A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods PDF full book. Access full book title A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods by Mark Mlynarski. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Mark Mlynarski
Publisher: Transportation Research Board
ISBN: 0309213444
Category : Technology & Engineering
Languages : en
Pages : 104
Get Book Here
Book Description
TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 700: A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods documents an analysis of 1,500 bridges that represent various material types and configurations using AASHTOWareTM Virtis® to compare the load factor rating to load and resistance factor rating for both moment and shear induced by design vehicles, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) legal loads, and eight additional permit/legal vehicles.
Author: Mark Mlynarski
Publisher: Transportation Research Board
ISBN: 0309213444
Category : Technology & Engineering
Languages : en
Pages : 104
Get Book Here
Book Description
TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 700: A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods documents an analysis of 1,500 bridges that represent various material types and configurations using AASHTOWareTM Virtis® to compare the load factor rating to load and resistance factor rating for both moment and shear induced by design vehicles, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) legal loads, and eight additional permit/legal vehicles.
Author:
Publisher:
ISBN: 9780309213448
Category : Highway research
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 700: A Comparison of AASHTO Bridge Load Rating Methods documents an analysis of 1,500 bridges that represent various material types and configurations using AASHTOWareTM Virtis® to compare the load factor rating to load and resistance factor rating for both moment and shear induced by design vehicles, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) legal loads, and eight additional permit/legal vehicles.
Author: Devin K. Harris
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Bridges
Languages : en
Pages : 56
Get Book Here
Book Description
Load rating is the process of determining the safe load-carrying capacity of a bridge; however, when plans and details are insufficient to determine the overall capacity of the structure, alternative methods must be used to infer what the live load capacity is. Two viable methods allowed by the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation are the commonly used but subjective engineering judgement and the experimentally based proof testing. However, these methods suffer from limitations. Engineering judgement typically is not based on physical phenomena and creates a degree of risk in unconservative estimates or unnecessarily restricts traffic and commerce if estimates are overly conservative. On the contrary, proof testing can cause damage during testing, tends to be expensive, and cannot be extrapolated to future performance. Thus, the objective of this study was to develop rational engineering approaches for load rating structures within the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) inventory for which limited as-built information is available. The initial phase of the investigation focused on categorizing the VDOT inventory to determine the types of structures that are likely to be missing information necessary for an analytical load rating, which were identified to be short span reinforced concrete slab or T-beam designs. Subsequent phases emphasized two main approaches to load rating: (i) structural identification frameworks based on finite element model updating; and (ii) leveraged vibration response characterization. Both approaches emphasized estimating unknown characteristics of these types of structures for use in a traditional analytical load rating. These unknown parameters include modulus of elasticity and strength of concrete as well as cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement. These estimates can ultimately be used to provide a rational estimate of load ratings. All approaches were evaluated on two slab and two T-beam structures in varying condition states, which had sufficient plans available, but were treated as having varying degrees of unknown details. The results illustrated that the finite element model updating method generated load ratings that were within 0% to -17% of the load ratings developed according to conventional calculations, with negative differences indicating lower rating factor estimates; and the vibration-based simplified method led to results with a percent difference ranging from 16% to -16%. It was also shown that instrumenting bridges with a limited number of sensors is sufficient for successful implementation of the developed methods. The results from the study have been synthesized into recommendations for VDOT to perform load ratings of structures with insufficient plans or information, with the goal of minimizing the degree and complexity of experimental measurement as well as simplifying the tools for performing the analyses of these structures as much as feasible.
Author: Lubin Gao
Publisher:
ISBN: 9781478709237
Category : Technology & Engineering
Languages : en
Pages : 677
Get Book Here
Book Description
LOAD RATING HIGHWAY BRIDGES In accordance with Load and Resistance Factor Rating Method First Edition The first comprehensive text introducing the background theory along with the practical procedure of load rating highway bridges with the state-of-the-art Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) method. With its simplicity and complete contents on this subject, this is an indispensable text for both students and practicing engineers. The safety of bridges is essential to the traveling public. To ensure that bridges in our highway system function safely and serve properly, engineers need to inspect and assess the live load carrying capacity of the bridges. Based on the results of inspection and evaluation, decisions are made on load restriction, repair, retrofit or replacement. Load rating, one of the critical tasks in this decision-making process, uses either an analytical method or non-destructive load testing to determine the live load carrying capacity of a bridge. This is a book solely concentrated on bridge load rating by using analytical load rating methods, with a focus on the LRFR method. The primary purpose of this book is to provide the basic concept of load rating highway bridges in terms of the LRFR method. The target readers are practicing engineers who want to acquire fundamental knowledge of the LRFR method. Bearing that in mind, the author attempts to strike a balance between theory and how-to. Engineers who are conducting or will perform load ratings of bridges can use this text as a reference in supplement to the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation (MBE). This book can also serve as a textbook or supplemental material for a senior level undergraduate or graduate course in bridge design and load rating. This text is divided into three major sections. The first section contains a brief introduction to bridge load rating (Chapter 1) and fundamentals of structural failure and structural reliability theory (Chapter 2). After completing this section, re
Author: Rafael Armendariz
Publisher:
ISBN: 9781622604999
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
The inspection and evaluation of bridges in Indiana is critical to ensure their safety to better serve the citizens of the state. Part of this evaluation includes bridge load rating. Bridge load rating, which is a measure of the safe load capacity of the bridge, is a logical process that is typically conducted by utilizing critical information that is available on the bridge plans. For existing, poorly-documented bridges, however, the load rating process becomes challenging to adequately complete because of the missing bridge information. Currently, the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) does not have a prescribed methodology for such bridges. In an effort to improve Indiana load rating practices INDOT commissioned this study to develop a general procedure for load rating bridges without plans. The general procedure was developed and it was concluded that it requires four critical parts. These parts are bridge characterization, bridge database, field survey and inspection, and bridge load rating. The proposed procedure was then evaluated on two bridges in Indiana that do not have plans as a proof of concept. As a result, it was concluded that load rating of bridges without plans can be successfully completed using the general procedure. A flowchart describing the general procedure was created to make the load rating process more user-friendly. Additional flowcharts that summarize the general procedure for different type of bridges were also provided.
