.33 = (190.0 kip-fi. Flexure: Span 1 @ 0.

.25 > 1.29)+1.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of HighwayBridges Example A5 Four-Span Continuous..`...0 The permit check fails in flexure.5)(0.. = 32.``.`.5) (0.`--- (1.O)( 1 .73 < 1.O)(32)-(1.4L (1 .108 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. the shear Strength II and Service II rating factors should also be evaluated prior to permit approval. 0.`. 0 If the flexural Strength II rating factors were greater than 1..67) (1.67 < 1 .6) = 0.``.. O X R F = (I .`..5)(0.0 c) Flexure at Pier 2 (1. 0 ) ( 1 .67 < 1.2) = 1.0)(1.0.3)(1 0.0)(1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . = Fy. As the governing flexure R F = 0.``.`.3) (21.36)-(1.0 Governs b) Flexure at Span 2. is unchanged.``.25)(8. Steel Plate Girder Bridge computed previously assuming f .`.25) (9.90) R F = (1.3) = 0.O)(l.3) (22. F.O)(l .O)(32)-(1.74) R F = Summarv of Ratine Factors EXAMPLE A5 INTERIOR GIRDER Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``-`-`.25)(11.0ksi Flexural Rating Factors a) Flexure at Span 1. A.0)(32)-(1.`.24)+1.

2 kip --`. (single span.0 24.0 19.1 kip 253.. (field measured) Dead Load Force Effects (DC = Component.9' DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS 48...``. 21 x 1/2 2 Bot. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS . NBI Item 59 Code = 7 Not field verified and documented unknown O degrees MEMBER PROPERTIES Member 1) Top Chord TC4 Riveted Section A h2) ~ Built-up Section 55. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Example A6 Through Pratt Truss Bridve Design Load Check of Selected Truss Members GIVEN Span Length: Year Built: Material: Condition: Riding Surface: ADTT (one direction): Skew: 175 fi.. D W = Wearing Surface) Member TC4 (Top Chord) BC4 (Bottom Chord) D1 (Diagonal) V1 (Vertical) PDC -558. Angle 5 x 3 112 x 518 2TopAngle3 112 x 3 112 X 318 Top Cover Plate 27 x 112 6 Eyebars 8 x 1 2 Eyebars 8 x 1 112 2 Channels ..92 9.`.`.4 kip 37.2 kip 106.8 kip 9.``.`.``-`-`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bndges ExampleA6 Single Span.7 kip 17.`. pin-connected truss) 1909 Steel Fy = 36 ksi (nominal yield by testing) Fu = 65. Chord BC4 3) Diagonal D1 4) VerticalV1 Riveted Asphalt Thickness = 3 in.1 2) Bot..`.1O9 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``.2 kip -39.`.``.15C33.3 2 Web PI.`.`--- A.4 ksi (nominal ultimate by testing) No deterioration..1 kip 535.

`... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``-`-`.`.`..``..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.``..``.``....`.`--- I A-1 10 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.`.

Steel Through P r a t t Truss Bridge Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``.``-`-`..NCHRF' 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.``..`.`....`.`..`.`..`--- rn *I öl u A-1 1 1 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`.``.``..

5 fi.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span...2 ( 40 -1. page A-132) Multiple Presence Factor Distribution Factor = - LRFD Table 3-4 1..`.``-`-`.`--- .75 . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.2.4 R represents the resultant of lane and wheel loads..3.1.. Edge distances = 1. W = lane load P =wheel loads Typical load placement within lane 12'-O" LANE 'WIDTH I . LIVE LOAD DISTRIBUTION FACTORS (North Truss) One Lane Loaded (see figure.1 - .75 fi. Analyzing as a planar structure.`..5 40 )x1'2 A-1 12 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.1 LRFD 4..``. ADplication of HL-93 LoadinP Within a Lane LRFD 3.``. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge LIVE LOAD ANALYSIS (Design Load Check) Use lever rule for the distribution of live loads to the North truss.1 Road width = 36.`.6.``.``.`.6.`. Distance between trusses = 40 ft.`.

O 40. Undistributed. page A-132) Multiple Presence Factor = - 1. no t impact.) Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem - .1 ..`--- Distribution Factor - c) Three Lanes Loaded (See figure.1 kip .33 g X PLL+IM - (1.53..`.25 + 9 ..363 I M = 33% The following member forces were computed using influence lines.25+21..68.363 (Governs) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.363) (-169.25)Lxl.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span. Member TC4 (See figure page A-26.6 kip X 1.``.85 Distribution Factor =(33.o (33.76. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge b) Two Lanes Loaded (see figure.``..25 + 21.`. 2 5 ) A x 0 .) Multiple Presence Factor = 0...`.`. 8 5 40.`..`.76.3 -169.2 kip - (Governs) PLL+IM - -68.355 LIVE LOAD FORCE EFFECTS (Due to HL-93) Distribution Factor Dynamic Load Allowance g = 1.``-`-`.``.``.`.1 kip A-113 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .6 kip) -23 1.00 1.00 - 1.3 kip . page A-1 14.

.L.`.`.`. / * C.L. A-1 14 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``-`-`.L.`.NORTH TRUSS --t C.. Steel Through Pratî Truss Bridge 1...`.L.``. NORTH TRUSS .`--- C.``. SOUTH TRUSS ONE LANE LOADED 12'-o" 12-0" C...`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single S~an.L.L. SOUTH TRUSS 40'-O" C/C TRUSSES / . SOUTH TRUSS --`. NORTH TRUSS 40'-O" C/C TRUSSES L TWO LANES LOADED C.``.``.`.75' i1 - 5'-O" 1 I 40'-O" C/C TRUSSES C.

``.`--- = = + 49.0 kip (Governs) = = PLL+IM = + 49.363) (99..3 kip 162..``.33 = 82..`.0 kip 49.6 kip (Governs) PLL+IM --`.3 x 1.`.5 kip (Governs) PLL+IM + 73.0 kip (1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .3 kip 36... Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Member BC4 Design Lane Load DesignTruck Design Tandem - 65.6 x 1.`.7 kip - A-1 15 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.`.1 kip 5 1 .9 kip 99.``..`.9 kip 49.0) 111.`..363) (162.5 kip (1.5 kip) 22 1.5 kip) 135.33 g x PLL+IM - Member D1 Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem = 33.33 Member V1 Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem - 16.``..``-`-`.4 kip 33.1 x 1.O kip 65.363) (82.6kip 46.0 kip 16.3 kip 73.NCHW 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.5 kip (1.

3 i n ! ' -k r 120 for main members OK LRFD 4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9. Slenderness Ratio LRFD 6.`.`.. The top chord is therefore evaluated as a concentrically loaded column..4 illustrates an example where the pins are eccentric.1 in. - 4541.. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge COMPUTE NOMINAL RESISTANCE OF MEMBERS 1) TODChord Member TC4 (Compression Member) Area Length - 55. 27"x1/2" i I ' PL.5 9.875 for pinned ends k A-1 16 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.1 = 0.``..`.2.``.3 = 28.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.. = 9.. Limiting.`. r 25 fi.``-`-`.`.`--- MEMBER TC4 Area = 55.``. 2 1 I1x/2" The gravis axis of the top chord coincides with the working line connecting the pins.`.`. PL.6.30 in.``...3 in? I. Appendix C6.2.8 < Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.

`.``.5 1.9..`--- A-1 17 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..7 -.’.`. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Nominal Compressive Resistance Column slenderness term h is defined as: LRFD 6.40 t k = 1.n8)’ 2.``.40 d F = 39.`.5 t 39. 4 9 J T .”00 (Intermediate length column) = 0.1 A = [$ _ .2 LRFD Eq.4 t LRFD 6. Y - (“T: ..40 :/ (back-to-back angles) LRFD Table 6-10 b = 18.- (.75 -37.49 tW S 1 .37.4.= 42 h t OK --`.``-`-`.40 = 1. (6-20) b k = plate buckling coefficient as specified in LRFD Table 6.104 c 2...4.3 > =1 ..7 OK LRFD Table 6-10 Web Plates k = 1.25 Check Limiting WidtWThickness Ratios .``.`.`..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA6 Single Span.49 = 42. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.`.1O.`. -=-b 18.i . TOD Plate b< .. 4 9 E -=-h 21 -42 tw 0.5 t 1/2 1.75 in..9.

