Você está na página 1de 255

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 1 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation, Section 1, Article C1.

4 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaulation and Rehabilitation


REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 12/07/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Add the following paragraph after the last paragraph in Article C1.4: Further information and details regarding QC/QA for Bridge Inspection can be found in NCHRP 20-07(252), Guidelines for Implementing Quality Control and Quality Assurance for Bridge Inspection.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: NCHRP 20-07(252), Guidelines for Implementing Quality Control and Quality Assurance for Bridge Inspection was published in 2009. This report documents both QC and QA practices that are presently implemented in the United States. The report serves as a resource for bridge owners that are developing, improving and/or implementing QC/QA practices.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Gives a reference document to bridge owners. Implementation NCHRP report guidance may improve bridge inspection practice.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 2 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Table of Contents TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/31/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Revise the Table of Contents as follows:

Section 6: Load Rating


TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1 Scope---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6-1 6.1.1 Assumptions----------------------------------------------------------------------------6.1.2 Condition of Bridge Members-------------------------------------------------------6.1.3 Evaluation Methods-------------------------------------------------------------------6.1.4 Bridges with Unknown Structural Components----------------------------------6.1.5 Component Specific Evaluations---------------------------------------------------6.1.5.1 Decks------------------------------------------------------------------------6.1.5.2 Substructures---------------------------------------------------------------6.1.6 6.1.7 Evaluation of Complex Structures------------------------------------------------Nonredundant Structures-----------------------------------------------------------

6.1.8 Qualifications and Responsibilities-----------------------------------------------6.1.9 Documentation of Load Rating---------------------------------------------------PART A - LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR RATING 6A.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 6A.1.1 General ........................................................................................................ 6A.1.2 Scope .............................................................................................................. 6A.1.3 Philosophy.....................................................................................................

6A.1.4 Assumptions................................................................................................................. 6A.1.5 Application of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications..................................... 6A.1.6 Evaluation Methods....................................................................................................... 6A.1.7 Load and Resistance Factor Rating................................................................................ 6A.1.7.1 Design Load Rating.......................................................................................... 6A.1.7.2 Legal Load Rating........................................................................................... 6A.1.7.3 Permit Load Rating.......................................................................................... 6A.1.8 Component-Specific Evaluation................................................................................... 6A.1.8.1 Decks ............................................................................................................... 6A.1.8.2 Substructures................................................................................................... 6A.1.9 Evaluation of Complex Structures................................................................................. 6A.1.10 Qualifications and Responsibilities.............................................................................. 6A.1.11 Documentation of Load Rating 6A.2 LOADS FOR EVALUATION...................................................................................................... 6A.2.1 General........................................................................................................................... 6A.2.2 Permanent Loads and Load Factors............................................................................... 6A.2.2.1 Dead Loads: DC and DW................................................................................ 6A.2.2.2 Permanent Loads Other than Dead Loads: P.................................................. 6A.2.2.3 Load Factors.................................................................................................... 6A.2.3 Transient Loads............................................................................................................. 6A.2.3.1 Vehicular Live Loads (Gravity Loads): LL...................................................... 6A.2.3.2 Applications of Vehicular Live Load.............................................................. 6A.2.3.3 Dynamic Load allowance: IM.......................................................................... 6A.2.3.4 Pedestrian Live Loads: PL............................................................................... 6A.2.3.5 Wind Loads: WL and WS................................................................................. 6A.2.3.6 Temperature Effects: TG and TU..................................................................... 6A.2.3.7 Earthquake Effects: EQ................................................................................... 6A.2.3.8 Creep and Shrinkage: CR and SH................................................................... 6A.3 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS........................................................................................................... 6A.3.1 General.......................................................................................................................... 6A.3.2 Approximate Methods of Structural Analysis............................................................... 6A.3.3 Refined Methods of Analysis........................................................................................ 6A.3.4 Analysis by Field Testing.............................................................................................. 6A.4 LOAD-RATING PROCEDURES....................................................................................................

6A.4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................... 6A.4.2 General Load-Rating Equation...................................................................................... 6A.4.2.1 General................................................................................................................... 6A.4.2.2 Limit States............................................................................................................ 6A.4.2.3 Condition Factor: c .............................................................................................. 6A.4.2.4 System Factor: s ............................................................................................... 6A.4.3 Design-Load Rating ..................................................................................................... 6A.4.3.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................ 6A.4.3.2 Live Loads and Load Factors .............................................................................. 6A.4.3.2.1 Live Load .............................................................................................. 6A.4.3.2.2 Live-Load Factors ................................................................................ 6A.4.3.3 Dynamic Load Allowance ................................................................................... 6A.4.4 Legal Load Rating ....................................................................................................... 6A.4.4.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................ 6A.4.4.2 Live Loads and Load Factors ............................................................................... 6A.4.4.2.1 Live Loads ............................................................................................ 6A.4.4.2.1a Routine Commercial Traffic............................................................ 6A.4.4.2.1b Specialized Hauling Vehicles.......................................................... 6A.4.4.2.2 Live-Load Factors ................................................................................ 6A.4.4.2.3 Generalized Live-Load Factors: L ...................................................... 6A.4.4.2.3a Generalized Live-Load Factors for Routine Commercial Traffic.... 6A.4.4.2.3b Generalized Live-Load Factors for Specialized Hauling Vehicles. 6A.4.4.3 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM .............................................................................. 6A.4.4.4 Rating in Tons ...................................................................................................... 6A.4.5 Permit Load Rating ...................................................................................................... 6A.4.5.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 6A.4.5.2 Purpose.................................................................................................................. 6A.4.5.3 Permit Types.......................................................................................................... 6A.4.5.3a Routine (Annual) Permits...................................................................... 6A.4.5.3a Special (Limited Crossing) Permits ...................................................... 6A.4.5.4 Live Load and Load Factors ................................................................................. 6A.4.5.4.1 Live Load ............................................................................................. 6A.4.5.4.2 Load Factors..........................................................................................

6A.4.5.4.2a Routine (Annual) Permits .............................................................. 6A.4.5.4.2b Special (Limited-Crossing) Permits ................................................ 6A.4.5.5 Dynamic Load Allowance: IM .............................................................................. 6A.4.5.6 Exterior Beams ..................................................................................................... 6A.4.5.7 Continuous Spans ................................................................................................. 6A.5 CONCRETE STRUCTURES ......................................................................................................... 6A.5.1 Scope ...................................................................................................................... 6A.5.2 Materials .................................................................................................................. 6A.5.2.1 Concrete .................................................................................................. 6A.5.2.2 Reinforcing Steel ..................................................................................... 6A.5.2.3 Prestressing Steel ..................................................................................... 6A.5.3 Resistance Factors ........................................................................................................ 6A.5.4 Limit States .................................................................................................................. 6A.5.4.1 Design-Load Rating .............................................................................................. 6A.5.4.2 Legal Load Rating and Permit Load Rating ......................................................... 6A.5.4.2.1 Strength Limit State .............................................................................. 6A.5.4.2.2 Service Limit State ............................................................................... 6A.5.4.2.2a Legal Load Rating ......................................................................... 6A.5.4.2.2b Permit Load Rating ....................................................................... 6A.5.5 Assumptions for Load Rating .................................................................................... 6A.5.6 Maximum Reinforcement ............................................................................................ 6A.5.7 Minimum Reinforcement ............................................................................................. 6A.5.8 Evaluation for Flexural and Axial Force Effects .......................................................... 6A.5.9 Evaluation for Shear .................................................................................................... 6A.5.10 Secondary Effects from Prestressing ......................................................................... 6A.5.11 Concrete Bridges with Unknown Reinforcement ....................................................... 6A.5.12 Temperature, Creep, and Shrinkage Effects .............................................................. 6A.5.13 Rating of Segmental Concrete Bridges....................................................................... 6A.5.13.1 Scope................................................................................................................... 6A.5.13.2 General Rating Requirements.............................................................................. 6A.5.13.3 Application of Vehicular Live Loads................................................................... 6A.5.13.4 Design Load Rating............................................................................................. 6A.5.13.5 Service Limit State ............................................................................................. 6A.5.13.5.1 Legal Load Rating...............................................................................

6A.5.13.5.2 Permit Load Rating.............................................................................. 6A.5.13.6 System Factor: s................................................................................................. 6A.5.13.7 Evaluation for Shear and Torsion ....................................................................... 6A.6 STEEL STRUCTURES ................................................................................................................. 6A.6.1 Scope ........................................................................................................................... 6A.6.2 Materials ...................................................................................................................... 6A.6.2.1 Structural Steels .................................................................................................... 6A.6.2.2 Pins ...................................................................................................................... 6A.6.2.3 Wrought Iron ........................................................................................................ 6A.6.3 Resistance Factors ........................................................................................................ 6A.6.4 Limit States .................................................................................................................. 6A.6.4.1 Design-Load Rating .............................................................................................. 6A.6.4.2 Legal Load Rating and Permit Load Rating ......................................................... 6A.6.4.2.1 Strength Limit State .............................................................................. 6A.6.4.2.2 Service Limit State ................................................................................ 6A.6.5 Effects of Deterioration on Load Rating ...................................................................... 6A.6.6 Tension Members ........................................................................................................ 6A.6.6.1 Links and Hangers ................................................................................................ 6A.6.6.2 Eye Bars ............................................................................................................... 6A.6.7 Non-Composite Compression Members ...................................................................... 6A.6.8 Combined Axial Compression and Flexure ................................................................. 6A.6.9 I-Sections in Flexure ................................................................................................... 6A.6.9.1 General.................................................................................................................. 6A.6.9.2 Composite Sections .............................................................................................. 6A.6.9.3 Non-Composite Sections ...................................................................................... 6A.6.9.4 Encased I-Sections ..................... 6A.6.9.5 Cross-Section Proportion Limits .................... 6A.6.9.6 Riveted Members ....... 6A.6.9.7 Diaphragms and Cross-Frames 6A.6.10 Evaluation for Shear ................. 6A.6.11 Box Sections in Flexure ................... 6A.6.11.1 Diaphragms and Cross-frames ........ 6A.6.12 Evaluation of Critical Connections .............. 6A.6.12.1 General ...... ..............

6A.6.12.2 Bearing-Type Connections ................... 6A.6.12.3 Slip-Critical Connections ............. 6A.6.12.4 Pinned Connections .............. 6A.6.12.5 Riveted Connections ............ 6A.6.12.5.1 Rivets in Shear .............. 6A.6.12.5.2 Rivets in Shear and Tension .......... 6A.7 WOOD STRUCTURES ................ 6A.7.1 Scope ........... 6A.7.2 Materials ................. 6A.7.3 Resistance Factors ................ 6A.7.4 Limit States ............. 6A.7.4.1 Design-Load Rating ............... 6A.7.4.2 Legal Load Rating and Permit Load Rating ........... 6A.7.5 Dynamic Load Allowance ......... 6A.7.6 Evaluation of Critical Connections ........... 6A.8 POSTING OF BRIDGES ... ......... 6A.8.1 General . ....... 6A.8.2 Posting Loads ... ......... 6A.8.3 Posting Analysis ... ......... 6A.8.4 Regulatory Signs .. ......... 6A.8.5 Speed Limits . ... ........ 6A.9 SPECIAL TOPICS ... ........ 6A.9.1 Evaluation of Unreinforced Masonry Arches ...... 6A.9.1.1 General .......... 6A.9.1.2 Method of Analysis . ........ 6A.9.1.3 Allowable Stresses in Masonry. .......... 6A.9.2 Historic Bridges .............

PART B - ALLOWABLE STRESS RATING AND LOAD FACTOR RATING 6B.1 GENERAL . .... 6B.1.1 Assumptions... 6B.1.2 Substructure Consideration..... 6B.1.3 Safety Criteria.....

6B.1.4 Application of Standard Design Specifications ..... 6B.1.5 Nonredundant Structures ... 6B.1.6 Load Rating for Complex Structures ...... 6B.2 QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.. 6B.3 RATING LEVELS.. 6B.3.1 Inventory Rating Level... 6B.3.2 Operating Rating Level.. 6B.4 RATING METHODS. 6B.4.1 Allowable Stress (AS) .. 6B.4.2 Load Factor (LF) .. 6B.5 RATING EQUATION. 6B.5.1 General .. 6B.5.2 Allowable Stress..... 6B.5.3 Load Factor ... 6B.5.4 Condition of Bridge Members ... 6B.5.5 Bridges with Unknown Structural Components .... 6B.6 NOMINAL CAPACITY (C) .. 6B.6.1 General ... 6B.6.2 Allowable Stress Method ... 6B.6.2.1 Structural Steel .. 6B.6.2.1.1 6B.6.2.1.2 Combined Stresses .. Batten Plate Compression Members....

6B.6.2.2 Wrought Iron.. 6B.6.2.3 Reinforcing Steel ... 6B.6.2.4 Concrete .... 6B.6.2.4.1 6B.6.2.4.2 6B.6.2.4.3 Bending ... Columns .. Shear (Diagonal Tension) ...

6B.6.2.5 Prestressed Concrete ..... 6B.6.2.6 Masonry .... 6B.6.2.7 Timber . .... 6B.6.3 Load Factor Method .. 6B.6.3.1 Structural Steel . .. 6B.6.3.2 Reinforced Concrete ...

6B.6.3.3 Prestressed Concrete .. 6B.7 6B.7.1 6B.7.2 LOADINGS .. Dead Load (D) . Rating Live Load . 6B.7.2.1 Wheel Loads (Deck) 6B.7.2.2 Truck Loads 6B.7.2.3 Lane Loads . . 6B.7.2.4 Sidewalk Loadings ... 6B.7.2.5 Live Load Effects (L) 6B.7.3 6B.7.4 6B.7.5 6B.7.6 6B.7.7 Distribution of Loads ... Impact (I) ... .. Deflection .. .. Longitudinal Loads .. Environmental Loads 6B.7.7.1 Wind .. 6B.7.7.2 Earthquake .... 6B.7.7.3 Thermal Effects .... 6B.7.7.4 Stream Flow .. 6B.7.7.5 Ice Pressure .. 6B.7.7.6 Permanent Loads Other Than Dead Loads . 6B.8 DOCUMENTATION OF RATING . 6B.9 POSTING OF BRIDGES . 6B.9.1 6B.9.2 6B.9.3 6B.9.4 6B.9.5 6B.10.1 6B.10.2 6B.10.3 6B.10.4 General .. Posting Loads ... Posting Analysis ... Regulatory Signs .. Speed Limits .... General . Routine Permits . Controlled Permits .... Escorted Permits ..

6B.10 PERMITS .

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: Portions of Section 6 will need to be renumbered to coincide with the new section headings. If this item passes this will be done prior to the interim being published.

BACKGROUND: The Manual for Bridge Evaluation (MBE) combines into a single Section 6 provisions for Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) method (Part A) from the Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges and the Allowable Stress and Load Factor rating methods (Part B) from the Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges (MCE). The LRFR and ASR/LFR Specifications in Section 6 have many articles that are independent of the load rating method and should therefore be identical. Items 1 through 12 include articles have been pulled out of Part A and Part B into a common section in front of Section 6. This would avoid conflicts, provide consistency between the Specifications, eliminate potential confusion, and reduce future editing effort. Items 13 through 35 pertain to revisions to or deletions of related Articles in Part A and Part B on account of their inclusion in the new up front section. Refer to 2010 Agenda Item 3.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Clarifies load rating requirements that apply equally to all load rating methods. This modification to the articles will make Part A and Part B load rating provisions consistent.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

10

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 3 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Various Articles TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 11/15/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 6.1, delete the last sentence in the 1st paragraph as follows: This Section sets forth criteria for the load rating and posting of existing bridges and provides a choice of load rating methods. Part A incorporates provisions specific to the Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) method developed to provide uniform reliability in bridge load ratings, load postings, and permit decisions. Part B provides safety criteria and procedures for the Allowable Stress and Load Factor methods of evaluation. No preference is placed on any rating method. Any of these three methods identified above may be used to establish live load capacities and load limits for purposes of load posting. Load ratings reported to the NBI shall be in accordance with this manual and in conformity with FHWA reporting requirements. Item #2 In Article 6.1, delete the 4th paragraph as follows: Bridge load ratings are based on information in the bridge file, including as-built construction plans and shop drawings, and the results of a recent field inspection. As part of every inspection cycle, bridge load ratings should be reviewed and updated as necessary, to reflect any relevant changes in condition or loading noted during the inspection. Item #3 Add the following paragraphs to the end of Article 6.1: The specific load ratings are used in identifying the need for load posting or bridge strengthening and in making overweight-vehicle permit decisions. Load ratings are routinely reported to the NBI for national bridge administration and are also used in local bridge management systems. This Section 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. Methods for the evaluation of existing bridges for extreme events such as earthquake, vessel collision, wind, flood, ice, or fire are not included herein. Rating of longspan bridges, movable bridges, and other complex bridges may involve additional considerations and loadings not specifically addressed in this Section and the rating procedures should be augmented with additional evaluation criteria where required.

11

Item #4 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article C6.1: Primary focus of this Section is the assessment of the safety of bridges for live loads (including overloads) and fatigue. Extreme events have a very low probability of occurrence but impart very high-magnitude forces on a structure. Hydraulic considerations (scour/ice/debris), wind loads, temperature effects collision and the effects of creep and shrinkage are generally not considered in the load rating of bridges, but should be considered under unique circumstance and structure types. 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. 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. Item #5 Add the following new Article 6.1.1 as follows: 6.1.1Assumptions The load rating of a bridge is based on existing structural conditions, material properties, loads, and traffic conditions at the bridge site. To maintain this capacity, the bridge is assumed to be subject to inspections at regular intervals, not to exceed the maximum interval cited in Article 4.3. Changes in existing structural conditions, material properties, loads, or site traffic conditions could require re-evaluation. The procedures for computing load rating of concrete bridges are based on the assumptions that materials and construction are of good quality and there is no loss of material design strength, or, when warranted, the material strength has been established by testing, and any reductions in area due to deterioration have been considered. In general, the condition factors for LRFR and the safety criteria (safety factors) for ASD and LFR to be used should be taken from this Manual. However, there are some cases where judgment must be exercised in making an evaluation of a structure and the condition factors and safety criteria may be adjusted based on site conditions and/or structure conditions as recorded in the most recent inspection report. This determination of the safety criteria (safety factors) most commonly applies to timber, which may be of substandard grade or where the material is weathered or otherwise deteriorated. In determining the load rating criteria for a bridge, consideration should be given to the types of vehicles using the bridge routinely. Every effort should be made to minimize hardships related to economic hauling without jeopardizing the safety of the public. All data used in the determination of the load rating criteria should be fully documented. In ordinary cases, the review of a permit application should not necessitate a special inspection of the bridge, and the evaluation may be based on the results of the most recent inspection. Item #6 Add the following new Article C6.1.1 as follows: C6.1.1 Load rating of a bridge should not be undertaken without a recent thorough field inspection, the field inspection: Provides the condition data and other critical noncondition data necessary for evaluation, Minimizes the possibility of the evaluator making a gross error in assessing the capacity of a component or connection, and Improves bridge safety through early discovery of deterioration or signs of distress that could signal impending failure. Guidance on data collection for the purpose of load rating a bridge is provided in Article 4.13.

12

Loss of concrete strength can occur if there has been appreciable disintegration of the concrete matrix and the separation of aggregates due to chemical agents or other causes. In such cases, material sampling and testing should be considered to assess concrete strength and quality. The actual amount of capacity reduction depends on the type of deterioration and its location. The following defects also have the potential for loss of critical strength: Loss in concrete cross-sectional area, delaminations, or cracking that change the member neutral axis; Loss in cross-sectional area of load-carrying reinforcing steel; Loss in cross-sectional area of shear or confinement reinforcing steel; and Degradation of the bond between reinforcing steel and concrete resulting in inadequate anchorage or development.

Deterioration of concrete components does not necessarily reduce their resistance. Loss of cover due to spalling might not have a significant influence on the member resistance if the main load-carrying reinforcing steel remains properly anchored and confined. The above examples are not a comprehensive list of indicators but highlight the importance of observing, quantifying, and assessing losses in order to accurately determine load ratings. Item #7 Add the following new Article 6.1.2 as follows: 6.1.2Condition 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, and for the capacity when force or moment is chosen for use in the basic rating equation. The rating of an older bridge for its load-carrying capacity should be based on a recent thorough field investigation. All physical features of a bridge which have an effect on its structural integrity should be examined as discussed in Section 4. Note any damaged or deteriorated sections and obtain adequate data on these areas so that their effect can be properly evaluated in the analysis. Where steel is severely corroded, concrete deteriorated, or timber decayed, make a determination of the loss in a cross-sectional area as closely as reasonably possible. Determine if deep pits, nicks, or other defects exist that may cause stress concentration areas in any structural member. Lowering load capacities below those otherwise permitted or other remedial action may be necessary if such conditions exist. As necessary, size, number, 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. Also, in addition to the physical condition, threaded members such as truss rods at turn-buckles should be checked to see if the rod has been upset(check the diameter at the smallest diameter of the rod) so that the net area will be properly calculated. This information will normally be taken from plans when they are available, but should be determined in the field otherwise. Any misalignment, bends, or kinks in compression members should be measured carefully. Such defects will have a great effect on the load-carrying capability of a member and may be the controlling factor in the loadcarrying capacity of the entire structure. Also, 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. 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. The effective area should be adjusted for rivet or bolt holes in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications or Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. Item #8 Add the following new Article C6.1.2 as follows: C6.1.2 The effective cross-section properties used in determining the resistance or strength of the section to applied

13

forces should be based on the gross cross-section less that portion which has deteriorated. For instance, in a steel tension member, the member should be evaluated based on the least cross-section area available to resist the applied tension force. Item #9 Add the following new Article 6.1.3 as follows: 6.1.3Evaluation Methods This Manual provides analytical and empirical methods for evaluating the safe maximum live load capacity of bridges or for assessing their safety under a particular loading condition. Empirical methods are load ratings by load testing. Only the specific analytical method, Load and Resistance Factor Rating of bridges, is discussed in Part A of Section 6. Other analytical methods are discussed in Part B, and load testing is discussed in Section 8. Item #10 Add the following new Article C6.1.3 as follows: C6.1.3 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. Safety assessment of a bridge using structural reliability methods may be used in special cases where the uncertainty in load or resistance is significantly different from that assumed in this Manual. (Reference: NCHRP Report 454, Calibration of Load Factors for LRFR Bridge Evaluation.) Item #11 Add the following new Article 6.1.4 as follows: 6.1.4Bridges with Unknown Structural Components For bridges where necessary details, such as reinforcement in a concrete bridge, are not available from plans or field measurements, a physical inspection of the bridge by a qualified inspector and evaluation by a qualified engineer may be sufficient to establish an approximate load rating based on rational criteria. Load tests may be helpful in establishing the safe load capacity for such structures. A concrete bridge with unknown details need not be posted for restricted loading if it has been carrying normal traffic for an appreciable period and shows no distress. The bridge shall be inspected regularly to verify satisfactory performance. Item #12 Add the following new Article C6.1.4 as follows: C6.1.4 Knowledge of the live load used in the original design, the current condition of the structure, and live load history may be used to provide a basis for assigning a safe load capacity. Bridge Owners may consider nondestructive proof load tests to establish a safe load capacity for such bridge. Item #13 Add a new Article 6.1.5 heading as follows: 6.1.5Component-Specific Evaluation

14

Item #14 Add the following new Article 6.1.5.1 as follows: 6.1.5.1Decks 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 verify 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. Capacity of timber plank decks is often controlled by horizontal shear. Item #15 Add the following new Article C6.1.5.1 as follows: C6.1.5.1 Test data indicates that the primary structural action of concrete decks is not flexure, but internal arching or membrane action. There is significant reserve strength in concrete decks designed by the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Heavily spalled and deteriorated concrete decks may be checked for punching shear under wheel loads. Item #16 Add the following new Article 6.1.5.2 as follows: 6.1.5.2Substructures Members of substructures need not be routinely checked for load capacity. Substructure elements such as pier caps and columns should be checked in situations where the Owner has reason to believe that their capacity may govern the load capacity of the entire bridge. Where deemed necessary by the Owner, load rating of substructure elements and checking of stability of substructure components, such as abutments, piers, and walls, should be done using all permanent loads and loads due to braking and centrifugal forces, but neglecting other transient loads such as wind or temperature. The permanent load factors shall be chosen so as to produce the maximum factored force effect. Where longitudinal stability is considered inadequate, the structure may be posted for restricted speed. Careful attention shall be given to substructure elements for evidence of distress or instability that could affect the load-carrying capacity of the bridge. As necessary, 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. Item #17 Add the following new Article C6.1.5.2 as follows: C6.1.5.2 Examples of distress that could trigger a load rating of substructure components include: a high degree of corrosion and section loss, changes in column end conditions due to deterioration, changes in column unbraced length due to scour, or columns with impact damage.

15

Item #18 Add the following new Article 6.1.6 as follows: 6.1.6Evaluation of Complex Structures The computation of load-carrying capacity of complex structures, such as suspension bridges, cable-stayed bridges, and curved girder bridges, may require special analysis methods and procedures. General guidance is available in this Manual but more complex procedures must be used for the actual determination of the load rating. Item #19 Add the following new Article C6.1.6 as follows: C6.1.6 The definition of Complex Bridges as defined in Section 1 is intended to be consistent with NBIS requirements for inspection. There are many types of complex structures that may require special analysis methods and procedures to determine the load carrying capacity. Regardless of structural complexity, the checking of capacity is always done on a member basis. When the structure being evaluated is of a type not covered in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, the analytical models should be sufficiently conservative so that member forces used in the rating are adequate to cover any increased uncertainty in calculating load effects. Item #20 Add the following new Article 6.1.7 as follows: 6.1.7Nonredundant Structures There may exist in a structure, critical components whose failure would be expected to result in the collapse of the bridge. Special considerations of these nonredundant components may be required in load rating the structure. Item #21 Add the following new Article C6.1.7 as follows: C6.1.7 This Section introduces the importance of redundancy in the evaluation and rating of bridges. Further guidelines in this area are provided in NCHRP Report 406, Redundancy in Highway Bridge Superstructures. Item #22 Add the following new Article 6.1.8 as follows: 6.1.8Qualifications and Responsibilities A registered Professional Engineer shall be charged with the overall responsibility for bridge-capacity evaluation. The engineering expertise necessary to properly evaluate a bridge varies widely with the complexity of the bridge. 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.

16

Item #23 Add the following new Article C6.1.8 as follows: C6.1.8 Engineer qualifications are also subject to requirements specific to a State or Bridge Owner. Item #24 Add the following new Article 6.1.9 as follows: 6.1.9Documentation of Load Rating The load rating should be adequately documented, including all background information such as field inspection reports, material and load test data, all supporting computations, and a clear statement of all assumptions used in calculating the load rating. If a computer model was used, the input data file should be retained for future use. Item #25 In Article 6A.1.1, delete the last two sentence in the 1st paragraph as follows: 6A.1.1General The load and resistance factor rating procedures of Part A provide a methodology for load rating a bridge consistent with the load and resistance factor design philosophy of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The specific load ratings are used in identifying the need for load posting or bridge strengthening and in making overweight-vehicle permit decisions. Load ratings are routinely reported to the NBI for national bridge administration and are also used in local bridge management systems. Item #26 In Article 6A.1.2, delete the 2nd paragraph as follows: Part A 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. Methods for the evaluation of existing bridges for extreme events such as earthquake, vessel collision, wind, flood, ice, or fire are not included herein. Rating of longspan bridges, movable bridges, and other complex bridges may involve additional considerations and loadings not specifically addressed in this Section and the rating procedures should be augmented with additional evaluation criteria where required. Item #27 In Article C6A.1.2, delete the 2nd paragraph as follows: Part As primary focus is the assessment of the safety of bridges for live loads (including overloads) and fatigue. Extreme events have a very low probability of occurrence but impart very high-magnitude forces on a structure. Study of past bridge failures indicates that failure due to hydraulics (scour/ice/debris) is the most common failure mode across the United States. Earthquake can also be a significant failure mode for bridges in regions considered to be seismically active. Bridges over navigable waterways with inadequate pier protection may be highly vulnerable to failure by vessel collision. 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. 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.

17

Item #28 Delete Article 6A.1.4 Item #29 Delete Article C6A.1.4 Item #30 Delete Article 6A.1.6 Item #31 Delete Article C6A.1.6 Item #32 Delete Article 6A.1.8 Heading Item #33 Delete Article 6A.1.8.1 Item #34 Delete Article C6A.1.8.1 Item #35 Delete Article 6A.1.8.2 Item #36 Delete Article C6A.1.8.2 Item #37 Delete Article 6A.1.9 Item #38 Delete Article C6A.1.9 Item #39 Delete Article 6A.1.10 Item #40 Delete Article C6A.1.10 Item #41 Delete Article 6A.1.11

18

Item #42 Delete Article 6A.5.5 Item #43 Delete Article C6A.5.5 Item #44 Delete Article 6A.5.11 Item #45 Delete Article C6A.5.11 Item #46 In Article 6B.1, delete the 1st paragraph as follows: Bridge Owners should implement standardized procedures for determining the load rating of bridges based on this Manual. Item #47 Delete Article 6B.1.1 Item #48 Delete Article 6B.1.2 Item #49 Delete Article C6B.1.2 Item #50 Delete Article 6B.1.3 Item #51 Delete Article 6B.1.5 Item #52 Delete Article C6B.1.5 Item #53 Delete Article 6B.1.6 Item #54 Delete Article 6B.2

19

Item #55 Delete Article C6B.2 Item #56 Delete Article 6B.5.4 Item #57 Delete Article C6B.5.4 Item #58 Delete Article 6B.5.5 Item #59 Delete Article C6B.5.5 Item #60 Add the following new Article 6B.7.8 as follows: 6B.7.8 Permanent Loads Other Than Dead Loads Secondary effects from post-tensioning shall be considered as permanent loads. Item #61 Add the following new Article C6B.7.8 as follows C6B.7.8 In continuous post-tensioned bridges, secondary moments are introduced as the member is stressed. Item #62 Delete Article 6B.8

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The Manual for Bridge Evaluation (MBE) combines into a single Section 6 provisions for Load and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) method (Part A) from the Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load and Resistance Factor Rating of Highway Bridges and the Allowable Stress and Load Factor rating methods (Part B) from the Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges (MCE). The LRFR and ASR/LFR Specifications in Section 6 have many articles that are independent of the load rating method and should therefore be identical. Items 1 through 12 include articles have been pulled out of Part A and Part B into a common section in front of Section 6. This would avoid conflicts, provide consistency between the Specifications, eliminate potential confusion, and reduce future editing effort. Items 13 through 35 pertain to

20

revisions to or deletions of related Articles in Part A and Part B on account of their inclusion in the new up front section.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Clarifies load rating requirements that apply equally to all load rating methods. This modification to the articles will make Part A and Part B load rating provisions consistent.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

21

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 4 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Article 6A.4.4.2.1a TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 12/22/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Revise Article 6A.4.4.2.1a as follows: The AASHTO legal vehicles and lane-type load models shown in Figures D6A-1 thru D6A-5 shall be used for load rating bridges for routine legal commercial traffic. For all span lengths the critical load effects shall be taken as the larger of the following: For all load effects, AASHTO legal vehicles (Type 3, Type 3S2, Type 3-3; applied separately) or sState legal loads. For negative moments and reactions at interior supports, a lane load of 0.2 klf combined with two AASHTO Type 3-3 vehicles or state legal loads multiplied by 0.75 heading in the same direction separated by 30 ft.

Take the largest of Type 3, Type 3S2, Type 3-3 vehicles, or state legal loads and plus lane loads. The lane load model is common to all three truck types. In addition, for span lengths greater than 200 ft, critical load effects shall be created by: AASHTO Type 3-3 or state legal load multiplied by 0.75 and combined with a lane load of 0.2 klf.

Dynamic load allowance shall be applied to the AASHTO legal vehicles and state legal loads, but and not the lane loads. If the ADTT is less than 500, the lane load may be excluded and the 0.75 factor changed to 1.0 if, in the Engineers judgment, it is warranted.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The revision clarifies that Type 3-3 or state legal loads can be used when using the lane load model for negative moments and reactions at piers and for span lengths greater than 200 ft.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: More consistency in load ratings when using the lane load model.

22

REFERENCES:

NCHRP Report 575; NCHRP 12-63 Calibration Report

OTHER: None

23

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 5 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Article C6A.4.4.2.3a TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 11/15/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: In Article C6A.4.4.2.3a, revise the 2nd paragraph as follows: 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. Legal loads of a given jurisdiction having gross vehicle weights that are significantly greater than the AASHTO legal loads should preferably be load rated using load factors provided for routine permits in this Manual. States with grandfathered trucks under 80 kips, which are excluded from federal weight laws and Formula B, whose load effects are bounded by load effects depicted by the NRL model should preferably be load rated using live load factors for SHV trucks in Table 6A.4.4.2.3b-1. The maximum moment and shear load effects of the NRL approaches 1.5 times the corresponding load effects of the AASHTO legal trucks. States may have grandfathered trucks where the maximum ratio of load effects could approach 2.0 times the corresponding AASHTO legal trucks. The use of load factors in Table 6A.4.4.2.3b-1 is conservative for these trucks. For an optimal evaluation of these grandfathered trucks, the calibration of SHV load factors, which is based on predicting the maximum expected live load, may be extended to cover a range up to 2.0 for the load effects, as described in Part C of the NCHRP 12-63 Calibration Report.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The MBE Section 6 Part A provides calibrated live load factors for LRFR ratings only for vehicles considered to be representative of the Formula B configurations. Many State legal loads, especially single unit trucks under 80 K, do not comply with Formula B requirements. Use of these same live load factors calibrated for the AASHTO trucks for rating exclusion vehicles may be conservative resulting in lower load ratings. More optimal load ratings can be obtained with the proposed revision.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved load ratings for state legal loads that represent grandfathered trucks.

24

REFERENCES: NCHRP Report 575; NCHRP 12-63 Calibration Report

OTHER: None

25

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 6 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Article C6A.4.4.2.3a TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 11/15/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Add the following after the last paragraph in Article C6A.4.4.2.3a: Alternate Approach to Deriving Site Specific Load Factors from WIM Data The commentary above on Site Specific Live Load Factors describes a simplified procedure for calculating load factors using the statistics for the heaviest 20 percent of the truck weight spectra to model the maximum load effects expected on typical bridges. It assumes that the heaviest trucks follow a Normal distribution and that 1 in 15 trucks will cross the bridge sidebyside. Studies performed in NCHRP 12-76 have shown that these simplifying assumptions may not be valid in all cases. NCHRP Project 12-76 has proposed a more consistent approach for using WIM data for live load modeling, which takes into consideration the actual distribution of the truck traffic data, including the actual configurations and the actual percentage of side-by-side crossings. Calculating of Maximum Load Effect Lmax The estimation of the maximum load effect Lmax expected over a 5-year bridge evaluation period can be executed through a variety of methods. The one implemented herein is based on the assumption that the tail end of the histogram of the maximum load effect over a given return period approaches a Gumbel distribution as the return period increases. The method assumes that the WIM data is assembled over a sufficiently long period of time to ensure that the data is representative of the tail end of the truck weight histograms. Equations in closed form for statistical projections can be utilized provided the tail of the load effect histogram for the original population of trucks approaches the tail end of a Normal distribution. A normal distribution fit can usually be obtained for the top 5 percent of data points. The process begins by assembling the measured load effects histograms (moment effect or shear force effect) for single lane events and two-lane events for a suite of simple and continuous spans. Then calculate cumulative distribution function for each load effect and obtain the standard deviate of the cumulative function. A plot is made of the upper 5 percent of the values of the normal deviate versus the load effect X. The slope m and intercept n of the best fit regression line provides the statistics for the normal distribution that best fits the tail end of the distribution. Calculation of Lmax for each span using equations in closed form for statistical projections can be performed as follows: The mean of Normal that best fits the tail end of the distribution: event = -n/m. The standard deviation of the best fit Normal: event=1/m.

