Indian Roads Congress Special Publication 51 GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES Published by ‘The Indian Roads Congress Copies can be had from The Secretary, Indian Roads Congress Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road NEW DELHI 1999 Price RS. is, 60/> (plus packing and postage).IRC: SP: 51-1999 First Published: June, 1999 (Rights of Publication and of Translation are reserved) Printed at Sagar Printers & Publishers, 1880, Udaichand Marg, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi-110003 (1000 copies) yeep e GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES CONTENTS Composition of Bridge Specifications & Standards Committee Background Introduction ‘Type of Tests Scope ‘Test Procedures Acceptance Criteria Page @ 0 @ 1 2 3 4 4 13IRC:SP:51 - 1999 MEMBERS OF THE BRIDGE SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE, AD. Narain (Convenor) The Chief Engineer (B) SER (Member Secretary) SS. Chakraborty Prof. DN. Tekh Ninan Koei AG. Borkar NK. Sinha ‘A Chakrabarti MY.B. Reo CR. Alimhandant Dr SK. Thakkar MK. Bhagwagsr PD. Wasi SA. Reddi Vijay Kumar CY, Kand MK Mukrjoe Mahesh Tandon Dr TIN. Subba Rao The Director AK Has She Prafulla Kumar (As on 27.9.1997) DG(RD) & Addl, Secretary tothe Govt. of Inia, Ministry of Surface Transpor (Reeds Wing), New Deli Ministry of Surface Traspor (Roads Wing), New Delhi “Managing Director, Consulting Eng. Services () Pv, ‘Lad, 57, Nera Place, New Det-110019 Directo, Structural Engg Res. Cente, Secto-19, ‘Cental Govt. Enclave, Kamla Netra Nagar, PB No, 10, Ghaziabad 201002 DG(RD) & Adil, Secy.. MOST (Ret), ‘36, Nalanda Aparments, Vikaspr, New Dei ‘Ac, Susnei Pot No. 22, Aran Kuruat Vaidya Nagar, ‘Bandra Reclamation, Murabal-400030 (Chief Engincer (IC), Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing), ‘Transpor Bhavan, New Deli-110001, Chief Eagiees, (Central Public Works Department, Nirman Bhavan, Room No424, New Dels-110011 Head, Bridge Division, (Central Road Resear Insitute, New Dethi-110020 (Chairman & Managing Director, STUP Consultants id, 1004-5 & 7, Raheja Chambers, 213, ‘Nariman Poet, Murbal-400021 Professor, Dept of Eathguake Enge., Univesity of Roorkee, Roorkee 247607 (Consulting Engines, Engg. Consultant (P) Lid E-14/15, Conaughe Place, New Delhi-110001 Secretary (R) tothe Govt of Maharastra, PAV. Manralaya, Mumbsi-400032 Dy. Managing Director, Garon India Li. Gammon House, Prabhadev, Mumbs- 400028 ‘General Manager, UP State Bridge Comp Lid, 486, Hawa Singh Block, Kiel Gaon, New Delhi-1 10068, Consulta, 2/136, Mahavir Nagar, Bhopal-062016 40/182, Chitranjan Bark, New Delhi 110019 ing Director, Tandon Consultant () Lid, 1D, Link Road, Jangpura Extn, New Delhi-1 10514 Consus Consultancy (P) Li, 2nd Flor, Pinky Plaza, Sth Road, Khar (W), Mumba #000S2 Highway Reseach Staion, Guindy, Madras-600025 [Executive Director (BAS), Reseach Designs & Standards Organisation, Licknow-226011 ‘Member, National Highway Authority of India Easter Avenue, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-1]0065, @IRC:SP:51 - 1999 23. 26, 25, 2, n. 23. Es 20 31 2 23. 3. 26. 36 Shui VR, Parangugam ‘Shei PD. Agarwal Shei B.C. Rao PC. Bhasin Shui PK. Sarma ‘The Chief Engineer (NH), ‘The Seortary tothe Govt, of Gujarat, ‘The Chief Engineer (R&B), ‘The Engineer in-Chief ‘The Chief Engineer (R) S&R ‘The Director & Head (Civil Eneg.) ‘The Chie Engineer (NH) ‘The Chief Bagineer (NH) Presiden, Indian Roads Congress 38 1 2 Secretary, Indian Roads Congest Chief Engineer (B) South, hier Eagincer, Dy. Director General (Bridget), ‘West Block IV; Wing 1. RK. Puram, Rew Deli-110066 324, Mandakini Enclave, Greater Kailash, New Dethi-110019, Chief Engineer, P.W.D. (Reads) Assam, 0, Chandmari, Guwahau-781003 PIW.D. BAR Branch, Patiala LP. Jaman) | R&B Department, Block No, 14, achvalaya Complex, Gandhinagar 382010 (D.Seee Rama Merthy) ‘Nasonal Highways, rum Manzi, Hyderabad.stods2 Haryana P.W.D., BAR, Sector-9 B CChendigarh-160019 Ministry of Surface Transport (Rosds Wing), New Deti-110001 (Vinod Kuma) Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, ‘New Dethi-110002 Prblic Works