= 'py = <py Fy Ag LRFD Eq. 6-9 A-118 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.66 1i.2 0. = 0.90 P.45.'04) x 36 x 55.4u . = -0.9 x (-1906. Example A6 Single Span.6) = 1715..6kip b) (Governs) LRFD Eq.NCHW 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges .45 E = 0.) P...``-`-`. local buckling prior to yielding will not occur..66(0.F.9 kip 2) Bottom Chord Member BC4 (Tension Member) 6 Eyebars 8 in.30 = -1906.957 x 36 x 55.95 (1728) = 1641.6-9 LRFD 6.``..33 OK As h c 2.`.45 LRFD Table 6. Total Area = 48 in? a) Limit State: yielding over gross area (in the shank of the eyebar) LRFD 6..`. Fy A.95 P.. x 1 in.5.1 O b I0.`--- Bottom Flange k = 0. 6-14 <pc = 0.``.`.30 = -0.`.33 (5/8+0. =%e3 LRFD Eq.2 P./: t b-t 6 = 5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Limit State: fracture at the eyebar head P. = -0. =<p.``.5) 0.95 x 36 x 48 = 0.45 t The built-up section meets limiting widthhhickness ratios.`. = 0.6 kip P.5. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bidge --`.``.`.25 (See previous calculations.4.8 > b = 5.`.4.. = 12.

4) = 3619.`. 6-9 b) Limit State: fracture at the eyebar head LRFD Eq..6 1/2 in.0 cpu = 0. + 1/32 in.+ 1/32 in.``.5kip > 1641.`--- P..6kip 3) Diagonal Member D 1 2 Eyebars 8 in. -11.6.5 -A.43 > 1.-6 1/2 in.2 A-1 1 9 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.) 1 in.6.20 in? 17. = 1641.2 = 6 112 in..0 CP. = 17..NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span. = 0..``.`.53 in? per eyebar.43>1. Total Area = 24 in? a) Limit State: yielding over gross area (in the shank of the eyebar) P..6. . = 0.53 -= 1. Ash& OK 6. = cPuFu4IU u = 1.35 Ashank 8x1 P.8 O Width of eyebar head at centerline of pin = 18 in. Fy Ag = 0. 6-9 P.``.80 (4524.1/32 in.53 x 6 = 0.`. Size ofpin hole LRFD 6.4.`.5 in..) x 1. governs Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . =(i8 in.``.95 x 36 x 24 = 0.`.95 (864) = 820.4 x 11.`.``-`-`. .2 = 11.8 kip "Py LRFD Eq. Size of pin hole = 6 1/2 in.35 8 X 1. OK 6.6..80 Width of eyebar head at centerline of pin = 18 in.20 --=1. A.5. x 1 1/2 in.`... A. = (18 in.-1/32 in.. A.80 x 65.6kip Lesser value of P. Steel Through Pratt T r u s s Bridge u = 1.

2 U = 0..`.80 x 65.3 kip b) Limit State: fracture at net area (at rivet holes) P.92 in? LACING 7 J .53 x 6 = 0.80 (4524.5 kip > 1641. = 820.8 kip Lesser value of P.`.8 kip 4) Vertical Member V1 2-15 C 33. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge P. = 0.8.8..`. u 'p. 15C33.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.9# MEMBER V1 4 Limit State: yielding over gross area p. =(PyFyAg = 0.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.``.. 6-10 LRFD 6..`.``-`-`.`.9 =20.8 kip > 820.1) LRFD Eq.95 (717.4 x 11..`.``..6 kip = 1799. Net Area Gross Area per channel = 9.96 in? LRFD 6..``.4) = 3619.2.95~36~19.3 A-120 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. = (PyFuA. 6-9 = 681. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``. = 0.85 Loads transmitted through webs only. three or more rivets per line.`.80 LRFD Eq.9' Total Area Ag = 19.. governs P.

= 0.2.25 ( :5 + 0. = 4 i/2 in. ---= S2 .``.``.`..``.85 = 0. Flange thickness = 0.`.1 = 7.D ARE WEB HOLES B-C-D Anet 15 =9.`.C.3 kip Lesser value of P.``.7 kip > 681.96 .lS2 0. 16 S g =i i/2 in.3 kip --`.84in? Anet = 7.84 in2 per channel A-B-C-D-E 4 e t - AgroSS .62 in? Total Aet P.4+2 x = 9.`--- A-121 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Web thickness = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .81= 15.81 in? per channel e 8.80 (868.. = 681..hole areas + (# of diagonals) - [:i) 16 (thickness) +2 x 0.4 in.4 x 15.``-`-`.6 in....125 x 0.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.x 0.125 4g 4 x 4 s RIVET HOLES A AND E ARE FLANGE HOLES B.96 .`.3) = 694.80 x 65.62 x 0..81 in? per channel = 2 x 7. governs P.40 = 9. Rivet hole 15 -in.96-3~-~0.3 x .4 16 = 8.`.`..

90 for riveted truss members and multiple eyebars --`.35 = 2.97 1.1) -(1.4.``-`-`.55 = 2) Bottom Chord BC4 f " ~ = 535.. = 1641.7 kip p u + ~ M = 221.`--- b) 6.O no deterioration cpC System Factor cps <p.DW 1) LL + IA4 Tor.25 1.35 measured Table 6-1 LOAD DC..4.`.25)(-39.`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Single Span.2..1) =1.4.`.9)-(1.3 cl 6.`..``.6kip A-122 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. = -1715.0)(0.25)(-558.4) (1.4 1.1 OPERATING 1.`.5 kip P.4. A) DESIGN LOAD RATING Strength I Limit State 6.3 6.90)(-1715.``.75 PDc = -558.25 Asphalt thickness was field 1.`.2.1 kip Pow = 37... Chord TC4 INVENTORY 1.1 kip Pow = -39.75)(-23 1.``.4. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge GENERAL LOAD RATING EQUATION 6..``.75 = 1.1 kip P. = 0..6.4 kip Pu+IM = -23 1.97x1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9 kip Inventory: RF Operating: RF (1.) Condition Factor cpc = 1.2 EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit States) a) Resistance Factor cp (Included in previous calculations of factored axial resistances and not used in RF equations that follow.

35 = 2.8 kip = 135..55 1..35 = 2.8 kip P.25)(-535.3 kip Inventory: RF Operating: RF (1.55 1.18 2.75 = 2.25)(106.8) .97~1.90)(1641.2 kip = 9.69 1.`.5) = 1.``.`--- =106.75)(221.69 2.75)(135.(1..97 1.`.40 1.75 = 1..0)(0.75)(111.7) = 2.25)(-17.``.97 2.90)(820.8) (1.25)(9.0)(0.`.2 kip PLL+IM = 111. Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE A6 TRUSS Limit State Member Design Load Rating Inventory I Operating 1.25)(253.(1.69~1.6) .2)-(1.6) = 1.``.90)(681.40~1..97 2..6 kip = 820.0)(0.(1.40 3.55 = 3) Diagonal D1 PDc Pow PLL+IM =253.``.1) -(1.`. Inventory: RF Operating: RF (1.18 = 4) VerticalVI Poc Pow e --`.NCHRP 12-46 Manual for ConditionEvaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A6 Shgle Span.25)(-37.`.`.``-`-`.3) (1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .2) (1.2kip =17.2) .`.3)-(1.7 kip = 68 1. Steel Through Pratt Truss Bridge Inventory: RF Operating: RF (1.11 I Strength1 I TopChord I I Bottom Chord Diagonal Vertical 1 A-123 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.35 = 3..75 = 1.1 1 = Service II limits will be satisfied if Strength I limits are satisfied for axial members..