26

Let nday = total number of trucks per day For 5-years: N= nday*365*5 The most probable value, uN, for the Gumbel distribution that models the maximum value in 5 years Lmax is given as:
ln(ln( N )) + ln(4 ) u N = event + event 2 ln( N ) 2 2 ln( N )

(C6A.4.4.2.3a-3)

The dispersion coefficient for the Gumbel distribution that models the maximum load effect Lmax is given as:
2 ln(N )

N =

event

(C6A.4.4.2.3a-4)

The mean value of Lmax is given as:


Lmax = max = u N + 0.577216

(C6A.4.4.2.3a-5)

The next step in the derivation of live load factors applies the projected maximum load effect Lmax from the WIM data in Equations 30 and 34 contained in NCHRP Report 454: Calibration of Load Factors for LRFR Evaluation. The general expressions for site specific live load factors for the Strength I limit state, following the same format as the derivation of the LRFR load factors are: Two or more lanes loading case:

L =

Lmax 2 1.8 > 1.3 LE2

(C6A.4.4.2.3a-6)

One lane loading case:

L =

Lmax 1 1.8 > 1.8 LE1

(C6A.4.4.2.3a-7)

where: Lmax1 Lmax2 LE1 LE2 = = = = Maximum single lane load effect expected over a 5-year period Maximum two or more lane load effect expected over a 5-year period Maximum load effect from one 120 K, 3S2 truck Maximum load effect from two 120 K, 3S2 trucks side by side

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

27

BACKGROUND: The calibration of the AASHTO LRFD and LRFR Specifications is based on the Ontario truck weight database. NCHRP Project 12-76 protocols recommend a calibration approach that focuses on the maximum live load variable, Lmax for updating the load factor for current traffic conditions using a normal distribution fit for the top 5% of data points. This approach is more robust and more accurate than the prior calibration approach.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Provides an improved procedure for deriving site specific live load factors for LRFR ratings.

REFERENCES: NCHRP 12-76 Final Report; Transportation Research Board, NCHRP Web Only Document 135

OTHER: None

28

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 7 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation: Section 6, Article 6A.8.3 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 11/15/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In the 4th paragraph of Article 6A.8.3, delete the 2nd sentence as follows: When the RF for any vehicle type falls below 0.3, then that vehicle type should not be allowed on the span. When RF falls below 0.3 for all three AASHTO legal trucks, then the span should be considered for closure. Item #2 In Article 6A.8.3, revise the 5th paragraph as follows: Where the RF is governed by the lane load shown in Figures D6A-4 and D6A-5, then the value of W in Eq. 1 6A.8.3-1 shall be taken as 80 kips. When States use their own legal loads which are different from the AASHTO legal loads, Eq. 1 6A.8.3-1 may be used for the posting load, but the gross weight of the States legal vehicle shall be substituted in the posting equation. Item #3 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article 6A.8.3: A Bridge Owner may close a structure at any posting threshold, but bridges not capable of carrying a minimum gross live load weight of three tons must be closed.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The sentence that is being deleted implies that the bridge should be closed to all traffic if RF < 0.3 for all three AASHTO trucks. The bridge can remain open to non-truck traffic or to other state legal loads that may be different from the three AASHTO trucks, if the RF 0.3 for those trucks. Deleting this sentence avoids this confusion. Additionally, the previous sentence is very clear in stating that When the RF for any vehicle type falls below 0.3, then that vehicle type should not be allowed on that span. This makes clear that only vehicles for which RF < 0.3 should not be allowed on the span.

29

The sentence that is added at the end of Article 6A.8.3 provides consistency between Part A (LRFR) and Part B (ASR/LFR) with regard to bridge closing requirements based on a minimum safe load capacity. The inserted sentence is taken from Article 6B.9.1 first paragraph and provides consistency in the minimum requirement for bridge closure among all three load rating methods.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Clarifies load posting and bridge closure requirements in LRFR and provides consistency in bridge closing criteria between Part A and Part B of Section 6.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

30

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 8 SUBJECT: Manual for Bridge Evaluation, Appendix A, Illustrative Examples A1 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaulation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/19/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Example A1A.1.5.4 as follows:

A1A.1.5.4Nominal Shear Resistance, Vn (LRFD Design 6.10.9.2)


W33 130 Rolled section, no stiffeners.

Web Depth clear of fillet = 29.75 in. Total Depth 2 (Flange thicknesses) = 31.39 in. D = d 2tf (Clear distance between flanges) = 33.1 2 0.855 = 31.39 in.

If

D Ek 1.12 with k= 5 for unstiffened web, C = 1.0 tw Fyw

where k = 5 for unstiffened web


D 29.75 = = 51.3 tw 0.580

D 31.39 = = 54.12 tw 0.580

1.12

Ek 29000 5 = 1.12 = 71.1 Fyw 36


54.12 71.1, therefore C = 1.0

LRFD Design Eq. 6.10.9.3.2-4

51.3 71.1, therefore C =1.0

then:

31

V n = Vcr = CV p where V p = 0.58 F yw Dt w

LRFD Design Eq. 6.10.9.2-1 LRFD Design Eq. 6.10.9.2-2

= = Item #2

1.0 x 0.58 36 29.75 31.39 0.580 360.3 380.15 kips

Revise Example A1A.1.5.5 as follows:

A1A.1.5.5Summary for Interior Stringer


Dead Load DC1 Moment, kip-ft Shear, kips Item #3 Revise Example A1A.1.6 as follows: A1A.1.6General Load-Rating Equation
RF = C ( DC ) ( DC ) ( DC ) ( DW ) ( DW ) ( DC ) ( P )( P ) C ( DC ) ( DC ) ( DW ) ( DW ) ( P )( P ) RF = ( L )( LL + IM ) ( L )( LL + IM )

Dead Load DC2 129.0 8.0

Live Load Distribution Factor gm = 0.626 gv = 78.9

Dist. Live Load + Impact 952.6 78.9

Nominal Capacity 2873.0 360.3 380.15

439.0 27.0

LRFD Design MBE Eq. 6A.4.2.1-1 Item #4 Revise Example A1A.1.8 as follows: A1A.1.8Design Load Rating (6A.4.3) A1A.1.8.1Strength I Limit State (6A.6.4.1)
Capacity C = ( c )( s ) ( ) Rn

RF =

( c )( s ) ( ) Rn ( DC ) ( DC ) ( DW ) ( DW ) ( L )( LL + IM ) ( )( s ) ( ) Rn ( DC ) ( DC ) ( DW ) ( DW ) RF = c ( L )( LL + IM )
A1A.1.8.1aInventory Level

Load DC LL

Load Factor 1.25 1.75

Table 6A.4.2.2-1

32

Load Factors

DC DW

LL

1.25 1.50 1.75

The dead load demands established for load cases DC1 and DC2 are permanent loads and therefore, the load factor for these loads will be taken from the load case DC.

RF = (1.0)(1.0)(1.0) ( 2873) (1.25)(439 +129) (1.50)(0) (1.75)(952.6)


Note: The remainder of this Example is unchanged.

Item #5 In Example A1A.1.8.2a, revise the indicated calculations as follows: LL = = RF = = 1.30 1.21
34.2 (1.0 )(11.49 ) (1.3)(14.42 )

DC

1.0

Table 6A.4.2.2-1

1.21

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agenda item is to correct some errors that were discovered in Example A1 in the MBE.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

33

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 9 SUBJECT: AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-18 Bridge Management, Evaluation and Rehabilitation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 02-28-10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: New AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection (See Included CD)

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: This agenda item is to replace the AASHTO Guide to Commonly Recognized Elements (CoRE) published in 1994 with a new improved AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection. The use of this new guide manual is not mandated and the requirements of the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) are still in effect. The approval of this guide manual will help facilitate the start of a multi-year transition period to provide time to develop training courses, enhanced examples, data migration procedures, inspector training, and development of the PONTIS 5.2 software. Continued input from the FHWA and the User Community will be incorporated through the T-18 Technical Committee. The AASHTO PONTIS taskforce has been planning for these changes and has written the requirements for development of the new PONTIS 5.2 software. Existing CoRe element level inspection data migration for AASHTO PONTIS users (42 states) will be available with a software utility built into the software. Approval of this ballot item is a positive step in advancing bridge inspection, condition assessment, and bridge management in the United States. This guide manual is presented as a state-of-the-art tool for bridge owners to manage their bridge inventories. This AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection builds on the element level condition assessment methods developed in the AASHTO Guide for Commonly Recognized Structural Elements. Improvements have been made to fully capture the condition of the elements by reconfiguring the element language to utilize multiple distress paths within the defined condition states. The AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection provides a comprehensive set of bridge elements that is designed to be flexible in nature to satisfy the needs of all agencies. The combined set of both National and Bridge Management elements captures the components necessary for an agency to manage all aspects of the bridge inventory utilizing the full capability of a Bridge Management System (BMS).

34

The new guide manual provides the following benefits: Establishes a set of National Elements to be used as a minimum standard. Establishes a set of expanded Bridge Management Elements that can be used to capture additional condition data to fully utilize a Bridge Management System. Standardizes the number of condition states at four. Changes the units for decks and slabs to area based units. Separates wearing surfaces from deck and slab elements. Separates protective coatings (paint) from steel elements. Supports flexibility for agencies to develop elements.

The target audience of this guide manual is primarily field inspectors. The condition data will be utilized by bridge managers for improved decision making and economic evaluation. The proper assessment of the condition of bridge elements is the cornerstone of sound bridge management. The introduction of element inspection condition methods in the early 1990s represented a significant advancement in the bridge inspection practice and has been employed by the vast majority of all State Transportation Departments in the United States. Bridge owners nationwide have recognized the benefits of detailed condition assessments through the use of the raw inspection information, expanded performance measures and bridge management system deterioration forecasting and evaluation. As the use of element level inspection techniques has expanded the need for improvements has been identified. This guide manual incorporates improvements through changes in the measurement units of decks and slabs, the development of a wearing surface element, the standardization of the number of condition states, the development of a protective coating element, and the incorporation of expanded element defect flags. The goal of this guide manual is to capture the condition of bridges in a simple way that can be standardized across the nation while providing the flexibility to be adapted to both large and small agency settings. This guide manual is not intended to supplant proper training or the exercise of engineering judgment by the inspector or professional engineer. There has been an increased focus on the management of our nations bridge inventory. Age, increased traffic demands and funding shortfalls have placed a greater emphasis on the need for effective bridge management. This guide manual is a building block for the future of bridge condition assessment and decision making. A presentation will be made at the T-18 technical committee meeting and again at the main session in Sacramento.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: The new AASHTO Guide Manual for Bridge Element Inspection will result in better condition assessments that will allow local, state, and federal agencies to more accurately report the condition of the bridge inventory in the United States. The impact of this improvement will be better decision making, better trade-off analysis and better representation of bridge needs. The guide manual incorporates a number of suggested improvements from bridge inspectors, bridge management engineers and bridge owners to improve the ease of field measurement, condition assessment and presentation of the bridge element condition information.

REFERENCES: FHWA. 1995. Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nations Bridges. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. AASHTO. 2002 with Interims. Guide for Commonly Recognized (CoRe) Structural Elements, CORE-1-I1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.

35

AASHTO. 2009. PONTIS Release 5.1, Users Manual. Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.

American Association of State Highway and

FHWA. 2006. Bridge Inspectors Reference Manual. Federal Highway Administration. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC. NCHRP. 1999. BRIDGIT Bridge Management System Users Manual and Technical Manual, NCHRP Project 12-28 (A and B1), Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC. NCHRP. 2007. Multi-Objective Optimization for Bridge Management, NCHRP Report 590, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC.

OTHER: None

36

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 10 SUBJECT: Revision to Section C5 of the D1.5 Bridge Welding Code TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-17 Welding
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/20/10 ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER D1.5 Bridge Welding Code

AGENDA ITEM: Add the following to Part B end of 2nd paragraph: Vision acuity is important and necessary for welders, welding operators, and tack welders to perform their jobs in an acceptable manner. Testing is not a guarantee that their vision will continue to remain acceptable. If it appears that an individual is having difficulty seeing properly, a vision acuity test should be performed.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Change approved by AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Committee and AWS D1 Main Committee.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

37

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 11 SUBJECT: Revision to Section 12 of the D1.5 Bridge Welding Code TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-17 Welding
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/20/10 ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER D1.5 Bridge Welding Code

AGENDA ITEM: Delete Existing Tables 12.3 and 12.4 and replace with the following proposed Tables 12.3, 12.4, 12.5 and 12.6. The two new additional tables result from separating SI and Metric units. Existing Table 12.5 will be re-numbered 12.7 and all references to the tables in other sections will be revised editorially.

Table 12.3 M270M (A 709M) Gr. 250, 345, 345S Minimum Preheat and Interpass Temperatures, C (see 12.14)
1.2 < HI 2.0 H8 50 80 110 160 Heat Input (as calculated by 5.12) kJ/mm 2.0 < HI 2.8 H16 H4 H8 H16 H4 70 100 120 180 40 50 80 140 40 70 90 150 50 80 110 160 40 40 70 120 HI > 2.8 H8 40 50 80 140

Thickness t, mm t 20 20 < t 40 40 < t 60 t > 60

H4 40 70 90 150

H16 40 70 90 150

Table 12.4 M270 (A 709) Gr. 36, 50, 50S Minimum Preheat and Interpass Temperatures, F (see 12.14)
30 < HI 50 H8 125 175 225 325 Heat Input (as calculated by 5.12) kJ/in 50 < HI 70 H16 H4 H8 H16 150 200 250 350 100 125 175 275 100 150 200 300 125 175 225 325 HI > 70 H8 100 125 175 275

Thickness t, in t 3/4 3/4 < t 1-1/2 1-1/2 < t 2-1/2 t > 2-1/2

H4 100 150 200 300

H4 100 100 150 250

H16 100 150 200 300

38

Table 12.5 M270M (A 709M) Gr. 345W, HPS 345W, HPS 485W Minimum Preheat and Interpass Temperatures, C (see 12.14)
1.2 < HI 2.0 H8 50 110 160 190 Heat Input (as calculated by 5.12) kJ/mm 2.0 < HI 2.8 H16 H4 H8 H16 H4 70 120 180 200 40 80 140 160 40 90 150 180 50 110 160 190 40 70 120 150 HI > 2.8 H8 40 80 140 160

Thickness t, mm t 20 20 < t 40 40 < t 60 t > 60

H4 40 90 150 180

H16 40 90 150 180

Table 12.6 M270 (A 709) Gr. 50W, HPS 50W, HPS 70W Minimum Preheat and Interpass Temperatures, F (see 12.14)
30 < HI 50 H8 125 225 325 375 Heat Input (as calculated by 5.12) kJ/in 50 < HI 70 H16 H4 H8 H16 150 250 350 400 100 175 275 325 100 200 300 350 125 225 325 375 HI > 70 H8 100 175 275 325

Thickness t, in t 3/4 3/4 < t 1-1/2 1-1/2 < t 2-1/2 t > 2-1/2

H4 100 200 300 350

H4 100 150 250 300

H16 100 200 300 350

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Change approved by AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Committee and AWS D1 Main Committee. Users of D1.5 have been confused by apparent inconsistencies in Tables 12.3 & 12.4. (Table 12.5 is rarely used.) Much of the confusion is caused by different rounding conventions between the SI and U.S. Customary units, but a review of the tables indicates that there are other sources of inconsistency as well, including different committee philosophies at the different times the two sets of numbers were tweaked and finalized, and even possible typographical errors. The proposed revisions are twofold: 1. Editorially separate the two sets of units into different tables to avoid inappropriate comparison between the two systems. 2. Return to first principles and regenerate the tables.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

39

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 12 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 6, Article 6.4.3.5 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-14 Steel
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/30/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Add the following to the end of the 1st paragraph of Article 6.4.3.5: Load-indicating devices which are incorporated into assemblies with hardened heavy hex AASHTO M 291 (ASTM A 563) Grade DH nuts shall be considered permissible for use, provided both the load-indicating device and heavy hex nut meet the mechanical property requirements of their respective ASTM standards. Item #2 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article C6.4.3.5: An assembly comprised of a load-indicating device affixed to a hardened heavy hex structural nut by the fastener manufacturer is also referred to as a captive DTI/nut.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The proposed change is intended to allow the use of the captive DTI/nut, or an assembly comprised of a loadindicating device (DTI) affixed to a hardened heavy hex structural nut by the fastener manufacturer. A joint companion item sponsored by the T-4/T-14 Committees proposes changes to Section 11 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications related to the use and verification testing of captive DTI/nut assemblies.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Allow the use of the new captive DTI/nut in highway bridge structures.

REFERENCES: None

40

OTHER: None

41

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 13 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 6, Articles 6.6.1.2.3 and 6.8.2.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-14 Steel
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/31/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Table 6.6.1.2.3-1 make the following additions/revisions: Add the following to the end of the Description for Conditions 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3: (Note: see Condition 2.5 for bolted angle or tee section member connections to gusset or connection plates). Add the following to the end of the Description for Condition 7.1: (Note: see Condition 7.2 for welded angle or tee section member connections to gusset or connection plates). Delete the bottom right figure in the Illustrative Example column under Condition 7.1. Add new Conditions 2.5 and 7.2 at the appropriate locations (see Attachment A). Item #2 Revise the 1st paragraph of Article 6.8.2.2 as follows: The shear lag reduction factor, U, shall be used when investigating the tension fracture check specified in Article 6.8.1 at the strength limit state. U should not be applied in the design of tension members at the fatigue limit state. Item #3 Add the following reference to the Reference List: McDonald, G.S., and K.H. Frank. 2009. The Fatigue Performance of Angle Cross-Frame Members in Bridges. Ferguson Structural Engineering Laboratory Report FSEL No: 09-1, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, December 2009.

42

Item #4 Add the following definition to Article 6.2: Effective Net AreaNet area modified to account for the effect of shear lag. Item #5 In Article 6.3, add the following reference to Article 6.6.1.2.3 (6.6.1.2.3) to the definition of the terms Ag, An, L, U and x in the Notation list. Revise the definition of Ae in the Notation list as follows: Ae = effective net area (in.2); effective flange area (in.2) (6.6.1.2.3) (6.13.6.1.4c)

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The present specification does not directly address the fatigue strength of angle or tee section members attached to gusset plates or connection plates by longitudinal fillet welds. Angles and tees are commonly used in cross-frames or diaphragms connecting adjacent girder lines, and also as lateral bracing members. These members can experience significant live load forces in horizontally curved and/or or skewed steel-girder bridges, and are subject to combined axial compression/tension and flexure under fatigue loading due to the eccentricities of the applied axial load in the member. The ballot item provides the Engineer with a simple method to determine the fatigue strength of these members without having to consider the effect of the moment due to the eccentricities inherent in the connection. The method is also applicable to determine the fatigue strength of angle or tee section members attached to gusset plates or connection plates with bolted connections, as noted.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Provides a simple and more rational method of checking the fatigue strength of these members.

REFERENCES: McDonald, G.S., and K.H. Frank. 2009. The Fatigue Performance of Angle Cross-Frame Members in Bridges. Ferguson Structural Engineering Laboratory Report FSEL No: 09-1, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, December 2009.

OTHER: None

43

ATTACHMENT A 2010 AGENDA ITEM 13 - T-14


Description Category Constant A (ksi3) Threshold (F)TH ksi Potential Crack Initiation Point Illustrative Examples

2.5 Base metal in angle or tee section members connected to a gusset or connection plate with high-strength bolted slip-critical connections. The fatigue stress range shall be calculated on the effective net area of the member, Ae = UAg, in which U=(1- x /L) and where Ag is the gross area of the member. x is the distance from the centroid of the member to the surface of the gusset or connection plate and L is the outto-out distance between the bolts in the connection parallel to the line of force. The effect of the moment due to the eccentricities in the connection shall be ignored in computing the stress range (McDonald and Frank, 2009). The fatigue category shall be taken as that specified for Condition 2.1. For all other types of bolted connections, replace Ag with the net area of the member, An, in computing the effective net area according to the preceding equation and use the appropriate fatigue category for that connection type specified for Condition 2.2 or 2.3, as applicable.

See applicable Category above

See applicable Constant above

See applicable Threshold above

Through the gross section near the hole, or in the net section originating at the side of the hole, as applicable

L c.g.

c.g.

44

7.2 Base metal in angle or tee section members connected to a gusset or connection plate by longitudinal fillet welds along both sides of the connected element of the member cross-section. The fatigue stress range shall be calculated on the effective net area of the member, Ae = UAg, in which U=(1- x /L) and where Ag is the gross area of the member. x is the distance from the centroid of the member to the surface of the gusset or connection plate and L is the maximum length of the longitudinal welds. The effect of the moment due to the eccentricities in the connection shall be ignored in computing the stress range (McDonald and Frank, 2009).

11x108

4.5

Toe of fillet welds in connected element

L L

x
c.g.

L c.g.

45

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 14 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 6, Article 6.7.4.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-14 Steel
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/31/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 6.7.4.2, revise the 4th , 5th and 6th paragraphs as follows: Where supports lines are not skewed more than 20 degrees from normal, intermediate diaphragms or crossframes may be placed in contiguous skewed lines parallel to the skewed supports lines. Where supports lines are skewed more than 20 degrees from normal, intermediate diaphragms or cross-frames shall be normal to the girders and may be placed in contiguous or discontinuous lines. Diaphragms or cross-frames are not required along skewed interior supports if diaphragms or cross-frames normal to the girders are provided at bearings that resist lateral forces. Where a support line at an interior pier is skewed more than 20 degrees from normal, elimination of the diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed interior support line may be considered at the discretion of the Owner. Where discontinuous intermediate diaphragm or cross-frame lines are employed normal to the girders in the vicinity of that support line, a skewed or normal diaphragm or cross-frame should be matched with each bearing that resists lateral force. Item #2 Revise the first two sentences of the 3rd paragraph of Article C6.7.4.2 as follows: Allowance of skewed intermediate diaphragms or cross-frames where supports lines are not skewed more than 20 degrees from normal is consistent with past practice. Where supports lines are skewed more than 20 degrees from normal, it may be advantageous to place the intermediate diaphragms or cross-frames oriented normal to the girders in discontinuous lines in such a manner that the transverse stiffness of the bridge is reduced, particularly in the vicinity of the supports. Item #3 Revise the 4th paragraph of Article C6.7.4.2 as follows: At severely skewed interior supports support lines at interior piers, the placement of diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed support line is not generally recommended. Ddetailing of the intersections of diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed support line with intermediate diaphragms or cross-frames oriented normal to the girders is complex, and in many cases, the normal diaphragms or cross-frames alone should be sufficient to resist any lateral components of force that develop at the bearings. Where discontinuous intermediate diaphragm or cross-frame lines are employed normal to the girders in the vicinity of interior supports, care must should be taken to match a diaphragm or cross-frame with each bearing that resists lateral force. Otherwise, the effect of the lateral

46

moment induced in the bottom flange due the eccentricity between the intermediate diaphragm or cross-frame and the bearing should be considered. Where a bearing does not resist lateral forceAlso, whenever any bearing along that support line is not matched with a diaphragm or cross-frame, care must be taken to ensure that the bottom flange of the girder is adequately braced. For such cases, the provision of diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed support line may be necessary. Refined analysis is recommended to allow for a more detailed examination of cross-frame forces, lateral bearing reactions and lateral flange bending whenever removal of diaphragms or cross-frames along, and/or in the vicinity of, severely skewed interior support lines is considered. For skews not exceeding 20 degrees from normal, diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed support line alone may be sufficient. In this case, intermediate diaphragms or cross-frames placed normal to the girders may would likely be too close together introducing significant lateral bending into the girder flanges. For skewed diaphragms or crossframes, connection plates should be oriented in the plane of the transverse bracing. The connection plate must be able to transfer force between the girder and the bracing without undue distortion. Welding of skewed connection plates to the girder may be problematic where the plate forms an acute angle with the girder.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Clarifications are proposed to the specification and commentary language related to evaluating the need for diaphragms or cross-frames along severely skewed support lines at interior piers when those lines are skewed more than 20 from normal. The specification language has been revised to indicate that for the case where an interior support is skewed more than 20 from normal, the elimination of the diaphragms or cross-frames along the skewed interior support line may be considered at the discretion of the Owner. More detailed guidance is also provided in the specification and commentary for the case where discontinuous intermediate diaphragm or cross-frame lines are employed normal to the girders in the vicinity of skewed interior support lines. Commentary language is added to indicate that refined analysis is recommended whenever the elimination of diaphragms or cross-frame along, and/or in the vicinity of, severely skewed interior support lines is being contemplated to allow for more detailed examination of cross-frame forces, lateral bearing reactions and lateral flange bending.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

47

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 15 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 11, Various Articles TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-14 Steel/T-4 Construction
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 12/22/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Add the following to the end of the 1st paragraph of Article 11.3.2.6: Load-indicating devices which are incorporated into assemblies with hardened heavy hex AASHTO M 291 (ASTM A 563) (AASHTO M 291M (ASTM A 563M)) Grade DH nuts shall be considered permissible for use, provided both the load-indicating device and heavy hex nut meet the mechanical property requirements of their respective ASTM standards. Item #2 Add new Commentary to Article 11.3.2.6 as follows: C11.3.2.6 An assembly comprised of a load-indicating device affixed to a hardened heavy hex structural nut by the fastener manufacturer is referred to herein as a captive DTI/nut. Item #3 Revise the 1st two sentences of the 3rd paragraph of Article 11.5.6.4.1 as follows: To perform the calibrated wrench verification test for short grip bolts, direct tension indicators (DTI) or captive DTI/nuts with solid plates may be used in lieu of a tension-measuring device. The DTI or captive DTI/nut lot shall be first verified with a longer grip bolt in the Skidmore-Wilhelm Calibrator or an acceptable equivalent device. Item #4 Revise the 1st sentence of the 4th paragraph of Article 11.5.6.4.1 as follows: Bolts and nuts together with washers or captive DTI/nuts of size and quality specified in the contract documents, located as required below, shall be installed in properly aligned holes and tensioned and inspected by any of the installation methods described in Articles 11.5.6.4.4 through 11.5.6.4.7 to at least the minimum tension specified in Table 11.5.6.4.1-1.

48

Item #5 Revise Article 11.5.6.4.2 as follows: 11.5.6.4.2 Rotational-Capacity Tests Rotational-capacity testing is required for all fastener assemblies, except for lock-pin and collar type fastener assemblies. Assemblies specified as galvanized shall be tested after galvanizing. Washers shall be required as part of the test even though they may not be required as part of the installation procedure. The following shall apply: Except as modified herein, the rotational-capacity test shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of AASHTO M 164 (ASTM A 325) (AASHTO M 164M (ASTM A 325M)). Each combination of bolt production lot, nut lot (or captive DTI/nut lot), and washer lot comprise one assembly lot for the purposes of testing and shall be tested as an assembly. Where washers are not required by the installation procedures, they need not be included in the assembly lot testing or lot identification. A rotational-capacity lot number shall have been assigned to each combination of component lots tested. Each qualified combination of component lots shall be assigned a unique rotational capacity assembly lot number. The minimum frequency of testing shall be two assemblies per rotational-capacity assembly lot. For bolts that are long enough to fit in a Skidmore-Wilhelm Calibrator, the bolt, nut (or captive DTI/nut), and washer assembly shall be assembled in a Skidmore-Wilhelm Calibrator or an equivalent device. Bolts that are too short to test in a Skidmore-Wilhelm Calibrator may be tested in a steel joint. The tension requirement, in the section below, need not apply. The maximum torque requirement, torque < 0.250PD, shall be computed using a value of P equal to the turn test tension taken as 1.15 times the bolt tension in Table 11.5.6.4.1-1. The assembly shall be tightened, two times the required number of turns indicated in Table 11.5.6.4.1-2 after snugging. After the required turn has been completed, it shall be verified that the maximum torque requirement has not been exceeded. The tension reached at the rotation below, i.e., the turn-test tension, shall be equal to or greater than 1.15 times the bolt required fastener tension, i.e., installation tension, shown in Table 11.5.6.4.1-1. In a tension-measuring device, the minimum rotation from an initial tension of ten percent of the minimum required tension shall be two times the required number of turns indicated in Table 11.5.6.4.1-2 without stripping or failure. Minimum rotation for bolt and captive DTI/nut combination assemblies shall be the required number of turns indicated in Table 11.5.6.4.1-2 beyond the turn after the gaps in the DTI are closed. After the required installation tension listed above has been exceeded, one reading of tension and torque shall be taken and recorded. The torque value shall conform to the following: (11.5.6.4.2-1)

Torque 0.250PD where:

49

Torque = P = D = Item #6

measured torque ftlb (Nmm) measured bolt tension, lb (N) bolt diameter, ft (mm)

Add the following paragraph at the beginning of Article C11.5.6.4.2: An assembly lot is defined as a combination of fastener components of different types which are configured as they are to be installed in the steel. An example would be a bolt, nut, and washer. Each component in an assembly lot will have come from a production lot of similar components. Any change in component lots warrants additional testing of the assembly lots into which the component lots are integrated. Item #7 Revise the last sentence of Article 11.5.6.4.7 as follows: Installation of a DTI under the turned element may only be permitted if either a washer is used to separate the turned element from the DTI, or verification testing in accordance with the provisions of this article and the manufacturers instructions demonstrates satisfactory performance without the washer under the turned element.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The majority of the proposed changes are intended to allow the use of the captive DTI/nut, or an assembly comprised of a load-indicating device (DTI) affixed to a hardened heavy hex structural nut by the fastener manufacturer. Since the DTI is integral part of the nut in the captive DTI/nut, changes to the rotational capacity test requirements were needed since the closing of the gaps of the DTI requires additional rotation. The change requires one full installation rotation after the gaps are closed for the captive DTI/nut. This provides performance requirements similar to those of fastener assemblies without the captive DTI/nut. Preinstallation verification testing must also still be performed to verify that the assemblies function properly before use in the structure. Language is also proposed to allow the use of DTIs under the turned element without having to use a hardened washer between the turned element and the DTI provided that the proper preinstallation verification testing is performed to ensure that each lot performs properly before they can be assembled and used in the structure in this manner/configuration. Minor editorial changes are also proposed to clarify the specification.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Allow the use of the new captive DTI/nut in highway bridge structures.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

50

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 16 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Sections 3, Article 3.4.1 and Section 12, Various Articles TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-13 Culverts/T-5 Loads
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/25/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Table 3.4.1-2 as follows: Type of Load, Foundation Type, and Method Used to Calculate Downdrag DC: Component and Attachments DC: Strength IV only DD: Downdrag Piles, Tomlinson Method Piles, Method Drilled shafts, ONeill and Reese (1999) Method DW: Wearing Surfaces and Utilities EH: Horizontal Earth Pressure Active At-Rest AEP for anchored walls EL: Locked-in Construction Stresses EV: Vertical Earth Pressure Overall Stability Retaining Walls and Abutments Rigid Buried Structure Rigid Frames Flexible Buried Structures other than Metal Box Culverts Flexible Metal Box Culverts and Structural Plate Culverts with Deep Corrugations Flexible Buried Structures o Metal Box Culverts and Structural Plate Culverts with Deep Corrugations o Thermoplastic culverts o All others ES: Earth Surcharge Load Factor Maximum Minimum 1.25 0.90 1.50 0.90 1.4 0.25 1.05 0.30 1.25 0.35 1.50 0.65 1.50 1.35 1.35 1.00 1.00 1.35 1.30 1.35 1.95 1.50 1.5 1.3 1.95 1.50 0.90 0.90 N/A 1.00 N/A 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.75

51

Item #2 In Article C3.4.1, add the following after the 19th paragraph: The earth load factor for thermoplastic culverts is set to 1.3; however, to preserve the overall safety at the same levels as historical specifications, an earth-load-installation factor is introduced later in these specifications as part of the implementation of NCHRP Report 631. This factor may be adjusted based on field control of construction practices. Item #3 In Article 12.4.1.3, add the following bullet to the end of the existing bullet list: For thermoplastic culverts, bedding and backfill materials: A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5, or A-3 soils. A maximum of 50 percent of the particle sizes may pass the No. 100 sieve and a maximum of 20 percent may pass the No. 200 sieve.

Item #4 In Article C12.4.1.3, revise the 1st paragraph as follows: Refer to Sections 26, and 27, and 30 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, for compaction criteria of soil backfill for flexible and rigid culverts, respectively. Item #5 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article C12.4.1.3: The restriction on materials passing the No. 100 sieve and No. 200 sieve for thermoplastic culverts are intended to eliminate uniform fine sands for use as pipe embedment. Such materials are difficult to work with, are sensitive to moisture content, and do not provide support comparable to coarser or more-broadly-graded materials at the same percentage of maximum density. The engineer may permit exceptions to these restrictions in special cases. If so, a suitable plan should be submitted for control of moisture content and compaction procedures. These silty and clayey materials should never be used in a wet site. Increased inspection levels should be considered if such a plan is approved. Item #6 Revise Table 12.5.5-1 under the row Thermoplastic Pipe as follows: Thermoplastic Pipe PE and PVC pipe: Thrust, T Soil stiffness, s Minimum wall area and buckling Global buckling, bck Flexure, f

1.00 0.90 1.00 0.70 1.00

52

Item #7 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article C12.5.5: The new thermoplastic design method evaluate more load conditions than prior specifications. Separate resistance factors are provided for each mode of behavior. The resistance factor for buckling is set at 0.7 and preserves the same level of safety as prior editions of these Specifications with the inclusion of the Installation Factor of Article 12.12.3.5. Buckling is an undesirable failure mode for culverts. Buckling can result in near total collapse of the culvert and blockage of the waterway. Item #8 Revise the title of Article 12.5.6.3 as follows: 12.5.6.3 Flexibility Limits and Construction Stiffness - Thermoplastic Pipe Item #9 In Table 12.6.6.3-1, revise the 8th row as follows: Thermoplastic Pipe General Under pavement Item #10 Add new Commentary to Article 12.6.6.3 as follows: C12.6.6.3 McGrath et al. (2005) have shown that the significant thermal expansion in thermoplastic pipe can affect pavement performance under shallow fills. Item #11 Replace Article 12.12 as shown in Attachment A. Item #12 Add the following additional references to Section 12: AASHTO. 2009. Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing, 29th Edition, HM-29, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. Includes AASHTO M, R, and T standards, which are also available individually in downloadable form. McGrath, T.J. and Beaver, J.L., 2005, Performance of Thermoplastic Pipe Under Highway Vehicle Loading, Research Report to Minnesota DOT, Oakdale, MN, Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. Moore, I.D., 1990, "Three-Dimensional Response of Elastic Tubes," International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 26, No. 4. NCHRP Report 631 2009 Updated Test and Design Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe by T.J. McGrath, I.D. Moore, G.Y. Hsuan. ID/8 12.0 in. ID/2 24.0 in.