Author: Bao Nhat Tran
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Bridges
Languages : en
Pages : 0
Get Book Here
Book Description
Bridge load rating is a crucial aspect of bridge evaluation and management, providing essential information regarding a bridge's capacity to safely accommodate traffic loads. For public safety, it is a crucial process for both new and existing bridges by establishing the weight restriction on heavy vehicles crossing the bridges to prevent structure damage and potential failure of the bridges. Rated bridge loads can be effectively communicated to road users through the installation of visible signage of truck weight limit (i.e., load posting). The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) currently utilizes the Load Factor Rating (LFR) methodology to determine load postings for bridges. The procedures and policies for this load rating process are specified in MoDOT’s Bridge Inspection Rating Manual (MoDOT, 2022). The primary goal of this research project is to help in establishing new LRFR posting policies and methodology which should have outcomes similarly to the current LFR methodology used in Missouri. Three studies are conducted in this work. The first is to compare rating load and rating factor between LFR and LRFR methodologies for five vehicles: H20 Legal Load, MO3S2, CZSU, CZRT, and SU5. The second study is to establish threshold and posting factor for MoDOT legal load vehicles to envelope SHVs and AASHTO vehicles. The last study is to answer the question to MoDOT whether serviceability limit state should be included in the legal load rating. Analyses of bridge rating was performed using the load rating software AASHTOWare BrR v7.1. With comparative rating results in LFR and LRFR methodology over hundred sample prestressed bridges across Missouri state, this study found that outcomes are similar in terms of rating load and number of bridges required posting. Using LFR method, there is one bridge that is required to post for vehicles CZSU and CZRT, while none of bridges require posting using the LRFR method. The ratio of rating load between LRFR and LFR have sample mean closed to 1.00 with Standard Deviation around 0.1. The second study of establishing threshold and posting factor for MoDOT vehicles to envelope Special Hauling Vehicles (SHVs) and AASHTO vehicles have suggested that; H20L has threshold of 31 tons and posting factor of 1; MO3S2 has a threshold of 40 tons and posting factor of 0.97; CZSU has a threshold equal to its own gross weight (40.8 tons) and posting factor of 1; CZRT has threshold equal to its gross weight (50 tons) and posting factor of 1. The serviceability limit state investigation has found that only six over one hundred sample bridges would have LRFR service III controls rating. The service III rating load of those bridges are about 64% to 67% compared to the strength – flexure limit state rating loads. While bridges are not showing distress over the course of the service, serviceability limit state might not need to consider for prestressed bridges in Missouri state.
Author: Fikret Necati Catbas
Publisher: Frontiers Media SA
ISBN: 2889662128
Category : Technology & Engineering
Languages : en
Pages : 212
Get Book Here
Book Description
This eBook is a collection of articles from a Frontiers Research Topic. Frontiers Research Topics are very popular trademarks of the Frontiers Journals Series: they are collections of at least ten articles, all centered on a particular subject. With their unique mix of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Frontiers Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author by contacting the Frontiers Editorial Office: frontiersin.org/about/contact.
Author: Gongkang Fu
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Bridges
Languages : en
Pages : 84
Get Book Here
Book Description
Because of the limitations of the analytical approach to rating bridges in the current AASHTO specifications, proof-load testing is often a desirable alternative rating method. The study reported here examined the feasibility of a proof-load testing program for New York, addressing both economic and technical aspects. Such a program with clearly defined application areas is found to be cost-effective. Two technical objectives are identified, based on review of current practice elsewhere: 1) prescription of the target proof load, and 2) development of a detailed procedure manual to guide typical proof-load tests. These tasks were completed and the results (including a draft text of the manual) are presented in this report.
Author: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
Publisher: AASHTO
ISBN: 1560514698
Category : Bridges
Languages : en
Pages : 38
Get Book Here
Book Description
Author: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures
Publisher: AASHTO
ISBN: 1560514965
Category : Bridges
Languages : en
Pages : 41
Get Book Here
Book Description