Department, Writers" Building, Block ‘C™, Caleuta-T00001 MP. PWD." HP Jamar Secretary tothe Gov. of Gujarat, R&B Deparment, Block No. 16, Sachivalya Complex, Gandhinagar-382010 AD.Neain DOWD) & Ada. Secret tothe Govt of india Minisy of Surface ‘Transport (Reads Wing), New Delhi S.C Sharma we Chie Engineer, Ministry Surface Transport (Reads Wing), New Debit BxOffeio - Beoffele Corresponding Members NY. Mera De GP. Saha Shitala Sharan De.M.G, Tamhankar ‘A-A7/1344, Adarsh Nagar, Wo, Mumbs-00025 Flat No. 4 Kavita, 1Sth Road, Khar(W), ‘Murbai-io00s2 ‘Adviser Consultan, Consuing Engg, Services (0) ‘Pt Lid, $7, Neh Place, New Deli-110019 Ennerity Scientist, ‘Suructural Engg. Research Centr, 399, Pocket E, ‘Maye Vihar Phaze I, Deli 10091 «iy GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES BACKGROUND 1.1, Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-10) set up in 1991 had identified and formed a sub-group to prepare the draft on ‘Guidelines for Load Testing of Bridges’. The newly constituted (B-10) Committee (1994-96) reviewed the work done by sub-group in its first ‘meeting held on the 26th April, 1994. ‘The guidelines drafted by a sub-group comprising of Sarvashri M.V.B. Rao (Convenor), A.D. Narain, C.V, Kand and MR. Kachhwaha were approved by the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-10) in its meeting held on the 29th November 1996 at Mumbai. The personnel of the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-10) are given below: AG. Borkar DK. Kanhere PC. Bhasin SS. Chakraborty MK. Chatterjee SG. Joglekar CN. Kand PY. Manjure N.Y. Merani ‘OD. Mohindra MVB. Rao President, IRC Hon. Treasurer, IRC Secretary, IRC - Convenor = Member-Secretary ‘MEMBERS Dr. TIN. Subba Rao S.A. Reddi Dr. NS. Rengaswamy KB. Sarkar Surjeet Sing Dr. M.G. Tamhankar Mahesh Tandon Director B&S, RDSO, Lucknow EX-OFFICIO. Sh. M.S. Guram, Chief Engineer, Punjab PWD B&R, Patiala Sh. A.D. Narain, Director General (Road Development) & Addl. Secy., MOST) Sh, $.C. Sharma, Chief Engineer, MosTIRC: SP: 51 ~ 1999 CORRESPONDING MEMBERS SR. Tambe NG. Thatte Dr. VK. Raina MK. Saxena MR. Vinayak deli idered an fed by Bridge Farther the Guidelines were considered and approv c Specifications & Standards Committee in its meeting held at New Delhi on 27.9.97, the Executive Committee on 29.11.97 and the Council on 5.1.98, . This guideline will only give procedure for a full-fledged load we Tpit i oye enn ti criteria. Inspite of the limitation associated with load testing of bridges, the method complements structural analysis an also faitates assessment of lant (eserve) stength Such lad testing should nt be considered ss acon requirement and shouldbe resorted io only on cate specie basis ‘The testing is done mainly to assess the Mexural capacity, wherein deformations in superstructures can be measured directly with reasonabl accuracy. Bridges ar rarely tested for shear sength evaluation due to absence of a reliable method of monitoring extremely small strains widening of shear cracks. 1, INTRODUCTION "s Bridge Maintenance & Rehabilitation Committee (B-10) has ateady fed Guidelines for Evaluation of Load Canying Capacity of Bridges as IRC: SP: 37. These guidelines deal with rating of bridges for standard IRC ive loads as specified in IRC: 6. In these goidtines, analytical method, load testing method and comelation method ae recommended butload testing method isrecommended only when no construction drains sad specifications originally followed are avalabe, The testing loads be used for rating of bridges are not the IRC's standard bridge loadings bat will be from amongst those commercially available, Normally, the tes ‘vehicle wil be chosen asthe next heavier vehicle than he predominantly heavy vehicle presently plying ovr the bridge. The application of load is over a very small duration of time during which the relevant deformatio 2 IRC: SP: 51 —1999 are measured. This method of rating of bridges is very convenient when 4 number of bridges in a road network are to be rated. But, when a newly constructed bridge is to be accepted, may be because its design is of an ‘unusual type or where