53

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: These agenda items are a result of the new design recommend ions of NCHRP report 631. The recommendation include the following: 1. A simplified design method for thermoplastic pipe that should be suitable for evaluating thermoplastic pipe for most design conditions. The design method is drawn largely from prior methods, but provides enhancements where necessary. 2. The load factor for earth load is reduced to the same values as rigid pipe; however, to preserve the traditional safety for thermoplastic pipe installations, an installation factor is incorporated into the design method. Designers are allowed to reduce the installation factor if specific guidelines for monitoring installation quality are met. This will allow substantial increases in depths of fill, the feasibility of which has been demonstrated in full-scale field testing. 3. Earth loads are calculated using the current AASHTO method, which considers the low hoop stiffness of thermoplastic pipe and the load reduction resulting from that low stiffness. 4. Material modulus values for a 75-year design period have been added. 5. Design for local buckling is largely unchanged except that the compression capacity of a pipe determined through the stub compression test can be used in lieu of the capacity calculated with the design equations. 6. Guidelines for computing bending strain have been improved with the addition of better guidance for the shape factor, which considers non-elliptical deformation due to non-uniform bedding. Tests and computer modeling have shown that the low hoop stiffness of profile wall HDPE can result in reduced bending strains relative to pipe with higher hoop stiffness. Provisions are added to estimate the expected field deflection; however, this is presented as a reasonability check for selecting appropriate backfill and compaction levels. Contractor field control is ultimately responsible for limiting deflection under construction.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: The new provisions will allow substantial increases in depths of fill, the feasibility of which has been demonstrated in full-scale field testing.

REFERENCES: NCHRP report 631 Updated Test and Design Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe by T.J. McGrath, I.D. Moore, G.Y. Hsuan.

OTHER: None

54

ATTACHMENT A - ARTICLE 12.12 2010 AGENDA ITEM 16 T-13/T-5 THERMOPLASTIC PIPE

12.12THERMOPLASTIC PIPES 12.12.1General The provisions herein shall apply to the structural design of buried thermoplastic pipe with solid, corrugated, or profile wall, manufactured of PE or PVC. C12.12.1 These structures become part of a composite system comprised of the plastic pipe and the soil envelope. The following specifications are applicable: For PE: Solid WallASTM F 714, CorrugatedAASHTO M 294, ProfileASTM F 894. For PVC: Solid WallAASHTO M 278, ProfileAASHTO M 304. 12.12.2Service Limit States 12.12.2.1General The allowable maximum localized distortion of installed plastic pipe shall be limited based on the service requirements and overall stability of the installation. The extreme fiber tensile strain shall not exceed the allowable long-term strain in Table 12.12.3.3-1. The net tension strain shall be the numerical difference between the bending tensile strain and ring compression strain. C12.12.2.1 The allowable long-term strains should not be reached in pipes designed and constructed in accordance with this Specification. Deflections resulting from conditions imposed during pipe installation should also be considered in design.

55

12.12.2.2Deflection Requirement Total deflection, t, shall be less than the allowable deflection, A, as follows:

C12.12.2.2 Deflection is controlled through proper construction in the field, and construction contracts should place responsibility for control of deflections on the contractor. However, feasibility of a specified installation needs to be checked prior to writing the project specifications. The construction specifications set the allowable deflection, A, for thermoplastic pipe at five percent as a generally appropriate limit. The Engineer may allow alternate deflection limits for specific projects if calculations using the design method in this section show that the pipe meets all of the strength-limit-state requirements.

t A
where: t =

(12.12.2.2-1)

total deflection of pipe expressed as a reduction of the vertical diameter taken as positive for reduction of the vertical diameter and expansion of horizontal diameter. (in.) total allowable deflection of pipe, reduction of vertical diameter (in.)

A =

Total deflection, calculated using Spanglers expression for predicting flexural deflection in combination with the expression for circumferential shortening, shall be determined as:

t =

K B D L Psp + C L PL D o 1000 E p I p R + 0.061 M s

+ sc D

(12.12.2.2-2)

in which:

Eq. 12.12.2.2-2 uses the constrained soil modulus, Ms, as the soil property. Note that the soil prism load is used as input, rather than the reduced load used to compute thrust. This check should be completed to determine that the expected field deflection based on thrust and flexure is lower than the maximum allowable deflection for the project.

sc =

Ts 1000 A eff E p

(12.12.2.2-3)

Ts = Ps Do 2

(12.12.2.2-4)

where: sc = service compressive strain due to thrust, as specified in Article 12.12.3.10.1c and taken as positive for compression service thrust per unit length (lb./in.) deflection lag factor , a value of 1.5 is typical bedding coefficient , a value of 0.10 is typical soil prism pressure (EV), evaluated at pipe springline (psi) Thrust and hoop strain in the pipe wall are defined positive for compression. There are no standard values for the deflection lag factor. Values from 1.0 to 6.0 have been recommended. The highest values are for installations with quality backfill and low initial deflections and do not generally control designs. A value of 1.5 provides some allowance for increase in deflection over time for installations with initial deflection levels of several percent. The bedding coefficient, KB varies from 0.083 for full support to 0.110 for line support at the invert. Haunching is always specified to provide good support; however, it is still common to use a value of KB equal to 0.10 to account for inconsistent haunch support.

Ts = DL = KB = Psp =

56

CL = PL =

live load distribution coefficient design live load pressure including vehicle, dynamic load allowance, and multiple presence effect (psi) outside diameter of pipe (in.) as shown in Figure C12.12.2.2-1 short- or long-term modulus of pipe material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 (ksi) moment of inertia of pipe profile per unit length of pipe (in.4/in.) radius from center of pipe to centroid of pipe profile (in.) as shown in Figure C12.12.2.2-1 diameter to centroid of pipe profile (in.) as shown in Figure C12.12.2.2-1 secant constrained soil modulus, as specified in Article 12.12.3.5-1 (ksi) design service load (psi) effective area of pipe wall per unit length of pipe as specified in Article 12.12.3.10.1b (in.2/in.)
Figure C12.12.2.2-1Schematic for Thermoplastic Pipe Terms

Do = Ep = Ip R D = = =

Ms = Ps = Aeff =

12.12.3Safety Against Structural Failure 12.12.3.1General C12.12.3.1

Buried thermoplastic culverts shall be investigated at the strength limit states for thrust, general and local buckling, and combined strain.
12.12.3.2Section Properties

Total compressive strain in a thermoplastic pipe can cause yielding or buckling, and total tensile strain can cause cracking.
C12.12.3.2

Section properties for thermoplastic pipe, including wall area, moment of inertia, and profile geometry should be determined from cut sections of pipe or obtained from the pipe manufacturer.

Historically, the AASHTO Specifications have contained minimum values for the moment of inertia and wall area of thermoplastic pipe; however, these values have been minimum values and are not meaningful for design. This is particularly so since provisions to evaluate local buckling were introduced in 2001. These provisions require detailed profile geometry that varies with manufacturer. Thus, there is no way to provide meaningful generic information on section properties. A convenient method for determining section properties for profile wall pipe is to make optical scans of pipe wall cross-sections and determine the properties with a computer drafting program.

57

12.12.3.3Chemical and Mechanical Requirements

C12.12.3.3

Mechanical properties for design shall be as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1. Except for buckling, the choice of either initial or long-term mechanical property requirements, as appropriate for a specific application, shall be determined by the Engineer. Investigation of general buckling shall be based on the value of modulus of elasticity that represents the design life of the project.

Properties in Table 12.12.3.3-1 include initial and long-term values. No product standard requires determining the actual long-term properties; thus, there is some uncertainty in the actual values. However, pipe designed with the Table 12.12.3.3-1 values for 50-year modulus of elasticity have performed well, and the properties are assumed to be reasonably conservative. Estimated values for a modulus of elasticity for a 75-year design life have been estimated from relaxation tests on PVC and PE in parallel plate tests. The tests were conducted for over two years and show that the modulus of elasticity reduces approximately linearly with the logarithm of time. Further, with a log-linear extrapolation, the differences between 50year and 75-year modulus values are very small. These values should be reasonably conservative, with the same reliability as the 50-year values. Pipe and thermoplastic resin suppliers should be asked to provide confirmation of long-term modulus values for any particular product. Values should meet or exceed those provided in Table 12.12.3.3-1. Where service life is in excess of 75 years, test data may be used for the desired life. The service long-term tension strain limit and the factored compression strain limit in Table 12.12.3.3-1 need to be multiplied by the appropriate resistance factors to obtain the strain limits.

Table 12.12.3.3-1Mechanical Properties of Thermoplastic Pipe


Type of Pipe Minimum Cell Class Service LongTerm Tension Strain Limit, FactoredCom pr. Strain Limit, yc (%) 4.1 Initial Fu min (ksi) 3.0 E min (ksi) 110.0 50-Year Fu min (ksi) 1.44 E min (ksi) 22 75-Year Fu min (ksi) 1.40 E min (ksi) 21

yt (%)
Solid Wall PE Pipe ASTM F714 Corrugated PE Pipe AASHTO M294 Profile PE Pipe ASTMF894 ASTM D3350, 335434C ASTM D3350, 435400C ASTM D3350, 334433C ASTM D3350, 335434C ASTM D1784, 12454C ASTM D1784, 12364C ASTM D1784, 12454C ASTM D1784, 12364C 5.0

5.0

4.1

3.0

110.0

0.90

22

0.90

21

5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5

4.1 4.1 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6

3.0 3.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 6.0

80.0 110.0 400.0 440.0 400.0 440.0

1.12 1.44 3.70 2.60 3.70 2.60

20 22 140 158 140 158

1.10 1.40 3.60 2.50 3.60 2.50

19 21 137 156 137 156

Solid Wall PVC Pipe AASHTO M278, ASTM F679 Profile PVC Pipe AASHTO M304

58

12.12.3.4Thrust

C12.12.3.4

Loads on buried thermoplastic pipe shall be based on the soil prism load, modified as necessary to consider the effects of pipe-soil interaction. Calculations shall consider the duration of a load when selecting pipe properties to be used in design. Live loads need not be considered for the long-term loading condition.
12.12.3.5Factored and Service Loads

Because of the time-dependent nature of thermoplastic pipe properties, the load will vary with time. Time of loading is an important consideration for some types of thermoplastic pipe. Live loads and occasional flood conditions are normally considered short-term loads. Earth loads or permanent high groundwater are normally considered long-term loads.
C12.12.3.5

The factored load, Pu, in psi shall be taken as:


Pu = EV EV K E K 2 VAF Psp + WA P W + LL LL P L CL

(12.12.3.5-1)

The service load, Ps, in psi shall be taken as:

Ps = K 2 VAF Psp + P L CL + P W in which:


SH - 1.17 VAF = 0.76 - 0.71 + 2.92 SH

(12.12.3.5-2)

(12.12.3.5-3)

For factors, refer to Article 12.5.4 regarding assumptions about redundancy for earth loads and live loads. The factor K2 is introduced to consider variation in thrust around the circumference, which is necessary when combining thrust with moment or thrust due to earth and live load under shallow fill. K2 is set at 1.0 to determine thrust at the springline and 0.6 to determine thrust at the crown. The term PL is also modified for this reason in later sections. Figure C3.11.3-1 shows the effect of groundwater on the earth pressure. Psp does not include the hydrostatic pressure. Psp is the pressure due to the weight of soil above the pipe and should be calculated based on the wet density for soil above the water table and based on the buoyant density for soil below the water table. See Table 3.5.1-1 for common unit weights.

SH =

s M s R EpAg
LW 1.0 Do

(12.12.3.5-4)

CL =

(12.12.3.5-5)

L W = W0 + 12 LLDF(H ) where:

(12.12.3.5-6)

In computing LW, add axle spacing (and increase total live load) if depth is sufficient for axle loads to interact.

59

KE

installation factor typically taken as 1.5 to provide traditional safety. Use of a value less than 1.5 requires additional monitoring of the installation during construction and provisions for such monitoring shall be provided on the contract documents.

The factor KE is introduced to provide the same safety level as traditionally used for thermoplastic culverts. Designers may consider using values of KE as low as 1.0 provided that procedures are implemented to ensure compliance with construction specifications. For culvert designs completed with an installation factor less than 1.5, the designer is required to specify additional minimum performance measures such as testing, monitoring, construction controls, gradation and backfill requirements including active monitoring of the backfill gradation and compaction (see Article 30.7.4 of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications). The construction controls include deflection measurements and shall require the Contractor to submit and get approval from the Owner's Engineer for his/her construction plan to be used to achieve the more stringent performance measures which allowed for the use of a smaller installation factor in the design. Backfill placement and monitoring shall be done at levels along the side of the culvert and includes measurement of change in vertical pipe diameter when the backfill reaches the top of the pipe. As the backfill nears the top of pipe the vertical pipe diameter should be greater than the vertical diameter prior to backfilling, but not more than three percent greater than the vertical diameter prior to backfilling.

K2

= = =

coefficient to account for variation of thrust around the circumference 1.0 for thrust at the springline 0.6 for thrust at the crown vertical arching factor The use of the vertical arching factor is based on the behavior, demonstrated by Burns and Richard (1964), that pipe with high hoop-stiffness ratios (SH, ratio of soil stiffness to pipe hoop stiffness) carry substantially less load than the weight of the prism of soil directly over the pipe. This behavior was demonstrated experimentally by Hashash and Selig (1990) and analytically by Moore (1995). McGrath (1999) developed the simplified form of the equation presented in this Section. The VAF approach is only developed for the embankment load case. No guidance is currently available to predict the reduced loads on pipe in trench conditions. The only trench load theory proposed for flexible pipe was that by Spangler, which does not have good guidance on selection of input parameters. It is conservative to use the VAF approach as presented for embankments. If evaluating the short-term load condition, then use the initial modulus of elasticity to compute SH. Similarly, if evaluating the long-term loading condition, then use the long-term modulus of elasticity to compute SH.

VAF

SH

hoop stiffness factor

60

PW CL LW

= = =

hydrostatic water pressure at the springline of the pipe (psi) live load distribution coefficient live load distribution width in the circumferential direction at the elevation of the crown (in.) depth of cover (ft.) load modifier as specified in Article 1.3.2, as they apply to vertical earth loads on culverts load factor for vertical pressure from dead load of earth fill, as specified in Article 3.4.1 soil prism pressure (EV), evaluated at pipe springline (psi) load factor for hydrostatic pressure, as specified in Article 3.4.1 load modifier as specified in Article 1.3.2, as they apply to live loads on culverts load factor for live load, as specified in Article 3.4.1 live load pressure (LL) with dynamic load allowance (psi) resistance factor for soil stiffness secant constrained soil modulus as specified in Table 12.12.3.5-1 (ksi) The term s appears in Eq. 12.12.3.5-4 to account for variability in backfill compaction. A lower level of compaction increases the applied thrust force on the pipe. For selecting values of the constrained soil modulus, Ms, prior editions of the specifications contained the commentary Suggested practice is to design for a standard Proctor backfill density five percent less than specified by the contract documents. This statement is not considered necessary with the addition of post-construction inspection guidelines to the LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, which should provide reasonable assurance that the design condition is achieved.

H EV EV Psp WA LL LL PL s Ms

= = = = = = = = = =

61

R Ep Ag Do W0

= = = = =

radius from center of pipe to centroid of pipe profile (in.) short- or long-term modulus of pipe material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 (ksi) gross area of pipe wall per unit length of pipe (in.2/in.) outside diameter of pipe (in.) width of live load ground-surface contact area parallel to flow in pipe as specified in Article 3.6.1.2.5 (in.) factor for distribution of live load through earth fills in Article 3.6.1.2.6

LLDF

In the absence of site-specific data, the secant constrained soil modulus, Ms, may be selected from Table 12.12.3.5-1 based on the backfill type and density and the geostatic earth pressure, Psp. Linear interpolation between soil stress levels may be used for the determination of Ms.

For culverts in embankment or wide trench installations under depths of fill up to 10.0 ft., the soil type and density selected from Table 12.12.3.5-1 shall be representative of the conditions for a width of one-half diameter each side of the culvert, but never less than 18.0 in. on each side of the culvert. For culverts under depths of fill greater than 10.0 ft., the soil type and density selected shall be representative of the conditions for a width of one diameter on each side of the culvert. The constrained modulus may also be determined experimentally using the stress-strain curve resulting from a uniaxial strain test on a sample of soil compacted to the field-specified density. The constrained modulus is the slope of the secant from the origin of the curve to a point on the curve corresponding to the soil prism pressure, Psp, Figure C12.12.3.5-1.

For culverts in trench installations under depths of fill greater than 10.0 ft., evaluation of the values of Ms for in-situ soil for a width one diameter either side of the pipe is not necessary, provided the in-situ soil has adequate vertical; and lateral stiffness. Stable trench walls, during the excavation process, are predictive of adequate vertical and lateral stiffness. Installation in narrow trenches reduces the vertical load, provided vertical stiffness of the soil is adequate to carry the load that is distributed around the pipe due to arching, as represented by the vertical arching factor (VAF) in the design method and adequate space is preserved at the side of the pipe to place and compact backfill. The minimum trench widths provided in the LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications are set to provide adequate space. Narrow trenches yield a desirable level of conservatism, since the transfer of the load to in-situ trench wall is not considered in flexible pipe design. If the structural backfill material is compacted crushed stone, then the secant constrained soil modulus, Ms, values for Sn-100 may be used. If the backfill is uncompacted (dumped) crushed stone, use the modulus values for Sn-90. While it is not common practice to monitor density of crushed stone backfills, experience has found that a modest compaction effort improves culvert performance and allows the use of the compacted values. The width of structural backfill is an important consideration when the in situ soil in the trench wall or the embankment fill at the side of the structural backfill is soft. Currently, only AWWA Manual M45, The Fiberglass Pipe Design Manual, addresses this issue.

Figure C12.12.3.5-1Schematic One-Dimensional Stress-Strain Curve of Soil Backfill

62

Table 12.12.3.5-1Ms Based on Soil Type and Compaction Condition

Psp Stress level

Sn-100 (ksi) 2.350 3.450 4.200 5.500 7.500 9.300

Sn-95 (ksi) 2.000 2.600 3.000 3.450 4.250 5.000 Si-95 (ksi) 1.415 1.670 1.770 1.880 2.090

Sn-90 (ksi) 1.275 1.500 1.625 1.800 2.100 2.500 Si-90 (ksi) 0.670 0.740 0.750 0.790 0.900

Sn-85 (ksi) 0.470 0.520 0.570 0.650 0.825 1.000 Si-85 (ksi) 0.360 0.390 0.400 0.430 0.510

(psi) 1.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 40.0 60.0


Psp Stress level

(psi) 1.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 40.0 60.0


Psp Stress level

Cl-95 (ksi) 0.530 0.625 0.690 0.740 0.815 0.895

Cl-90 (ksi) 0.255 0.320 0.355 0.395 0.460 0.525

Cl-85 (ksi) 0.130 0.175 0.200 0.230 0.285 0.345

(psi) 1.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 40.0 60.0


1. 2.

The soil types are defined by a two-letter designation that indicates general soil classification, Sn for sands and gravels, Si for silts and Cl for clays. Specific soil groups that fall into these categories, based on ASTM D 2487 and AASHTO M 145, are listed in Table 12.12.3.5-2. The numerical suffix to the soil type indicates the compaction level of the soil as a percentage of maximum dry density determined in accordance with AASHTO T 99.

63

Table 12.12.3.5-2Equivalent ASTM and AASHTO Soil Classifications

Basic Soil Type (1) Sn (Gravelly sand, SW) Si (Sandy silt, ML) Cl (Silty clay, CL)

ASTM D 2487 SW, SP (2) GW, GP sands and gravels with 12% or less fines GM, SM, ML also GC and SC with less than 20% passing a No. 200 sieve CL, MH, GC, SC also GC and SC with more than 20% passing a No. 200 sieve

AASHTO M 145

A1, A3 (2)

A-2-4, A-2-5, A4

A-2-6, A-2-7, A5, A6

1. 2.

The soil classification listed in parentheses is the type that was tested to develop the constrained soil modulus values in Table 12.12.3.5-1. The correlations to other soil types are approximate. Uniformly graded materials with an average particle size smaller than a No. 40 sieve shall not be used as backfill for thermoplastic culverts unless specifically allowed in the contract documents and special precautions are taken to control moisture content and monitor compaction levels.

12.12.3.6Handling and Installation Requirements

The flexibility factor, FF, in./kip shall be taken as:

FF =
where:

S EI

(12.12.3.6-1)

I E S

= = =

moment of inertia (in.4/in.) initial modulus of elasticity (ksi) diameter of pipe (in.)

The flexibility factor, FF, shall be limited as specified in Article 12.5.6.3.


12.12.3.7Soil Prism C12.12.3.7

The soil-prism load shall be calculated as a pressure representing the weight of soil above the pipe springline. The pressure shall be calculated for three conditions: If the water table is above the top of the pipe and at or above the ground surface:

D b H + 0.11 o 12 Psp = 144

(12.12.3.7-1)

The soil prism load and vertical arching factor, VAF, serve as a common reference for the load on all types of pipe. The soil prism calculation needs to consider the unit weight of the backfill over the pipe. Use the wet unit weight above the water table and the buoyant unit weight below the water table. In cases where the water table fluctuates, multiple conditions may need to be evaluated. Figure C3.11.3-1 shows the effect of groundwater on the earth pressure. See Table 3.5.1-1 for common unit weights.

If the water table is above the top of the pipe and below the ground surface:

10

64

(HW 1 Psp = 144

b + (12.12.3.7-2) Do s ( H - 24 ) - H W

Do D ) + 0.11 o 24 12

If the water table is below the top of the pipe: s

Do H + 0.11 12 P sp = 144 where: Psp = Do = b H = =

(12.12.3.7-3)

soil-prism pressure (EV), evaluated at pipe springline (psi) outside diameter of pipe ( in.) unit weight of buoyant soil ( lb/ft3) depth of fill over top of pipe (ft.) depth of water table above springline of pipe (ft.) wet unit weight of soil (lb/ft3)
C12.12.3.8

Hw = s =

12.12.3.8Hydrostatic Pressure

The pressure due to ground water shall be calculated as: PW =

w K wa H w
144

(12.12.3.8-1)

Hydrostatic loading due to external water pressure should be calculated in all cases where water table may be above the pipe springline at any time. This load contributes to hoop thrust but does not affect deflection.

where: PW = W = Kwa = hydrostatic water pressure at the springline of the pipe (psi) unit weight of water (lb/ft3) factor for uncertainty in level of groundwater table There is often uncertainty in the level of the groundwater table and its annual variations. The designer may use the factor Kwa with values up to 1.3 to account for this uncertainty or may select conservative values of Hw with a lower value of Kwa but not less than 1.
C12.12.3.9

12.12.3.9Live Load

The live load shall be determined as a pressure applied at the pipe crown. The live load magnitude shall be based on the design vehicular live load in Article 3.6.1.2 and shall include modifiers for multiple presence/overload, dynamic load allowance, and distribution through cover soils.

Live load calculations are included here to demonstrate the computation of live load thrust at the crown and springline. NCHRP Project 15-29 to revise this is nearing completion. This project is proposing no changes to the live load distribution.

11

65

The live load pressure, PL, shall be taken as:


PL = P (1 + IM / 100 ) m ( L0 + (12 H + K 1) LLDF ) (W0 + (12 H + K1 ) LLDF )

(12.12.3.9-1) where: PL P IM m L0 = = = = = service live load on culvert (psi) design wheel load as specified in Article 3.6.1.2 (lbs) dynamic load allowance as specified in Article 3.6.2.2 (%) multiple presence factor as specified in Table 3.6.1.1.2-1 length of live load surface contact area parallel to pipe diameter as specified in Article 3.6.1.2.5 (in.) depth of fill over top of pipe (ft.) factor for distribution of live load through earth fills as specified in Article 3.6.1.2.6 width of live load ground surface contact area parallel to flow in pipe as specified in Article 3.6.1.2.5 (in.) coefficient to consider design location. 0 for live load at the crown of the pipe D0/2 for live load at the springline Increase as necessary if depth is sufficient for wheels and/or axles to interact. Add axle spacing if depth is sufficient for axles to interact. Add wheel spacing if depth is sufficient for wheels to interact. Setting the term K1 to 0 is the normal assumption in distributing live loads to the pipe and accounts for the load attenuating to the top of the pipe; however, the load continues to spread longitudinally along the pipe as it attenuates from the crown to the springline. Using the term K1 = D0/2 provides a means to account for this.

H LLDF W0

= = =

K1

= = =

12.12.3.10Wall Resistance

12.12.3.10.1Resistance to Axial Thrust 12.12.3.10.1aGeneral


Elements of profile wall pipe shall be designed to resist local buckling. To determine local buckling resistance, profile-wall pipe geometry shall be idealized as specified herein and an effective area determined in accordance with the following provisions.

12

66

12.12.3.10.1bLocal Buckling Effective Area


For the determination of buckling resistance, profile wall pipe shall be idealized as straight elements. Each element shall be assigned a width based on the clear distance between the adjoining elements and a thickness based on the thickness at the center of the element. The idealization of a typical corrugated profile should be based on the approximation in Figure 12.12.3.10.1b-1.

C12.12.3.10.1b
To complete the local buckling calculations, the profile is idealized into a group of rectangular elements. To complete the idealization, it should include: The actual total area. If the crest element is curved, it should be idealized at the centroid of the curvature. The idealized element need not touch the idealized webs.

See McGrath et al (2009) for guidance on other profile types.

Figure 12.12.3.10.1b-1Typical and Idealized Cross-Section of Profile Wall Pipe

To evaluate the resistance to axial thrust, the area of the profile shall be reduced to an effective area, Aeff, for local buckling effects. The effective area of the profile shall be determined by subtracting the ineffective area of each element from the gross section area, as:
A eff = A g -

(w - b )t
e

(12.12.3.10.1b-1)

The resistance to local buckling is based on the effective width concept used by the cold formed steel industry. This theory assumes that even though buckling is initiated in the center of a plate element, the element still has substantial post-buckling strength at the edges where the element is supported. This concept is demonstrated in Figure C12.12.3.10.1b-1.

in which: b e = w = (12.12.3.10.1b-2)

(1 - 0.22/ )

(12.12.3.10.1b-3)

w yc 0.673 = t k

(12.12.3.10.1b-4)
Figure C12.12.3.10.1b-1Effective Width Concept

The local buckling evaluation reduces the capacity of pipe wall sections with high ratios of width to thickness. The calculations in Eqs. 12.12.3.10.1b-1 to 12.12.3.10.1b-4 must be repeated for each element in the idealized profile.

13

67

where: Aeff = be = = = = effective area of pipe wall per unit length of pipe (in.2/in.) element effective width (in.) effective width factor slenderness factor spacing of corrugation (in.) as specified in Figure 12.12.3.10.1b-1 factored compressive strain limit as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 gross area of pipe wall per unit length of pipe (in.2/in.) thickness of element (in.) total clear width of element between supporting elements (in.) plate buckling coefficient, k=4 for supported elements, k=0.43 for unsupported elements, such as free standing ribs The plate buckling coefficient is analogous to the effective length factor, k, in column buckling. The stub compression test has been incorporated as a requirement into AASHTO product standards M294 and M304. The test data should be readily available from manufacturers and quality control tests.

yc = Ag = t w k = = =

As an alternate to determining the effective area by the calculation procedure presented above, the results of the stub compression test, AASHTO T 341-10, may be used, in which case the effective area Aeff shall satisfy: A eff =

Pst K t Ag Fu

(12.12.3.10.1b -5)

in which: Pst = stub compression capacity from T 341-10 ( lb/in). time factor as specified in Table 12.12.3.10.1b-1 material yield strength for design load duration, ksi

Kt = Fu =

Table 12.12.3.10.1b-1Time Factor

Time Period Initial 50 year 75 year (est.)

PE 0.9 0.3 0.25

PVC 0.95 0.6 0.5

14

68

12.12.3.10.1cCompression Strain
The factored compressive strain due to factored thrust, uc, and the service compressive strain due to service thrust, sc, shall be taken as: uc = Tu 1000 A eff E p

) )

(12.12.3.10.1c-1)

sc =

Ts 1000 A eff E p

(12.12.3.10.1c-2)

in which:

D Tu = Pu o 2
where: uc = sc = Tu = Ts = Aeff = Ep =

(12.12.3.10.1c-3)

factored compressive strain due to thrust service compressive strain due to thrust factored thrust per unit length (lb/in.) service thrust per unit length (lb/in.) effective area of pipe wall per unit length of pipe (in.2/in.) short-term modulus for short-term loading or long-term modulus of pipe material for long-term loading as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 (ksi) outside diameter of pipe (in) factored load as specified in Eq. 12.12.3.5-1

Do = Pu =

12.12.3.10.1dThrust Strain Limits


The factored compression strain due to thrust, uc, shall satisfy:
uc T yc where: uc = T = yc = factored compressive strain due to thrust resistance factor for thrust effects factored compression strain limit of the pipe wall material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 (12.12.3.10.1d-1)

15

69

12.12.3.10.1eGeneral Buckling Strain Limits


The factored compression strain due to thrust, incorporating local buckling effects, uc, shall satisfy: uc bck bck (12.12.3.10.1e-1)

C12.12.3.10.1e
The equations for global resistance presented here are a conservative simplification of the continuum buckling theory presented by Moore (1990). Detailed analysis using the full theory may be applied in lieu of the calculations in this section.

The nominal strain capacity for general buckling of the pipe shall be determined as:

bck =

1.2C n E p I p A eff E p

2/3 )1/3 ( ) M 1 2 s s

(1 - )2

Rh (12.12.3.10.1e-2)

in which:
Rh = 11.4 D 11 + 12H

(12.12.3.10.1e-3)

where: uc = bck = bck = factored compressive strain due to thrust resistance factor for global buckling nominal strain capacity for general buckling The term s appears in this expression for bck to account for backfills compacted to levels below that specified in the design. Lower levels of compaction increases the thrust force in the pipe. For designs meeting all other requirements of these specifications and the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, the correction for backfill soil geometry, Rh, is equal to value at left. The complete theory proposed by Moore (1990) provides variations in Rh that consider nonuniform backfill support. In the extreme case where the width of structural backfill at the side of the culvert is 0.1 times the span and the modulus of the soil outside of the structural backfill is 0.1 times the modulus of the backfill, then

Rh =

correction factor for backfill soil geometry

Rh =

20 56 + D 12H

(C12.12.3.10.1e-1)

Cn = Ep = Ip =

calibration factor to account for nonlinear effects = 0.55 short- or long-term modulus of pipe material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1 (ksi) moment of inertia of pipe profile per unit length of pipe (in.4/in.) effective area of pipe profile per unit length of pipe (in.2/in.)

Aeff =

16

70

resistance factor for soil pressure secant constrained soil modulus as specified in Table 12.12.3.5-1 (ksi) Poissons ratio of soil diameter to centroid of pipe profile (in.) depth of fill over top of pipe (ft.) Poissons ratio is used to convert the constrained modulus of elasticity to the plane strain modulus.

Ms = D H = = =

12.12.3.10.2Bending and Thrust Strain Limits 12.12.3.10.2aGeneral


To ensure adequate flexural capacity the combined strain at the extreme fibers of the pipe profile must be evaluated at the allowable deflection limits against the limiting strain values.

12.12.3.10.2bCombined Strain
If summation of axial strain, uc, and bending strain, f, produces tensile strain in the pipe wall, the combined strain at the extreme fiber where flexure causes tension shall satisfy: f uc < f yt (12.12.3.10.2b-1)

C12.12.3.10.2b
The criteria for combined compressive strain is based on limiting local buckling. A higher strain limit is allowed for combined strain because the web elements, which are subjected primarily to bending, are less likely to buckle and increase the stability of elements near the crest and valley. The strain limit for combined compression strain is 50 percent higher than that for hoop compression alone because the web elements, which experience low strains due to bending, are not likely to buckle, thus increasing the stability of elements near the crest and valley. While this behavior would be more accurately modeled as an increase in the k factor of Eq. 12.12.3.10.1b-4, the increase in the limiting strain is considered adequate for this simplified design method. For thrust capacity, the section is limited by consideration of hoop compression capacity alone. The check of combined compression strain, hoop plus bending, is used to limit the allowable pipe deflection. Elements subjected primarily to bending (such as a web element in Figure 12.12.3.10.1b-1 when the pipe is deflected) are not highly stressed near the centroid, where buckling initiates, and theoretical k factors for plates in bending are greater than 20. To simplify the analysis for combined bending and thrust, elements, such as the web whose centroid is within c/3 of the centroid of the entire profile wall, may be analyzed only for the effect of hoop compression strains. That is, increases in strain due to bending may be ignored. Past practice has used tensile strain limits specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1, with no guidance on ultimate strain limits. For purposes of design calculations, assume that ultimate tensile strain capacity is 50 percent greater than the service capacities provided in Table 12.12.3.3-1. A higher strain limit is allowed under combined bending and compression. This increase is permitted because the web element under flexure has a low stress at

The combined strain at the extreme fiber where flexure causes compression shall satisfy: f + uc < T 1.5 yc where: f = factored strain due to flexure factored compressive strain due to thrust service long-term tension strain limit of the pipe wall material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1

(12.12.3.10.2b-2)

uc = yt = f T yc

= resistance factor for flexure = resistance factor for thrust = factored compression strain limit of the pipe wall material as specified in Table 12.12.3.3-1

In the absence of a more-detailed analysis, the flexural strain may be determined based on the empirical relationship between strain and deflection as: c f = EV D f f R D (12.12.3.10.2b-3)

17

71

in which: f = A sc D where: f = factored strain due to flexure service compression strain due to thrust reduction of vertical diameter due to flexure (in.) load factor for vertical pressure from dead load of earth fill, as specified in Article 3.4.1 (12.12.3.10.2b-4)

the center of the element, reducing the likelihood of buckling, and allowing it to provide more stability to the crest and valley elements.

SC = f = EV = Df

= shape factor as specified in Table 12.12.3.10.2b-1. The shape factors for corrugated PE pipe can be reduced by 1.0 from the table values to account for the effect of the low hoop stiffness ratio. = the larger of the distance from neutral axis of profile to the extreme innermost or outermost fiber (in.) radius from center of pipe to centroid of pipe profile (in.) diameter to centroid of pipe profile (in.) total allowable deflection of pipe, reduction of vertical diameter (in.)

R D

= =

A =

Flexural strains are always taken as positive. Peak flexural stress occurs near the crown for live load conditions and near the haunch/invert region for deep burial cases. The factors K1 and K2 should be used in the thrust computations to determine the thrust strains used in Eqs. 12.12.3.10.2b-1 and 12.12.3.10.2b-2. The service compressive strain is used for determination of the factored strain due to flexure instead of the factored compressive strain. The use of the factored compressive strain would result in an unconservative flexural strain demand. The empirical shape factor is used in the design of fiberglass pipe and is presented in AWWA Manual of Practice M45 Fiberglass Pipe Design (1996). It demonstrates that bending strains are highest in low stiffness pipe backfilled in soils that require substantial compactive effort (silts and clays), and is lowest in high stiffness pipe backfilled in soils that require little compactive effort (sands and gravels). Table 12.12.3.10.2b-1 does not cover all possible backfills and density levels. Designers should interpolate or extrapolate the Table as necessary for specific projects. More detailed analyses must consider the likelihood of inconsistent soil support to the pipe in the haunch zone, and of local deformations during placement and compaction of backfill. Bending strains typically cannot be accurately predicted during design due to variations in backfill materials and compactive effort used during installation. Installation deflection limits are specified in the construction specifications to assure that design parameters are not exceeded. The deflection design limit is five percent reduction of the vertical diameter as specified in the construction specification. The pipe must be designed to permit this deflection, unless extraordinary measures are specified in contract documents to minimize compactive effort and to control deflections. The AASHTO Bridge Construction Specifications currently restrict the allowable total vertical deflection to five percent.

18

72

Table 12.12.3.10.2b-1Shape Factors, Df, based on Pipe Stiffness, Backfill and Compaction Level

Pipe Stiffness (F/y, ksi) = EI / 0.149 R 0.009 0.018 0.036 0.072


1. 2. 3. 4.
3

Pipe Zone Embedment Material and Compaction Level Gravel (1) Dumped to Slight (3) 5.5 4.5 3.8 3.3 Moderate to High (4) 7.0 5.5 4.5 3.8 Dumped to Slight (3) 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.5 Sand (2) Moderate to High (4) 8.0 6.5 5.5 4.5

GW, GP, GW-GC, GW-GM, GP-GC and GP-GM per ASTM D 2487 (includes crushed rock) SW, SP, SM, SC, GM and GC or mixtures per ASTM D 2487 <85% of maximum dry density per AASHTO T 99, < 40% relative density (ASTM D 4253 and D 4254) 85% of maximum dry density per AASHTO T 99, 40% relative density (ASTM D 4253 and D 4254)

12.12.4Construction and Installation

The contract documents shall require that the construction and installation conform to Section 30, Thermoplastic Culverts, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications.