``..`.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...`.``.`..``..``.`.`.``-`-`..`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.

`.x 0.O)@.0)(0. 1 8 x 21S2 12.. 1 8 - A. 175 kiplft.``-`-`. DW .. b) Wearing Surface Asphalt Thickness Asphalt Overlay: MDW - 3 1/2in.032 kiplft.0)](1.0)(0.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span..`.042 x 21S2 2. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Example A7 Reinforced Concrete Slab BridPe Design and Legal Load Check GIVEN Span Length: Year Built: Material: Condition: Riding Surface: ADTT (one direction): Skew: 21.33)(1...`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5 fi.``. (simple span) 1963 Concrete Reinforced Steel h ’ =3ksi fy = 40 ksi No deterioration.x 0.125 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . (g)(l.``.207 = 0.``.0 kip-fi.4 kip-fi.`. 150) = O.`.``.. Parapet and curb: 2[(1. (field measured) = 0.`. NBI Item 59 Code = 6 Not field verified and documented unknown O degrees DEAD LOAD ANALYSIS Interior stripunit width a) Components Concrete slab: DC (E )(l .042 kiplft.207 kiplft.5) +(2.144) - .5)(1..150)/43 = 0.`.`..

`..* (UNIT WIDTH) A-126 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.``.58 in..`.`--- r 7-' SLAB REINFORCEMENT MAIN REINFORCEMENT #8 AT 6" CC As = 1...``-`-`. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge 3 ?h" ASPHALT CROSS SECTION --`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.`.``..`.``.``..

`. (4.. 10 LRFD 4. 30.65 ft. 43. + 12. the edge strip will not govern for this bridge since its effective width for one full lane of loading is 2 x 72 in. =72 in.9 in.``. or 60. = 6 ft.5 x 43 127.3 E = L .(0.``..``.41 ft.44 a 12..0 ft. or 30.5 x 127. w. 40.0 fi.0 in.2.1.0 ft. The effective strip width shall not exceed either the full strip width or 72. 8 4 + 1.0+5.`.41 ft. = 93. 137.`.8 in..8 in. the effective strip width is: Sum of: the distance between the edge of the deck and the inside face of the barrier + one half the interior strip width + 12. < 60 ft.`.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . > 10. 10.127 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.18) = = --`.4b E2 LRFD 4.6.``-`-`. 21. = 144 in. A.0-/.`.64) = 0.0 in.0 -= 3 Design Lanes 12 . For Longitudinal Edge Strips.8 in. = 10.5 ft. E LñFD Eq.`.0 in.6.172 in. < 11.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.384 kip/ft.`.0 ft. (4-18) L .0 + 5. = 12 ft.`--- b) More than one lane loaded E 84.0 JL.. =18. ReinforcedConcrete Slab Bridge LIVE LOAD ANALYSIS (Design Load Check) Equivalent strip width for slab type bridges (Interior Strip) a) One lane loaded LRFD 4. = 10. - NL 12'0 NL = . + 0. E = = 21.0 + 1.4a Even without including the parapet..0 in. 11.W. = w.5FT < 60ft.0 ft.0 in..65 ft. > 127.. E2 Supports 1 line of wheels + a tributary portion of the design lane load 6 .6.2.65 fi.44 J21. Lesser of 43. > 72 in.2.0 w 5NL LRFD Eq.1.0 ft. Lesser of 43.l 2 43 3 OK Use E = 10.

`.G. c Pi a 4 M n 2.2.85 2. LRFD 5.58~40 (12-Y)xL 12 57. 14-2 = 12 in. (5-19) C ASf" AS O.4~ 1.8 = 30. (5-25) 1.65 COMPUTE NOMINAL RESISTANCE Flexural Resistance: Rectangular Section b.``..`.4 kip-fi./ft. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge The rating will consider only the interior strip width. 85&'ß.0 kip&.58~40 0./ft.07 in.0 kip-ft.43 x 0..3 LRFD Eq.75 kip-ft.7.`..9 kip-ft.0+219.`.b 0. Distance to C..33 = 328. 37.65 ft. A-128 --`. MidsDan Live Load Force Effects (HL-93): Dynamic Load Allowance Equivalent Strip Width Design-Lane Load Moment Design Truck Moment Design Tandem Moment MLL+rM = = = 33 percent 10. 2 19.`. 0.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.. = b = 12 in. Governs =37.79 x 2 ' #8 bars at 6 in.85 x 3 x 0.3.``. 10. Live Load Moment per unit width of slab: Mu+IM = 328.. ß b C 1.58 in?/&. 1. 172.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .85 12 in...43 in.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.``-`-`.85 x 12 2.`.``. of steel LRFD Eq.8 kip-fi.

98 kip-fi..G. = 12 in..24 & = 0. --`..416 x 1.7 LRFD 5.`.9+1..< 51. of tensile steel d. This assures minimum ductility. distance from the neutral axis to the extreme tension 2 fiber of the uncracked concrete 1 = .6 = 16.98 kip-fi.``.4.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.`.2 =O (fr'fpb) sbc -Md.33Mu 6. = 1.3.2 Mcr Md.6 MAXIMUM REINFORCEMENT C -50.20 < 0.7..``-`-`.5.75~30.25~2.nc (sbc -i) non-composite dead load moment =O compressive stress in concrete due to effective prestress in the precompressed tensile zone sbc _ - _ Yt uncracked section modulus (neglect steel) I Yt Z sbc moment of inertia of uncracked section 14 =.. = 5 1.4) = 95.2 x 13.6 kip-fi. > 51. =1.6 f. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT (LRFD 2000 Interim) Amount of reinforcement must be sufficient to develop Mr equal to the lesser of: 1.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .90 x 57.2 Mcr 392 = 163 K in.9 kip-ft.`. Mcr 7 = 0 .= 7 in.43 de = d. = 13.`.33~(1. 2 4 E = 0.`--- LRFD 5.x 12 x 143=2744 i n ! 12 -2744 = 392 in: LRFD 5.14.2*43.3.416 ksi = 0..25~12+1.`. de .nc fPb = 1.`.``.1 A-I29 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. c = 2.2 Mcr or 1.. OK The section meets the requirements for minimum reinforcement.33 Mu Mr 1.`.75 kip-fi.2 1) cpMn = 0. (6-4) 2) 1. = distance from extreme compression fiber to the C.4. No Good = Eq.``.3 kip fi.2.42 de Putting limits on the neutral axis depth is the same as putting limits on the tensile reinforcement.5.0.42 12 OK Shear Concrete slabs and slab bridges designed in conformance with AASHTO Specifications may be considered satisfactory for shear. 6.98 kip-fi.

`.`.4 6..4.63 x 1.4 6.2. evaluate the bridge for Legal Loads. LEGAL LOAD RATING Live Load: AASHTO Legal Loads-Type 3.`.5 A. As RF < 1..3 6.75) .0)(0.3 b) 1.4.. GENERAL LOAD-RATING EQUATION 6.(6-1) R F = --`. D W LL + IA4 INVENTORY 1.8 kip-ft..1 E = 10.4.5.`. kip-fi. /fi. Type 3S2 137.2.3S2.9 6.4) (1. A) SystemFactor 'p.``.9) = 0.=l.25)(2.35 field measured Table 6-i Inventory: R F Operating: RF (1.O for HL-93.9)(57. IM = 33 percent Type 3 MLL MLL+Ihf Unknown riding surface conditions.4. 3-3 (Rate for all 3) 6.``.4..4.81 = No service limit states apply to reinforced concrete bridge members.25)(12.4.(1.1 Type 3-3 123.0)(1. E Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2 6.8 15.130 6. 1.75)(30.4.5.75 = 0. 2.90 for flexure Condition Factor <pc <pc=l.O Slab Bridge DESIGN LOAD RATING Strength I Limit State c) 6.o No deterioration LRFD 5.(1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .3 = = 150. <p.4.4.2.2 Eq.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.75 OPERATING. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge Also shear need not be checked for design load and legal load ratings of concrete members.``-`-`.1 17.`.25 Asphalt thickness was 1.0).63 1.4 18.`.4.5.1 LOAD DC.``..`--- c-(YDC)(Dc)-(YDW)(Dw) (YL )(LL + EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit States) a) Resistance Factor <p <p=0.25 1.35 = 0.``.65 ft..`..