quality of construction is suspected to be not as specified, then a full-fledged testing of the bridge has to be resorted to as an assurance test by application of loads atleast equivalent to the design Toads. Such load testing has also to be employed when contract conditions So specify: At times, testing of bridges by the application of design live load or more is resorted to when the research objective so demands. Normally Old bridges are not to be tested inthis manner. The basic difference between the load testing as envisaged in IRC: SP: 37 and the load testing in these uidelines is that the behaviour of the bridge is observed by the application of design live load or load slightly exceeding design live load over a longer period of say 24 hours and the elastic performance of the bridge deck on removal of the test load can be observed. 2. TYPE OF TESTS The load tests on bridges could be classified under five heads: (@) Behaviour Tests (©) Proof Load Tests (©) Stress History Tests (d) Ultimate Load Tests (©) Diagnostic Tests The Behaviour Tests are caried out to verify the results of any ‘method of analysis or design. The test load could be equal to or lower than the design load. ‘The Proof Load Tests are more commonly adopted for operational rating of bridges. The tests are done on new structures which had design or construction problem or for the rating of an existing bridge. The Stress History Test is cartied out to establish the distribution of stress ranges in fatigue prone areas of sridges. The data obtained from Passage of regular traffic is used to assess the fatigue life, ‘The Ultimate Load Tests are performed to understand the global 3IRC: SP: 51-1999 behaviour when sufficient theoretical knowledge is not available to predict the structural performance. The tests provide valuable information regarding the sequence and mode of failure. The Diagnostic Tests are meant to monitor the behaviour of a ‘component of a bridge either to establish the cause of damage or its share in transfer of loads when sufficient theoretical analysis is not developed. ‘The type, magnitude, application and duration of different tests is decided on the basis of objective and evaluation procedure. Each ‘methodology depends on exigencies and site conditions. Thus, until and unless specified, the term “Joad test” used without qualification commonly denotes Proof Load Test only. 3. SCOPE ‘These guidelines deal with Proof Load Test. They cover testing of superstructures, excluding arches for evaluation of their flexural capacity. ‘Testing for shear capacity is not considered. This test is not intended to assess ultimate load carrying capacity of bridge superstructure, 4, TEST PROCEDURES 4.1, Selection of Span In case of new multispan bridges, minimum one out of 15 spans ‘could be chosen for load testing, the maximum chosen being two when the total number of spans exceeds 15. 4.2. Method of Loading 4.2.1. The method of loading should be such as to either simulate the specific class of vehicle or induce in the member(s) the calculated forces, viz., the bending moments at critical sections. The test loads may be in the form of: ~ mobile test vehicl kil the [$6- s IRC: SP: 51-1999 ~ static loads on wheeV/track imprints ofthe specific clas of vehicle for which the bridge is to be rated; ~ static loads on a configuration which produces the calculated force in the member(s) under test. 4.2.2. Test Vehicles: The usage of commercial vehicles has been recommended in para 6 of IRC: SP: 37. The vehicles and/or their trailers are uniformly loaded with preweighed units like concrete cubes or sand soil containers and the axle loads determined on weigh bridges. However, the commercial vehicles do not produce the expected load effects of standard loadings. Use of special test vehicles would be ideal. The advantage of special test vehicles is that they can be moved on and off the structure quickly. 