19

73

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 17 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 12, Article C12.4.2.8 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-13 Culverts
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 10/12/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Add the following new commentary to Article C12.4.2.8: C12.4.2.8 The AASHTO Materials Specifications also include a provisional specification for MP 20-10 for SteelReinforced Polyethylene Pipe (PE) Ribbed Pipe, 12.0 to 36.0 in. diameter. The steel ribs are the main load carrying members for the pipe and the thermoplastic material braces the steel ribs from distortion or buckling. The thermoplastic also distributes the load between the ribs. It is necessary to evaluate the composite system of thermoplastic liner and steel rib for adequacy. It is important to assure that the tensile strains within the thermoplastic do not exceed the long-term strain capacity for the thermoplastic material used in the construction of the pipe. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the profile that has been calibrated against results for full scale tests are recommended. Design specifications for this product will be considered for inclusion in these Specifications when a satisfactory number of instrumented installations are documented to validate performance.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The AASHTO Subcommittee for Materials has balloted and approved a provisional specification for SteelReinforced Polyethylene (PE) Ribbed Pipe. This agenda item is being proposed to recognize the product in the commentary of these design specifications and provide some guidance for owners that choose to utilize the product. Technical Committee T-13 Culverts is working with industry to develop a design specification to be incorporated in a future agenda item. The design specification being developed is based on the research DuroMaxx Pipe Assessment by I.D. Moore (24 February 2009, 60 August 2009).

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Provides design guidance for steel reinforced thermoplastic pipes.

74

REFERENCES: DuroMaxx Pipe Assessment by I.D. Moore (24 February 2009, 60 August 2009)

OTHER: None

75

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 18 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 30, Various Articles TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-13 Culverts / T-4 Construction
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/25/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Revise Section 30 as follows See Attachment B

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: The provisions of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Article 3.4.1 and Section 12 , Buried Structures and Tunnel Liners., and the AASHTO product standards for HDPE and PVC culverts will be modified concurrently with these agenda items.

BACKGROUND: The agenda items are based on the recommendation of the NCHRP Report 631 Updated Test and Design Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe by T.J. McGrath, I.D. Moore, G.Y. Hsuan. The agenda items include the changes proposed for construction, with emphasis placed on post-construction inspection to confirm that deflection levels are within specified limits and line and grade and joints are all as specified.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improvement of construction specification based on the recommendation of the NCHRP Report 4-26 Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe, Design and Testing,

REFERENCES: NCHRP Report 631 Updated Test and Design Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe by T.J. McGrath, I.D. Moore, G.Y. Hsuan.

OTHER: None

76

ATTACHMENT B 2010 AGENDA ITEM 18 - T-13 / T-4 SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPESCULVERTS

30-i

77

30-2

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.1GENERAL 30.1.1Description This work shall consist of furnishing, installing, and inspecting buried thermoplastic pipeculverts in conformance with these Specifications and the contract documents. C30.1.1 Plastic pipe is manufactured by a variety of methods with a variety of wall profiles. Common profiles are solid cylindrical wall with or without a standing rib, corrugated, and corrugated with a smooth liner. As used in this Specification, thermoplastic pipe is defined in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Section 12, Buried Structures and Tunnel Liners. See AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Section 12, Buried Structures and Tunnel Liners, and ASTM D 2321, Standard Practice for Underground Installation of Thermoplastic Pipe for Sewers and Other Gravity-Flow Applications, for additional guidance. C30.1.2

30.1.2Workmanship and Inspection Importance of Construction Procedures All thermoplastic pipe materials shall conform to the workmanship and inspection requirements of AASHTO M 278, M 294, or M 304; or ASTM F 679, F 714, F 794, or F 894, as applicable. Contract documents shall conform to the requirements of Article 12.12.3.5 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and Section 30 of this Specification.

In general, as the quality of backfill (represented primarily by the particle size and the portion of the backfill passing the No. 200 sieve) decreases, higher compaction levels (e.g., percentage of maximum density per AASHTO T99 or T190 (ASTM D 2844)) are required to achieve equivalent culvert performance. Satisfactory performance of culverts requires proper control of construction procedures at all times. The embedment material placed around a culvert provides a significant support that is relied upon in the culvert structural design. Together, the culvert and embedment form an integral soil-structure system. Therefore, selection of suitable quality backfill materials, which are then properly placed and compacted, is essential.

30.1.3Terminology Terminology used in this Specification is illustrated in Figure 30.1.3-1 and 30.1.3-2 defined below:

78

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-3

Beddingthe material on which the structure is seated. It may be in situ soil, if such soil meets all necessary requirements, or imported backfill material. The bedding may be specified as a different material than the structural backfill. Culvert Bottomthe lowest point on the outside of the culvert for closed shapes. Culvert Crownthe highest point on the inside of the culvert. Culvert Invertthe lowest point on the inside of the culvert for closed shapes. Culvert Topthe highest point on the outside of the culvert. Embankmentthe soil already placed and compacted in layers at the sides of and above the embedment zone. Embedment Zonethe zone of structural backfill around the culvert. It consists of bedding, haunch material, sidefill, and initial topfill. Foundation Soilthe soil that supports the bedding, culvert, and structural backfill. It must provide a firm stable surface and may be undisturbed, existing (in situ) soil, replaced and compacted in situ soil, or an imported material. Haunchthe portion of the culvert between the culvert bottom and the springline. Haunch Zonethe region of the backfill between the bedding or foundation soil and the culvert surface from the culvert bottom to near the springline. It is a region where hand placement and compaction methods are normally required for the backfill. Backfill in the haunch zone is to be the same material as the structural backfill. In Situ Soilthe native undisturbed soil existing at the site of the culvert installation. Shoulderthe portion of the culvert between the culvert top and the springline. Sidefillthe embedment zone between the haunch and the shoulders of the culvert supporting the sides of the culvert. Springlinethe line along the side of the culvert where the tangent to the culvert wall is vertical. It occurs at the widest point in the culvert. Structural Backfillall the material placed and compacted around the culvert to help support the culvert. Topfillthe embedment zone over the top of the culvert beginning at the shoulders and extending upward to the limit of the structural backfill zone. The topfill is to be the same material as the structural backfill.

79

30-4

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

Embankment (placed)

Structural Backfill
Culvert

Bedding

Foundation Soil a) Embankment Installation

Embankment Zone Structural Backfill


Culvert

Sloped/Benched Trench Wall

In Situ Soil
Bedding

Foundation Soil b) Trench Installation

Topfill
Top Shoulder Structural Backfill

Culvert

Crown Springline Invert Haunch

Sidefill

Haunch Zone

Bedding

Bottom

c) Embedment Zone

d) Culvert

Figure 30.1.3-1Terminology for Culvert Installation

80

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-5

d b
Figure 30.1.3-2Foundation Treatment with Placed Bedding

where: s = diameter b = bedding width d = bedding depth 30.2WORKING DRAWINGS When drawings and specifications are not provided in the contract documents the Contractor shall provide to the Engineer Where specified or requested by the Engineer, the Contractor shall provide Manufacturer's installation instructions or working drawings and substantiating calculations in sufficient detail to permit a structural review. Sufficient copies shall be furnished to meet the needs of the Engineer and other entities with review authority. The working drawings shall be submitted sufficiently in advance of proposed installation and use to allow for their review, revision, if needed, and approval without delay of the work. The Contractor shall not start construction of any thermoplastic pipe installations for which working drawings are required until the drawings have been approved by the Engineer. Such approval will not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for results obtained by use of these drawings or any of the other responsibilities under the contract. 30.3MATERIALS 30.3.1Thermoplastic PipeCulverts Polyethylene pipe (PE) shall conform to the material workmanship and inspection requirements of AASHTO M294, or ASTM F714 or F894. Polyvinylchloride (PVC) Poly, i.e., Vinyl Chloride or PVC, pipe shall conform to the material workmanship and inspection requirements of AASHTO M278, or AASHTO M304, ASTM F679, or ASTM F794. C30.2 Complete drawings and specifications include a detailed trench cross-section with all applicable dimensions, materials and compaction levels identified at all locations, and requirements for dewatering during construction.

81

30-6

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.3.2Bedding Materials and Structural Backfill Bedding and structural backfill shall meet the requirements of AASHTO M 145, A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5, or A-3. Bedding material shall have a maximum particle size of 1.25 in. (30 mm). Backfill for thermoplastic pipe shall be free of organic material, stones larger than 1.5 in. (40 mm) in greatest dimension, or frozen lumps. Moisture content shall be in the range of optimum content, typically 3 percent to +2 percent, so as to permit thorough compaction. Consideration should be given to the potential for migration of fines from adjacent materials into opengraded backfill and bedding materials. For pipe types that are not smooth on the outside, i.e., pipes with corrugated or profile walls, backfill gradations should be selected that will permit the filling of the corrugation or profile valleys. Flowable fills, such as controlled low strength mortar, CLSM, or controlled density fill, CDF, may be used for backfill and bedding provided adequate flotation resistance can be achieved by restraints, weighing, or placement technique. With CLSM backfill, trench width can be reduced to a minimum of the outside diameter plus 12.0 in. (300 mm). When CLSM is used, all joints shall have gaskets. 30.3.2.1General Bedding shall be granular material with a maximum particle size of 1.0 in. Backfill shall be granular materials as specified in the contract documents; shall be free of organic material, rock fragments larger than 1.5 in. in the greatest dimension, and frozen lumps; shall have a moisture content within the limits required for compaction. C30.3.2.1 Granular backfill has 35 percent or less material by weight finer than the No. 200 sieve as defined in AASHTO M 145. While it is economical to use in situ material for bedding pipes, the engineer must verify that the in situ material meets the requirements stated in Article 30.3.2.1. This is often difficult, since in situ soils are highly variable. If use of in situ material is allowed, the engineer should include provisions for assessing it during construction and importing new bedding material if necessary. Construction of pipes during the winter months may pose potential problems when frozen soils are included in the backfill zone or when frost-susceptible soils are used as backfill material. Frozen soil will not compact effectively and may result in points of concentrated loads when frozen and regions of inadequate support upon thawing. Frost-susceptible soils should not be used in the embedment zone within the frost penetration depth. This will exclude the use of silty sand or silty gravel where freezing temperatures occur.

82

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-7

Bedding and backfill materials shall meet the requirements of AASHTO M145 for A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5, or A-3 soils. A maximum of 50 percent of the particle sizes may pass the No. 100 sieve and a maximum of 20 percent may pass the No. 200 sieve.

The restriction on materials passing the No. 100 sieve and the No. 200 sieve is intended to eliminate soils composed of significant amounts of fine sands and silts. Such materials are difficult to work with, are sensitive to moisture content, and do not provide support comparable to coarser or more-broadly-graded materials at the same percentage of maximum density. Restricted materials include some A-1-b, A-3, A-2-4, and A-2-5 soils. All A-2-6 and A-2-7 soils display similar characteristics and are eliminated from use as backfill materials. The Engineer may permit exceptions to these restrictions in special cases. If so, a suitable plan should be submitted for control of moisture content and compaction procedures. These silty and clayey materials should never be used in a wet site or if significant live loads will be imposed on the pipe. Increased inspection levels should be considered if such a plan is approved. C30.3.2.2 Control of migration is based on the relative gradations of adjacent materials. Acceptable criteria include: D15/d85 < 5 where D15 is the sieve-opening size passing 15 percent by weight of the coarser material and d85 is the sieve-opening size passing 85 percent by weight of the finer material. D50/d50 < 25 where D50 is the sieve-opening size passing 50 percent by weight of the coarser material and d50 is the sieve-opening size passing 50 percent by weight of the finer material. This criterion need not apply if the coarser material is well graded as defined in ASTM D 2487. C30.3.2.3 McGrath et al. (1998) indicates that CLSM can be an effective backfill material for thermoplastic pipes. Other research has been conducted on this subject e.g. (Folliard et al. 2008).

30.3.2.2Control of Particle Migration The gradation of bedding and backfill materials shall be selected to prevent particle migration between adjacent materials. Gradations of in situ bedding, backfill, and embankment materials shall be evaluated for compliance with this requirement. Alternatively, a suitable geotextile, meeting the requirements of AASHTO M288 for separation, may be used to maintain separation of incompatible materials

30.3.2.3Controlled Low-Strength Material Controlled low-strength material (CLSM), also known as flowable fill, may be used as structural backfill. If not specified in the contract documents, a mix design and complete construction details must be submitted. Minimum construction details include methods for control of flotation forces, and waiting time between placing CLSM and backfilling over the structure. 30.4ASSEMBLY

83

30-8

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.4.1General Thermoplastic pipe units shall be assembled in accordance with the Manufacturers instructions and as specified in the contract documents. Copies of the Manufacturers assembly instructions shall be furnished to the installation crew. All pipes shall be unloaded and handled with reasonable care. Pipe and fittings shall not be rolled or dragged over gravel or rock and shall be prevented from striking rock or other hard objects during placement in trench or on bedding. Care shall be taken to prevent the units from striking rock or other hard objects during placement. Thermoplastic pipe shall be placed in the bed starting at the downstream end. Damaged pipe or fittings shall not be incorporated into the project. 30.4.2Joints Joints for thermoplastic pipe shall comply with the details shown in the contract documents and on the approved working drawings. Each joint shall be sealed to prevent infiltration of soil (soiltight), fines (silttight) or water (watertight) as required by the contact documents. Field tests may be required by the Engineer whenever there is a question regarding compliance with the contract requirements. Joints shall be installed so that the connection of pipe sections will form a continuous surface free from irregularities in the flow line. C30.4.2 Joint types include corrugated bands, bell-andspigot pipe ends, and double-bell couplings. All of these joint types can be supplied with or without gaskets. Other joint types may be used provided that documentation is provided to demonstrate that the joint meets the project requirements. Joints are often provided as soiltight or watertight. Definitions of soiltight and silttight joints are vague. Examples can be found in these Specifications, Section 26 Metal Pipes. Watertight joints are normally specified to meet ASTM D3212. Pressure capability of joint shall be based on project requirements. Commonly available pressure capabilities are 2, 5, and 10 psi. The AASHTO Materials engineers are currently working on joint definition issues. C30.4.2.1 Watertightness shall be based on project requirements. Available watertightness pressure levels are 2, 5, and 10 psi (0.015, 0.035, and 0.070 MPa). C30.4.2.2 Suitable field joints can be obtained with the following types of connections: Corrugated bands (with or without gaskets) Bell and spigot pipe ends (with or without gaskets) Double bell couplings (with or without gaskets)

30.4.2.1 General Joints for thermoplastic pipe shall meet the performance requirements for soiltightness unless watertightness is specified. 30.4.2.2 Field Joints Joints shall be so installed that the connection of pipe sections will form a continuous line free from irregularities in the flow line.

30.5INSTALLATION

84

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-9

30.5.1General Installation Requirements Space shall be provided at the site for storage of the culvert pipes unless they are installed as delivered. Unanticipated ground conditions shall be reported to the Engineer. Water conditions shall be controlled so that pipes are laid in dry conditions. All pipe laying, joining, and backfilling shall be in accordance with the stricter of the Manufacturers instructions, contract documents, or these specifications. Trenches shall be excavated in such a manner as to ensure that the sides will be stable under all working conditions. Trench walls shall be sloped or supported in conformance with all standards of safety. Only as much trench as can be safely maintained shall be opened. All trenches shall be backfilled as soon as practicable, but not later than the end of each working day. Trench details, including foundation, bedding, haunching, initial backfill, final backfill, pipe zone, and trench width shall be taken as shown in Figure 30.5-1. FIGURE HERE Figure 30.5.1-1 Trench Details. 30.5.2Excavation and Groundwater Control Excavation shall be to the width, depth, and grade shown in the contract documents. Trenches shall be excavated in such a manner as to ensure that the sides will be stable under all working conditions. All construction shall be in conformance to all applicable safety standards. Only as much trench as can be safely maintained and backfill as soon as practicable, but not later than the end of each working day shall be opened. Trench walls shall be sloped, benched, braced, or otherwise supported to ensure their stability throughout construction in conformance to all applicable safety standards. Large stones, rocks, and any debris falling into the trench shall be removed. Sloped walls may be benched to facilitate compaction of backfill against them. If horizontal trench bracing is used, it shall be removed as backfill progresses upward. Unless otherwise directed by the Engineer, sheeting driven below the top of the pipe elevation shall be left in place and cut off not less than 1.5 ft above the top of the pipe after backfill has been installed to this elevation. Where seepage is present sheeting with soiltight joints shall be used to prevent washing out of soil behind the sheeting. Necessary action to prevent surface runoff from entering the trench shall be taken. A movable trench shield may be used as an alternative to sheeting and bracing to provide a safe working condition in the bottom of a trench. The trench shield shall be used in a manner that will not leave voids in the backfill or disrupt compacted backfill as the trench shield is advanced.

C30.5.1

Controlling groundwater without violating the assumptions of the pipe design is important. It is often necessary to consult with a Geotechnical Engineer to address drainage issues.

C30.5.2 Since trench width has an impact on the performance of the pipe, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications also provided guidance on trench width. The Engineer may allow trenches to be left open overnight provided that the excavation is secured in accordance with all applicable safety standards and prevented from accumulating water from rain. If possible, the trench walls below the top of the pipe should be vertical. Trench walls should be undisturbed in situ soil at least up to the top of the culvert at the time of backfilling. In instances where the depth of fill over the culvert will be significant, the replacement material above the existing ground may need to be structural backfill to provide a suitable embedment zone. The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, which consider the stiffness of the material at the site of the pipe, provide guidance.

85

30-10

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

For installations where the top of the culvert extends above or within the rise of the existing ground, and the existing ground will be covered with an embankment, vegetation, organic or frozen material, and any soft materials that do not meet the stiffness requirements of the structural backfill for a distance at least equal to the culvert diameter each side of the culvert springline shall be removed and replaced with embankment material. 30.5.3Groundwater Control Water conditions shall be controlled. Water seeping into the trench from the sides or top shall be removed. If continuous seepage occurs, a sump pump shall be used to remove the water. When the water table is above the bottom of the trench, quick conditions or instability of the trench bottom can occur in which case the groundwater level shall be lowered to below the trench bottom. This water level shall be maintained until the pipe and sufficient backfill are placed to compensate for the uplift forces. Sites requiring excavation below the groundwater table shall be dewatered to at least 12.0 in. below the deepest portion of the excavation, or when the culvert is installed in a stream or river bed, the water shall be diverted or separated by cofferdams. Advance approval of the Engineer shall be obtained if construction must continue in water. Under these conditions, free-draining gravels shall be used as foundation and bedding. 30.5.4 30.5.2 Trench Widths Trench width shall be sufficient to ensure working room to properly and safely place and compact haunching and other backfill materials. If not specified in the contract documents, Tthe space between the pipe and trench wall shall should be wider than the compaction equipment used in the pipe zone., but not Minimum trench width shall not be less than 1.5 times the pipe outside diameter plus 12.0 in. Trenches shall be kept to the specified width as any increase in trench width will increase the load on the pipe. Structural backfill shall be comprised of well-graded, granular materials, such as AASHTO A-1, A-2-4 and A-2-5 soils to facilitate better consolidation around the pipe and to minimize the possibility of soil migration and piping of the in-situ soils meet the requirements of Article 30.3.2.1. C30.5.4 Narrower trenches may be allowed if culverts are backfilled with CLSM. CLSM readily flows under and around the culvert to provide good haunch and sidefill support, thus reducing the needed working room at the side of the culvert.

86

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-11

If the trench walls do not stand without support, the trench width shall be increased in accordance with the design criteria in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Article 12.12.3.4 Thrust 12.12.3.5 Factored and Service Load. Determination of trench width in soils that are unsupported, and unstable soils shall include consideration of the size of the pipe, the stiffness of the backfill and in situ soil, the depth of cover and other site-specific conditions as applicable. The trench shall be excavated to the width, depth, and grade as indicated on the plans and/or given by the Engineer. 30.5.5 30.5.3 Foundations and Bedding The foundation under the culvert shall be investigated for its adequacy to support the loads. The foundation soil shall be investigated for the full width of the trench, or for wide trench or embankment installations, a width of 12.0 in. or one-half the span of the culvert, whichever is larger, on each side of the culvert springline. The remedies for soft or inadequate foundation soils noted below shall apply to the same widths as investigated (see Figure 30.1.3-2). The foundation depths specified shall be taken to include the combined foundation and bedding depth. For rock and boulders, use b = culvert diameter 1D, and use a minimum d = 6.0 in., but not less than twice the corrugation. For soft spots, use b = 2D or the trench width, whichever is smaller, and use a minimum d = 4.0 in., but not less than the corrugation depth or less than a depth sufficient to reduce the stress on the soft soil to its allowable bearing value.

Flexible pipe requires soil support at the sides, and unstable trench walls are an indication that a wider trench width is required. This criterion does not refer to trenches for which trench supports are required only to comply with OSHA. The AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications provide additional guidance on the width of trench backfill in wet native soil conditions. Generally, stable trench walls, during the excavation process, are predictive of adequate vertical and lateral stiffness for this application.

C30.5.5 A foundation should be provided such that the structure backfill does not settle more than the pipe to avoid downdrag loads on the culvert and to maintain specified pipe invert elevations. If the foundation is firm under the pipe but soft at the sides, compression of the soft material can cause increased load on the pipe due to downdrag. Thus, the foundation quality must be evaluated for a width greater than the pipe.

If the in situ soil is suitable to support the culvert, it may be considered adequate to serve as the foundation. The bottom of the excavation shall be undisturbed in situ material. If boulders, rock, vegetation, organic or frozen material, or any soft materials that do not meet the stiffness requirements of the structural backfill are present, they shall be removed for a width of at least one-half diameter on either side of the culvert to a depth specified by the Engineer and replaced with specified bedding material. If the foundation is loose, it shall be compacted as specified, but to not less than 90 percent of maximum density per AASHTO T99 for A-1 or A-3 soils or 95 percent of maximum density for A-2 soils, before placing the culvert. After compaction, the foundation shall be uniformly firm and level to support the culvert along its length.

87

30-12

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

When the natural foundation soil is judged by the Engineer to be unsatisfactory to support the pipe, or structural backfill, the soil shall be excavated to the depth d and width b prescribed in the contract documents. The excavation shall be backfilled with bedding material compacted as specified, but to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density per AASHTO T99 for A-1 or A-3 soils or 95 percent of maximum dry density for A-2 soils. Foundation and bedding shall meet the requirements of Article 30.3.2 and shall be installed as required by the Engineer according to conditions in the trench bottom. A stable and uniform bedding shall be provided for the pipe and any protruding features of its joint and/or fittings. The middle of the bedding equal to one-third the pipe outside diameter (OD) should be loosely placed, while the remainder shall be compacted to a minimum 90 percent of maximum density per AASHTO T 99. A minimum of 4.0 in. (100 mm) of bedding shall be provided prior to placement of the pipe unless otherwise specified. When rock or unyielding material is present in the trench bottom, a cushion of bedding of 6.0 in. (150 mm) minimum thickness shall be provided below the bottom of the pipe. When the trench bottom is unstable, material shall be excavated to the depth required by the Engineer, and replaced with a suitable foundation. A suitably graded material shall be used where conditions may cause migration of fines and loss of pipe support. 30.5.6Bedding A bedding layer shall be provided to the thickness specified. Unless indicated otherwise in the contract documents, the bedding shall be compacted to a minimum density equal to 90 percent of the maximum dry density per AASHTO T99, except that the portion of the bedding layer under the center third of the culvert diameter shall be left uncompacted. The bedding surface shall conform to the specified elevation, grade, and alignment and shall be straight and flat over the length of the pipe section so that unacceptable longitudinal bending does not occur, and the pipe drains as designed. C30.5.6 The maximum desired loose bedding layer thickness for compaction is 6.0 in. Leaving the center third of the bedding uncompacted provides a soft cushion for the pipe, minimizing hard support on the invert. In addition, the compacted bedding at the sides of the culvert provides a path for soil to arch over the top of the culvert. Many states require 95 percent of the maximum dry density per AASHTO T99 for the bedding material. These high standards may not be achievable without overexcavation and replacement of the foundation soils or geosynthetic reinforcement if the foundation material is not sufficiently stiff. In soft native soils it may be necessary to over excavate and replace the foundation material to achieve specified compaction of the outer bedding. Proper dewatering of the in situ soils is very important. The tolerance of the culvert to longitudinal bending depends on the culvert material and geometric properties.

88

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-13

30.5.7Placing Culvert Sections The culvert shall be placed after the foundation soil and bedding are prepared. Pipes shall be placed on the bedding starting at the downstream end. If less than a full length of pipe is needed to meet the plan specified length, the partial piece shall not be the terminal piece. 30.5.8 30.5.4 Structural Backfill Structural backfill shall meet the requirements of Article 30.3.2. Structural backfill shall be placed and compacted in layers not exceeding an 8.0-in. (200-mm) loose lift thickness and brought up evenly and simultaneously on both sides of the pipe to an elevation not less than 1.0 ft (300 mm) above the top of the pipe. Structural backfill shall be worked into the haunch area and compacted by hand. A minimum compaction level of 90 percent standard density per AASHTO T 99 shall be achieved. Special compaction means may be necessary in the haunch area as shown in Figure 30.5.4-1. All compaction equipment used within 3.0 ft (900 mm) of the pipe shall be approved by the Engineer. Ponding or jetting the structural backfill to achieve compaction shall not be permitted without written permission from the Engineer. Backfill materials placed in the zone extending more than 1.0 ft (300 mm) above the pipe to final grade shall be selected, placed, and compacted to satisfy the loading, pavement, and other requirements above the pipe. 30.5.8.1General Equipment and construction procedures used to backfill culverts shall be selected such that requirements for backfill density and control of culvert deflection and shape will be met. Sufficient inspection and testing should be undertaken to verify that the quality of the soil and the compactive effort are as specified. Placing and compacting backfill to the top of the culvert shall be completed in such a manner that the culvert shape is not distorted. When trench wall supports are used, they shall be left in place below the top of the culvert or removed in a manner that avoids disturbing compacted backfill. All foreign material falling into the trench during placement and compacting of the backfill shall be removed. For each of the three basic stages of construction (backfilling) i.e. haunch, sidefill, and topfill stages, procedures shall be established that will achieve the specified degree of compaction without damaging or excessively distorting the culvert.

C30.5.7 While it is preferable to lay pipe starting at the downstream end, the Engineer may grant permission to begin at other locations.

C30.5.8.1 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications provide guidance on the suitability of in situ soils for use in the structural backfill zone.

Once a backfilling procedure is established, the primary inspection effort should be to ensure that the established procedure is followed. Only occasional checks of soil density may then be required, as long as the material and procedures are unchanged. A good construction control plan will improve efficiency of installation effort and help ensure proper performance without having to rely on time-consuming testing, particularly in the haunch area, which is difficult to access. Sidefill compaction can impose significant lateral forces on the pipe wall. This will increase the vertical diameter of the pipes and, if excessive, can result in culvert wall distress. Upward deflection of the crown should not exceed 3 percent during sidefill compaction.

89

30-14

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.5.8.2Backfilling under the Haunch Material shall be carefully placed in the haunches using mechanical tampers, manual tampers, or other means that fill all voids and meet the specified compaction levels. Adjacent sidefill zones shall be placed along with the haunch zones to provide lateral support for the haunch material. Installation of haunch fill shall be carried out on both sides simultaneously to avoid rolling the culvert, and the compaction force shall be controlled so that the culvert is not lifted off grade, and the bottom of the culvert is not damaged. If the culvert is to be backfilled with CLSM, all requirements of the project specifications or the submitted detailed work plan shall be followed. Provide means to prevent culvert flotation shall be provided.

C30.5.8.2 It is important that the selected tamping procedures will meet the design assumptions. In general, a minimum compaction level exceeding 85 percent AASHTO T99 is needed to prevent a collapsing soil structure upon saturation. The effort required to achieve a particular degree of compaction varies with the backfill material type. Investigation of various means of achieving compaction in the haunch zone, and the effect of haunch support on buried pipe performance is reported in FHWA Report FHWA-RD-98-191, Pipe Interaction with the Backfill Envelope, by McGrath et al. (1998). These studies showed that large void spaces result underneath culverts without good compaction in the haunch area. Loose layers should generally not exceed 6.0 in. in thickness to permit the backfill material to be worked into the haunch zone. Shovel slicing was shown to be effective in providing haunch support. Different-sized tampers were shown to be effective for different backfill soils. A large faced tamper (3 x 6 in.) was effective for silty sand, while a small faced tamper (1 x 3 in.) was effective for crushed stone backfill. Haunching is best accomplished by placing part of the first layer of backfill, working it into the haunches and then placing the remainder of the lift. Thick layers prevent material from being worked into the haunches. Water-jetting has been found to be an effective procedure for compacting backfill and developing uniform support with clean coarse-grained backfills and good drainage; however, problems have been encountered in achieving consistent results, and verification is difficult.

Water jetting to densify the backfill shall not be allowed unless approved in advance by the Engineer.

90

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-15

30.5.8.3Sidefill Structural backfill material in the sidefill zone shall be placed in horizontal, uniform layers not exceeding 8.0 in. loose thickness unless a larger thickness is specified. The layers shall be compacted with appropriate equipment to not less than 90 percent of maximum density per AASHTO T99 for A-1 and A-3 soils and 95 percent A-2-4 and A2-5 soils. A maximum of 50 percent of the particle sizes may pass the No. 100 sieve and a maximum of 20 percent may pass the No. 200 sieve. The maximum difference in the sidefill surface elevations between the two sides of the culvert at any time shall not exceed one-quarter of the diameter, or 24.0 in. whichever is smaller. For pipe less than 24.0 in. in diameter, this difference need not be less than one-half the diameter. The sidefill surface elevation shall be kept at or below the level of adjacent soil or embankment. Placement and compaction of the sidefill layers adjacent to the haunch zone shall be carried out concurrently with backfilling under the haunch. Sidefill material shall be placed, spread, and compacted working parallel to the culvert to avoid creating areas of unequal support. Equipment used to compact sidefill within 3.0 ft (1 m) from each side of the culvert shall not impose excessive force on the culvert that results in distorting the culvert shape. Thermoplastic culverts are flexible, thus sidefill material shall be placed and compacted to avoid excessive and unsymmetrical deformations. The shape shall be monitored to ensure satisfactory results. 30.5.8.4Topfill Placement of structural topfill shall be taken to begin when the sidefill elevation reaches the shoulders. Procedures, as approved by the Engineer, shall be used for placing and compacting topfill. Topfill need not extend above the top of the pipe more than 6.0 in. unless otherwise specified. Additional material over the topfill shall be provided to protect all culverts before permitting heavy construction equipment to pass over them. Construction loads may require additional cover beyond that required for the final condition to which the design loads apply.

C30.5.8.3 Design soil stiffness is very sensitive to the level of compaction (FHWA Report FHWA-RD-98-191 Pipe Interaction with Backfill Envelope, McGrath et al. 1998). Many states require 95 percent maximum dry density per AASHTO T99 for all sidefill soils. Achieving these high standards is highly dependent upon local practice and available materials. Generally, compaction of fill material to the required density is dependent on the thickness of the layer of fill being compacted, soil type, amount of compactive force, and length of time the force is applied. Experience with compaction indicates that 8.0 in. thick loose layers using two coverages with a given compactor will give better uniformity and higher average level of compaction than one 12.0 in. thick loose layer with four coverages of the same compactor. Alternatively, a 12.0 in. loose layer will require larger compactors to produce the same average compaction as achieved by a smaller compactor with a 6.0 in. thick layer. Larger compactors must be evaluated for possible induced structural distortions. Unequal support may result when compacting perpendicular to the culvert long axis.

C30.5.8.4 See design specifications for guidance on minimum cover depths. Specifying a depth of 6.0 in. above the top of the pipe provides protection for the pipe as less controlled materials are placed and compacted to complete the trench backfill. This dimension is unrelated to the depth of fill required to prevent damage from vehicles passing over the pipe.

91

30-16

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.6 30.5.5 MINIMUM COVER A minimum depth of cover above the pipeculvert should be maintained before allowing vehicles or heavy construction equipment to traverse the pipe trench. The minimum depth of cover should be established by the Engineer based on an evaluation of specific project conditions. For embedment materials installed to the minimum density given in Article 4 30.5.8, Structural Backfill, cover of at least 2.0 ft (600 mm) shall be provided before allowing vehicles or construction equipment to cross the trench surface. Minimum cover for construction loads shall be as shown in Table 30.5.56-1. Hydrohammer type compactors shall not be used over the pipe.

C30.5.5 C30.6 Diameters greater than 4.0 ft (1200 mm) in Table 30.5.5-1 are for information only. See Tables A12-11, A12-12, and A12-13 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications for nominal sizes.

Table 30.6-1 Table 30.5.5-1 Minimum Cover for Construction Loads

Minimum Cover, in., for Indicated Axle Loads, kips Nominal Pipe Diameter, ft 2.03.0 3.54.0 4.55.0 18.050.0 24.0 36.0 36.0 50.075.0 30.0 36.0 36.0 75.0110.0 36.0 42.0 42.0 110.0150.0 36.0 48.0 48.0

Minimum cover shall be measured from the top of the pipe to the top of the maintained construction roadway surface. If unpaved, the surface shall be maintained. 30.7INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS 30.5.6 Inspection Requirements 30.7.1 30.5.6.1 Visual Inspection All pipes shall undergo inspection during and after installation to ensure proper performance. Installation of bedding and backfill materials, as well as their placement and compaction, shall be determined to meet the requirements of this section. During the initial phases of the installation process, inspection shall concentrate on detecting improper practice and poor workmanship. Errors in line and grade, as well as any improper assembly or backfill techniques, shall be corrected prior to placing significant backfill or trench fill. Coupling bands shall be properly indexed with the corrugation and tightened, and bell/spigot joints shall be properly assembled to prevent the infiltration of soil fines. Where gaskets are used, they shall be properly seated to prevent groundwater infiltration and should appear uniformly oriented around the pipe. In areas where cracking or joint separation is found, a remediation or replacement plan shall be submitted for approval. Final internal inspections shall be conducted on all buried thermoplastic pipe installations to evaluate issues that may affect long-term performance. Final inspections shall be conducted no sooner than 30 days after completion of installation and final fill. C30.7.1 C30.5.6.1 Inspection at the appropriate times during installation will detect and allow correction of line and grade, jointing, and shape change problems. The timing and number of inspections required will vary with the significance and depth of the installation. The contractor is advised to provide initial inspections himself to avoid problems later on. Racking or flattening of the pipes curvature indicates improper backfill placement methods that must be corrected. Slight peaking of the crosssectional shape should be taken as indicative of achieving proper compaction requirements. Soil consolidation continues with time after installation of the pipe. While 30 days will not encompass the time frame for complete consolidation of the soil surrounding the pipe, it is intended to give sufficient time to observe some of the effects that this consolidation will have. However, occasionally pavement is placed over the pipe sooner than 30 days. While the 30-day time limit should be maintained, a brief inspection of the pipe prior to paving over it, particularly for the first few joints, may be prudent to ensure that good construction practices are being applied.

92

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-17

Shallow cover installations shall be checked to ensure the minimum cover level is provided.