.. 9 0 ) ( 5 7 .10 40 Type 3-3 40 1.22 Type 3 RF = 1..``-`-`.1 6.00 No posting required as RF > 1. 0 ) ( 1 .10 Type 3-3 1.2. Concrete slabs and slab bridges designed in conformance with AASHTO Specifications may be considered satisfactory for shear.4. 1 Type 3S2 1.``.`.22 I Flexure T3 1.81 Legal Load Rating T3S2 T3-3 1. Reinforced Concrete Slab Bridge A) Strength I Limit State Generalized Live-Load Factor yL = 1.1 ADTT = Unknown Table 6-5 RF = ( 1 .`.O for all AASHTO Legal Loads.10 1. 2 5 ) ( 2 . Shear need not be checked for Legal Loads.`.5. 0 ) ( 0 .AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A7 Single Span.. Summaw Truck Weight (tons) RF Safe Load Capacity (tons) Type 3 25 1.9 Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE A7 INTERIOR STRIP Limit State Strength1 Design Load Rating Inventory Operating 0. 7 5 ) [ ( 1 .`.``.22 49 LRFD 5. No service limit states apply to reinforced concrete bridge members at the Legal Load Rating.14. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.80 Flexure: 6.`--- . 4 ) ] (1 .`.5. 2 5 ) ( 1 2 .o0 25 Type 3S2 36 1.o0 A-131 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``.``.8O)(MLL+. 0 ) + ( 1 ..4.`.63 0....

..``.--`.`.``...`.`..``.`.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`...``.`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``-`-`.

`.`. 18. (simple span) 1934 Concrete f.``. 18. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``..`--- Condition: No deterioration. maximum negative moment. V (left of GI) 0.. and the maximum shear. 8 114 in..7 kip-ft. NE31 Item 59 Code = 6 ADTT (one direction): Unknown Skew: O degrees 1.`. 33.`.5 kip-ft.4 kip-ft. from West Girder) d) At 8..``.) Location on Floorbeam a) At East Girder b) At West Girder c) Max MD (8. Rating factors are calculated for the maximum positive moment.'=3 ksi Fy = 33 ksi Steel Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. (field measured) sz Floorbeam Spacing: Overlay Thickness: As the overlay thickness was field measured. (9..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA8 Simple Span.48in! 159.44 in? 1905. The cross section on page A-134 shows all of the appurtenances contributing dead loads. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Example A8 GIVEN Two-Girder Steel Bridge Design Load Rating of Girder and Floorbeam Span Length: Year Built: Material: 94 ft.1 kip 12..17 ft.`.64 kip +A4 A-133 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. from West Girder MDC+DW 42.`.``.47 fi.`. The point loads and distributed loads due to the tributary areas of the appurtenances-on an interior floorbeam are shown in the first figure on page A-135. Dead Load Force Effects (See figure on Page A-135.63 ft.1 kip O kip Effect M. the load effects for DC and DW have been combined as the same load factor will apply for both loadings. Rating of Intermediate Floorbeam Rolled Section: W24 x 70' Non-Composite A I. VDC+DW 13. - 20..59 in? 9 ft.``-`-`. 5 5/8 in..8 kip-ft.) (1 1 floorbeams counting ends) 2 in.

``. Two-Girder Steel Bridge 5..`. Y z O m m d u O A-134 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.``... 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`..`--- t .`..`.`.`...``.`.``.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.``-`-`..

5 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``..`.``.`. 8 5k klf W2=0.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span..070 f I t i 1 I n t I 1 1 .08k 4 =2.`--- FLOORBEAM DEAD LOAD FORCE EFFECTS A-13.04 k 51 k yFo*67i G d .070 0 . 3 3 klf W2=0.13 k Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.`.``.-1/ I I 1 W i 4 .``.`...`.``-`-`.... Two-Girder Steel Bridge P2=2..`.51 SHEAR (DC+ D W ) -13. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . 6 ~ ~ ~ 1 1 I n 11.`.

.64 x 9.`.64 x 9.`.62 kip 25+25 x .47 h a d e r n meei -- 52t6 L = 26.47’ - 9.33 = 52.06 kip ‘Lane per faol width ..62 kip Tandem+Lane Ru+rM = = (25+25 x .52 kip (Governs) > 48..`.``..33+0. Reaction at Floorbeam B: --`.`.47 9.-“O6 .47 58..`--- IA4 = 33% %+IM Truck + Lane = = 32 kip x 1.``.``-`-`.`.47’ L .0.606 kiplft..`.x 1.AASHTO Manuai for ConditionEvaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.x 1. 48.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . = W 10 A-136 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..23 kip = P ‘Lane = 0.33 + 0.47 fi.47 = 6.``.Modeling deck as hinged at the floorbeams.64 x 9. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Live Load (HL 93) Reactions on Intermediate Floorbeam TANDEM 25 25 TRUCK 9.`..46 kip handem = 9.

``.``. MLL+IM = 242 kip-fi. Two lanes occupying 12 fi. at 8.17 fi.`..`.O r 12'-o C. ROADWAY - -_ 12-0" Maximum Positive Live Load Moment in Floorbeam is at 8.`.`. rn = 1.17 fi. from G2. from G2 is calculated by statics..`--- P = 26. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ... over two 10 fi.23 kip W = 0.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span. The moment at 8.`.. each --`.17 fi..``.L. Each main girder is treated as a pinned support.``-`-`.606 kip/fi.`.. from West Girder (G2) A-137 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..``. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Critical Dositions of the two lanes to produce maximum Dositive moment in the floorbeam multiple presence factor.`. adjacent sections Neglect the farthest east wheel load and the lane load overhanging G1 for the maximum floorbeam moment calculation.

The loading in the figure results in a shear of 48.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.``-`-`..`. over one 10 ft.`. Each main girder is treated as a pinned support. section The shear left of G2 is calculated by statics.2.`.`.GIRDERS Maximum Live Load Shear in Floorbeam is to the left of G1.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .. wheel load just left of G1 is the governing case..`.23 kip W = 0.``.`.C. P = 26.2 24-0" ROADWAY 12'-0" œ w klf I I I I I I I I I l l l l l l I (1 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`. The multiple presence factor (m) for one lane loaded is 1.2 = 57.`--- 18'-O"C.`..2 kip. VLL+rM = 48.. Multiply by the multiple presence factor. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Critical Dosition of one loaded lane to Droduce maximum shear in the floorbeam..``. m = 1. One lane loaded.2 x 1.``.``.606 kip/ft. multiple presence factor.8 kip at the floorbeam section above and to the left of the East Girder (Gl) A-138 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..

. loads positioned as far to the right as permitted in LRFD A 3.``.`--- Maximum Negative Live Load Moment in Floorbeam is at G2.2 C. over one 10 A.`.``-`-`.6.606 kiplfl. m = 1. ROADWAY - I- 18'-0" C...2 = .. P = 26.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span..``.1..`.L. The moment at G2 is calculated by statics.7 kip-fi.2 kip-fi. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Critical Dosition of east lane to Droduce maximum negative moment in the floorbeam Multiple presence factor. GIRDERS --`.at the floorbeam section above the East Girder (GI) A-139 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.3.`.74. C.`. The loading in the figure results in a moment of 62... Multiply by the multiple presence factor.`. MLL+rM = .`. .`.2 x 1. section Neglect the farthest east wheel load and the lane load overhanging G1 for the maximum floorbeam moment calculation.23 kip W = 0. Each main girder is treated as a pinned support.62.``. One lane loaded. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1.