4.23. Static Loads 4.2.3.1. Simulation of the specific IRC vehicle: The load effect on ‘span can be produced by building up preweighed units on loading imprints spaced as per codal provisions. The imprints are built either with brick ‘masonry or concrete and rolled steel sections placed across pairs of imprints, so that platforms could be built on a group of four imprints for placement of preweighed units. The area of each platform depends on the magnituce of the load and unit weight of individual unit. A preweighed unit normally comprises sand or soil filled gunny bags, concrete cubes, bricks etc, which ccan be carried manually. Otherwise, large concrete blocks, containers of ‘water or (stone) ballast or stee! ingots could be used if mechanical handling facilities are available to load and unload them from test vehicles. Fig. 1 shows a scheme for building up 2 lanes of IRC Class A loading on the carriageway of a bridge. The loads are placed eccentrically on the carriageway of a bridge in such a way that maximum bending moment is produced in any longitudinal. 4.2.3.2. Other types of static loads: Any configuration whica produces the design forces (load effects) in the member(s) could be adopted, for instance uniformly distributed load. Any of the appropriate methods of load distribution between the girders can be adopted in arriving at the test load and its configuration on the span. But the method of distribution 5IRC: SP: 1 ~ 1999 os _ Dee Fig. 1, Placement of 2-lanes of IRC Class-A loading and footpat on 7 tpath loading, 7 4 f ay of loads should be the same as adopted in the approved design. Howev where the approved designs are not avaiable the owner of tbe Bridge should specify the appropriate method of load distribution. Inthe case of multiple girders itis possible thatthe design moments are simultaneously induced in more than one girder. It may well happen thatthe magnitude of the test load on the spun is greater than that of the design IRC vehicle, but the forces induced in any member should be always equal to the specified design force of the load test. 43. Loading and Unloading Sequence 43.1. The test load shall be applied in stages so that timely action, such as stopping the test, can be taken if any untoward distress is observed at any stage. In most eases, the design live load effect would be equal to or less than that due to dead load, The dead load is already acting and the test load is some specified multiple of live load more than one. The suggested stages of test load placement are 30 per cent, 50 per cent, 70 percent, 80 per cent, 90 per cent and 100 per cent. Unloading should also bein the same stages. The next incremental loading should be added only after the deflections under the previous load have stabilised and all the stipulated observations are completed. : 4.3.2. The selection of first stage of loading depends on the general 6 IRC: SP: 51-1999 condition of a bridge and the load carrying capacity theoretically assessed. It is advisable to monitor the appearance and widening of flexural cracks atevery stage of loading, so as to decide about placement of next incremental Toad. Its expected thatthe load-deflection characteristics at every increment are linear and any abnormal behaviour is reflected in the load v/s deflection data, If the deflection observed exceeds the limit prescribed in the code the further loading shall be stopped. Subsequent actions shall be taken in consultation with appropriate authorities. Occasionally, crackling sounds at the locations of expansion joints are heard when the rotation capacity is exceeded, particularly, in balanced cantilever bridges. Spalling of delaminated concrete is also possible during load tests. 44, Preparatory Work = All visual defects should be measured, mapped and plotted. = It should be ensured that bearings are functional = Expansion gaps, joints should be cleared of all debris. = It-will be useful to give the surface of the superstructure a coat of white wash, so that appearance of cracks becomes immediately perceptible. 