It is recommended that inspection personnel not enter culverts less than 24.0 in. (600 mm) in diameter. Internal inspection of culverts in this size range is best conducted using video cameras. Culverts should be entered only by inspection personnel trained in working within confined spaces and using procedures in full compliance with applicable State, Local, and Federal OSHA regulations. C30.7.2 C30.5.6.2 Inspection criteria are newly added to the specification, as there was minimal guidance in the previous specification. Ten percent of each pipe installation shall be defined as ten percent of the number of pipe runs, and not less than ten percent of the total length of installed pipe on the project. The requirement of deflection testing ten percent of each pipe installation is intended to serve as a minimum and does not limit owners from more stringent requirements. The pipe inside diameters should be provided by the pipe manufacturer for every size and type of pipe delivered. If the pipe inside diameter is not provided, or is not available, pipe inside diameter can be developed by averaging the diameters measured at eight equally spaced locations around a section of unloaded pipe for every given size and manufacturer. There are many appropriate methods suitable for measuring deflection, including video inspection equipment, mandrels, and other direct measurement devices. For pipes tested by a mandrel, the mandrel shall be pulled through the entire pipe. Whichever method is used for deflection measurement, a minimum of ten percent of the total length of installed pipe shall be tested, in addition to any areas that were identified in the visual inspection as having deflection. Installed pipe deflections that exceed five percent of the initial inside diameter may indicate that the installation was substandard. Appropriate remediation, if any, will depend upon the severity of the deflection, the condition of the pipe, and evaluation of the factor of safety using Section 12, Buried Structures and Tunnel Liners, of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. Installed pipe deflections that exceed 7.5 percent of the initial inside diameter will require remediation or replacement of the pipe.

30.7.2 30.5.6.2 Installation Deflection The pipe shall be evaluated to determine whether the internal diameter of the barrel has been reduced more than five percent when measured not less than 30 days following completion of installation. Pipes shall be checked for deflection using a mandrel or any other device approved by the Engineer that can physically verify the dimensions of the pipe and is not limited by poor lighting, waterflow, pipe length, or other limiting conditions of the installed environment. Pipes larger than 24.0 in. (600 mm) may be entered and deflection levels measured directly. In all pipe installations, at least ten percent of the total number of pipe runs representing at least ten percent of the total pipe footage on the project shall be randomly selected by the Engineer and inspected for deflection. Also, as determined by the 100 percent visual inspection in Section Article 30.5.6.17.1, all areas in which deflection can be visually detected shall be inspected for deflection. Where direct measurements are made, a measurement shall be taken once every 10.0 ft (3000 mm) for the length of the pipe, and a minimum of four measurements per pipe installation is required. If a mandrel is used for the deflection test, it shall be a nine (or greater odd number) arm mandrel, and shall be sized and inspected by the Engineer prior to testing. A properly sized proving ring shall be used to check or test the mandrel for accuracy. The mandrel shall be pulled through the pipe by hand with a rope or cable. Where applicable, pulleys may be incorporated into the system to change the direction of pull so that inspection personnel need not physically enter the pipe or manhole. For locations where pipe deflection exceeds five percent of the inside diameter, an evaluation shall be conducted by the Contractor utilizing a Professional Engineer and submitted to the Engineer for review and approval considering the severity of the deflection, structural integrity, environmental conditions, and the design service life of the pipe. Pipe remediation or replacement shall be required for locations where the evaluation finds that the deflection could be problematic. For locations where pipe deflection exceeds 7.5 percent of the inside diameter, remediation or replacement of the pipe is required.

93

30-18

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

30.7.3Compaction Control Field compaction shall be evaluated based on compacted density and moisture content obtained from acceptable methods, such as the cone replacement (AASHTO T191, ASTM D1556) or the nuclear gage (ASTM D2922 and D3017). A reference density test shall be performed on a representative sample to obtain a value of maximum dry density (MDD) and optimum moisture content (OMC). This test shall be repeated for each new soil type encountered and for composition variations within the same soil type. Thus, samples should be taken periodically during construction to provide an appropriate series of reference tests. The contract documents shall determine the number and location of field tests to ensure that the quality of the soil and the compaction obtained is as specified and shall stipulate acceptance criteria for the compacted soil. 30.7.4Use of Reduced Installation Factor If the culvert design was completed with an installation factor less than 1.5, additional deflection checks shall be required during construction. Before the beginning of construction, the contractor shall submit and obtain approval for a detailed construction plan that meets the performance measures specified by the designer.

C30.7.3 The best approach to compaction control is to conduct frequent tests early in the project to establish the critical control parameters that achieve the specified compaction level, such as type of equipment, number of passes, and moisture content. Once the parameters are established, the test frequency can be reduced as long as the identified parameters are monitored.

C30.7.4 If a reduced installation factor is used, specific installation controls are required in the contract documents to actively monitor backfill gradation and compaction levels at the side of the pipes throughout the construction process. Change in the vertical pipe diameter are to be measured when the backfill reaches the top of the pipe. At this point in the construction process, the vertical pipe diameter is to be greater than the vertical diameter prior to backfilling, but not more than three percent greater than the vertical diameter prior to backfilling.

30.8 30.6 MEASUREMENT Culvert pipes shall be measured in linear feet installed in place, completed, and accepted. The number of feet shall be the average of the top and bottom centerline lengths of pipe. Pipe installations shall be measured in linear feet (meters) installed in place, completed and accepted. The number of feet (meters) shall be the centerline lengths of the pipe. 30.9 30.7 PAYMENT The length as measured above will be paid for at the contract prices per linear foot (meter) bid for thermoplastic pipe of the sizes specified. Such price and payment shall constitute full compensation for furnishing, handling, and installing the pipe and for all materials, labor, equipment, tools, and incidentals necessary to complete this item. Such price and payment shall also include excavation, bedding material, backfill, headwalls, endwalls, and foundations for pipe.

94

ATTACHMENT B SECTION 30: THERMOPLASTIC PIPE CULVERTS

30-19

The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.

95

30-20

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS

REFERENCES
AASHTO. 2007. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 4th Edition, LRFDUS-4 or LRFDSI-4, American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. Available in customary U.S. units or SI units. AASHTO. 2006 2009. Standard Specifications for Transportation Materials and Methods of Sampling and Testing, 26th 29th Edition, HM-26 HM-29, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC. Includes AASHTO M, R, and T standards, which are also available individually in downloadable form. McGrath, T.J., Selig, E.T., Webb, M.C., and Zoladz, G.V., 1998, Pipe Interaction with the Backfill Envelope, FHWA-RD-98-191, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, McLean, VA. NCHRP Report 597 2008 Development of a Recommended Practice for Use of Controlled Low-Strength Material in Highway Construction by Folliard, K.J., Lianxiang, D., Trejo, D., Halmen, C., Sabol, S., and Leshchinsky, D. NCHRP Report 631 2009 Updated Test and Design Methods for Thermoplastic Drainage Pipe by T.J. McGrath, I.D. Moore, G.Y. Hsuan.

96

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 19 SUBJECT: Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals: Addition of specification and commentary language for the bending of square aluminum tubes about a diagonal axis in Section 4, Article 4.8.1 and Section 6, Article 6.7.1. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-12 - Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals
REVISION ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

DESIGN SPEC CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway EVALUATION Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/25/10

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Article 4.8.1 as follows: In the combined stress ratio equations, the bending stress for steel, fb , and aluminum (in Eq. 5-16 in of Article 5.12.1 and the bending stresses for aluminum, fb, fbx and fby, in and Eqs. 6-30 and 6-30a of in Article 6.7.1), shall be divided by the coefficient of amplification CA to account for the secondary moment. Item #2 In Article 6.7.1, add the following as the second paragraph of this Article: In addition to equation 6-30, square extruded tubes used as vertical cantilever pole type supports bent about a skewed (diagonal ) axis shall satisfy the following requirement:
f a + ( f bx F C A Fbx a0

) + (

f by C A Fby

fs + F s

1.0

(6-30a)

fbx = bending stress about x axis fby = bending stress about y axis For tubes with all elements S S1 (defined in Table 6-3): = 1.60
F cy F = bx n y

(6-30b)

97

F cy F = by n y

(6-30c)

For tubes with elements S1 < S S2 (defined in Table 6-3): = 1.0 Fbx = Fb in Table 6-3 Fby = Fb in Table 6-3 Item #3 Revise the 4th sentence of the 2nd paragraph of Article C6.7.1 as follows: The term Fa0 is used when the axial stress is small and the term fb/Fb fa/Fa0 is usually of negligible magnitude. Item #4 Add the following Commentary to the end of Article C6.7.1: Menzemer et al. (2009) compared theoretical diagonal bending to experimental tests. The interaction increase in allowable stress is justified for tubes bent about the diagonal for sections with limited width-thickness ratios. Although the diagonal strength properties are significantly less than the primary axis properties, tests show additional strength compared with current strength predictions. For compact sections, the reserve strength is 33 percent higher for bending about a diagonal axis (Zx/Sx = 1.5) than about the principle axes (Zx/Sx = 1.13), where Zx and Sx are plastic and elastic section moduli, respectively.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: Article 4.8.1 has been modified in Item #1 to reference the new Equation 6-30a and the bending stresses in the x and y direction.

BACKGROUND: None

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: Menzemer, C., D. White, J. Bowman, and R. Minor. 2009 Bending of Hollow Aluminum Tubes About a Diagonal Axis, Light Metal Age, Vol. 67, No. 6, November/December 2009, pp. 2427.

OTHER: None

98

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 20 SUBJECT: Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals: Addition of a fatigue detail, CAFL and the specification language for a cast aluminum base connection in Section 11. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-12 - Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals
REVISION ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

DESIGN SPEC CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway EVALUATION Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/25/10

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Add the following as Detail 26 to Table 11-2Fatigue Details of Cantilevered and Noncantilevered Support Structures Construction Fillet-Welded Connections Detail 26. Base metal at a pair of circumferential fillet welds at least 0.48D apart in the tubes longitudinal direction (see note k). Stress Category C'

Application Fillet welded tube to integrally stiffened cast base connection

Example 17

Item #2 Add the following to the Notes section under Table 11-2:
k

Applicable to ASTM B 221 6005, 6061, and 6063 aluminum alloy extruded aluminum tube to 356 aluminum alloy cast base connections. Assembly shall be heat treated to T6 temper after welding. Tubes shall be fit to a base with non-tapered bore. Maximum tube diameter at base shall be 305 mm (12 in) with tube diameter/thickness (D/t) ratio at base between 20 minimum to 55 maximum. Cast base shall have a minimum of four anchor bolts with two integral gussets per anchor bolt. Size gusset width such that a radius from centerline of tube to the outermost gusset-to-base fillet toe circumscribes the complete anchor bolt hole. The gussets shall be at least 6 mm (0.25 in) average thickness. The maximum angle of the gusset to the outer wall of the collar section () shall be 45 degrees. Base design shall be tested to develop the maximum bending strength of the tube without visible distress to the base. The cast base flange thickness shall be at least 19 mm (0.75 in) at the grip of the anchor bolts and at least 13 mm (0.5 in) elsewhere. The collar thickness shall be at least 4.8 mm (0.1875 in). Fillet welds shall be made with 4043 filler material. The fillet welds shall be sufficient to develop the static strength of the tube and be placed in the following order: weld the top of the base and tube followed by the end of

99

the tube and bottom of base. The base shall be for top mounted luminaire and short mast arms that result in a dead load stress of 34 MPa (5 ksi) or less. Outside of these limitations, owner may specify fatigue category to use for design. Item #3 Add Category C for Aluminum to Table 11-3Constant-Amplitude Fatigue Limits as shown below: Detail Category A B B' C C' D E E' ET K2 Item #4 Add the following detail to Figure 11-1 Illustrative Examples MPa 165 110 83 69 48 31 18 8 7 Steel ksi 24 16 12 10 7 4.5 2.6 1.2 1.0 MPa 70 41 32 28 22 17 13 7 3 2.7 Aluminum ksi 10.2 6.0 4.6 4.0 3.2 2.5 1.9 1.0 0.44 0.38

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: Noted in agenda item above.

100

BACKGROUND: None

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: Azzam, D. and Menzemer, C.C., 2006. Fatigue Behavior of Welded Aluminum Light Pole Support Details, The Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Volume 132, No. 12, December 2006, pp. 19191927.

OTHER: None

101

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 21 SUBJECT: Committee Report and Recommendations for Approval TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-11 Research
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 1/4/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: A list of recommended research statements will be presented for approval.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Research statements that were reviewed were submitted by Technical Committee Chairs or State Bridge Engineers.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Will depend on results from the research.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

102

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 22 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 5, Article 5.11.5.2.1 (WAI 150) TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-10 Concrete
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 04/30/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Add the following to the end of Article 5.11.5.2.1: For columns with longitudinal reinforcing that anchors into oversized shafts, where bars spliced by noncontact lap splices, and longitudinal column and shaft reinforcement are spaced farther apart transversely than one-fifth the required lap splice length or 6.0 in., the spacing of the shaft transverse reinforcement in the splice zone shall not exceed the value determined as:

Str =

2 Asp f ytr ls kAl ful

(5.11.5.2.1-1)

where:
Str = Asp = fytr = ls

spacing of transverse shaft reinforcement (in.) area of shaft spiral or transverse reinforcement (in.2) specified minimum yield strength of shaft transverse reinforcement (ksi) Class C tension lap splice length of the column longitudinal reinforcement (in.) area of longitudinal column reinforcement (in.2) specified minimum tensile strength of column longitudinal reinforcement (ksi), 90 ksi for A615 and 80 ksi for A706 factor representing the ratio of column tensile reinforcement to total column reinforcement at the nominal resistance

Al = ful =

Item #2 Add the following corresponding commentary adjacent to the addition to Article 5.11.5.2.1 above: C5.11.5.2.1 This ratio, k, could be determined from strain analysis and equilibrium. A default value of k = 0.5 could safely be used in most applications.

103

The development length of column longitudinal reinforcement in drilled shafts is from WSDOT-TRAC Report WA-RD 417.1 titled "Noncontact Lap Splices In Bridge Column-Shaft Connections".

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The proposed addition to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications is adapted from the recommendation of the Washington State University research published in WSDOT TRAC Report WA-RD 417.1 titled "Noncontact Lap Splices in Bridge Column-Shaft Connections"

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: WSDOT TRAC Report WA-RD 417.1 titled "Noncontact Lap Splices In Bridge Column-Shaft Connections" by David I. McLean.

OTHER: None

104

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 23 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 5, Article 5.12.2 (WAI 124A) TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-10 Concrete
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 10/24/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Article 5.12.2 as follows: The provisions of Article 8.3.4 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications shall apply. The contract documents shall prohibit the use of aggregates from sources that are known to be excessively alkali-silica reactive. If aggregate of limited reactivity is used, the contract documents shall require the use of either lowalkali-type cements or a blend of regular cement and pozzolanic materials, provided that their use has been proven to produce concrete of satisfactory durability with the proposed aggregate. Item #2 Delete Article C5.12.2 as follows: Alkali-silica reactive aggregates occur throughout the world. In the United States, most are found in the West and Midwest. In most states, public agencies have identified locations where reactive aggregates occur. When in doubt, the Designer should investigate this possibility. Excessive reactivity is generally determined by tests (ASTM C 227) made on aggregates prior to their use. Although the line of demarcation between nonreactive and reactive combinations is not clearly defined, expansion when tested per ASTM C 227 is generally considered to be excessive if it is greater than 0.05 percent at three months or 0.10 percent at six months. Expansions greater than 0.05 percent at three months should not be considered excessive where the six-month expansion remains below 0.10 percent. Data for the three-month test should be considered only when six month results are not available. Reference to AASHTO M 80 will not specifically prohibit use of reactive aggregates as AASHTO M 80. It only requires the use of low-alkali cements or additives. More guidance on this is contained in ACI 201.2R.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

105

BACKGROUND: Updated information on ASR is being added to the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications in a companion ballot item. This item deletes all other references to avoid duplication of information and the future need to maintain the same information in two places.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improve durability

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

106

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 24 SUBJECT: Proposed AASHTO Publication - Bridge Aesthetics Sourcebook Practical Ideas for Short and Medium Span Bridges TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-9 Bridge Preservation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 02/15/10 ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER Bridge Aesthetics Sourcebook

AGENDA ITEM: Proposed AASHTO Publication Bridge Aesthetics Sourcebook Practical Ideas for Short and Medium Span Bridges (see included CD)

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The TRB Subcommittee on Bridge Aesthetics, AFF10(2), developed the proposed Aesthetics Sourcebook. It was written by volunteer members of the Subcommittee and reviewed by a multidisciplinary group engineers and cultural specialists interested in improving the way bridges fit into a local setting. The manual was developed to provide guidance to practicing engineers doing design, construction, and maintenance work on highway bridges. The manual has been reviewed by the Technical committee on Bridge Preservation (T-9), and is being proposed as an AASHTO publication (manual).

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Guidelines contained within the document are voluntary for use by bridge owners. It is expected that use of the guidelines will improve the appearance of bridges. The technical specifications for the design of bridges will not be affected.

REFERENCES: Bob Healy, Liaison from AASHTO SCOBS to AFF10(2). Bruce Johnson, Chair for Technical Committee on Bridge Preservation (T-9). The ballot item can be accessed at http://bridgeaesthetics.org/ A chapter outline is attached.

107

OTHER:

A. Why Consider Aesthetics? 5 B. How to Consider Aesthetics 9 1. Understand the Goals and the Site 9 2. Develop a Design Intention/Vision 15 3. Do a Conceptual Engineering Study 16 4. Proceed to Detailed Analysis and Design 18 C. Design Guidelines 19 1. Horizontal and Vertical Geometry 19 2. Superstructure Type 21 3. Pier/Support Placement and Span Arrangements 22 4. Abutment Placement and Height 24 5. Superstructure Shape (including parapets, overhangs and railings) 25 6. Pier Shape 28 7. Abutment Shape 29 8. Color 30 9. Texture, Ornamentation and Details 32 10. Lighting, Signing and Landscaping 34 D. Background Information 37 1. Fundamentals 37 2. Context Sensitive Design/Context Sensitive Solutions and How to Achieve Them 46 3. Community and Stakeholder Involvement 48 4. Practical Tips When Historic Bridges or Historic Settings are Involved 51 5. Working with Architects, Landscape Architects and Artists 54 6. Bridge Aesthetics and Cost 55 E. Example Bridges 59 F. Bibliography 65

108

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 24A SUBJECT: Proposed additions to the AASHTO Transportation Glossary, 4th Edition-2009 to include definitions of Bridge Rehabilitation, Bridge Replacement, Major Repairs, Bridge Preservation, Preventive Maintenance, Intervention Maintenance, and Operational Maintenance TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-9 Bridge Preservation
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 04/07/10 ADDITION NEW DOCUMENT

CONSTRUCTION SPEC MOVABLE SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC OTHER Additions to the AASHTO Transportation Glossary

AGENDA ITEM: Proposed additions to AASHTO Transportation Glossary Bridge rehabilitation is the work required to restore the structural integrity of a bridge as well as work necessary to correct major safety defects1 The work can be done on multiple elements and/or components. Functional improvements such as widening, increasing vertical clearance and structural improvements are included in this category. Bridge rehabilitation projects are generally aimed at improving the condition rating of the structure. Bridge rehabilitation is not considered a preservation activity. Bridge rehabilitation projects provide complete or nearly complete restoration of bridge elements or components. These projects typically require engineering resources for design, a lengthy completion schedule, and considerable costs. Most rehabilitation projects include repairs to several bridge components but can be limited to bridge deck replacement. Bridge replacement involves the total replacement of a structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridge with a new facility constructed in the same general traffic corridor.2 Bridge replacement is required when the service life of the structure is exhausted or it has become functionally obsolete. Bridge replacement is not a preservation activity. Bridge replacement projects require engineering resources for design, a length completion schedule, and considerable costs. Major repairs consist of structural repairs, typically aimed at the complete or near complete restoration of the element or elements. Major repairs typically involve repairs to a bridge component. The structural repair of bridge substructures or a deck overlay is considered major repairs. As major repairs typically aim to improve the structural or operation adequacy of a structure, they are not considered a preservation activity. Major repairs will improve the condition rating of the component and improve the condition rating of the structure.

Title 23 Highways Chapter 1 Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation Part 650.405 Eligible Projects. 2 Ibid

109

Bridge Preservation: consists of activities performed on bridges elements or components that aim to prevent, delay, or mitigate damage or deterioration. Preservation actions may be scheduled or condition driven. Bridge preservation activities do not entail structural or operational improvements of an existing bridge asset beyond its originally designed strength or capacity. An effective bridge preservation program will address bridges while they are still in good condition and before the onset of serious deterioration. By applying a cost-effective treatment at the right time, the service life of the bridge is extended. The cumulative effect of systematic, successive preservation treatments is to postpone costly reconstruction. During the life of a bridge, the cumulative discount value of the series of bridge preservation treatments is substantially less than the discounted value of the large cost of reconstruction and generally more economical than the cost of major rehabilitation. Additionally, performing a series of successive bridge preservation treatments during the life of a bridge is less disruptive to uniform traffic flow than the long closures normally associated with reconstruction projects. Preventive Maintenance is directed at performing activities that will preserve bridge components in their present (or intended) condition, forestalling development of a structural deficiency.3 Preventive maintenance is typically applied to bridge elements on structures with significant remaining service life. As a major component of bridge preservation, preventive maintenance is a strategy of extending the service life by applying cost-effective treatments to structurally sound bridges. The concept of preventive bridge maintenance suggests that many relatively small repairs and activities are performed to keep the bridge in good condition, retard future deterioration, and avoid large expenses in major bridge rehabilitation or bridge replacements. Preventive maintenance activities can be classified into two groups: scheduled and response. Scheduled maintenance (programmed at intervals)4. These activities are performed on a pre-determined interval and aim to maintain existing bridge element condition. Bridge element or component ratings are not directly improved as a result of scheduled maintenance activities. Examples of scheduled maintenance activities include bridge washing, bearing lubrication, and deck sealing. Scheduled activities are typically done on bridges rated good or fair. Candidate structures are typically selected using inventory data as opposed to condition ratings. Response maintenance actions are activities done as needed and identified through the inspection process5. Response maintenance performed on a non-deficient bridge to restore a bridge element to an acceptable level of service is a preservation activity. Response repairs will improve the condition rating of the element without significantly or only minimally improving the condition rating of the structure. Typical projects in this category include small volume non-structural concrete repairs of deteriorated substructure elements, resealing expansion joints, painting structural steel members, replacing wearing surfaces. Intervention Maintenance consists of activities aimed at reducing the potential for element or component level deterioration prior to or at the onset of discernable damage. Intervention maintenance is performed on bridges with significant remaining service life, on marginally deficient or non-deficient elements in a proactive manner to avoid more significant damage. Examples of type of intervention maintenance are: replacing rust-prone steel sliding bearings with elastomeric bearings, retrofitting fracture critical details on steel members, and armor-plating scour vulnerable foundations.

AASHTO Maintenance Manual for Highway and Bridges 2007, 3.1.1.3 Bridge Maintenance Concepts page 131. Ibid. 5 Ibid.
3 4

110

Typical of preservation activities, intervention maintenance involves minimal disruptions to traffic and results in the complete or near complete restoration of the bridge elements. Intervention maintenance is bridge preservation activity.

Operational maintenance involves activities such as snow and ice removal, dead animal removal, operating movable bridges, and removal of graffiti. These activities generally involve a service request and are not aimed at preserving the asset or making structural improvements. Operational maintenance includes incident response activities aimed at providing functionality to a highway system through the stabilization or temporary repair of a damaged asset. Operational maintenance is not considered preservation activities.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The AASHTO Subcommittee on Maintenance, Bridge Technical Working Group, has developed definitions to promote greater consistency in the use of maintenance and preservation terminology. This is being done to facilitate several NCHRP and SHTP2 research projects currently underway to prepare guidelines for decision making about bridge maintenance and preservation activities. SCOM requests SCOBS concurrence in these definitions.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: These new definitions will provide consistency for use of these terms in future AASHTO publications regarding design for service life of bridges and guides for decision making for maintenance and preservation actions.

REFERENCES: Memorandum from King Gee to Directors of Field Services, Division Administrators, and Federal Lands Highway Division Engineers, October 8, 2004 Letter from King Gee to Directors of Field Services, Division Administrators, and Federal Lands Highway Division Engineers, January 11, 2002 Transportation Asset Management Guide, November 2002 prepared by NCHRP Project 20-24(11) AASHTO Maintenance Manual for Roadways and Bridges, 2007 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 118 / Monday, June 21, 2004 / Proposed Rules Title 23--Highways Chapter IFederal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, Part 650.405 Definitions

OTHER: None

111

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 25 SUBJECT: LRFD Movable Highway Bridge Design Specifications: Section 8, Article 8.6.1.5 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-8 Movable Bridges
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 02/27/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 8.6.1.5, revise the paragraph as follows: In general, vVariable frequency drives should shall not be used for movable bridge drives. Item #2 In Article C8.6.1.5, delete the existing commentary and replace it with the following: Variable frequency speed control has seen limited success for speed control of movable bridges. While these drives are compatible with squirrel cage induction motors, inverter duty motors should be considered for their ability to withstand the higher harmonic voltages that may be produced. Variable frequency drives have historically lacked the ability for precise control of torque at low speed. Control of torque under overhauling loads and stall conditions, such as seating, has sometimes been unsuccessful. Although flux vector drives are a subcategory of variable frequency drives, the exclusion is for traditional VFDs (Volts per Hertz type), which are not able to provide dynamic braking and also experience cogging at low speeds. The flux vector drives are acceptable as outlined in Article 8.6.1.6.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Variable frequency drives (VFDs) are a system for controlling the rotational speed of an electric motor by controlling the frequency of the electrical power supplied to the motor. Variable frequency drives save money by adjusting the output of the machine to meet the current demand of the system. However, variable frequency speed control has seen limited success in movable bridge application. This is due to the fact that the variable frequency drives have historically lacked the ability for precise control of torque at low speed, conditions that typically are seen during seating or braking. The control of torque under overhauling loads and stall conditions has sometimes been unsuccessful with variable frequency drives. To remedy this dynamic braking units with external resistors are required for decelerating and overhauling loads.

112

The AASHTO T-8 committee has sought out the opinion of Heavy Movable Structures, Inc. on this subject to determine if the language of the specifications should be changed. Heavy Movable Structures recommended that the specification prohibit the use of VFDs on movable bridges. To better reflect this prohibition the language of the commentary was adjusted to reflect changes to the specification. Flux vector drives may be specified when precise speed and torque control are required utilizing squirrel cage motors.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

113

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 26 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 13, Various Articles TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-7 Guardrail and Bridge Rail
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/27/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article C13.1, revise the 2nd paragraph as follows: The bridge railing performance need not be identical over the whole highway network. New railing designs should match site needs leading to a multiple test level concept, as described in NCHRP Report 350 or AASHTO, Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware. Item #2 In Article C13.1, delete the 3rd paragraph and replace it with the following new paragraph: Previously crash tested railing should retain its test level approval and should not have to be tested to meet NCHRP Report 350 updating. All highway safety hardware accepted prior to the adoption of AASHTO, Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH), using criteria contained in NCHRP Report 350, may remain in place and may continue to be manufactured and installed. Highway safety hardware accepted using NCHRP Report 350 criteria is not required to be retested using MASH criteria. New highway safety hardware not previously evaluated must utilize MASH for testing and evaluation. Item #3 Revise the following definition in Article 13.2 as follows: Crash Testing of Bridge RailingsConducting a series of full-scale impact tests of a bridge railing in accordance with the recommended guidelines in NCHRP Report 350 or AASHTO, Manual of Assessing Safety Hardware in order to evaluate the railings strength and safety performance. Item #4 In Article C13.4, revise the 6th paragraph as follows: Procedures for testing railing are given in AASHTO, Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.

114

Item #5 In Article C13.7.2, revise the 1st paragraph as follows: The six test levels mentioned herein are intended to correspond with the six test levels contained in AASHTO, Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware and NCHRP Report 350, Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. Item #6 In Article C13.7.2, revise the 7th paragraph as follows: These criteria, including other vehicle characteristics and tolerances, are described in detail in the AASHTO, Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware and the NCHRP Report 350. Item #7 In Article 13.7.3.1.2, revise the 2nd paragraph as follows: The crash test specimen for a railing system may be designed to resist the applied loads in accordance with Appendix A of this Section or NCHRP Report 350 with its revisions. Item #8 In Article C13.7.3.2, revise the 1st paragraph as follows: These heights have been determined as satisfactory through crash tests performed in accordance with NCHRP Report 350 and experience. Item #9 Add the following to the References: AASHTO. 2009. Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware, MASH-1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: These changes incorporate the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware into the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Testing and acceptance of new bridge railing will be affected.

REFERENCES: None

115

OTHER: None

116

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 27 SUBJECT: LRFD Bride Design Specifications: Section 13, Table 13.7.2-1 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-7 Guardrail and Bridge Rail
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/29/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Revise Table 13.7.2-1 as follows:


Table 13.7.2-1 Bridge Railing Test Levels and Crash Test Criteria.

Vehicle Characteristics W (kips) B (ft.) G (in.) Crash angle, Test Level TL-1 TL-2 TL-3 TL-4 TL-5 TL-6 W (kips) B (ft.) G (in.) Crash angle, Test Level TL-1 TL-2 TL-3 TL-4 TL-5 TL-6

NCHRP Report 350

Small Automobiles 1.55 1.8 5.5 5.5 22 22 20 20 30 45 60 60 60 60 2.42 5.5 N/A 25 30 45 60 60 60 60 30 45 60 60 60 60 3.3 5.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Pickup Truck 4.5 6.5 27 25 30 45 60 60 60 60 5.0 6.5 28 25 30 45 60 60 60 60

SingleUnit Van-Type Van Truck Tractor-Trailer 18.0 50.0 80.0 7.5 8.0 8.0 49 64 73 15 15 15 Test Speeds (mph) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 N/A N/A N/A 22.0 N/A 79.3 7.5 N/A 8.0 63 N/A 73 15 N/A 15 Test Speeds (mph) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 55 N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 N/A N/A N/A

Tractor-Tanker Trailer 80.0 8.0 81 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50 79.3 8.0 81 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50

AASHTO MASH

117

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: This change incorporates the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware into the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Testing and acceptance of new bridge railings will be affected.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

118

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 28 SUBJECT: Guide Specification for Design of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Bridges TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-6 Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/28/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Guide Specification for Design of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Bridges (Specification) See Attachment A Guide Specification for Design of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Bridges (Commentary) See Attachment B

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Provides a Guide Specification in LRFD format for the design of Externally Bonded FRP Systems for Strengthening Concrete Bridges.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

119

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

ATTACHMENT A 2010 AGENDA ITEM 28 - T-6

AASHTO LRFD GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN OF EXTERNALLY BONDED FRP SYSTEMS FOR STRENGTHENING CONCRETE BRIDGES

DATE 02/28/2010 T-6 PAUL LILES, Chair

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Section 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................5

SCOPE.......................................................................................................................................................................5 1.1 DEFINITIONS ..........................................................................................................................................................5 1.2 LIMITATIONS .........................................................................................................................................................7 1.3 DESIGN PHILOSOPHY...........................................................................................................................................7 1.4 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................................................8 Section 2 CONCRETE STRUCTURES STRENGTHENED WITH FRP SYSTEMS ............................................10

SCOPE.....................................................................................................................................................................10 2.1 DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................................................10 2.2 NOTATION.............................................................................................................................................................12 2.3 MATERIAL PROPERTIES ....................................................................................................................................15 2.4 General.............................................................................................................................................................15 2.4.1 Concrete...........................................................................................................................................................15 2.4.2 Reinforcing Steel .............................................................................................................................................15 2.4.3 Prestressing Steel .............................................................................................................................................15 2.4.4 FRP ..................................................................................................................................................................15 2.4.5 2.4.5.1 General........................................................................................................................................................15 2.4.5.2 Tensile Strength and Strain .........................................................................................................................15 2.4.5.3 Modulus of Elasticity ..................................................................................................................................16 2.4.5.4 Coefficient of Thermal Expansion ..............................................................................................................16 2.4.5.5 Time-Dependent Behavior ..........................................................................................................................16 Creep-rupture.....................................................................................................................................16 2.4.5.5.1 Fatigue ...............................................................................................................................................17 2.4.5.5.2 STRENGTHENING LIMITS..................................................................................................................................17 2.5 Structural Loads...............................................................................................................................................17 2.5.1 Structural Fire Endurance ................................................................................................................................17 2.5.2 Overall Structural Strength ..............................................................................................................................18 2.5.3 LIMIT STATES ......................................................................................................................................................18 2.6 Service Limit State...........................................................................................................................................18 2.6.1 Fatigue and Creep Rupture Limit State............................................................................................................18 2.6.2 Strength Limit State .........................................................................................................................................19 2.6.3 2.6.3.1 General........................................................................................................................................................19 2.6.3.2 Resistance Factors.......................................................................................................................................19 2.6.3.3 Stability .......................................................................................................................................................21 Extreme Event Limit State...............................................................................................................................21 2.6.4 DESIGN CONSIDERATION .................................................................................................................................21 2.7 General.............................................................................................................................................................21 2.7.1 Effect of Imposed Deformation .......................................................................................................................21 2.7.2 DESIGN FOR FLEXURAL AND AXIAL FORCE EFFECTS..............................................................................21 2.8 Assumptions for Service, Fatigue and Creep Rupture Limit States.................................................................21 2.8.1 Assumptions for Strength and Extreme Event Limit States.............................................................................22 2.8.2 2.8.2.1 General........................................................................................................................................................22 2.8.2.2 Shear Strength.............................................................................................................................................23 2.8.2.3 Existing Substrate Strain.............................................................................................................................23 2.8.2.4 Flexural Strengthening of concave soffits...................................................................................................23 2.8.2.5 Rectangular Stress Distribution...................................................................................................................23 Flexural Members............................................................................................................................................23 2.8.3 2.8.3.1 Stress in Prestressing Steel at Nominal Flexural Resistance.......................................................................23 2

121

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

2.8.3.2 Effective Stress in FRP Systems at Nominal Flexural Resistance ..............................................................25 General ..............................................................................................................................................25 2.8.3.2.1 Reinforced Concrete..........................................................................................................................25 2.8.3.2.2 Prestressed Concrete..........................................................................................................................26 2.8.3.2.3 2.8.3.3 Neutral Axis Position ..................................................................................................................................27 2.8.3.4 Flexural Resistance .....................................................................................................................................27 Factored Flexural Resistance.............................................................................................................27 2.8.3.4.1 Flanged Sections................................................................................................................................28 2.8.3.4.2 Rectangular Sections .........................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.4.3 Other Cross-Sections .........................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.4.4 Strain Compatibility Approach..........................................................................................................29 2.8.3.4.5 2.8.3.5 Limits for FRP Reinforcement....................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.6 Deformations...............................................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.7 Stress Limits................................................................................................................................................29 Concrete.............................................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.7.1 Steel Reinforcing Bars.......................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.7.2 Prestressing Tendons .........................................................................................................................29 2.8.3.7.3 FRP Reinforcement ...........................................................................................................................30 2.8.3.7.4 Compression Members ....................................................................................................................................30 2.8.4 2.8.4.1 Pure Axial Load ..........................................................................................................................................30 General ..............................................................................................................................................30 2.8.4.1.1 Limits for FRP Reinforcement ..........................................................................................................30 2.8.4.1.2 Factored Axial Resistance .................................................................................................................30 2.8.4.1.3 Compressive Strain for Confined Concrete .......................................................................................31 2.8.4.1.4 Circular Cross-Sections .....................................................................................................................32 2.8.4.1.5 Noncircular Cross-Sections ...............................................................................................................32 2.8.4.1.6 Stress Limits ......................................................................................................................................33 2.8.4.1.7 2.8.4.2 Combined Axial Load and Bending Moment .............................................................................................33 Limits for FRP Reinforcement ..........................................................................................................33 2.8.4.2.1 Factored Axial Resistance .................................................................................................................33 2.8.4.2.2 2.8.4.3 Ductility Enhancement................................................................................................................................33 DESIGN FOR SHEAR............................................................................................................................................33 2.9 General.............................................................................................................................................................33 2.9.1 General Requirements......................................................................................................................................33 2.9.2 2.9.2.1 General........................................................................................................................................................33 2.9.2.2 Maximum Spacing of Transverse Reinforcement.......................................................................................34 2.9.2.3 FRP Reinforcement Limits .........................................................................................................................34 Nominal Shear Resistance ...............................................................................................................................34 2.9.3 2.9.3.1 Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by the Concrete .................................................................................35 2.9.3.2 Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by Shear Reinforcement....................................................................36 2.9.3.3 Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by the FRP System............................................................................36 Effective Strain Level in the FRP System .........................................................................................37 2.9.3.3.1 Bond-Dependent Coefficient.............................................................................................................38 2.9.3.3.2 2.10 DETAILS, DEVELOPMENT AND LAP SPLICE OF REINFORCEMENT.........................................................39 2.10.1 General.............................................................................................................................................................39 2.10.2 General Requirements for FRP Systems..........................................................................................................39 2.10.3 Detailing of FRP Systems................................................................................................................................39 2.10.4 Development Length........................................................................................................................................40 2.10.4.1 Surface Mounted FRP Systems...................................................................................................................40 2.10.4.2 NSM FRP Systems .....................................................................................................................................40 2.10.5 Lap Splice Length of FRP Systems .................................................................................................................41 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................................42 Section 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS.................................................................................................................44

SCOPE.....................................................................................................................................................................44 DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................................................44 LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................................................................................45 3

122

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

MATERIAL AND MANUFACTURE....................................................................................................................46 3.4 Fibers ...............................................................................................................................................................46 3.4.1 Matrix Resins...................................................................................................................................................46 3.4.2 Manufacturing Process ....................................................................................................................................46 3.4.3 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES .....................................................................................................................................46 3.5 Fibers Content..................................................................................................................................................46 3.5.1 Glass Transition Temperature..........................................................................................................................46 3.5.2 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES ..............................................................................................................................46 3.6 Tensile Strength ...............................................................................................................................................46 3.6.1 Tensile Modulus of Elasticity ..........................................................................................................................47 3.6.2 Ultimate Tensile Strain ....................................................................................................................................47 3.6.3 DURABILITY REQUIREMENTS .........................................................................................................................47 3.7 General.............................................................................................................................................................47 3.7.1 SAMPLING.............................................................................................................................................................48 3.8 Sampling Frequency and Number of Specimens .............................................................................................48 3.8.1 Method of Sampling Selection.........................................................................................................................48 3.8.2 Rejection..................................................................................................................................................................48 3.9 3.10 Product Certification................................................................................................................................................48 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................................50

123

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Section 1 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

1.1

SCOPE

These Guide Specifications offer a description of the unique material properties of fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) composite materials as well as provisions for repair, upgrade or both of existing concrete bridge structures strengthened with externally bonded FRP systems. FRP systems shall be in the form of laminates, near surface mounted (NSM) bars or both. These Guide Specifications are not intended to supplant proper training or the exercise of judgment by the Design Professional, and state only the minimum requirements necessary to provide for public safety. The Owner or the Design Professional may require the sophistication of the design or the quality of materials and construction to be higher than the minimum requirements. The Design Professional shall be familiar with the provisions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (4th Edition, 2007) and latest interim specifications as well as with the design of conventional reinforced and prestressed concrete structures. The commentary is not intended to provide a complete historical background concerning the development of these Guide Specifications, nor is it intended to provide a detailed summary of the studies and research data reviewed in formulating the provisions of the Guide Specifications. However, references to some of the research data are provided for those who wish to study the background material in depth. The commentary directs attention to other documents that provide suggestions for carrying out the requirements and intent of these Guide Specifications. However, those documents and this commentary are not intended to be a part of these Guide Specifications.