75 x 3.4.`. bf = 9 in.``-`-`.4.`.2 LRFD Eq.17 fi.1.10. Girder MLL+IM VLL+ZM -57.. Web slenderness check: LRFD 6.`.4.10.64 in.0 kip-fi.6a Web-Flange Interaction: 2Dcp = 55. 242.4 < 0.`--- W 24x70'./T OK The section satisfies web slenderness requirements for compact sections. and OK f = 6.``.10..8 kip O kip Loading one lane two lanes -74. 2 3. = 0.76 -=3.10. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .``.`.76 = 11 1.22 < 0.75 x 0.64 .3 OK LRFD 6..`.76 t..41 in..`. from W.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.7 kip-fi. Flange slenderness: LRFD 6..22 . Compute Nominal Resistance of Floorbeam Positive Moment Section Non composite construction: --`.1.``.4. tf = 518 in.. no deterioration t..``.11.`. 6. = 22.1. D.1.2-1 D cp =W=-- D 2 22.382 2tf A-140 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS b OK Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.5 > 55.32 in. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Summary of Live Load (HL-93) Force Effects in Floorbeam: Location 1) At East Support 2) 8.

.995 in.62 2 .`.41 in. = 184..10.11.62 in. = 216in.``.1.63] Negative Moment Section Web.0 kip 33 ksi x 11.10.Ox11. Fyc P.9.32+-=11.2 x 153'2 [11.1.2 kip LRFD Appendix A.``-`-`. Plastic Moment: M p Flange width Flange thickness TopFlange: LRFD 6.32)2]+[2 2 x 22. 153.32 in.`.7 6.2 kip-ft.4. I A-I41 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. x 0.62 in. = 11. x 184....AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.1 kip-in. flange.1.``. 2 2 dt = d.`--- Lateral Bracing: Positive moment compression flange is fully in contact with the deck and may be assumed to be adequately braced by the deck. - bc tc 33 x 8.322 +(22.3 bc = 8.7 Lb = 18ft. and interaction slenderness are all the same as for the +M section.`.``.32 in.. t..`. x 0.`..995 in.64 = 6014.6. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .0 kip Bottom Flange: Web: 4 pwc = pwt - P.6. LRFD Lateral Bracing 6.`.64-11. 184. = 501.`.22*64 . 0.4.63in. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.``. = 0. Case I: Y =-=-. The Positive Moment section is therefore compact.

0 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS LRFD 6.2 OK then V..) Mi = (1. = 1.7 kip LRFD Eq.64 -= 55. (6-1) EVALUATION FACTORS (for Strength Limit States) a) Resistance Factor cp cp= 1. --`. = 0. 6.``-`-`.10.7.2-1 GENERAL LOAD-RATING EOUATION 6..2 0.44 in. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Mi will be the factored dead load moment at the west girder support since the live load moment at the west girder will conservatively be zero by inspection.2.0 for flexure and shear Condition Factor cp. I221 in.`.`.41 = 177.2 Eq.93 in. Mp = 501.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span..4) = -41.22. The Negative Moment section is therefore compact. OK The section is adequately braced.4.58 F p Dt.142 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. Therefore the ratio of A 4 . LRFD 6.`.41 2 .. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT no deterioration . 4 6 d F = 73 > 55. = 0.``.4.2 t.5.``.2 kip-fi.`.5 in.4 L h = 216 in..7.`--- Nominal Shear Resistance (unstiffened web) D .3 A. to M . is taken as negative. ry = ry = A = 20.`.``. 76.``. cp.2 = I 1. (See loading figure on page A-137.25) (-33.10.2 b) 6...58 x 33 x 22. (dead load from figure on page A-135) The floorbeam is bent in reverse curvature.4.7 kip-fi.`. 4 6 E = 2 .64 x 0..

. Positive Live Load Moment) Inventory: R F = (1.5.1) (1.(1. 6.2.4 6.5) = 1.25)( 18.0)(50 1.42 X -= 4.`.``-`-`.`.2) .``.8) = 1.4.0)(1.4.75 3..75 LL + IM OPERATING 1.(1. cp.60 Operating: RF = = 1.17 fi.75)(74.35 2.75)( 57.`.0)(1.0)(1.60 x 1.25 Asphalt thickness was field measured 1.3 6.2)(1.O)( 1.`. Two-Girder Steel Bridge c) SystemFactor <p.1 B) Service II Limit State RF At 8.75)(242) Operating: RF = 1.6..`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.7) = 3.2 A-143 fR = 0.6.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.13 (1. from West Girder LRFD 6.0 for floorbeams.(1.42 (1. floorbeam spacing < 12 ft. = 1.``.4 1.``.`.O)( 177.0)(501.35 RF .4.10..`.(1.7) .0)(1...07 6.4.25)(13.35 Table 6-1 Flexure at 8.25)(42.1 1.. DESIGN LOAD RATING Strength I Limit State A) LOAD DC.13x==1. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .8) Operating: Shear at East Girder Inventory: RF = 1.46 1.`.. DW INVENTORY 1.80Rb Rh Fys --`.25 1. from West Girder (Max.17 ft.0)(1 .35 Flexure at East Girder (Max Negative Moment) Inventory: RF .``.75 1.

2 0.2b LRFD 6.10.1.4.16) Operating: At East Girder RF = 1 30 1. R. Two-Girder Steel Bridge For homogeneous sections.4 .o0 A-144 --`.`.. for Compression Flanges 11.25(1.= 1.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.10..0 x 1.0 x 33 = 26..05 x .``.O.80 x 1.YDC = “fDW= 1 . Rh shall be taken as 1.3.`.41 55..`.3.9) = 1..``.`.i YL = 1.`. For tension flanges.2a Determine Load Shedding Factor.4.``.32 2x-.4..o Table 6.0 Inventoqr: RF .2 < 170.4 ksi .1 LRFD 6.26.3 = for Inventory for Operating 1.36 1.``-`-`..10. Rb shall be taken as 1.8 OK fR YD = 0. LRFD 6.55.``.O.`.05 1.3(18.3..`.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.

``.`.o0 RATING OF EAST GIRDER (G1) SECTION AT MIDSPAN COV PL 18" x 7/16" / /' '\. At Midspan: At Midspan: At Girder End: MDC+DW S VDc+Dw = 3512... Two-Girder Steel Bridge Inventory: R F = 26.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . _ '\A ___ 8" x 8" x 5/8" PL 108" x %I' INT STIFF L 6" x 3 %" x 3/8" @ 5' Dead Load Force Effects Each floorbeam transmits a concentrated load of 24.30 1.`..``..60) Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`.08 1.49 kip/ft.1.08 x -= 4.`. = 4556 in? for the net section = 136. The built-up girder has a self weight of 0.2 kip-ft.25(3..``.00 1. 'COV PL 18" x 7/16" \ .AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.4 .2 1) = 3. .`.3(5.``.`--- Operating: RF = 3.`.63 kip due to dead loads to the East Girder.`..``-`-`..0 kip A-145 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.

``..`.`...`..`. 7- . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .C.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.`--- 12'-O" LANE WIDTH R = Resultant Live Load For calculating reactions.``. ROADWAY GIRDER G2 WEST e .`.``-`-`.``. C. I 18'-O' C.`. 8'-1 1/2" mœ 9'-ott .9 6'-1'12" A-146 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale... the resultant of each lane may be used instead of the wheel loads and distributed load.`.GIRDERS - I 43 9-0" . Two-Girder Steel Bridge Live Load Analysis Compute distribution factors for East Girder: Application of Live Load (HL-93) Critical Position of the Two Lanes to Produce Maximum Load on the East Girder G1 --`...L.``.