4.5. Precautions = Staging should be stable and safe = Staging for instruments and that for observers should be quite independent. Staging for instruments should be rigid. = Due to temperature change, the superstructure may tend to hog or sag; therefore, it should be ensured that when this occurs, contact with the spindle of the dial gauge is not lost. Spindle extensions should be fixed to take care of this. Daring the 24 hour retention period of built up load, care shall be taken to cover the preweighed units with tarpaulin, so that rain or strong winds do not affect the stacking on the platforms. 7IRC: SP: 51 — 1999 4.6. Observations ‘The following should be observed, measured and recorded at regular intervals of one hour over a period of 24 hours: deflections at critical sections (for instance for simply supported spans at mid-span and at quarter-span. In box girders, it will be ‘useful to record deflections under each of the external ribs). appearance of cracks and their development, length, width, location, orientation correlated with load. = deformation of beatings. ambient temperature and related temperature in the body of the structure. 4.7. Measurement of Deflections Delfections could be measured with the following devices: (@) Dial gauges (@) Ruler and cursor (©) Deflectometers (@) Precision level © Water level ‘The methods (a) to (c) could be used wherever dry bed is available under the span. Otherwise, methods (4) and (¢) can be used by using a reference station at the nearby abutment. When girder bridges are subjected to load tests, it is essential to clear debris in the expansion gaps and lubricate steel bearings to permit free translation and rotational movements of the spans. ‘The deflection measurement can be done by suspension wire method at the required locations using dial gauges (Fig. 2). In this method trestles or posts 1.5 m tall would be embedded in firm ground and dial gauges 8 IRC: SP: 51 ~ 1999 ig. 2 Suspension wire method for deflection measurement sing dal guage o ele ‘and cursor east count 0.01 mm are clamped to them. The spindles of the dial ames “connected by a pair of adapters in plumb line with a GI or Invar aire wire is made tut by attaching a weight atthe end. The method Could be parly modified by using a (stel) scale and cirsor instead of dia} fauge, when the order of anticipated deflection exceeds 100 mm. His aiveesows the seale and cursor method for measurement of large deflections. 4.8. Procedure for Temperature Correction: ‘A set of thermocouples are to be fixed at different locations of deflection measurement for monitoring temperature ofthe bridge deck: fn ceeence of thermocouples, hand held instruments could be used wherein f probe could be inserted in a preformed hole in concrete surfars, for seoding temperature. As a last resort, thermometers could also be suspended from restles used for deflection measurement 49 messi ee Shade temperature. The number of thermocouples/hermometes/pr0p seed could be about half the total umber of locations for deflection ‘measurement.IRC: SP: 51 - 1999 ‘The superstructure tends to hog or sag due to variation in ambient temperature and it is necessary to apply correction to the deflection data during static load test. This is so since the duration of loading or unloading operation in static load test could be for 4-5 hours. For this purpose, the platforms on masonry imprints meant for building up static loads should be placed in respective positions for observing thermal response of the bridge deck prior to load test. The deflection values and ambient temperature data are generally collected from dawn 10 dusk for two or three consecutive days at | hour intervals. The temperature vs. deflection data are collected on these days and a curve drawn for each station (dial gauge location), which is taken as basic curve for temperature correction. Usually the temperature-deflection characteristic would be a best fit obtained from a cluster of readings. The deflection reading at any location and temperature during load test, is super-imposed on the basic. curve. The difference between the two values give the true deflection for the location under reference, corresponding to the same temperature. Fig. 3 shows typical characteristic of thermal response, super imposed on load vs. deflection data during a proof test. Precaution The bridge deck temperature gets affected