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

1.2

DEFINITIONS

BinderChemical treatment applied to the random arrangement of fibers to give integrity to roving and fabric. Specific binders are use to promote chemical compatibility with the various laminating resin used. CompositeEngineering materials such as concrete and fiber reinforced polymer, made from two or more constituent materials that remain distinct, but combine to form materials with properties not possessed by any of the constituent materials individually. The constituent materials are generally characterized as matrix and aggregate or matrix and reinforcement.. Design ProfessionalThe engineer or engineering firm responsible for the design of the bridge and issuing Contract Documents or administering the Work under Contract Documents, or both. ConfinementA condition where the disintegration of the concrete under compression is prevented by the development of lateral and/or circumferential forces such as may be provided by appropriate reinforcing, steel or composite tubes, or similar devices.

124

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

FabricA two-dimensional network of woven, nonwoven, knitted, or stitched fibers. FiberA slender and greatly elongated solid material, generally with a length at least 100 times its diameter, that has properties making it desirable for use as reinforcement. Fiber, AramidHighly oriented organic fiber derived from polyamide incorporating into an aromatic ring structure. Fiber, CarbonFiber produced by heating organic precursor materials containing a substantial amount of carbon, such as rayon, polyacrylonitrile (PAN), or pitch in an inert environment. Fiber, GlassFiber drawn from an inorganic product of fusion that has cooled without crystallizing. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)A general term for a composite material comprising a polymer matrix reinforced with fibers in the form of fabric, mat, strands, or any other fiber form. FilamentSee Fiber. FRPFiber reinforced polymer. LaminateA precured or wet layup FRP system. MatrixThe resin or binders that hold the fibers in FRP together, transfer load to the fibers, and protect them against environmental attack and damage due to handling. Near Surface Mounted (NSM) SystemsCircular or rectangular FRP bars bonded into grooves made in the concrete surface. PolymerThe product of polymerization; more commonly a rubber or resin consisting of large molecules formed by polymerization. PolymerizationThe reaction in which two or more molecules of the same substance combine to form a compound containing the same elements and in the same proportions but of higher molecular weight. Precured FRP SystemA fully cured FRP system that is usually made in a factory and brought to the site as a rigid solid. If used as a repair material for concrete, a precured FRP system is bonded to the surface of the concrete with an adhesive. Prestressed ConcreteConcrete components in which stresses and deformations are introduced by application of prestressing forces. Reinforced ConcreteStructural concrete containing no less than the minimum amount of prestressing tendons or nonprestressed reinforcement specified according to AASTHO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. ReinforcementReinforcing bars, prestressing steel, and/or fiber reinforced polymer materials. RovingA parallel bundle of continuous yarn, tows, or fibers with little or no twist. Structural ConcreteAll concrete used for structural purposes. TendonA high-strength steel element used to prestress the concrete. TowAn untwisted bundle of continuous filaments. YarnA twisted bundle of continuous filaments. Wet Layup FRP SystemA method of forming FRP laminates using dry FRP fabrics that are saturated with resin in-place. Once cured, the resin acts as the matrix of the FRP laminate and allows adhesion of the laminate to the substrate.

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1.3

LIMITATIONS

Strengthening of concrete members with fully unbonded or partially unbonded prestressing tendons as well as seismic design are not addressed in these Guide Specifications. Furthermore, wrapping with FRP composites to solely address a durability problem without other remedial actions is outside the scope of this document and not recommended. These Guide Specifications will be limited to design provisions; construction and inspection requirements are deferred to other AASTHO and NCHRP literature addressing concrete repair. Externally bonded FRP systems shall not be used as compression reinforcement.

8 9 10 11 12 13

1.4

DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

These Guide Specifications are based on limit state design principles where structural components shall be proportioned to satisfy the requirements at all appropriate service, fatigue and creep rupture, strength, and extreme event limit states. In many instances, serviceability or fatigue and creep rupture limits may control the design. Provisions related to limit states analysis, general design and location features, loads and load factors, and structural analysis and evaluation shall be in compliance with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

126

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

REFERENCES American Concrete Institute, Committee 440. 2008. Guide for the Design and Construction of Externally Bonded FRP systems for Strengthening Concrete Structures. ACI 440.2R-08, Farmington Hills, MI, USA. Balaguru, P.N., Nanni, A., and Giancaspro, J. 2008. FRP Composites for Reinforced and Prestressed Concrete Structures. Taylor & Francis, 318 pp. Burgoyne, C., Editor. 2001. Fiber Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Fifth International Symposium (FRPRCS-5). Proc., Int. Conf., Cambridge, UK. Cosenza, E., Manfredi, G., and Nanni, A., Editors. 2001. Composites in Construction: A Reality. Proc., Int. Workshop, Capri, Italy, ASCE, Reston, VA, 277 pp. Dolan, C.W., S. Rizkalla, and A. Nanni, Editors. 1999. Fiber Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Fourth International Symposium (FRPRCS-4). ACI Special Publication No. 188, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 1182 pp. El-Badry, M., Editor. 1996. Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures. Proc., ACMBS-II, Montreal, Canada, pp. 1027. Figueiras, J., L. Juvandes, and R. Furia, Editors. 2001. Composites in Construction. Proc., CCC 2001, Porto, Portugal. GangaRao, H.V.S., Taly, N., and Vijay, P.V., 2007. Reinforced Concrete Design with FRP Composites. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis, 382 pp. Humar, J., and A.G. Razaqpur, Editors 2000. Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures. Proc., 3rd Inter. Conf., Ottawa, Canada. Japan Concrete Institute Editor, 1997. Fiber Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Third International Symposium (FRPRCS-3). Proc., Int. Conf., Published by Japan Concrete Institute, Sapporo, Japan. Iyer, S.L., and R. Sen, Editors. 1991. Advanced Composite Materials in Civil Engineering Structures. Proc., American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, 443 pp. Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., Nanni, A., and Karbhari, V.M. 2004. Bonded Repair and Retrofit of Concrete Structures Using FRP Composites: Recommended Construction Specifications and Process Control Manual. NCHRP Report 514, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, USA. Mirmiran, A., Shahawy, M., Karbhari, V.M., Nanni, A.,, and Kalayci, A.S. 2008. Recommended Construction Specifications and Process Control Manual for Repair and Retrofit of Concrete Structures using Externally Bonded FRP Composites. NCHRP Report 609, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, USA. Mirmiran, A., and Nanni, A., Editors. 2006. Composites in Civil Engineering. International Institute for FRP in Construction (IIFC), Proc., Third International Conference on FRP Composites in Civil Engineering (CICE 2006), Miami, FL, 745 pp. Nanni, A., Editor. 1993. Fiber-Reinforced-Plastic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures: Properties and Applications. Developments in Civil Engineering, Vol. 42, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 450. Nanni, A., and C.W. Dolan, Editors. 1993. FRP Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS-1). Proc., ACI SP-138, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, pp. 977.

127

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Neale, K.W., and Labossiere, P., Editors. 1992. Advanced Composite Materials in Bridges and Structures. Proc. Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, Montreal, Canada, 705 pp. Rizkalla, S., and Nanni, A., Editors. 2003. Field Applications of FRP Reinforcement: Case Studies. ACI Special Publication No. 125, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 434 pp. Shield, C.K., Busel, J.P., Walkup, S.L., and Gremel, D.D. Editors. 2005. Fiber Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Seventh International Symposium (FRPRCS-7). ACI Special Publication No. 230, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, CD-ROM. Taerwe, L., Editor. 1995. Fiber Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Second International Symposium (FRPRCS-2). Proc., Int. Conf., Published by E & FN Spon (RILEM Proceedings 29), Ghent, Belgium. Tan, K.H., Editor. 2003. Fiber-Reinforced-Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Sixth International Symposium (FRPRCS-6). Proc., Int. Conf., V. I & II, Singapore. Teng, J.-G., Editor. 2001. FRP Composites in Civil Engineering. Proc., Int. Conf. (CICE 2001), Hong Kong, China, Vol. 1 & 2. Triantafillou, T., Editor. 2007. Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Reinforcement for Concrete Structures Eighth International Symposium (FRPRCS-8). Proc., Int. Conf., Patras, Greece, pp. 701. White, T.D., Editor. 1992. Composite Materials and Structural Plastics in Civil Engineering Construction. Proc. of The Materials Engineering Congress, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, pp. 532-718.

128

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

SYSTEMS

Section 2

CONCRETE STRUCTURES STRENGTHENED WITH FRP

CONCRETE STRUCTURES STRENGTHENED WITH FRP SYSTEMS

16 17 18 19 20 21

2.1

SCOPE

These Guide Specifications cover general design considerations based on conventional reinforced concrete (RC) and prestressed concrete (PC) design principles and knowledge of the specific mechanical behavior of FRP systems. The Design Professional shall be familiar with the provisions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (5th Edition, 2007) and latest interim specifications as well as with the design of conventional reinforced and prestressed concrete structures.

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

2.2

DEFINITIONS

BinderChemical treatment applied to the random arrangement of fibers to give integrity to roving and fabric. Specific binders are use to promote chemical compatibility with the various laminating resin used. Compression-Controlled SectionA cross-section in which the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel at nominal resistance is less than or equal to the compression-controlled strain limit. Compression-Controlled Strain LimitThe net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel at balanced strain conditions. See Article 2.8.2.1. Concrete CoverThe specified minimum distance between the surface of the reinforcing bars, strands, or other embedded items, and the surface of the concrete. CompositeEngineering materials such as concrete and fiber reinforced polymer, made from two or more constituent materials that remain distinct, but combine to form materials with properties not possessed by any of the constituent materials individually. The constituent materials are generally characterized as matrix and aggregate or matrix and reinforcement.. ConfinementA condition where the disintegration of the concrete under compression is prevented by the development of lateral and/or circumferential forces such as may be provided by appropriate reinforcing, steel or composite tubes, FRP systems, or similar devices. CreepTime-dependent deformation of concrete under permanent loads. DebondingFailure of cohesive or adhesive bond at the interface between a substrate and a strengthening or repair system. DelaminationA planar separation in a material that is roughly parallel to the surface of the material. 10

129

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

Development LengthThe distance required to develop the specified strength of a reinforcing bar, prestressing stand, or FRP system. Effective DepthThe depth of a component effective in resisting flexural or shear forces. Effective PrestressThe stress or force remaining in the prestressing steel after all losses have occurred. Extreme Tension SteelThe reinforcement (prestressed or nonprestressed) that is farthest from the extreme compression fiber. FabricA two-dimensional network of woven, nonwoven, knitted, or stitched fibers. FiberA slender and greatly elongated solid material, generally with a length of at least 100 times its diameter, that has properties making it desirable for use as reinforcement. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)A general term for a composite material comprising a polymer matrix reinforced with fibers in the form of fabric or any other fiber form. See Composite. FilamentSee Fiber. FRPSee Fiber Reinforced Polymer. LaminateA precured or wet layup FRP system. MatrixThe resin or binders that hold the fibers in FRP together, transfer load to the fibers, and protect them against environmental attack and damage due to handling. Net Tensile StrainThe tensile strain at nominal resistance exclusive of strains due to the effective prestress, creep, shrinkage, and temperature. Normal-Density ConcreteConcrete having a density between 135 and 150 lb/ft3. Near Surface Mounted (NSM) SystemsCircular or rectangular FRP bars bonded into grooves made in the concrete surface. Precured FRP SystemA fully cured FRP system that is usually made in a factory and brought to the site as a rigid solid. If used as a repair material for concrete, a precured FRP system is bonded to the surface of the concrete with an adhesive. Prestressed ConcreteConcrete components in which stresses and deformations are introduced by application of prestressing forces. Reinforced ConcreteStructural concrete containing no less than the minimum amount of prestressing tendons or nonprestressed reinforcement specified herein. ReinforcementReinforcing bars, prestressing tendons, and/or FRP systems. ResinGenerally a thermosetting resin produced by the condensation reaction of an aromatic alcohol with an aldehyde (usually a phenol with formaldehyde). Resin, ThermosettingA material that hardens by an irreversible cross-linking of monomers, typically when subjected to heat or light energy. RovingA parallel bundle of continuous yarn, tows, or fibers with little or no twist. Specified Strength of ConcreteThe nominal compressive strength of concrete specified for the work and assumed for design and analysis of new structures.

11

130

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

SpiralContinuously wound bar or wire in the form of a cylindrical helix. SubstrateAny material on the surface of which another material is applied. Structural ConcreteAll concrete used for structural purposes. Temperature, Glass-TransitionThe midpoint of the temperature range over which an amorphous material (such as glass or polymer) changes from (or to) a brittle, vitreous state to (or from) a plastic state TendonA high-strength steel element used to prestressed the concrete. Tension-Controlled SectionA cross-section in which the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel at nominal resistance is greater than or equal to 0.005. TowAn untwisted bundle of continuous filaments. Transverse ReinforcementReinforcement used to resist shear, torsion, and lateral forces or to confine concrete in a structural member. The terms stirrups and web reinforcement are usually applied to transverse reinforcement in flexural members and the terms ties, hoops, and spirals are applied to transverse reinforcement in compression members. YarnA twisted bundle of continuous filaments. Yield StrengthThe specified yield strength of reinforcement. Wet Layup FRP SystemA method of forming FRP laminates using dry FRP fabrics that are saturated with resin in-place. Once cured, the resin acts as the matrix of the FRP laminate and allows adhesion of the laminate to the substrate.

28

2.3 Ac Ae Af

NOTATION = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = cross-sectional area of concrete in compression, in.2 (2.8.3.1) cross-sectional area of effectively confined concrete section, in.2 (2.8.4.1.6) area of the FRP flexural reinforcement, in.2 (2.6.2) area of FRP transverse reinforcement, in.2 (2.10.3) area of FRP shear reinforcement within a distance sf, in.2 (2.9.3.3) gross area of section, in.2 (2.8.4.1.3) area of prestressing steel, in.2 (2.8.3.2.3) area of nonprestressed steel reinforcement, in.2 (2.6.2) total area of longitudinal reinforcement, in.2 (2.8.4.1.3) area of compression reinforcement, in.2 (2.8.3.3) area of shear reinforcement, in.2 (2.9.3.2) depth of equivalent rectangular stress block, in. (2.8.2.5) smaller cross-sectional dimension for rectangular FRP bars, in. (2.10.4.2) width of the compression face of the member, in. (2.8.3.3) larger cross-sectional dimension for rectangular FRP bars, in. (2.10.4.2) effective web width taken as the minimum web width, measured parallel to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure, or for circular sections, the diameter of the sections, modified for the presence of ducts where applicable, in. (2.9.2.3) web width or diameter of a circular section, in. (2.8.3.3) distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis, in. (2.8.3.3) environmental reduction factor (2.4.5.2) diameter of the circular cross-section, in. (2.8.4.1.3) diameter of FRP bar, in. (2.10.4.2) effective depth from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tensile force in the tensile reinforcement, in. (2.9.2.2) distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of nonprestressed tensile reinforcement, in. (2.6.3.2) 12

Af,anchor Afv Ag Aps As Ast ' As Av a ab b bb bv bw c CE D db de ds

= = = = = = =

131

' ds df dfv dp dv

= = = = =

Ec Ef Ep Es e f c'
' f cc fcpe

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of compression reinforcement, in. (2.8.3.4.2) distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in (2.6.2) effective depth of FRP shear reinforcement, in. (2.9.3.3) distance from the extreme compression fiber to centroid of prestressing tendons, in. (2.6.3.2) effective shear depth taken as the distance, measured perpendicular to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of 0.9de or 0.72h, in. (2.9.2.2) modulus of elasticity of concrete, ksi (2.8.3.1) tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi (2.6.2) modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons, ksi (2.8.3.2.3) tensile modulus of elasticity of steel reinforcement, ksi (2.6.2) eccentricity of prestressing steel with respect to the centroid of the cross-section, in. (2.8.3.1) specified compressive strength of concrete for use in design, ksi (2.8.2.5) compressive strength of confined concrete, ksi (2.8.4.1.3) compressive stress in concrete due to effective prestress forces only (after allowance for all prestress losses) at extreme fiber of section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, kip (2.9.3.1) effective stress level in the FRP system, ksi (2.8.3.2.1) (2.9.3.3) design tensile strength of the FRP system, ksi (2.4.5.2) stress level in the FRP system for fatigue and creep rupture limit state, ksi (2.6.2) stress level in nonprestressed steel reinforcement, ksi (2.6.2) lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP system, ksi (2.8.4.1.3) tensile strength for product certification as reported by manufacturers, ksi (2.4.5.2) compressive stress in concrete (after allowance for all prestress losses) at centroid of cross section resisting externally applied loads or at junction of web and flange when the centroid lies within the flange, ksi (2.9.3.1) average stress in prestressing steel, ksi (2.8.3.1) stress in prestressing steel at service, ksi (2.8.3.7.3) specified tensile strength of prestressing steel, ksi (2.8.3.7.3) yield strength of prestressing steel, ksi (2.8.3.7.3) modulus of rupture of concrete, ksi (2.9.3.1) stress in the mild tension reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance, ksi (2.8.3.3) stress in the mild steel compression reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance, ksi (2.8.3.3) specified yield strength of reinforcing bars, ksi (2.8.3.3) specified minimum yield strength of compression reinforcement, ksi (2.8.2.1) face dimension of concrete cross-section, in. (2.8.4.1.2) compression flange depth of an I or T member, in. (2.8.3.3) modification factor accounting for concrete strength (2.9.3.3.2) modification factor accounting for the configuration of the FRP system (2.9.3.3.2) depth of the neutral axis at service load condition measured from the extreme compression fiber, in. (2.6.2) span length from center-to-center of support, in. (2.6.1) active bond length, in. (2.9.3.3.2) development length of FRP systems, in. (2.10.4) moment causing flexural cracking at section due to externally applied loads, kip-in. (2.9.3.1) total unfactored dead load moment acting on the monolithic or noncomposite section, kip-in. (2.9.3.1) maximum factored moment at section due to externally applied loads, kip-in. (2.9.3.1) nominal flexural resistance, kip-in. (2.8.3.4.1) factored flexural resistance, kip-in. (2.8.3.4.1) service moment at section, kip-in. (2.6.2) factored bending moment, kip-in. (2.8.4.2.1) modular ratio, number of plies of the FRP system (2.8.1) (2.8.4.1.3) Ef / Ec modular ratio for FRP systems (2.8.1) Ep / Ec modular ratio for prestressed steel reinforcement (2.8.1) Es / Ec modular ratio for nonprestressed steel reinforcement (2.8.1) effective force in prestressing steel after allowance for all prestress losses, kip (2.8.3.1) nominal axial resistance, kip (2.8.4.1.3) 13

ff ffd ff,s fs,s fl ffu fpc fps fps,s fpu fpy fr fs f s' fy f y' h hf k1 k2 kds L Le ld Mcre Mdnc Mmax Mn Mr Ms Mu n nf np ns Pe Pn

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

132

Pr Pu Rn Rn r rc Sc Snc SDL SLL s sf Tg tf Vc Vci Vcw Vd Vf Vi Vn Vp Vs Vr Vu wf 1 bi 'c cu ccu f fd fe fd fu pe pi ps pu t y a b

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

factored axial resistance, kip (2.8.4.1.3) factored axial force, kip (2.8.4.2.1) nominal strength of the member (2.5.1) nominal strength of the member subjected to elevated temperature due to fire (2.5.2) radius of gyration of the section, in. (2.8.3.1) radius of edge of a prismatic cross-section confined with FRP systems, in. (2.8.4.1.6) section modulus for the extreme fiber of the composite section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, in.3 (2.9.3.1) section modulus for the extreme fiber of the monolithic or noncomposite section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, in.3 (2.9.3.1) unfactored dead load effect (2.5.1) unfactored live load effect (2.5.1) spacing of stirrups, in. (2.9.3.2) spacing of FRP shear reinforcement, in. (2.9.3.3) glass transition temperature, F (2.5.2) nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in. (2.8.3.2.2) nominal shear resistance provided by the concrete, kip (2.9.3) nominal shear resistance provided by the concrete when inclined cracking results from combined shear and moment, kip (2.9.3.1) nominal shear resistance provided by the concrete when inclined cracking results from excessive principal tensions in the web, kip (2.9.3.1) shear force at section due to unfactored dead load and includes both DC (dead load of structural components and nonstructural attachments) and DW (dead load of wearing surfaces and utilities), kip (2.9.3.1) nominal shear resistance provided by the FRP system, kip (2.9.2.3) factored shear force at section due to externally applied loads occurring simultaneously with Mmax, kip (2.9.2.3) nominal shear resistance, kip (2.9.2.1) component in the direction of applied shear of the effective prestressing force; positive if resisting the applied shear, kip (2.9.3.1) nominal shear resistance provided by shear reinforcement, kip (2.9.2.3) factored shear resistance, kip (2.9.2.1) factored shear force, kip (2.10.3) width of the FRP system, in. (2.9.2.2) angle of inclination of transverse reinforcement to longitudinal axis, angle of inclination of FRP shear reinforcement to longitudinal axis, (2.9.3.2) (2.9.3.3) ratio of the depth of the equivalent uniformly stressed compression zone assumed in strength limit state to the depth of the actual compression zone (2.8.2.5) resistance factor (2.6.3.2) initial strain level on the concrete substrate prior to the installation of the FRP system, in./in. (2.8.2.3) maximum strain of unconfined concrete corresponding to f c' , in./in. (2.8.4.1.4) failure strain of concrete in compression, in./in. (2.8.3.2.2) maximum compressive strain for FRP-confined concrete, in./in. (2.8.4.1.3) effective strain level in the FRP system at nominal resistance, in./in. (2.8.3.1) (2.9.3.3.1) design tensile strain of the FRP system, in./in. (2.4.5.2) effective strain level in the FRP system at failure, in./in. (2.8.4.1.3) strain level in the FRP system corresponding to FRP rupture or debonding, in./in. (2.8.3.2.2) tensile strain for product certification as reported by manufacturers, in./in. (2.4.5.2) effective strain in prestressing steel after losses, in./in. (2.8.3.1) initial strain level in prestressing steel, in./in. (2.8.3.2.3) strain in prestressing steel at nominal resistance, in./in. (2.6.3.2) specified tensile strain of prestressing steel, in./in. (2.8.3.2.3) net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal resistance, in./in. (2.6.3.2) strain corresponding to yield strength of nonprestressed steel reinforcement, in./in. (2.6.3.2) stress efficiency factor for FRP systems (2.8.4.1.3) strain efficiency factor for FRP systems (2.8.4.1.4) 14

133

v f g b

= = = = =

bond-dependent coefficient (2.9.3.3.1) efficiency factor for FRP systems, (2.8.4.1.3) additional reduction factor for FRP systems As /bh ratio of longitudinal steel reinforcement to cross-sectional area of a compression member (2.8.4.1.6) average bond strength for FRP bars, ksi (2.10.4.2)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

2.4 2.4.1

MATERIAL PROPERTIES General

Design should be based on the material properties cited herein and on the use of materials that conform to the standards for the grades of construction materials as specified in AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications. Where other grades or types of materials are used, their properties, including statistical variability, shall be established prior to design. The minimum acceptable properties and test procedures for such materials shall be specified in the contract document. The contract documents shall define the grades or properties of all materials to be used. 2.4.2 Concrete

Normal and structural low-density concrete shall conform to the provisions of Article 5.4.2 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 2.4.3 Reinforcing Steel

Reinforcing steel bars shall conform to the provisions of Article 5.4.3 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 2.4.4 Prestressing Steel

Prestressing steel strands shall conform to the provisions of Article 5.4.4 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 2.4.5 FRP General

2.4.5.1

FRP systems shall conform to the material specifications reported in Section 3 and comply with the applicable limitations of Article 1.3. 2.4.5.2 Tensile Strength and Strain

The tensile strength and strain for product certification of FRP systems as reported by manufacturers shall be in compliance with the provisions of Articles 3.6.1 and 3.6.3, respectively. The tensile strength for product certification as reported by manufacturers, ffu, shall be defined as the average tensile strength calculated for a frequency and number of specimens as specified in Article 3.8.1 minus three times the standard deviation. The design tensile strength and strain considering reductions for service environment, ffd and fd respectively, to be used in all design equations shall be determined as follows:
f fd = C E f fu

(2.4.5.2-1) (2.4.5.2-2)

fd = CE fu
15

134

1 2

where:

CE ffu

= = =

environmental reduction factor as specified in Table 2.4.5.2-1 tensile strength for product certification as reported by manufacturers, ksi tensile strain for product certification as reported by manufacturers, in./in. Table 2.4.5.2-1 Environmental reduction factors Exposure condition Fiber type Carbon Glass Aramid Environmental reduction factor, CE 0.85 0.65 0.75

fu
3 4 5

Typical bridge environment

Aggressive environment

Carbon Glass Aramid

0.85 0.50 0.70

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2.4.5.3 Modulus of Elasticity

The modulus of elasticity for product certification of GFRP reinforcing bars as reported by manufacturers shall be in compliance with the provisions of Article 3.6.2 and shall be determined as the average modulus of elasticity calculated from experimental tests for a frequency and number of specimens as specified in Article 3.8.1. 2.4.5.4 Coefficient of Thermal Expansion

The coefficient of thermal expansion for FRP systems shall be provided by the manufacturer. Typical values for the coefficient of thermal expansion are given in Table 2.4.5.4-1. Table 2.4.5.4-1 Typical coefficients of thermal expansion of FRP systems (10-6 / F) Direction Carbon -0.6 to 0 12 to 27 Glass 3.3 to 5.6 10.4 to 12.6 Aramid -3.3 to -1.1 33 to 44

Longitudinal Transverse

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

2.4.5.5

Time-Dependent Behavior

2.4.5.5.1 Creep-rupture
To avoid creep-rupture of the FRP system under sustained stresses, the stress level computed on the FRP system, ff,s, shall be equal to or less than the values reported in Table 2.4.5.5.1-1, unless the FRP manufacturer can provide substantiating evidence following ASTM D7337/D7337M procedures demonstrating that higher values of the stress limits can be safely utilized. Test method from ASTM D7337/D7337M is only applicable to FRP bars. When the stress level on the FRP system is within the elastic response range of the strengthened member, the stresses may be computed by elastic analysis.

16

135

1 2

Table 2.4.5.5.1-1 Stress limits for FRP systems Carbon 0.55ffd Glass 0.20ffd Aramid 0.30ffd

3 4 5 6 7

2.4.5.5.2 Fatigue
To avoid failure of the FRP system subjected to cyclic stresses and fatigue, the stress level of the FRP system, ff,s, shall be equal to or less than the values reported in Table 2.4.5.5.1-1 related to creep-rupture. When the stress level on the FRP system is within the elastic response range of the strengthened member, the stresses may be computed by elastic analysis.

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

2.5 2.5.1

STRENGTHENING LIMITS Structural Loads

The un-strengthened structural member, without the FRP system, shall have sufficient strength to resist a level of load to satisfy Eq. 2.5.1-1 without collapse:

( Rn )existing (1.10S DL + 0.75S LL )new


where:

(2.5.1-1)

Rn SDL SLL
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

= = = =

resistance factor specified in Article 2.6.3.2 nominal strength of the member unfactored dead load effect unfactored live load effect

In cases where the live load acting on the strengthened member has a high likelihood of being present for a sustained period of time, a live load factor of 1.0 shall be used instead of 0.75 in Eq.2.5.1-1. 2.5.2 Structural Fire Endurance

To ensure that FRP strengthened structures do not collapse in a fire event, the requirement of Eq. 2.5.2-1 shall be satisfied:
Rn S DL + S LL

(2.5.2-1)

where:

Rn

nominal strength of the member subjected to elevated temperature due to fire

The nominal strength Rn shall be computed based on the reduced material properties of the existing member and shall not account for the contribution of the FRP system, unless it is demonstrated that the temperature in the FRP system remains below a critical temperature, which is conservatively defined as the Tg. The load effects, SDL and SLL, shall be determined using the current load requirements for the structure. If the FRP system is meant to allow greater load-carrying capacity, such as an increase in live load, the load effects shall be computed using these greater loads.

17

136

1 2 3

2.5.3

Overall Structural Strength

All members of a structure shall be capable of withstanding the anticipated increase in loads associated with the use of the FRP system.

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

2.6 2.6.1

LIMIT STATES Service Limit State

At service limit state, concrete bridge components shall be analyzed as fully elastic structures. Checks to be performed at service limit state shall be related to deformations and the level of stress reached in the concrete, steel reinforcement, prestressing tendons, and the FRP system as specified in Articles 2.8.3.6, 2.8.3.7.1, 2.8.3.7.2, 2.8.3.7.3, and 2.8.3.7.4 respectively. The effects of excessive deck deformation, including deflections, shall be considered. The deflection caused by live load plus dynamic load allowance should not exceed the following criteria:


where:

L/800 for decks with no pedestrian traffic, L/1000 for decks with limited pedestrian traffic, and L/1200 for decks with significant pedestrian traffic

L
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 2.6.2

span length from center-to-center of supports, in. Fatigue and Creep Rupture Limit State

Fatigue need not to be investigated for concrete deck slabs in multigirder applications. The stress level in the existing prestressed and/or nonprestressed steel reinforcement resulting from the fatigue load combination specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall be in compliance with the applicable provisions of Article 5.5.3 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The stress level in the FRP system, ff,s, resulting from the fatigue load combination specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall meet the requirement of Article 2.4.5.5.2. The stress level in the FRP system, ff,s, may be determined as:

f f ,s = f s,s
where:

E f d f kd s Es d s kd s

bi E f

(2.6.2-1)

fs,s Ef Es df ds kds

= = = = = =

stress level in nonprestressed steel reinforcement, ksi tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi modulus of elasticity of steel reinforcement, ksi distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the extreme tension steel element, in. depth of the neutral axis at service load condition measured from the extreme compression fiber, in.

18

137

bi
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

strain level in the concrete substrate at the time when the FRP system is installed as specified in Article 2.8.2.3, in./in.

The stress level in nonprestressed steel reinforcement, fs,s, may be determined as:
f s,s = M s + bi A f E f d f kd s / 3 ( d s kd s ) Es As Es ( d s kd s / 3)( d s kd s ) + A f E f d f kd s / 3 d f kd s

) (

)(

(2.6.2-2)

where:

Ms Af As
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2.6.3

= = =

service moment at section, kip-in. area of the FRP flexural reinforcement, in.2 area of nonprestressed steel reinforcement, in.2 Strength Limit State General

2.6.3.1

The strength limit state to be considered shall be those of strength and stability. Factored resistance shall be the product of nominal resistance as determined in accordance with the applicable provisions of Articles 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, and 2.10 unless another limit state is specifically identified, and the resistance factor as specified in Article 2.6.3.2. 2.6.3.2 Resistance Factors

Resistance factors for flexural strengthening of reinforced concrete members with FRP systems shall be taken as (Figure 2.6.3.2-1):
If t 0.005, then = 0.90
If y < t < 0.005, then = 0.65 + 0.25 ( t y ) 0.005 y

(2.6.3.2-1)

(2.6.3.2-2)

If t y , then = 0.65
where:

(2.6.3.2-3)

t y

= =

net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal resistance, in./in. strain corresponding to yield strength of nonprestressed steel reinforcement, in./in.

27

19

138

0.90

0.65

1 2 3 4 5 6

0.005

Strain level at ultimate

Figure 2.6.3.2-1 Resistance factor for flexure Resistance factors for flexural strengthening of prestressed concrete members with FRP systems in compliance with the limitations of Article 1.3 shall be taken as:

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 where: ps =

If ps 0.013, then = 0.90 +

0.25 ( ps 0.010 ) 0.013 0.010 0.25 ( ps 0.010 ) 0.013 0.010

(2.6.3.2-4)

If 0.010 < ps < 0.013, then = 0.65 +

(2.6.3.2-5)

If ps 0.010 , then = 0.65 +

0.25 ( ps 0.010 ) 0.013 0.010

(2.6.3.2-6)

strain in prestressing steel at nominal resistance computed according to Eq. 2.8.3.1-5, in./in.