`.``-`-`..14 18-- 10 LRFD 3.7 kip-fi.`.``.4 + 1425.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span..2 Distribution Factor g 1 = l2 7 x 1.``.24 x 2612.147 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`--- = 1. At Girder End: Shear due to HL-93 IM Design Lane Load Design Truck = 33% = 30.9 kip A. g x MLL+rM = 1.1. Governs over Tandem MLL+IM = 717..14 = g2 = 1.4 kip-fi.7 = 3239.`.0x 1.0 kip-fi..8 kip Governs over Tandem Design Tandem = 48.``. Two-Girder Steel Bridge a) Case of only East lane loaded Multiple presence factor m = 1.0 g --`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`..`.33 = 2612.2 b) Case of both lanes loaded (as shown in the previous diagram) Multiple presence factor m = 1. Live loads are applied to the main girders as concentrated forces at the floorbeam locations.`.6.1.2 = 1. = 1425.06 kip per floorbeam as previously determined.O 18-Distribution Factor 10 18---12 10 x 1.24 Axle loads are distributed between adjacent floorbeams assuming the deck acts as hinged at the floorbeams. The lane load imposes 6.``.3 kip = 64.. At Midspan: Moments due to HL-93 IM Design Lane Load Design Truck = 33% = 717.`...7 kip-ft.24 > 1.

``.1.1..3.10.4.``-`-`...+i) = 10.``.`.`.5 kip g x VLL+IM = = 1.4 use f..33 = 116.10.`..~ 3 .AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4. 7 .2 1 2 108= 54 in.5 kip 144.10. LRFD 6.8 kip x 1.C6.`.5<2-=216 6tW FAIL The section is not compact..`.10. = Fyc = 33 ksi Conservative initial assumption for f c represents an upper bound: At midspan: 2tf 2( 2 x =6 .`.4-1 COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE OF SECTION Classifv Section Non-composite symmetrical section --`.24 X 116.3 kip + 64..``. Two-Girder Steel Bridge VLL+IM = 30./293:00=111.``..2 Check Web Slenderness for compact sections: D C P 3.76 .`.3.7 > 6 A-148 OK Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. Check compression flange slenderness for noncompact sections: LñFD 6.4kip LRFD Fig.`--- D C P - 1 -Web Depth 2 -x LRFD 6.

.9 Check CorDression Flange Bracing Distance between points bracing the compression flange Spacing of floorbeams 9 ft..2.76 x 4.`.4.`.. 6 1.1.``.10.07 .0 Fyf F n Rh Determine Load Shedding Factor....`.61 16 + 2 x 18 x .10.10.`.`.``..`.`.+ .A-149 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2 3 3 = 4. radius of gyration of a notional section comprised of the compression flange of the steel section plus one-third of the depth of the web in compression taken about the vertical axis (in.97 in.5)= 43. The compression flange is adequatelybraced. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.) 1 12 ( 18+ 2 ~ & ) 1 8 ' (108)(5)' = 729.``-`-`.4. LRFD 6. Flexural Resistance LRFD 6..76 5 = 203.5 Y8 in. .4 = 1.3. = 113.2a .(108)(0.07 in.``.``./% OK > Lb = 113.4.`--- . Two-Girder Steel Bridge The compression flange is not slender.6in. Rb LRFD 6..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.6 in.4 = 'b 'h = 1. The section qualifies as noncompact.2 i n ! 2 x 9.

``.4.h b E ) ar -2Dctw 4 Ac = compression flange area at midspan LRFD Eq.544 1 = 0.10.`.76 when the compression flange area 2 tension flange area LRFD 6.5 34.. 6.2a-2 =1 - 'b [ 1200+ ar 300ar ) [ F .958 = 31.`.10.`.2 cpf = cp. 6.0 x 0.97 = 1. = 1.``.544 [216 ..958 F" = 1.3.`.`--- for flexure and shear A-I50 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.4...4.3.2 Eq.2a-6 ar . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS ..3.4.4.2 x 54 x 0.6ksi x 33 ksi GENERAL LOAD-RATING EQUATION 6.`.5. (6-1) EVALUATION FACTORS (for STRENGTH Limit States) a) Resistance Factor cp LRFD 6.`.170..``.0 --`. Two-Girder Steel Bridge 'b = 5.``-`-`.544 'b =1- [ 1...``.81 1200+300 x 1.10.`.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.2a + lW Therefore: LRFD Eq.

0 kip = 144.6.`.35 = 1.4 6.54) = 1.2.00 no deterioration NI31 Item 59 Code = 6 6.1 VDC+DW VLL+IM = 136.`.0)(0.`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2.``.MLL+ihf - S = 3239'7 l 2 4556 = 8.1 Flexural stresses at midspan (unfactored): fLL+IM .4. Two-Girder Steel Bridge b) Condition Factor <pc 'p..``.90 <ps = 1.`.0 SystemFactor <p..4..13 = = Operating: RF 1.DW INVENTORY 1.`.4. the Service II limit state does not need to be checked for the Design Load Rating as discussed in example AS (will not govern load ratings).6ksi (1.``.4. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4.MSHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA8 Simple Span.``. A) Strength I Limit State Shear forces at girder ends: 6.75 6.54 ksi Resistance at midspan: F n Inventory: RF = 31.`.75 1.35 Table 6-1 LL -k IM Flexure A) Strength I Limit State I .6) .(1.6.4 kip A-151 --`. Riveted Two-Girder System For Shear 6.6.3 1.25) (1.`.75)(8.4.13 x 1.1 B) Service II Limit State Since the section is noncomposite and non-compact.`..25)(9.... = 1. DESIGN LOAD RATING LOAD DC.3 c) For Flexure.25 OPERATING 1.``-`-`.46 6..90)(1. ips = 0.0)(3 1.25 Asphalt thickness was field measured 1.

3..3~ Required end panel transverse stiffener spacing (for stiffened girders) < 1.`.2 33 ) LRFD Eq.`.``-`-`.10.`.10.607 Vp = 0.3a Determine C 29000 x 21.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.52 -3( = 29000 x 21.``.2 D =188.3.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluationand Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.`--- .``.`.7.3a-7 .58 Fp D tw Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. OK Interior panel ratings have not been illustrated here.2 D = 1 5 0 < -=216 tW 29000 x 21..10..`.5D 1.``. 6.`. Transverse stiffener spacing =5 fi.3~-2 A-152 0.3~ v.3.7.. = 9ft.3.1. Shear Resistance of End Panel LRFD 6. = cvp LRFD 6.. > 9ft. 6..``.7.10.5D = 13..5 fi..4< -=216 tW LRFD Eq. Two-Girder Steel Bridge Girder Web: D = 108in.7.7. LRFD 6.10.3.

. Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE A8 FLOORBEAM Limit State MAIN GIRDER Limit State Shear 2.35 A-153 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`--- As the bridge has sufficient capacity (RF > 1.0) (1.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..(1.`. further evaluation for legal loads is not required.81 x 1..``.0) for the HL-93 loading.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A8 Simple Span.`.25)(136.`.4) .``.`.607 x 1033. Two-Girder Steel Bridge = 0.``-`-`.35 = --`.``.35 = 2..0)(1.`.6kip = 627...4) = 1.81 1.75 = 1.75)(144.58 x 33 x 108 x 0.`.0)(627.0)(1.``.5 = 1033. = cvp = 0..4 kip Inventory: RF Operating: RF (1.`.6 kip v.

`..``.``.`...`.``.`.`.`..`..``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...``-`-`.Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..