due to variation in humidity and strong winds on the day. Also, the data gathered on sunny and cloudy days would be different, although the ambient temperature is same. Therefore, to avoid inconsistencies in the data, it is preferable to choose two identical spans, one for load test and the other for temperature- deflection data and should be monitored simultaneously. This approach reduces the total period of load testing by at least two days. 4.9. Correction for Rotation of Pier ‘The deflection data of cantilever span bridges and those with tall piers (of effective length to radius of gyration ratio 50 and above) need further correction due to rotation of the piers. The rotation could be measured with a clinometer mounted on the hammer head portion for 10 IRC: SP: 51 ~ 1999 pusrost TEWPERATURE "0 7 oe ne Bo BH BASIC TEM. CURVE Hig. 3 -yplel base temperature correction carve with oud-efeeton dats in oad testIRC: SP: 51 ~ 1999 cantilever bridges directly over the piers. The clinometer is initially set to ‘no load’ condition and rotations at incremental loads can be measured directly. ‘The rotation of the piers could also be measured with a column of dial gauges placed across the depth of pier at fixed distances. More than one column of dial gauges would be required to measure rotation of circular piers in the longitudinal and transverse direction. The method needs erection of a mounting system to fix the dial gauges and also an independent scaffolding or ladder for personnel to record the dial gauge data. ‘An indirect method to determine rotation of pier can be adopted when the pier and superstructure are monolithic, as in cantilever bridges. In this case, the load free arm could be instrumented for deflection ‘measurement (at different cross sections) along the span length and the ratio of difference in deflection values and distance between cross sections yields rotation of load free arm. The rotation of pier would be equal to the rotation of load free arm, due to monolithic action Fig. 4 shows the schematic arrangement adopted to determine rotation of piers by the indirect method. i | | Tig. 4. Scheme for determination of rotation of deflection in a cantilever bridge 12 pres IRC: SP: 51 ~ 1999 4.10, Percentage Recovery of Deflection ‘he percentage recovery cold be ales for vanes of dfeton he eee vey is een at 24 Rous ater removal of led ‘The calculation is done as follows after effecting temperature and/ of rotation correction to deflection data: Initial value (on dial gauge) ~ RL Final value after placement of test load - R2 (Thereafter, measurements are to be taken at regular intervals of one hour, as per Clause 4.5). ‘Value at 24 hours after placement of test load .. R3 ‘Value immediately after removal of test load. R4 (Thereafter, measurement are to be taken at regular intervals of one hour, as per Clause 4.5) ‘Value at 24 hours after removal of test load RS ‘Total deflection R3-R1 . Total recovery 24 hrs after removal of R3-RS test load Percentage of recovery of deflection BERS x 100 24 hrs after removal of test load. R3-R1 5, ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, 45,1. The criterion of acceptance is based on recovery of deflection after removal of test load. It is necessary to specify the quantum of applied oad, the duration of the load on the span and the percentage recovery of deflection on removal of load. 13IRC: SP: 51-1999 5.2. For bridges designed for IRC Standard loadings, criteria for load testing of steel, PSC and RCC superstructures are given in Table below. ‘Tans, Accernnce Coarsun ‘Type of Bridges Live Load Duration of Minimum percentage Intensity for Retention of recovery of Deflection Testing ‘Test Load ‘at 26 hrs after (iss) __removal of Test Load 1 . Py 15 2. . aw 85 3. . m 8s 4 * um 15 (1.0L plus corresponding impact as per IRC Codes) ‘A general acceptance criterion for the behaviour of a structure under test load is that it shall not show ‘visible evidence of failure” which include appearance of cracks of width more than 0.3 mm, spalling or deflections which are excessive and incompatible with safety requirements, “4