Resistance factors for shear strengthening of concrete components with FRP systems shall be taken as: normal weight concrete0.90 lightweight concrete.0.70

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Resistance factors for compression-controlled sections with spirals or ties strengthened with FRP systems, as defined in Article 2.8.2.1, shall be set equal to 0.75. Resistance factors for tension-controlled sections with spirals or ties strengthened with FRP systems, as defined in Article 2.8.2.1, shall be set equal to 0.90. For sections belonging to the transition region in which the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel at nominal resistance is between the limits for compression-controlled and tension-controlled sections, as defined in Article 2.8.2.1, may be linearly increased from 0.75 to 0.90 as the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel increases from the compression-controlled strain limit to 0.005. This variation in may be computed for nonprestressed members such that:

d 0.75 = 0.65 + 0.15 s 1 0.90 c


and for prestressed members such that:
dp 0.75 = 0.583 + 0.25 1 1.00 c

(2.6.3.2-7)

(2.6.3.2-8)

20

139

1 2

where: c ds dp = = = distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis, in. distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of nonprestressed tensile reinforcement, in. distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of prestressing tendons, in.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Resistance factors shall not be applied to the development length and splice lengths of reinforcement as specified in Article 2.10.
2.6.3.3 Stability

The structure as a whole and its components shall be designed to resist sliding, overturning, and uplift. Effect of eccentricity of loads shall be considered in the analysis and design.
2.6.4 Extreme Event Limit State

The structure as a whole and its components shall be proportioned to resist collapse due to extreme events, specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, as may be appropriate to its site and use.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

2.7 2.7.1

DESIGN CONSIDERATION General

Components and connections shall be designed to resist load combinations, as specified in Section 3 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, at all stages during the life of the structure, including those during construction. Load factors shall be as specified in Section 3 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. As specified in Section 4 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, equilibrium and strain compatibility shall be maintained in the analysis.
2.7.2 Effect of Imposed Deformation

The effect of imposed deformations due to shrinkage, temperature change, creep, and movements of supports shall be investigated.

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

2.8 2.8.1

DESIGN FOR FLEXURAL AND AXIAL FORCE EFFECTS Assumptions for Service, Fatigue and Creep Rupture Limit States

The following assumptions may be used in the design of reinforced and prestressed concrete components for all compressive strength levels: Prestressed concrete resists tension at sections that are uncracked, except as specified in Article 5.7.6 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The strains in the concrete vary linearly, except in components or regions of components for which conventional strength of materials is inappropriate. The modular ratio, n, is rounded to the nearest integer number and it is calculated as follows:
o

n = ns = Es /Ec for reinforcing bars 21

140

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
2.8.2

o o

n = np = Ep /Ec for prestressing tendons n = nf = Ef /Ec for FRP systems

An effective modular ratio of 2n is applicable to permanent loads and prestress.


Assumptions for Strength and Extreme Event Limit States General

2.8.2.1

Factored resistance of concrete components shall be based on the conditions of equilibrium and strain compatibility, the resistance factors as specified in Article 2.6.3.2, and the following assumptions: Design calculations are based on the dimensions, internal reinforcing steel arrangement, and material properties of the existing member being strengthened. Strain is directly proportional to the distance from the neutral axis, except for disturbed regions and deep members that shall satisfy the requirements of Article 5.13.2 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. If the concrete is unconfined, the maximum usable strain at the extreme concrete compression fiber is not greater than 0.003. If the concrete is confined, a maximum usable strain exceeding 0.003 in the confined core may be utilized as specified in Article 2.8.4.1.4. The stress in the reinforcement is based on a stress-strain curve representative of the steel and FRP system or on an approved mathematical representation. FRP systems shall be taken as linear-elastic up to failure. The tensile strength in the concrete is neglected. The concrete compressive stress-strain distribution is assumed to be rectangular, parabolic, or any other shape that results in a prediction of strength in substantial agreement with the test result. Perfect bond exists between concrete and the reinforcement. Balanced strain conditions exist at a cross-section when tension reinforcement reaches the strain corresponding to its specified yield strength fy just as the concrete in compression reaches its assumed ultimate strain of 0.003. Sections are compression-controlled when the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel is equal to or less than the compression-controlled strain limit at the time the concrete in compression reaches its assumed strain limit of 0.003. The compression-controlled strain limit is the net tensile strain in the reinforcement at balanced strain conditions. For grade 60 reinforcement, and for all prestressed reinforcement, the compression-controlled strain limit may be set equal to 0.002. Sections are tension-controlled when the net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel is equal to or greater than 0.005 just as the concrete in compression reaches its assumed strain limit of 0.003. Sections with net tensile strain in the extreme tension steel between the compression-control strain limit and 0.005 constitute a transition region between compression-controlled and tension-controlled sections. The use of compression steel reinforcement in conjunction with additional tension reinforcement is permitted to increase the strength of flexural members. The use of compression FRP systems in conjunction with additional tension reinforcement in not permitted to increase the strength of flexural members. In the approximate flexural resistance equations of Articles 2.8.3.3 and 2.8.3.4, fy and f y' may replace fs and f s' , 22

141

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

respectively, subject to the following conditions:


o

fy may replace fs when, using fy in the calculation, the resulting ratio c/ds does not exceed 0.6. If c/ds exceed 0.6, strain compatibility shall be used to determine the stress in the mild steel tension reinforcement.

f y' may replace f s' when, using f y' in the calculation, c 3d s' . If c < 3d s' , strain compatibility shall be used to determine the stress in the mild steel compression reinforcement.

2.8.2.2

Shear Strength

When FRP systems are used to increase the flexural strength of a member, the member shall be capable of resisting the shear forces associated with the increased flexural strength. The potential for shear failure of the section shall be considered by comparing the design shear strength of the section to the required shear strength. If additional shear strength is required, FRP systems oriented transverse to the beam longitudinal axis may be used to resist shear forces as specified in Article 2.9.
2.8.2.3 Existing Substrate Strain

The initial strain level on the substrate, bi, may be determined from an elastic analysis of the existing member, considering all loads that will be on the member during the installation of the FRP system. The elastic analysis of the existing member may be based on cracked section properties.
2.8.2.4 Flexural Strengthening of concave soffits

If the extent of the curved portion of the soffit exceeds a length of 40 in. with a rise of 0.2 in., the surface shall be either made flat before installing the FRP system, or alternatively, anchor systems such as FRP anchors or U-wrap shall be installed to prevent FRP delamination.
2.8.2.5 Rectangular Stress Distribution

The constitutive relationship between concrete stress and strain may be considered satisfied by an equivalent rectangular concrete compressive stress block of 0.85 fc over a zone bounded by the edges of the cross-section and a straight line located parallel to the neutral axis at the distance a = 1 c from the extreme compression fiber. The distance c shall be measured perpendicular to the neutral axis. The factor 1 shall be taken as: For concrete strengths, f c' , not exceeding 4 ksi, 1 = 0.85 For concrete strengths between 4 and 8 ksi, 1 = 1.05 0.05 f c' For concrete strengths greater than 8 ksi, 1 = 0.65 Additional limitations on the use of the rectangular stress block when applied to hollow rectangular compression members shall be investigated as specified in Article 5.7.4.7 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.
2.8.3 Flexural Members Stress in Prestressing Steel at Nominal Flexural Resistance

2.8.3.1

For rectangular or flanged sections subjected to flexure about one axis where the approximate stress distribution specified in Article 2.8.2.5 is used, the average stress in prestressing steel, fps, for a typical seven-wire low-relaxation prestressing strand may be taken as:

23

142

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

For Grade 250 ksi steel:


If ps 0.0076 , then f ps = 28.5 ps 0.04 1000 ps 6.4

(2.8.3.1-1)

If ps > 0.0076 , then f ps = 0.25

0.04 1000 ps 6.4

(2.8.3.1-2)

For Grade 270 ksi steel:


If ps 0.0086 , then f ps = 28.5 ps 0.04 1000 ps 7.0 0.04 1000 ps 7.0

(2.8.3.1-3)

If ps 0.0086 , then f ps = 0.27

(2.8.3.1-4)

and:
ps = pe + Pe e 2 1 + + pnet 0.035 Ac Ec r 2

(2.8.3.1-5)

in which: For concrete crushing failure mode:


dp c pnet = 0.003 c

(2.8.3.1-6)

For FRP rupture or FRP debonding failure modes:

dp c pnet = f + bi df c

(2.8.3.1-7)

where:

pe Pe Ac Ec e r dp c

= = = = = = = =

effective strain in prestressing steel after losses, in./in. effective force in prestressing steel after allowance for all prestress losses, kip cross-sectional area of concrete in compression, in.2 modulus of elasticity of concrete, ksi eccentricity of prestressing steel with respect to the centroid of the cross-section, in. radius of gyration of the section, in. distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of prestressing tendons, in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis specified in Article 2.8.3.3, in.

24

143

f bi df
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

= =

effective strain level in the FRP system at nominal resistance specified in Article 2.8.3.2, in./in. strain level in the concrete substrate at the time when the FRP system is installed specified in Article 2.8.2.3, in./in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in.
Effective Stress in FRP Systems at Nominal Flexural Resistance

=
2.8.3.2

2.8.3.2.1 General
The effective stress level for strength and extreme event limit states, ff, may be determined as:

f f = Ef f
where:

(2.8.3.2.1-1)

Ef f
9 10 11 12 13 14 15

= =

modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi effective strain level in the FRP system at nominal resistance, in./in.

2.8.3.2.2 Reinforced Concrete


The effective strain level, f, for strength and extreme event limit states may be determined as:
df c f = cu bi fd c

(2.8.3.2.2-1)

where:

cu df c bi
16 17 18 19

= = = =

failure strain of concrete in compression, in./in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis specified in Article 2.8.3.3, in. strain level in the concrete substrate at the time when the FRP system is installed specified in Article 2.8.2.3, in./in.

The strain level in the FRP system corresponding to FRP rupture or FRP debonding, fd , may be determined as follows:

20 21 22 23 24 25

For FRP laminates: fd = 0.083

f c' 0.9 fd nE f t f

(2.8.3.2.2-2)

For FRP NSM systems: fd = 0.7 fd


where:

f c' 0.9 fd nE f t f

(2.8.3.2.2-3)

f c'
n

= =

specified compressive strength of concrete for use in design, ksi number of plies of the FRP system
25

144

tf fd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 pu pi df c dp bi 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 and

= =

nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in. design tensile strain of the FRP system, in./in.

To achieve the strain level in the FRP NSM system corresponding to FRP rupture or FRP debonding, fd , the bonded length of the FRP NSM system shall be greater than the development length specified in Article 2.10.4. 2.8.3.2.3 Prestressed Concrete The effective strain level for strength and extreme event limit states shall be determined from: Eq. 2.8.3.2.2-1 when concrete crushing is the controlling failure mode. Eq. 2.8.3.2.3-1 for failures controlled by prestressing steel rupture:

df c f = pu pi fd d p c bi

(2.8.3.2.3-1)

where: = = = = = = specified tensile strain of prestressing steel, in./in. initial strain level in prestressing steel, in./in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the neutral axis specified in Article 2.8.3.3, in. distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of prestressing tendons, in. strain level in the concrete substrate at the time when the FRP system is installed specified in Article 2.8.2.3, in./in.

pi =

Pe P + e Aps E p Ac Ec

e2 1 + 2 r

(2.8.3.2.3-2)

where: Pe Aps Ep Ac Ec e r = = = = = = = effective force in prestressing steel after allowance for all prestress losses, kip area of prestressing steel, in.2 modulus of elasticity of prestressing tendons, ksi cross-sectional area of concrete in compression, in.2 modulus of elasticity of concrete, ksi eccentricity of prestressing steel with respect to the centroid of the cross-section, in. radius of gyration of the section, in.

22 26

145

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

For Grade 270 and 250 ksi strands, the value of pu to be used in Eq. 2.8.3.2.3-1 shall be set equal to 0.035. The strain level in the FRP system corresponding to FRP rupture or FRP debonding, fd , may be determined from Eqs. 2.8.3.2.2-1 and 2.8.3.2.2-2.
2.8.3.3 Neutral Axis Position

The position of the neutral axis shall be calculated as follows: For rectangular section behavior:
c=
' ' Aps f ps + As f s + A f f f As fs

0.85 f c' 1b

(2.8.3.3-1)

For T-section behavior:


c=
' ' Aps f ps + As f s + Af f f As f s 0.85 f c' ( b bw ) h f

0.85 f c' 1bw

(2.8.3.3-2)

where: Aps fps As fs


' As

= = = = = = = = = = = = =
2.8.3.4

area of prestressing steel, in.2 average stress in prestressing steel specified in Article 2.8.3.1, ksi area of nonprestressed steel reinforcement, in.2 stress in the mild steel tension reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance as specified in Article 2.8.2, ksi area of compression reinforcement, in.2 stress in the mild steel compression reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance as specified in Article 2.8.2, ksi area of the FRP flexural reinforcement, in.2 effective stress level in the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.8.3.2.1-1, ksi specified compressive strength of concrete for use in design, ksi stress block factor specified in Article 2.8.2.5 width of the compression face of the member, in. web width or diameter of a circular section, in. compression flange depth of an I or T member, in.
Flexural Resistance

f s'

Af ff
f c'

b bw hf 17 18 19 20 21 22

2.8.3.4.1 Factored Flexural Resistance The factored flexural resistance Mr shall be taken as:
M r = M n

(2.8.3.4.1-1)

27

146

1 2

where: Mn = = resistance factor as specified in Article 2.6.3.2 nominal flexural resistance, kip-in.

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2.8.3.4.2 Flanged Sections For flanged sections subjected to flexure about one axis, where the approximate stress distribution specified in Article 2.8.2.5 is used and where the compression flange depth is less than a = 1c, as determined in accordance with Article 2.8.3.3, the nominal flexural resistance Mn may be taken as:
a hf a a a a ' ' ' M n = Aps f ps d p + As f s d s As f s d s + f Af f f d f + 0.85 f c' ( b bw ) 2 2 2 2 2 2

(2.8.3.4.2-1)

where: Aps fps dp As fs ds


' As

= =

area of prestressing steel, in.2 average stress in prestressing steel at nominal bending resistance specified in Eqs. 2.8.3.1-1 through 2.8.3.1-4, ksi distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of prestressing tendons, in. area of nonprestressed tension reinforcement, in.2 stress in the mild steel tension reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance as specified in Article. 2.8.2.1, ksi distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of nonprestressed tensile reinforcement, in. area of compression reinforcement, in.2 stress in the mild steel compression reinforcement at nominal flexural resistance as specified in Article 2.8.2.1, ksi distance from extreme compression fiber to the centroid of compression reinforcement, in. area of the FRP flexural reinforcement, in.2 effective stress level in the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.8.3.2.1-1, ksi distance from the extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the FRP system, in. specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi width of the compression face of the member, in. web width or diameter of a circular section, in. stress block factor specified in Article 2.8.2.5 compression flange depth of an I or T member, in. 1c; depth of the equivalent stress block, in. 28

= = = = = =

f s'
' ds

= = = = = = = = = =

Af ff df

f c'
b bw 1 hf a

147

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

An additional reduction factor for FRP systems, f = 0.85, shall be applied to the flexural-strength contribution of the FRP system as specified in Eq. 2.8.3.4.2-1. 2.8.3.4.3 Rectangular Sections For rectangular sections subjected to flexure about one axis, where the approximate stress distribution specified in Article 2.8.2.5 is used and where the compression flange depth is not less than a = 1c as determined in accordance with Article 2.8.3.3, the nominal flexural resistance Mn may be determined by using Eqs. 2.8.3.1-1 through 2.8.3.1-4, 2.8.3.2.1-1, and 2.8.3.4.2-1, in which case bw shall be taken as b. The additional reduction factor f for FRP systems specified in Article 2.8.3.4.2 shall apply. 2.8.3.4.4 Other Cross-Sections For cross-sections other than rectangular sections with vertical axis of symmetry or sections subjected to biaxial flexure without axial load, the nominal flexural resistance, Mn, shall be determined by an analysis based on the assumptions specified in Article 2.8.2. The additional reduction factor f for FRP systems specified in Article 2.8.3.4.2 shall apply. 2.8.3.4.5 Strain Compatibility Approach Alternatively, the strain compatibility approach may be used if more precise calculations are required. The appropriate provisions of Article 2.8.2.1 shall apply. The stress and corresponding strain in any given layer of reinforcement may be taken from any representative stressstrain formula or graph for mild reinforcement, prestressing strands, and the selected FRP system. The additional reduction factor f for FRP systems specified in Article 2.8.3.4.2 shall apply.
2.8.3.5 Limits for FRP Reinforcement

There are no limitations in the use of FRP systems as externally bonded reinforcement to concrete members. The provisions of Article 2.5 shall apply.
2.8.3.6 Deformations

Deformations in concrete structures strengthened with externally bonded FRP systems may be computed as specified in Article 5.7.3.6 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. In the calculations, the FRP system shall be conservatively ignored.
2.8.3.7 Stress Limits

2.8.3.7.1 Concrete Compression stresses in the concrete shall be investigated at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The stress limitation of 0.45 fc shall apply to all concrete components. 2.8.3.7.2 Steel Reinforcing Bars Tension stresses in the steel reinforcing bars computed according to Eq. 2.6.2-2 shall be investigated at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The stress limitation of 0.80 fy shall apply to all existing steel reinforcement. 2.8.3.7.3 Prestressing Tendons Tension stresses in prestressing steel, fps,s, shall be investigated at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The stress limitations specified in Eq. 2.8.3.7.3-1 shall apply:

f ps ,s 0.82 f py

(2.8.3.7.3-1)

29

148

1 2 3 4 where: fpy fpu 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 where: Pr Pn = = factored axial resistance, kip nominal axial resistance, ksi as: = = yield strength of prestressing steel, ksi

f ps ,s 0.74 f pu

(2.8.3.7.3-2)

specified tensile strength of prestressing steel, ksi

2.8.3.7.4 FRP Reinforcement Tension stresses in the FRP reinforcement computed according to Eq. 2.6.2-1 shall be investigated at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. The stress limitation specified in Article 2.4.5.5.1 shall apply.
2.8.4 Compression Members Pure Axial Load

2.8.4.1

2.8.4.1.1 General Confinement of reinforced concrete components by means of FRP systems may be used to enhance the concrete component strength and ductility. 2.8.4.1.2 Limits for FRP Reinforcement FRP systems shall not be applied as confinement of prestressed compression members. Confinement of reinforced concrete components with FRP systems when the specified concrete compressive strength is equal to or larger than 10 ksi shall not be considered effective. The provisions of Article 2.8.4 shall not be applied to concrete members with aspect ratio h/b greater than 2.0, or face dimensions b or h exceeding 36 in, unless testing demonstrates their effectiveness. A minimum confinement ratio f l / f c' of 0.08 shall be provided. The lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP system, fl, shall be computed from Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-5. 2.8.4.1.3 Factored Axial Resistance The factored axial resistance of concrete compressive components, symmetrical about both principal axes, shall be taken
Pr = Pn

(2.8.4.1.3-1)

in which: For nonprestressed members with spiral reinforcement:


' Pn = 0.85 0.85 f cc Ag Ast + f y Ast

(2.8.4.1.3-2)

For nonprestressed members with tie reinforcement:


' Pn = 0.80 0.85 f cc Ag Ast + f y Ast

(2.8.4.1.3-3)

30

149


' f cc

= = = = =

resistance factor specified in Article 2.6.3.2 compressive strength of confined concrete, ksi specified yield strength of reinforcing bars, ksi gross area of section, in.2 total area of longitudinal reinforcement, in.2

fy Ag Ast 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

The compressive strength of confined concrete shall be taken as:


' f cc = f c' + 3.3 f a fl

(2.8.4.1.3-4)

in which:
fl = 2 E f nt f fe D

(2.8.4.1.3-5)

where: f a fl Ef n tf D fe = = = = = = = = additional reduction factor for FRP systems equal to 0.95 stress efficiency factor for FRP systems determined according to Articles 2.8.4.1.5 and 2.8.4.1.6 lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP system as specified in Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-5, ksi modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi number of plies of the FRP system nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in. diameter of the circular cross-section, in. (for noncircular cross-section refer to Article 2.8.4.1.6) effective strain level in the FRP system at failure as specified in Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-6., in./in.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

The effective strain level in the FRP system at failure shall be taken as:

fe = fd
where: fd = = efficiency factor for FRP systems equal to 0.55 design tensile strain of the FRP system, in./in.

(2.8.4.1.3-6)

18 19 20 21 22

2.8.4.1.4 Compressive Strain for Confined Concrete The maximum compressive strain for FRP-confined concrete, ccu, shall be taken as:
ccu
0.45 fl fe = 1.5 + 12b ' ' f c c

' c

(2.8.4.1.4-1)

31

150

1 2

where:
'c

= = = = =

maximum strain of unconfined concrete corresponding to f c' , in./in. strain efficiency factor for FRP systems determined according to Articles 2.8.4.1.5 and 2.8.4.1.6 lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP system as specified in Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-5, ksi specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi effective strain level in the FRP system at failure as specified in Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-6, in./in.

b fl
f c'

fe 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Unless a more detail analysis is performed, the maximum strain of unconfined concrete corresponding to f c' may be taken as 0.002. To prevent excessive cracking that may result in loss of concrete integrity, ccu shall be limited to 0.01. 2.8.4.1.5 Circular Cross-Sections For circular cross-sections, the stress and strain efficiency factors for FRP systems, a and b respectively, may be taken equal to 1.0. 2.8.4.1.6 Noncircular Cross-Sections For noncircular cross-sections, fl in Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-5 corresponds to the lateral confining pressure provided by the FRP system of an equivalent circular cross-section with diameter D equal to the diagonal of the rectangular cross-section with face dimensions b and h computed as:

D = b2 + h2
The stress efficiency factor for FRP systems shall be taken as:

(2.8.4.1.6-1)

a =

Ae Ac

b h

(2.8.4.1.6-2)

The strain efficiency factor for FRP systems shall be taken as:

b =
in which:

Ae Ac

h b

(2.8.4.1.6-3)

27 28 29 30

Ae = Ac

b 2 2 h h ( h 2rc ) + b ( b 2rc ) 1 g 3 Ag 1 g

(2.8.4.1.6-4)

where: Ae Ac Ag = = = cross-sectional area of effectively confined concrete section, in.2 cross-sectional area of concrete in compression members, in.2 gross area of section, in.2 32

151

rc g 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

= =

radius of edges of a prismatic cross-section confined with FRP systems, in. ratio of longitudinal steel reinforcement to cross-sectional area of a compression member (As /bh)

2.8.4.1.7 Stress Limits To ensure that radial cracking does not occur at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, the compressive stress in the concrete shall be limited to the value of 0.65 f c' while the stress in the longitudinal steel reinforcement shall remain below 0.60fy. The stress in the FRP system at the Service Limit State Load Combination I specified in Table 3.4.1-1 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall never exceed the creep rupture stress limit provisions specified in Article 2.4.5.5.1.
2.8.4.2 Combined Axial Load and Bending Moment

2.8.4.2.1 Limits for FRP Reinforcement To ensure the shear integrity of the member, the effective strain for FRP-confined concrete components computed according to Eq. 2.8.4.1.3-6 shall be limited to 0.004. The strength enhancement for FRP-confined concrete components shall only be considered when the factored axial force and the factored bending moment, Pu and Mu, fall above the line connecting the origin and the balanced point in the PM diagram for the unconfined member. 2.8.4.2.2 Factored Axial Resistance When the eccentricity of the concrete component is equal to or less than 0.1h, the factored axial resistance shall be determined as specified in Article 2.8.4.1.3. When the eccentricity of the concrete component is larger than 0.1h, the methodology and equations presented in Article 2.8.4.1 may be used to determine the concrete material properties of the FRP-confined member. A P-M diagram may be developed by satisfying strain compatibility and force equilibrium.
2.8.4.3 Ductility Enhancement

For circular and noncircular cross-sections, the maximum compressive strain for FRP-confined concrete components shall be taken from Eq. 2.8.4.1.4-1 and the applicable provisions of Articles 2.8.4.1.5 and 2.8.4.1.6.

24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

2.9 2.9.1

DESIGN FOR SHEAR General

Applicable provisions of Article 5.8 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall apply.
2.9.2 General Requirements General

2.9.2.1

The factored shear resistance, Vr, shall be taken as:


Vr = Vn

(2.9.2.1-1)

where: = resistance factor as specified in Article 2.6.3.2

33

152

Vn 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

nominal shear resistance specified in Article 2.9.3, kip

2.9.2.2

Maximum Spacing of Transverse Reinforcement

For steel reinforcing bars, the limitations specified in Article 5.8.2.7 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall apply. For FRP systems installed in the form of discrete strips, the center-to-center spacing between the strips shall not exceed:
dv + wf 4

(2.9.2.2-1)

where: dv = effective shear depth taken as the distance, measured perpendicular to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of 0.9de or 0.72h, in. width of the FRP system, in.
FRP Reinforcement Limits

wf 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

=
2.9.2.3

The shear resistance provided by both steel reinforcing bars, Vs, and the FRP system, Vf, shall satisfy:

Vs + V f 0.25 f c' bv d v
where: Vs Vf
f c'

(2.9.2.3-1)

= = = =

nominal shear resistance provided by shear reinforcement, kip nominal shear resistance provided by the FRP system, kip specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi effective web width taken as the minimum web width, measured parallel to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure, or for circular sections, the diameter of the sections, modified for the presence of ducts where applicable, in. effective shear depth taken as the distance, measured perpendicular to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of 0.9de or 0.72h, in.
Nominal Shear Resistance

bv

dv

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

2.9.3

The nominal shear resistance, Vn, shall be determined as:


Vn = Vc + Vs + f V f

(2.9.3-1)

where: Vc Vs Vf = = = nominal shear resistance provided by the concrete as determined in Article 2.9.3.1, kip nominal shear resistance provided by shear reinforcement as determined in Article 2.9.3.2, kip nominal shear resistance provided by the FRP system as determined in Article 2.9.3.3, kip 34

153

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

An additional reduction factor for FRP systems, f, shall be applied to the nominal shear resistance provided by the FRP system as specified in Eq. 2.9.3-1. The additional reduction factor shall be taken as: 0.95 for completely wrapped members as indicated in Figure 2.9.3-1 a); 0.85 for three-side and/or two-opposite-side members as indicated in Figure 2.9.3-1 b) and c).

a) Completely Wrapped 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 where:
f c'

b) Three-Side (U-Wrap)

c) Two-Opposite-Side

Figure 2.9.3-1 Typical Wrapping Configurations for Concrete Members Strengthened with FRP Systems 2.9.3.1 Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by the Concrete

The term Vc specified in Eq. 2.9.3-1 for normal weight concrete members shall be taken as: For nonprestressed members:

Vc = 0.0632 f c' bv d v
For prestressed members, Vc shall be permitted to be computed as the lesser of Vci or Vcw:
Vci = 0.02 f c' bv d v + Vd + Vi M cre 0.06 f c' bv d v M max

(2.9.3.1-1)

(2.9.3.1-2)

Vcw = 0.06 f c' + 0.30 f pc bv d v + V p in which:


M M cre = Sc f r + f cpe dnc S nc

(2.9.3.1-3)

(2.9.3.1-4)

= =

specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi effective web width taken as the minimum web width, measured parallel to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure, or for circular sections, the diameter of the sections, modified for the presence of ducts where applicable, in. effective shear depth taken as the distance, measured perpendicular to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of 0.9de or 0.72h, in. shear force at section due to unfactored dead load and includes both DC (dead load of structural components and nonstructural attachments) and DW (dead load of wearing surfaces and utilities), kip

bv

dv

Vd

35

154

Vi Mcre Mmax fpc Vp Sc fr fcpe Mdnc Snc 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 where: Av fy dv = = =

= = = =

factored shear force at section due to externally applied loads occurring simultaneously with Mmax, kip moment causing flexural cracking at section due to externally applied loads, kip-in. maximum factored moment at section due to externally applied loads, kip-in. compressive stress in concrete (after allowance for all prestress losses) at centroid of cross section resisting externally applied loads or at junction of web and flange when the centroid lies within the flange, ksi component in the direction of applied shear of the effective prestressing force; positive if resisting the applied shear, kip section modulus for the extreme fiber of the composite section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, in.3 modulus of rupture of concrete, ksi compressive stress in concrete due to effective prestress forces only (after allowance for all prestress losses) at extreme fiber of section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, kip total unfactored dead load moment acting on the monolithic or noncomposite section, kip-in. section modulus for the extreme fiber of the monolithic or noncomposite section where tensile stress is caused by externally applied loads, in.3

= =

= =

FRP systems to provide additional shear resistance to concrete components shall not be applied to lightweight concrete members, unless testing demonstrates their effectiveness.
2.9.3.2 Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by Shear Reinforcement

The term Vs specified in Eq. 2.9.3-1 shall be determined as:


Vs = Av f y d v ( sin + cos ) s

(2.9.3.2-1)

area of shear reinforcement within a distance s, in. specified yield strength of reinforcing bars, ksi effective shear depth taken as the distance, measured perpendicular to the neutral axis, between the resultants of the tensile and compressive forces due to flexure; it need not be taken to be less than the greater of 0.9de or 0.72h, in. angle of inclination of transverse reinforcement to longitudinal axis, spacing of stirrups, in.
Nominal Shear Resistance Provided by the FRP System

s 11 12 13 14 15

= =
2.9.3.3

The term Vf specified in Eq. 2.9.3-1 shall be determined as:


Vf = Afv f f d fv ( sin + cos ) sf

(2.9.3.3-1)

in which: 36

155

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 where: Afv ff dfv sf n tf wf f Ef 8 = = = = = = = = = =

A fv = 2nt f w f f f = f Ef

(2.9.3.3-2) (2.9.3.3-3)

area of FRP shear reinforcement within a distance sf, in.2 effective stress level in the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.9.3.3-3, ksi effective depth of FRP shear reinforcement indicated in Figure 2.9.3.3-2 a), in. angle of inclination of FRP shear reinforcement to longitudinal axis indicated in Figure 2.9.3.3-2 b) and c), spacing of FRP shear reinforcement indicated in Figure 2.9.3.3-2 b) and c), in. number of plies of the FRP system nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in. width of the FRP system indicated in Figure 2.9.3.3-2 b) and c), in. effective strain level in the FRP system at nominal resistance specified in Article 2.9.3.3.1, in./in. tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi

dfv

wf wf wf wf

sf

sf

a) Cross-Section 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 where: fd =

b) Lateral View (=90)

c) Lateral View (90)

Figure 2.9.3.3-2 Example of Shear Strengthening of Concrete Components with FRP Systems

2.9.3.3.1 Effective Strain Level in the FRP System The effective strain level, f, is the maximum strain that can be achieved in the FRP system at nominal resistance and shall be limited to: For completely wrapped sections as indicated in Figure 2.9.3-1 a):
f = 0.004 0.75 fd

(2.9.3.3.1-1)

For three-side and/or two-opposite-side members as indicated in Figure 2.9.3-1 b) and c):
f = v fd 0.004

(2.9.3.3.1-2)

design tensile strain of the FRP system specified in Eq.2.4.5.2-2, in./in. 37

156

v 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

bond-dependent coefficient specified in Article 2.9.3.3.2.

Mechanical anchors may be used at the termination points of the FRP system to develop larger tensile forces. The effectiveness of such mechanical anchors shall be demonstrated by testing. The test methodology shall be suggested by the FRP system manufacturer and approved by the purchaser. When approved mechanical anchors are used, the effective strain level in the FRP system may be taken as specified in Eq. 2.9.3.3.1-1 for completely wrapped sections. 2.9.3.3.2 Bond-Dependent Coefficient The bond-dependent coefficient is function of the concrete strength, the configuration and the stiffness of the FRP system. It shall be determined as:
v = k1k2 Le 0.75 468 fu

(2.9.3.3.2-1)

where: k1 k2 Le fu = = modification factor accounting for concrete strength specified in Eq. 2.9.3.3.2-2 modification factor accounting for the configuration of the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.9.3.3.2-3 and 2.9.3.3.2-4 active bond length specified in Eq. 2.9.3.3.2-5, in. tensile strain for product certification as reported by manufacturers, in./in.

= =

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

The modifications factor k1 and k2 shall be computed as:

f' k1 = c 4

2/ 3

(2.9.3.3.2-2) d fv Le d fv

for three-side (U-wrap) FRP system configuration, k2 =

(2.9.3.3.2-3)

for two-opposite-side FRP system configuration, k2 = in which the active bond length, Le, shall be computed as:

d fv 2 Le d fv

(2.9.3.3.2-4)

Le =

45.5

( nt

Ef

0.58

(2.9.3.3.2-5)

where:
f c'

= = = =

specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi effective depth of FRP shear reinforcement indicated in Figure 2.9.3.3-1 a), in. tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in. 38

dfv Ef tf

157

number of plies of the FRP shear reinforcement

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

2.10 2.10.1

DETAILS, DEVELOPMENT AND LAP SPLICE OF REINFORCEMENT General

Applicable provisions of Articles 5.10 and 5.11 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall apply.
2.10.2 General Requirements for FRP Systems

Detailing provisions of FRP systems used for strengthening concrete components typically depend on the geometry of the existing structure, the soundness and quality of the substrate, and the level of load that is to be sustained by the FRP system. The following requirements shall be met: Do not turn inside corners such as at the intersection of beams and soffit of the slab; Provide a minimum 0.5 in. radius when FRP systems in the form of fabric are wrapped around outside corners; Provide sufficient development length as specified in Article 2.10.3; Provide sufficient overlap when splicing FRP plies as specified in Article 2.10.5.
2.10.3 Detailing of FRP Systems

When the factored shear force at the termination point of the FRP system is greater than 2/3 the nominal shear resistance provided by the concrete specified in Article 2.9.3.1 (Vu > 0.67Vc), the FRP system shall be anchored with transverse reinforcement to prevent splitting of the concrete cover. The area of such transverse reinforcement, Af,anchor, may be realized with FRP systems in a U-wrap configuration indicated in Figure 2.9.3-1 b) and shall be determined as:
A f ,anchor =

(A (E

f fd

longitudinal

f v fd

(2.10.3-1)

anchor

where: Af ffd Ef v fd = = = = = area of the FRP flexural reinforcement, in.2 design tensile strength of the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.4.5.2-1, ksi tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi bond-dependent coefficient specified in Article 2.9.3.3.2 design tensile strain of the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.4.5.2-2, in./in.

28 29 30 31 32 33 34

It shall be permitted to determine the location of the cutoff points of FRP systems for positive and negative moment regions as follows: For simply supported concrete components, a single ply of FRP system shall be terminated at least a distance equal to the development length specified in Article 2.10.4 past the point along the span corresponding to the cracking moment. For multiple-ply FRP systems, the termination points of the plies shall be tapered. The outermost ply shall 39

158

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

be terminated not less than the development length specified in Article 2.10.4 past the point along the span corresponding to the cracking moment. Each successive ply shall be terminated not less than an additional 6 in. beyond the previous ply. For continuous concrete components, a single-ply FRP system shall be terminated d/2 or 6 in. whichever is greater beyond the inflection point (point of zero moment resulting from factored loads). For multiple-ply FRP systems, the termination points of the plies shall be tapered. The outermost ply shall be terminated not less than 6 in. beyond the inflection point. Each successive ply shall be terminated not less than an additional 6 in. beyond the previous ply.
2.10.4 Development Length Surface Mounted FRP Systems

2.10.4.1

For surface mounted FRP systems such as FRP fabrics and laminates, the development length shall be computed as indicated in Eq. 2.10.4.1-1.
ld = 0.32 nE f t f f c'

(2.10.4.1-1)

where:
f c'

= = = =

specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi number of plies of the FRP system tensile modulus of elasticity of the FRP system, ksi nominal thickness of one ply of the FRP system, in.
NSM FRP Systems

n Ef tf 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

2.10.4.2

For near surface mounted (NSM) FRP systems, the development length shall be computed as: For circular FRP bars:
ld = db f fd 4 b

(2.10.4.2-1)

For rectangular FRP bars:


ld = ab bb f fd 2 ( aa + bb ) b

(2.10.4.2-2)

where: db b ffd ab = = = = diameter of FRP bar, in. average bond strength for FRP bars, ksi design tensile strength of the FRP system specified in Eq. 2.4.5.2-1, ksi smaller cross-sectional dimension for rectangular FRP bars, in.