`--- Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale. 139 kip/ft.815 kip/ft.2 = 110.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA9 Simple Span.`. and utilities may be uniformly distributed among the beams. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge Example A9 Note: P/S Concrete Adiacent Box-Beam Bridpe Design Load and Permit Load Rating of an Interior Beam This example demonstrates the rating calculations for moment at the centerline of a prestressed concrete adjacent box beam bridge. diameter.. - 1.. stop = 753 in. - Parapets: 2 (1.2. 270 ksi stress-relieved strand Grade 60 No deterioration..1 are also satisfied.02 kip/&.499in.. x 33 in.``...`.150)12 1 Ailing: 2 x 0.`.`. x 12 TotalDC .150 1 - o.``. (simple span) 1988 f : = 5 ksi (P/S Beam) 1/2 in.`.25 x 0. NBi Item 59 Code = 7 Field verified and documented Smooth approach and deck 4600 O degrees ADTT (one direction): Skew: Section Properties 48 in. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT . - 0.6.056 kip/&.003 lup/ft.``. wearing surface.3 = 6629in.. M. = 1 -xl. 1) Components and Attachments DC - Beam Self Wt (including diaphragms) Sidewalks: 2 0.4 = 6767in..6 kip-ft. Conditions given in LRFD 4.3 Dead Load Analysis-Interior Beam The beams are sufficiently transversely post-tensioned to act as a unit.``.. permanent loads due to barrier. Therefore.`.Olx7O2 8 618.2. Box Beams A I. GIVEN Span Length: Year Built: Concrete: Prestressing Steel: Reinforcing Steel: Condition: Riding Surface: 70 ft. (9:i2 x 7 x 0..0 x 2.`. = A-155 --`.``-`-`.O 1 kip/ft. 0. S.

``..`--- A-156 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span....`...`.`.``.``. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge - 4 c SI w a --r J i 4 W O x a m I l ? .``-`-`.`.`. r I - --`.`..`.

985 in.5’ 2(48-5) + 2(33-5.2 2 1. Prestressed ConcreteAdjacent Box-Beam Bridge Asphalt thickness = 2 1/2 in. (not field measured) 2) Wearing Surface and Utilities Asphalt Overlay: DW 12 1 ’5 x 36.. Gas Main: 0. = Area enclosed by the centerlines of elements = (48-5)(33 .2.5 = (2.095 kip/ft.``-`-`.``.52 Say 1.`.0 x 0.095 x 70’ = 1 8 58.`.5 (Nb)4.`. x 12 --`.`.2.4 A-157 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.6.5 I = 110. The beams are transversely post-tensioned to act as a unit.005 kip/ft.05 kip/ft.5) 5.5 5 = 209..``.499in..5)(i2)4’2 = 1.`.144 x . For closed thin-walled shapes: LRFD C4.1-3 A.`--- - 0.. 0.09 kip/ft. Total D W = ¡UDw = ..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and ResistanceFactor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span. 1 12 in.5 1/2) = 1182. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ..4 b = 48 in.`.`..= 12 0.``.2 kip fi.5 in? S = length of a side element J = 4~1182. Comuute Live Load Distribution Factors for an Interior Beam Nb = 12 LRFD Table 4-7 k = 2..x 0. Girder LRFD Table 4-4 Live Load Analvsis-Interior Type g cross section.

g X MLL+IM = (0.186 g .`.6 48 10..4) = 454.`--- = 48 10.. = 980.4kip-fi. = g.`.268)(1695. (5-16) k fPU dP 0.50 305 12x70 209985 ( [ ( .186 Two or more lanes loaded: gm2 = k b 305 ( p”( r2(.268 > 0.G. = 33% (Governs) MLL+IM = 392. of prestressing tendons A-158 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.0 x 1.``. = 825.`..4 kip-ft..3 x 70 r5’( 110499 209985 p” = 0.p”” b 12L - = 0.268 Maximum Live Load (HL-93) Moment at Midspan: Design Lane Load Design Truck Design Tandem IA4 = 392.``.2 1 10499 10.0 kip-fi.``.0 kip-fi.`.50 [ 48 33.33 = 1695..0 + 980..0 kip-fi.06 1.``-`-`.k t ) = LFWD Eq.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span.3L = .`..38 for stress-relieved strands = 270ksi = distance from extreme compression fiber to the C.. COMPUTE NOMINAL FLEXURAL RESISTANCE fPS =fpu[ l .`. = 0. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge a) Distribution Factor for Moment One Lane Loaded: - gmi [ b 33.``..

85x 5 x 0.76in.2.7.`.80x 48+0.``-`-`...`.85L ßlb+kAps-.``..06x 270 270 0.81 in.76 = 3.`.6-1858.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span..`.``.`. < 5.``. fPS = 254. ( 3:1)h LRFD Eq.6in.`. the rectangular section behavior assumption is valid.0 ksi = = 3.2 b fc’ = 48 in.80 - 3.06 x 254..38 x 3. . 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .06in.fPU dP LRFD Eq. (5-19) neglects non-prestressed reinforcement. (5-25) --`.80 x 4.``. Therefore.`..2 = a = = 0.6 4.4in. 30.06x 30. APS = 20 x 0. Pi c LRFD C 5.2.5 in.`--- A-159 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.0 30.6kip-ft..153 = 3. = 5 ksi Pi = 0. For rectangular section: C - Aps f p u 0. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge = = 33 in..

4 76 de 30.4) + 1.75 (454..6) + 1.`. = 0.2 Mu = 1.7 MINIMUM REINFORCEMENT Amount of reinforcement must be sufficient to develop M . = (fr -I-fpb) b ‘ Modulus of Rupture f.``-`-`.6 = 0.6 < 0.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span..3.24 = 0.5...`. 2..24 & LRFD 5.6 in.8 1.33 Mu or 1.16 c .`.AfpR1 fpe = Initial Prestress .76 in. equal to the lesser of: 1.537 ksi where Ppe = Effective Prestress Force Determine Effective Prestress Force Ppe Ppe = Apsfpe TotalPrestressLosses = AfpEs + A\fp~~ .`.42 d e --`..2 M.25 (618.2 > Mr check Mr 2 1. = (1.Total Prestress Losses A-160 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale...2.5 (58.0)(1858.-= 0.``.6) = 1858.``.33 Mu = 2202.. MC. de = d .6 1) LRFD 5.3.. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .4.``.`--- C c = 4.`.7.``. = 30. -. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge Check Ductility (Maximum reinforcement) Limit neutral axis depth to: -10.`. = qM.42 OK 6.2 Mcr M.`.2)= 1655.

.``-`-`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .. L g p x 14.7 x 270) 20 x 0.4.578. ) ' . = 14.499.-2...815 x 702 = 499. shrinkage.1 + 578.`.4.7 f p u if not available in plans.145)'.2..12 .2 x 14.5 in.`--- A-161 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.``.744 = 13.3 -= Eci 33000 ( w .AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span..`.2 kip-fi.64 ksi LRFD 5.`.3 AfpTL PPR = 19.``.064 = 1.1 in..9.744 ksi .0 4 x PPR (Average for box girder) = + A P S fPY Aps fpy + As fy --`.4 Ep AfpES 3644 b) Approximate lump sum estimate of time-dependent losses (includes creep.e I Initial Piestress = 0. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge a) Loss Due to Elastic Shortening E ' f p E S A fpES = 'ci fcgp f =-+--- P A P e2 I M.O40 .0.4 LRFD (3. and relaxation of steel) ' f p E S LRFD 5.`.153 = 578. M.`.2.`.``. = Moment due to self-weight of the member 1 8 = .5 &Ö = 3644 ksi = 28500ksi = 28500 x 1.5. ~ Jfn = 33000 (0..x 0.3 k A I e =753 in? = 110499 in4 = 16.3 110499 110499 753 = 0.4 in. LRFD Table 5-7 = (0.`.768+ 1.``.

4.5-2. A...0 PPR AfpTL + 4 x 1.0 .5 ksi LRFD Table 5-2 As =O = 1..``.7 kip-fi.6=1858.1 = 24.`--- ' f p R 1 = -fpJ fPY 0.``.4) 753 6767 = 1.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span.``.4..Total Prestress Losses = 0.80fpu fpy = 0.``.9 -- 501.5....2x1267.24.162 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.2Mcr =1. = l. = 1858.4b AfpR1= 11.11.98) 20 x 0.536 1 + 1.`.`.85fpu LRFD C5.9(16.2 OK 6.`.AfpR1 = 13.153 = 501.4b --`.7 x 270 .Ox1858.501.7=1521.5. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge APS = 3.`.66 LRFD 5.712) 6767 x 12 = 1267.0 MpR1 = 23 ksi c) Relaxation at Transfer log (24t) 10 LRFD 5.98 fpe = 164 ksi PL = (0.7 Minimum reinforcement check is satisfied.85 x 270 = 229.`.6>1.9.``-`-`.6 kip-fi.9..70~270-24.712 ksi + Mcr = (fr + f p b ) sb = (0.06 in.= = 0. Mr Mr = CPM.`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .9 kip .5.55 fpj t = 1 Day (Assumed) f p j = 0.9.98 ksi fpe = Initial Prestress .`.66 ksi Total Prestress Losses = MPEs+ AfpTL.85 x fPY Grn Stress-relieved strand = 0.64 + 23.5.0 = 19.

2..)(cp.26 x = Operating: RF 1..`.25 1.75 1.1 6.35 Table 6-1 Flexure at Midsoan: Inventory: RF (1.2) (1...1 ..`.4.`.4.``.35 1.75 1.`.4. (p.162) Allowable Tensile Stress Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS = 0.1 Flexural ResistancefR = fpb + Allowable tensile stress fPb = compressive stress due to effective prestress = 1.7 12 ksi (See previous calculation.``-`-`.2.0)(1.``.. = 1.3 6.4.4.4. =1.O for flexure Condition Factor <pc ( p . PrestressedConcrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge GENERAL LOAD-RATING EOUATION 6.50)(58.O no deterioration System Factor (p.0)(1858.25)(618.25 1.5.50 1.19 --`.4.`.. DESIGN LOAD RATING Strength I Limit State R F = (<p.4 6.6)-(1.`--- LRFD A-163 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.(YDc)(w-(YD.`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges ExampleA9 Simple Span.)(~)4l LOAD DC DW A) LL +IM (YL)(LL + I M ) INVENTORY OPERATING 1. A.26 = = 1. B) Service III Limit State (Inventory Level) 6.3 b) cl 6.4) = 1.2 EVALUATION FACTORS (for STRENGTH Limit States) a) Resistance Factor (p cp = 1.2. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .5.75)(454.50 Asphalt thickness was not field measured 1.5.63 Shear need not be checked for the design load as the bridge does not exhibit signs of shear distress.0 LRFD 5.`..``.``.6) -(1.0)(1.)(Dw) 1.

``.3.80)(0..2.4 6. 103 ksi Total fD = 1.`.5 --`.`. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge = 0.``.0 YD R F = 2..19 & 5.712 + 0.58..0)(1.425 = 2.``-`-`.1 2.2 x 12 6767 = O.45 > 1.20 ksi Live Load Stress: YL = 0. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS .`. LEGAL LOAD RATING Inventory Design-Load Rating RF > 1.137-(1.4.`--- A-164 Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`..AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span.`....4.`. PERMIT LOAD RATING Permit Type: Permit Weight: The Permit vehicle: ADTT (one direction): Routine 240 kips Shown on page A-21 4600 6.9.4.425 ksi fR = 1.``.2 = 0.``.137 ksi Dead Load Stress: fDW .0 OK 6. therefore the legal load ratings do not need to be performed and no posting is required.4.80 = 1. 3.O..20) (0.806) Table 6-1 = 1.`.

25(618.6 kip-fi. Not illustrated here.75 x 1858.268 (two lanes loaded distribution factor) Field inspection verified: Smooth Riding Surface 6. 0. Simplified check using 0.1. M D .6). Flexure: RF = (1.1 Table 6.``. Prestressed ConcreteAdjacent Box-Beam Bridge From Live Load Analysis by Computer Program: Undistributed maximum: MLL = 2592 kip-fi.I) RF= 1.20 .`.. < 1440.2.: --`.1.2.. g .5....M.75 M.`. = 0.``.5 6. A) Strength I Limit State 1.AASHTO Manual for ConditionEvaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span.5. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT .1 kip-ft.``.4.``-`-`.5.4.1000 6.`.4.5.6.1 kip-fi.10) = 764.0)(1858.6 kip-fi.5. = 1440.1 IM = 10% Distributed Live Load Effects: MLL+IM = (2592)(0.2 Service I Limit State LRFD distribution analysis methods as described in LRFD 4.5. (previously calculated) fpe C6.10) = 764.268 M L L + I M = (2592)(0.2. g . M.9 kip-fi.0 OK Note: Permit trucks should be checked for shear incrementally along the length of the member.1.1.9 .9 kip-fi. No Good A-165 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.6.0)(1. see example A3.yL .2-1 y L = 1.20 5000 .2.1267.268)(1..4.2 kip-fi.2) (1.`.30 .9 6.0 kip-fi.3.2 = 164 ksi (previously calculated) MLL+IM MDc aì + MDw + ..5(58.268)(1. = 1394..4. MDc = 618. = 1267.2 kip-fi.29)(764.7 = 173.6) .``. = 58.6.`. B) 6.2 should be used. = 0.`.29 For a routine permit use a multi-lane loaded distribution factor. =0...01 > 1.75 M..4.1000 4600 ..7 kip-fi.`.0)(1.`--- MDc + MDW + MLL+IM = 1440.

S(O.2 fc = 5 ksi n = 7 4a..`.. Stress due to moments in excess of the cracking moment acts upon the cracked section.4 = 4.85 x 270) = 206. fR = 0.9(0.`--- .G.166 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`.80 in..`.97 < 1.4 in? (48)(c)+21..4)(33-2. + M.9fy = O.4-4.80) ( 4:0J +(21. Aps = 3.. OK Icr = -(48)(4.0.``.80)2 = 16014in.06in.0.75 M .85f .``.0 No Good 1440. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`. OF STRANDS Assume neutral axis is in the top flange..4 A. .. Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge Moment Ratio = 0..`. The moments up to the cracking moment cause stress in the reinforcement equal to the effective prestress. ) = 0..`.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span.80)3 1 12 + (48)(4.50 in. + MLL+IM --1394.4"C.``. M.9 b) Refined check using 0.``-`-`..6 ksi Section Properties for the Cracked Section: LRFD Table 3-1 48" I- 5l/2" I 2.`.= 21.``.`.90 fy Calculate stress in outer reinforcement at Midspan. < 5.

9Fy = 206.0+23.8 ksi <: f R = 0...2)(12)(33-2-4.0 OK f...`. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT --`.8 = 187.`.6 ksi OK Stress Ratio = 2 = -206'6.45 I I ~ ~ I StressRatio= 1.`. =164.`--- .``.``.10 I A.80) = 23... Prestressed Concrete Adjacent Box-Beam Bridge Stress beyond the effective prestress: My (173.10 > 1.`.``.167 Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale.`. the more detailed check indicates that the condition is acceptable.o1 1.``.8 For this bridge.AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges Example A9 Simple Span..1. 187.8 ksi f = n Ï = 7 16014 Stress in the reinforcement at Permit crossing Service I: f .63 I Permit Load Rating 1 .``-`-`.26 Operating 1.. Summary of Rating Factors EXAMPLE Al INTERIOR GIRDER r I Limit State Strength I Strength II Service III Fatigue Flexure Flexure I Design Load Rating Inventory 1.`.`. the simplified check indicates that the Service I condition is violated for the permit truck.

`.`..`.`--- Licensee=Parsons Brinckerhoff 49 loc/5960396001 Not for Resale..`.`.``-`-`.``.``. 08/04/2006 06:37:33 MDT ...``...`..Copyright American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Provided by IHS under license with AASHTO No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS --`..`.``.