40

159

bb 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

larger cross-sectional dimension for rectangular FRP bars, in.

Unless a more detailed analysis is performed, it shall be permitted to assume b = 1.0 ksi. The minimum dimension of the groove cut on the concrete surface where the FRP bar is inserted shall be taken not less than 1.5db. Where a rectangular FRP bar with large aspect ratio is employed, this limit may lose significance due to constructability, in which, a minimum groove size of 3.0ab x 1.5bb shall be specified.
2.10.5 Lap Splice Length of FRP Systems

Lap splice length of FRP systems shall be provided as recommended by the FRP system manufacturer. A minimum lap splice length of 12 in. shall be provided for FRP systems overlapping the fibers along their length. Lap splice is not required in the direction transverse to the fiber.

41

160

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

REFERENCES

Aiello, M.A., Galati, N., and La Tegola, L.A. 2001. Bond Analysis of Curved Structural Concrete Elements Strengthened using FRP Materials. Fifth International Symposium on Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete structures (FRPRCS-5), Cambridge-Thomas Telford, London, pp. 680-688. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2007. Standard Test Methods for Tensile Creep Rupture of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars. ASTM D7337/D7337M, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. Bank, L.C. 2006. Composites for Construction: Structural Design with FRP Materials. John Wiley & Sons, Hobeken, NJ, 560 pp. Bisby, L.A., Green, M.F., and Kodur, V.K.R. 2005. Response to Fire of Concrete Structures that Incorporate FRP. Progress in structural Engineering and Materials, V. 7, No. 3, pp. 136-149. De Lorenzis, L., and Nanni, A. 2001. Characterization of FRP Rods as Near Surface Mounted reinforcement. Journal of Composites for Construction, V. 5, No. 2, pp. 114-121. De Lorenzis, L., Lundgren, K., and Rizzo A. 2004. Anchorage Length of Near-Surface-Mounted FRP Bars for Concrete Strengthening. Experimental Investigation and Numerical Modeling. ACI Structural Journal, V. 101, No. 2, pp. 269-278. Eshwar, N., Ibell, T., and Nanni, A. 2003. CFRP Strengthening of Concrete Bridges with Curved Soffits. International Conference Structural Faults + Repair 2003, M.C. Forde, ed., Commonwealth Institute, London, 10 pp. (CD-ROM). Hassan, T., and Rizkalla, S. 2003. Investigation of Bond in Concrete Structures Strengthened with Near Surface Mounted CFRP Strips. Journal for Composites in Construction, V. 7, No. 3, pp. 248-257. Khalifa, A., Gold, W., Nanni, A., and Abel-Aziz, M. 1998. Contribution of Externally Bonded FRP to the Shear Capacity of RC Flexural Members. Journal of Composites in Construction, V. 2, No.4, pp. 195-203. Lam, L., and Teng, J. 2003a. Design-Oriented Stress-Strain Model for FRP-Confined Concrete. Construction and Building Materials, V. 17, pp. 471-489. Lam, L., and Teng, J., 2003 b. Design-Oriented Stress-Strain Model for FRP-Confined Concrete in Rectangular Columns. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, V. 22, No. 13, pp. 1149-1186. Malvar, L. 1998. Durability of Composites in Reinforced Concrete. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Durability of Composites for Construction, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada, pp. 361-372. Nowak, A.S., and Szerszen, M.M. 2003. Calibration of Design Code for Buildings (ACI 318): Part 1Statistical Models for Resistance. ACI Structural Journal, V. 100, No. 3, pp. 377-382. Pessiki, S., Harries, K.A., Kestner, J., Sause, R., and ricles, J.M. 2001. The Axial Behavior of Concrete Confined with Fiber Reinforced Composite Jackets. Journal in Composites for Construction, V. 5, No. 4, pp. 237-245. Priestley, M., Seible, F., and Calvi, G. 1996. Seismic Design and Retrofit of Bridges. John Wiley & Sons, New York, 704 pp. Reed, C.E., Peterman, R.J., and Rasheed, H.A. 2005. Evaluating FRP Repair Method for Cracked Prestressed Concrete Bridge Members Subjected to Repeated Loadings (Phase 1). KTRAN Report No. K-TRAN: KSU-01-2, Kansas Department of Transportation, Topeka, KS, 106 pp.

42

161

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Rocca, S., Galati, N., and Nanni, A. 2008. Review of Design Guidelines for FRP Confinement of Reinforced Concrete Columns of Noncircular Cross Sections. Journal of Composites for Construction, V. 12, No. 1, pp. 80-92. Szerszen, M.M., and Nowak, A.S. 2003. Calibration of Design Code for Buildings (ACI 318): Part 2Reliability Analysis and Resistance Factors. ACI Structural Journal, V. 100, No. 3, pp. 383-391. Teng, J.G., Smith, S.T., Yao, J., and Chen, J.F. 2001. Intermediate Crack Induced Debonding in RC Beams and Slabs. Construction and Building Materials, V.17, No. 6-7, pp. 447-462. Triantafillou, T.C. 1998. Shear Strengthening of Reinforced Concrete Beams using Epoxy-Bonded FRP Composites. ACI Structural Journal, V. 95, No. 2, pp. 107-115. Yamaguchi, T., Kato, Y., Nishimura, T., and Uomoto, T. 1997. Creep Rupture of FRP Rods Made of Aramid, Carbon and Glass Fibers. Third International Symposium on Non-Metallic (FRP) Reinforcement for Concrete Structures (FRPRCS3), V. 2, Japan Concrete Institute, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 179-186.

43

162

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Section 3 MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

3.1

SCOPE

This Section describes permitted constituent materials, limits on constituent volumes, and minimum performance requirements for FRP systems to be used as externally bonded or surface mounted systems for strengthening concrete members. FRP systems shall be in the form of laminates, fabrics, or near surface mounted (NSM) bars. When carbon or glass surface mounted (NSM) FRP systems are used to strengthen concrete members, applicable provisions of ACI 440.6 shall apply.

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

3.2

DEFINITIONS

Commercial-Grade MaterialA material formulated for and used in industrial (not consumer) applications. FabricA two-dimensional network of woven, nonwoven, knitted, or stitched fibers. FiberA slender and greatly elongated solid material, generally with a length at least 100 times its diameter, that has properties making it desirable for use as reinforcement. Fiber, Aramid (AFRP)Highly oriented organic fiber derived from polyamide incorporating into an aromatic ring structure. Fiber, Carbon (CFRP)Fiber produced by heating organic precursor materials containing a substantial amount of carbon, such as rayon, polyacrylonitrile (PAN), or pitch in an inert environment. Fiber, Glass (GFRP)Fiber drawn from an inorganic product of fusion that has cooled without crystallizing. Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)A general term for a composite material comprising a polymer matrix reinforced with fibers in the form of fabric, mat, strands, or any other fiber form. FilamentSee Fiber. FRPFiber reinforced polymer. LaminateA precured or wet layup FRP system. Manual layupThe process of placing reinforcing material in its final position and applying the resin as a liquid.

44

163

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

MatrixThe resin or binders that hold the fibers in FRP together, transfer load to the fibers, and protect them against environmental attack and damage due to handling. Near Surface Mounted (NSM) SystemsCircular or rectangular FRP bars bonded into grooves made in the concrete surface. PolymerThe product of polymerization; more commonly a rubber or resin consisting of large molecules formed by polymerization. PolymerizationThe reaction in which two or more molecules of the same substance combine to form a compound containing the same elements and in the same proportions but of higher molecular weight. Precured FRP SystemA fully cured FRP system that is usually made in a factory and brought to the site as a rigid solid. If used as a repair material for concrete, a precured FRP system is bonded to the surface of the concrete with an adhesive. Production LotAny lot of FRP systems produced from start to finish with the same constituent materials used in the same proportions without changing any production parameter, such as cure temperature or line speed.. Property, GuaranteedA characteristic value provided by the manufacturer no greater than the mean minus three standard deviations of at least the required number of samples tested according to a specified test method. Property, Nominal A value provided by the manufacturer no greater than the mean of at least the required number of samples tested according to a specified test method. ReinforcementReinforcing bars, prestressing steel, and/or fiber reinforced polymer materials. Resin, EpoxyA class of organic chemical bonding systems used in the preparation of special coatings or adhesives for concrete or as binders in epoxy-resin mortars, concretes, and FRP composites. RovingA parallel bundle of continuous yarn, tows, or fibers with little or no twist. SizingSurface treatment applied to filaments to impart desired processing, durability, and bond attributes. TowAn untwisted bundle of continuous filaments. Temperature, Glass TransitionThe midpoint of the temperature range over which an amorphous material (such as glass or high polymer) changes from (or to) a brittle, vitreous state to (or from) a plastic state. Vinylester, ResinA thermosetting reaction product of epoxy resin with polymerizable unsaturated acid (usually methacrylic acid) that is then diluted with a reactive monomer (usually styrene). YarnA twisted bundle of continuous filaments. Wet Layup FRP SystemA method of forming FRP laminates using dry FRP fabrics that are saturated with resin in-place. Once cured, the resin acts as the matrix of the FRP laminate and allows adhesion of the laminate to the substrate.

46 47 48 49

3.3

LIMITATIONS

The test method L.2 Test Method for Tension Test on Flat Specimen from ACI 440.3R, Guide Test Method for Fiber-Reinforced Polymers (FRPs) for Reinforcing or Strengthening Concrete Structures is referenced. Because this test method is not written in mandatory language, purchaser and manufacturer shall agree on the protocols to be used.

45

164

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

3.4 3.4.1

MATERIAL AND MANUFACTURE Fibers

Fibers shall be in the form of unidirectional rovings or tows of given size and mass. Fiber sizings and coupling agents shall be compatible with the resin system used to impregnate the fibers.
3.4.2 Matrix Resins

Vinylester, polyester, epoxy, and cementitious-based resin systems are permitted provided the finished products meet the physical and durability requirements of Articles 3.5 and 3.7. For precured FRP systems, styrene is permitted to be added to the polymer resin during processing. Added styrene shall be less than 10% by mass of the polymer resin. The amount of styrene, as mass percentage of the polymer resin, added during processing shall be reported. Constituent content of resin shall be determined by ASTM D3171.
3.4.3 Manufacturing Process

The manufacturer shall document the process used and report the date of production and production size lot. Process or material modifications are not permitted during the production of a single lot.

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

3.5 3.5.1

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES Fibers Content

The fiber content shall be measured by ASTM D3171 or D2584. When ASTM D3171 is used, fiber content shall not be less than 55% by volume. When ASTM D2584 is used, fiber content shall not be less than the fraction by mass corresponding to 55% by volume. The manufacturer shall report the fiber content of the end product by volume or by mass in accordance with the method used.
3.5.2 Glass Transition Temperature

The glass transition temperature Tg of the resin shall not be less than 140F for polyesters and vinylesters and 180F for epoxies. The glass transition temperature shall be measured on a coupon cut from the as-produced FRP system using either the differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) method in ASTM E1356 or the dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) method in ASTM E1640. When using the DSC method, test result for both the first scan and the second scan shall be reported.

28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

3.6 3.6.1

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES Tensile Strength

The tensile strength shall be determined for two purposes: 1) overall product certification (that is, guaranteed value) from multiple production lots; and 2) manufacturers quality control and purchasers quality assurance for each production lot. The guaranteed tensile strength for product certification shall be as determined by a test method submitted by the manufacturer for acceptance by the purchaser at a frequency and number of specimens specified in Article 3.8.1. The test method specified in Article 3.3 may be selected for this purpose. The tensile strength of a production lot shall be measured for the purchasers quality assurance as determined by a test method submitted by the manufacturer for acceptance by the purchaser at a frequency and number of specimens specified in 46

165

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Article 3.8.1. The test method specified in Article 3.3 may be selected for this purpose. The strength of each specimens shall be reported and be not less than the guaranteed strength reported by the manufacturer. If the strength is less than the guaranteed strength, the production lot shall be rejected.
3.6.2 Tensile Modulus of Elasticity

The tensile modulus of elasticity shall be determined for the purpose of product certification (that is, nominal value). The nominal tensile modulus of elasticity for FRP systems installed by manual layup or other field fabrication systems, determined according to the test method of Article 3.3, shall not be less than the values reported on Table 3.6.2-1.
Table 3.6.2-1 Nominal tensile modulus of elasticity for field fabricated FRP systems

Fiber type Aramid Carbon Glass 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Method 1 Based on composite area 5,500 ksi 18,000 ksi 3,000 ksi

Method 2 Based on equivalent fiber area 10,000 ksi 32,000 ksi 10,000 ksi

The nominal tensile modulus of elasticity for precured FRP systems such as pultruded bars and plates, determined according to ASTM D 7205/D 7205M for bars and the test method of Article 3.3 for plates, shall not be less than the values reported on Table 3.6.2-2.
Table 3.6.2-2 Nominal tensile modulus of elasticity for precured FRP systems

Fiber type Aramid Carbon Glass

Ef 9,500 ksi 20,500 ksi 5,500 ksi

18 19 20 21 22 23

3.6.3

Ultimate Tensile Strain

The ultimate tensile strain shall be calculated for the purpose of product certification (that is, nominal value). The nominal ultimate tensile strain shall be calculated by dividing the guaranteed tensile strength by the nominal tensile modulus of elasticity. The nominal ultimate tensile strain of AFRP, GFRP, and CFRP systems either field fabricated or precured and obtained by this procedure shall be at least 2.5, 2.25, and 1.5%, respectively.

24 25 26 27 28

3.7 3.7.1

DURABILITY REQUIREMENTS General

Environmental durability tests for the purpose of manufacturers quality control and for the purchasers quality assurance given in Table 3.7.1-1 shall be performed by the FRP system manufacturer at a frequency and number of specimens specified in Article 3.8.1.

47

166

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Each test method indicated in Table 3.7.1-1 shall comply with the requirements specified in the Qualifications for Seismic Retrofitting of Bridge Columns Using Composites: Volume 1: Composite Properties Characterization issued by the California Department of Transportation (For T-6 Committee only: check with Jim Gutierrez for latest CALTRANS requirements).
Table 3.7.1-1 Environmental Durability Test Matrix

Environmental Durability Test Water Resistance Sal Water Resistance Alkali Resistance Dry Heat Resistance Fuel Resistance Ultraviolet Light Resistance Freeze/Taw Resistance 8 9 10

Test Conditions 100% humidity at 100F Immersion at 70 F Immersion in CaCO3 at 70 F, pH = 9.5 Furnace at 140 F Immersion at 70 F Cycle between UV at 140 F and condensate at 100 F Cycle between 100% humidity at 100 F and freezer at 0 F

Test Duration 1,000, 3,000 and 10,000 hr 1,000, 3,000 and 10,000 hr 1,000, 3,000 and 10,000 hr 1,000 and 3,000 hr 4 hr 4 hr per condition, 100 cycles 24 hr per cycle, 20 cycles

A test method is considered to be passed if the mechanical properties of the specimen calculated after each of the tests reported on Table 3.7.1-1 differ by no more than 15% with respect to the value as determined on Article 3.6.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

3.8 3.8.1

SAMPLING Sampling Frequency and Number of Specimens

For the determination of each of the mechanical and durability properties for the manufacturers quality control tests and for the purchasers quality assurance tests, at least five samples of sufficient length to perform the required tests shall be obtained from each production lot. For the determination of each of the mechanical properties for product certification, at least 25 samples of sufficient length to perform the required tests shall be obtained in groups of five from five different production lots. Tests for the determination of the mechanical properties for product certification shall be repeated at least every three years.
3.8.2 Method of Sampling Selection

Samples from each production lot to be used for preparing the specimens shall be selected by the manufacturer on a random basis.

22 23 24

3.9

Rejection

The purchaser has the option to reject material that fails to conform to the requirements of this Section. Rejection shall be reported to the manufacturer or supplier promptly and in writing.

25 26 27

3.10

Product Certification

When specified in the purchase order or contract, the purchaser shall be furnished with:

48

167

1 2 3 4 5

Documentation showing constituents, their quantities, and their properties as provided by the supplier; and Product certification stating that samples representing each production lot have been tested and inspected as indicated in this Section and the requirements have been met.

49

168

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

REFERENCES

American Concrete Institute, Committee 440. 2004. Guide Test Methods for Fiber-Reinforced Polymers (FRPs) for reinforcing or Strengthening Concrete Structures. ACI 440.3R-04, Farmington Hills, MI, USA. American Concrete Institute, Committee 440. 2008. Specifications for Carbon and Glass Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bar Materials for Concrete Reinforcement. ACI 440.6-08, Farmington Hills, MI, USA. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2002. Standard Test Methods for Ignition Loss of Cured Reinforced Resins. ASTM D2584-02, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2006. Standard Test Methods for Constituent Content of Composite Materials. ASTM D3171-06, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2006. Standard Test Methods for Tensile Properties of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite Bars. ASTM D7205/D 7205M, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2003. Standard Test Methods for Assignment of the Glass Transition Temperature by Differential Scanning Calorimetry. ASTM E1356-06, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2004. Standard Test Methods for Assignment of the Glass Transition Temperature by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis. ASTM E1640-04, West Conshohocken, PA, USA. California Department of Transportation, 1999. Qualifications for Seismic Retrofitting of Bridge Columns Using Composites: Volume 1: Composite Properties Characterization. Caltrans, Sacramento, CA, USA.

50

169

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

ATTACHMENT B 2010 AGENDA ITEM 28 - T-6

AASHTO LRFD GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN OF EXTERNALLY BONDED FRP SYSTEMS FOR STRENGTHENING CONCRETE BRIDGES
COMMENTARY

DATE 02/28/2010 T-6 PAUL LILES, Chair

170

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1....................................................................................................................................................................................5 C1.1 .......................................................................................................................................................................................5 C1.2 .......................................................................................................................................................................................5 C1.3 .......................................................................................................................................................................................5 C1.4 .......................................................................................................................................................................................5 Section 2....................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.1 .......................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.2 .......................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.3 .......................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4 .......................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.1 ................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.3 ................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.4 ................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.5 ................................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.5.1 .........................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.5.2 .........................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.5.3 .........................................................................................................................................................................6 C2.4.5.4 .........................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.4.5.5 .........................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.4.5.5.1...................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.4.5.5.2...................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.5 .......................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.5.1 ................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.5.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.5.3 ................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.6 .......................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.6.1 ................................................................................................................................................................................7 C2.6.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.6.3 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.6.3.1 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.6.3.2 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.6.3.3 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.6.4 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.7 .......................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.7.1 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.7.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8 .......................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.1 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2.1 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2.2 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2.3 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2.4 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.2.5 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.3 ................................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.3.1 .........................................................................................................................................................................8 C2.8.3.2 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.2.1...................................................................................................................................................................9 2

171

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56

C2.8.3.2.2...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.2.3...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.3 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4.1...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4.2...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4.3...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4.4...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.4.5...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.5 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.6 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.7 .........................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.7.1...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.7.2...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.7.3...................................................................................................................................................................9 C2.8.3.7.4.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4 ..............................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1 .......................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.1.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.2.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.3.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.4.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.5.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.6.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.1.7.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.2 .......................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.2.1.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.2.2.................................................................................................................................................................10 C2.8.4.3 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9 .....................................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.2 ..............................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.2.1 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.2.2 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.2.3 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3 ..............................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3.1 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3.2 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3.3 .......................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3.3.1.................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.9.3.3.2.................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.10 ...................................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.10.1 ............................................................................................................................................................................11 C2.10.2 ............................................................................................................................................................................12 C2.10.3 ............................................................................................................................................................................12 C2.10.4 ............................................................................................................................................................................12 C2.10.4.1 .....................................................................................................................................................................12 C2.10.4.2 .....................................................................................................................................................................12 C2.10.5 ............................................................................................................................................................................12 Section 3..................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.1 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.2 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.3 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.4 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.4.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.4.2 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 3

172

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

C3.4.3 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.5 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.5.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.5.2 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.6 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.6.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.6.2 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.6.3 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.7 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.7.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.8 .....................................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.8.1 ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 C3.8.2 ..............................................................................................................................................................................14 C3.9 .....................................................................................................................................................................................14 C3.10 ...................................................................................................................................................................................14

173

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 C1.1 Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) systems for strengthening concrete bridge structures are an alternative to traditional strengthening techniques, such as steel plate bonding, section enlargement, and external post-tensioning. FRP strengthening systems use FRP composite materials as supplemental externally bonded reinforcement. FRP systems offer advantages over traditional strengthening techniques: they are lightweight, relatively easy to install, and noncorrosive. Due to the characteristics of FRP materials as well as the behavior of concrete members strengthened with FRP systems, specific guidance on the use of these systems is needed. FRP systems can be used to rehabilitate or restore the strength of a deteriorated structural member, retrofit or strengthen a sound structural member to resist increased loads, or address design or construction errors. The term shall denotes a requirement for compliance with these Guide Specifications. The term should indicates a strong preference for a given criterion. The term may indicates a criterion that is usable, but other local and suitably documented, verified, and approved criterion may also be used in a manner consistent with the LRFD approach to bridge design. A list of references related to FRP systems in concrete structures is reported at the end of this Section. C1.2 C1.3 C1.4 The limit states specified herein are intended to provide for a buildable, serviceable bridge, capable of safely carrying design loads for a specified lifetime.

Section 1 INTRODUCTION

174

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 C2.1 This Guide Specifications refers to commercially available FRP systems consisting of fibers and resins combined in a specific manner and installed by a specific method. These systems have been developed through material characterization and structural testing. Untested combinations of fibers and resins result in unexpected range of properties as well as potential material incompatibilities. Any FRP systems considered for use should have sufficient test data demonstrating adequate performance of the entire system in similar applications, including its method of installation. The use of untested combinations of fibers and resins should be avoided. C2.2 C2.3 C2.4 C2.4.1 C2.4.2 C2.4.3 C2.4.4 C2.4.5 C2.4.5.1 C2.4.5.2 When loaded in direct tension, FRP materials do not exhibit any plastic behavior (yielding) before rupture. The tensile behavior of FRP materials is characterized by a linear stress-strain relationship until failure. The material properties provided by the manufacturers are considered as initial properties that do not include the effects of long-term exposure to the environment. Because long-term exposure to various type of environment may reduce the tensile strength as well as creep rupture and fatigue endurance of FRP systems, the material properties used in all design equations are reduced based on type and level of environmental exposure. C2.4.5.3

Section 2 CONCRETE STRUCTURES STRENGTHENED WITH FRP SYSTEMS

175

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 C2.5

C2.4.5.4 The coefficient of thermal expansion for FRP systems typically differ in the longitudinal and transverse directions, depending upon the type of fiber, resin, and volume fraction of fiber. A negative value for the coefficient of thermal expansion indicates that the material contracts with increased temperature and expands with decreased temperature. For reference, concrete has a coefficient of thermal expansion that varies between 4 x 10-6 to 6 x 10-6 / F; steel has a coefficient of thermal expansion of 6.5 x 10-6 / F. C2.4.5.5 C2.4.5.5.1 FRP materials subjected to a constant load over time can suddenly fail after a time period referred to as the endurance time. As the ratio of the sustained tensile stress to the short-term strength of the FRP system increases, the endurance time decreases. Researches indicated that glass, aramid, and carbon fibers can sustain approximately 0.3, 0.5, and 0.9 times their ultimate strength, respectively, before encountering a creep-rupture problem (Yamaguchi et al., 1997; Malvar 1998). C2.4.5.5.2

C2.5.1 Strengthening limits are imposed to guard against collapse of the structure should bond or other failure of the FRP system occur due to damage, vandalism, or other causes. To prevent sudden failure of the member in case the FRP system is damaged, strengthening limits are imposed such that the increase in the load-carrying capacity of the member strengthened with FRP systems is limited. The philosophy is that the loss of the FRP system should not cause member failure under sustained service loads. C2.5.2 The level of strengthening that can be achieved with the use of externally bonded FRP systems may be limited by coderequired fire resistance rating of the structure. The polymer resin currently used for FRP systems suffer deterioration of mechanical and bond properties at temperature close to or exceeding the glass transition temperature (Tg) of the polymer. A typical Tg range for field-applied resins is 140 to 180 F. Because of the degradation of most FRP systems at high temperature, the strength of externally bonded FRP systems is assumed to be lost completely in a fire, unless it can be demonstrated that the FRP temperature remains below its critical temperature (for example, FRP systems with a fire protection coating). The critical temperature of an FRP system should be taken as the lowest glass transition temperature of the components of the repair system. The fire endurance of concrete components strengthened with FP systems may be improved with the use of specific resin systems, coatings, insulation systems, or other methods of fire protection (Bisby et al., 2005). C2.5.3 While FRP systems are effective in strengthening members for flexure and shear and provide additional confinement, other modes of failure, such as punching shear and bearing capacity of footings, may be only slightly affected by the presence of the FRP system. C2.6 C2.6.1

176

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

C2.6.2 The stress level in the steel reinforcement is calculated based on a cracked-section analysis of the concrete component strengthened with FRP system. Although this method ignores the initial strain level in the FRP system, such value does not greatly influence the depth to the neutral axis in the elastic response range of the member. C2.6.3 C2.6.3.1 C2.6.3.2 The resistance factor is set at 0.9 for ductile sections and 0.65 for brittle sections where the steel does not yield, and provides a linear transition for the resistance factor between these two extremes. C2.6.3.3 C2.6.4 C2.7 C2.7.1 C2.7.2 C2.8 C2.8.1 C2.8.2 C2.8.2.1 C2.8.2.2 C2.8.2.3 Unless all loads on a member, including self-weight and any prestressing forces, are removed before installation of the FRP system, the substrate to which the FRP system is applied will be strained. These strains shall be considered as initial strain and shall be excluded from the strain in the FRP system. C2.8.2.4 The presence of curvature soffit of a concrete member may lead to the development of tensile stresses normal to the adhesive and surface to which the FRP system is bonded. Such tensile stresses result when the FRP system tends to straighten under load and may promote the FRP system delamination that reduces the effectiveness of the flexural strengthening (Aiello et al., 2001; Eshwar et al., 2003). C2.8.2.5 C2.8.3 C2.8.3.1 8

177

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

C2.8.3.2 C2.8.3.2.1 The effective stress level in the FRP system, ff, is the maximum level of stress that can be developed before failure of the section. C2.8.3.2.2 The effective strain level in the FRP system, f, is the maximum level of strain that can be developed before failure of the section occurs due to crushing of the concrete, FRP rupture or FRP debonding. C2.8.3.2.3 The effective strain level in the FRP system, f, is the maximum level of strain that can be developed before failure of the section occurs due to crushing of the concrete, FRP rupture, FRP debonding or prestressing steel rupture. C2.8.3.3 C2.8.3.4 C2.8.3.4.1 C2.8.3.4.2 Additional reduction factors applied to the contribution of the FRP systems are recommended to reflect uncertainties inherent in FRP systems compared with traditional reinforced and prestressed concrete. These reduction factors were determined based on statistical evaluation of variability in mechanical properties, predicted versus full-scale test results, and field applications. FRP-related reduction factors were calibrated to produce reliability indexes typically above 3.5. Reliability indexes for FRP strengthened members are determined based on the approach used for reinforced concrete buildings (Nowak and Szerszen, 2003; Szerszen and Nowak, 2003). C2.8.3.4.3 C2.8.3.4.4 C2.8.3.4.5 C2.8.3.5 C2.8.3.6 C2.8.3.7 C2.8.3.7.1 C2.8.3.7.2 C2.8.3.7.3

178

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 C2.8.4

C2.8.3.7.4

C2.8.4.1 An increase in the overall member capacity is an immediate outcome typically expressed in terms of improved peak load resistance. Ductility enhancement, determines the ability of the member to sustain rotation and drift without a substantial loss in the strength. C2.8.4.1.1 C2.8.4.1.2 Strength enhancement for concrete compression components with f c' of 10 ksi or higher has not been experimentally verified. Tests performed by Lam and Teng, 2003a, b indicated that a ratio of f l / f c' > 0.08 shall be adopted. C2.8.4.1.3 The efficiency factor for FRP systems, , accounts for the premature failure of the FRP system (Pessiki et al., 2001), due to the multiaxial state of stress to which the FRP system is subjected as opposed to pure axial tension used for material characterization. This behavior may also be related to stress concentration caused by cracking of concrete as it dilates. C2.8.4.1.4 C2.8.4.1.5 Confinement of reinforced concrete circular cross-sections with FRP systems provides a circumferentially uniform pressure to the radial expansion of the concrete when fibers are aligned transversally to the longitudinal axis of the member. C2.8.4.1.6 C2.8.4.1.7 As loads approach factored load levels, damage of the concrete in the form of significant cracking in the radial direction might occur. The FRP system contains the damage and maintains the structural integrity of the concrete component. At service load levels, however, this type of damage should be avoided. In such a way, the FRP system will only act during overloading conditions that are temporary in nature. C2.8.4.2 C2.8.4.2.1 The balanced point represents the balanced failure in which crushing of the concrete and yielding of the tension steel reinforcement develop simultaneously. C2.8.4.2.2 P-M diagrams for FRP confined concrete components have been developed using well-established procedures (Bank, 2006, Rocca et al., 2008).

10

179

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

C2.8.4.3 In concrete components confined with FRP systems, increase of ductility results from the ability to develop greater compressive strains in the concrete before compressive failure occurs. Confinement with FRP systems may also delay buckling of longitudinal steel reinforcement in compression. C2.9 C2.9.1 C2.9.2 C2.9.2.1 C2.9.2.2 C2.9.2.3 C2.9.3 Completely wrapping the FRP system around the concrete component on all four sides is the most efficient wrapping method and is most commonly used in column applications where access to all four sides of the column is usually available. In beam applications where an integral slab makes impractical to completely wrap the concrete component, the shear resistance may be improved by wrapping the FRP system around three sides or bonding to two opposite side of the member. Although all three techniques have been shown to improve the shear resistance of concrete components, completely wrapping the member with FRP system is the most efficient method, followed by the three-sided U-wrap configuration. Bonding to two sides of a beam is the least efficient method. C2.9.3.1 C2.9.3.2 C2.9.3.3 C2.9.3.3.1 This strain limitation is based on testing conducted by Priestley et al., 1996. Higher strain levels should not be used. FRP systems that do not enclose the entire section have been observed to delaminate from the concrete substrate before the loss of aggregate interlock of the concrete component. Bond stresses have analyzed to determine the usefulness of these FRP system configurations and the effective strain level that can be achieved (Triantafillou, 1998). C2.9.3.3.2 The bond-dependent coefficient is determined based on experimental investigation (Khalifa et al., 1998). C2.10 C2.10.1

11

180

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

C2.10.2 Detailing provisions of FRP systems used for strengthening concrete components typically depend on the geometry of the existing structure, the soundness and quality of the substrate, and the level of load that is to be sustained by the FRP system. C2.10.3 Limited data suggest a modest increase in the FRP strain at debonding may be achieved with the provision of transverse reinforcement (Reed et al., 2005). C2.10.4 C2.10.4.1 The development length is determined based on experimental investigation (Teng et al., 2001). C2.10.4.2 The average bond strength for FRP bars is determined based on experimental data (De Lorenzis et al., 2004; Hassan and Rizkalla, 2003). The minimum groove dimension is based on experimental investigations (De Lorenzis and Nanni, 2001; Hassan and Rizkalla, 2003). C2.10.5 FRP systems consisting of multiple unidirectional fibers oriented in more than one direction require lap splice in more than one direction to maintain the continuity of the fibers and the overall strength of the FRP systems.

12

181

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 C3.1 C3.2 C3.3 C3.4 C3.4.1 The fiber type and fiber amount determine the physical and mechanical properties of the FRP system. C3.4.2 C3.4.3 C3.5 C3.5.1 C3.5.2 This temperature does not represent the maximum permitted service temperature, and is intended for purchasers quality assurance only. Manufacturers should be consulted to determine the appropriate maximum service temperature of the FRP system. C3.6 C3.6.1 C3.6.2 C3.6.3 The calculation method is based on the assumption that the stress-strain behavior of the FRP system is linear elastic. C3.7 C3.7.1 C3.8 C3.8.1 13

Section 3 MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS

182

1 2 3

C3.8.2 C3.9 C3.10

14

183

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 29 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 1, Article C1.3.2.1 (WAI 36) TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-5 Loads
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/21/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Add the following paragraph to the end of the current Commentary to Article 1.3.2.1: The Strength I Limit State in the AASHTO LRFD Specifications has been calibrated for a target reliability index of 3.5 with a corresponding probability of exceedance of 2.0E-04 during the 75-year design life of the bridge. This 75-year reliability is equivalent to an annual probability of exceedance of 2.7E-06 with a corresponding annual target reliability index of 4.6. Similar calibration efforts for the Service Limit States are underway. Return periods for extreme events are often based upon annual probability of exceedance and caution must be used when comparing reliability indices of various limit states.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Learned on Assuring Bridge Safety and Serviceability International Scan.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: None

REFERENCES: 2009 White Paper, QUANTIFICATION OF STRUCTURAL SAFETY OF HIGHWAY BRIDGES: Annual Probability of Failure by Dennis Mertz

OTHER: None

184

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 30 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 3, Article 3.4.1 (WAI 32) TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-5 Loads
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 02/15/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 3.4.1, revise the 4th bullet item as follows: STRENGTH IVLoad combination for superstructures only relating to very high dead load to live load force effect ratios. Item #2 In Article 3.4.1, revise the Commentary to the 4th bullet item on Strength IV (above) as follows: The standard calibration process for the strength limit state consists of trying out various combinations of load and resistance factors on a number of bridges and their components. Combinations that yield a safety index close to the target value of = 3.5 are retained for potential application. From these are selected constant load factors and corresponding resistance factors for each type of structural component reflecting its use. This calibration process had been carried out for a large number of bridges with spans not exceeding 200 ft. For the primary components of large bridges, the ratio of dead and live load force effects is rather high, and could result in a set of resistance factors different from those found acceptable for small- and medium-span bridges. Short and medium spans are considered as approximately up to 600 ft., intermediate spans between 600 and 1,000 ft., and long spans greater than 1,000 ft. It is believed to be more practical to investigate one additional load case than to require the use of two sets of resistance factors with the load factors provided in Strength Load Combination I, depending on other permanent loads present. Spot checks had been made on a few bridges with up to 600-ft. spans, and it appears that Strength Load Combination IV will govern where the dead load to live load force effect ratio exceeds about 7.0. This load combination can control during investigation of construction stages. The load combination was revised in 2010 for a more consistent reliability index; the Load Combination IV now governs when the dead load to live load force effect ratio is about 3.

185

Item #3 In Table 3.4.1-1, 5th row (STRENGTH IV), 3rd column (LL, etc.) , replace the with 1.4 as shown below:
Table 3.4.1-1Load Combinations and Load Factors DC DD DW EH EV ES EL PS CR SH p p p p p p p 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Use One of These at a Time

Load Combination Limit State STRENGTH I (unless noted) STRENGTH II STRENGTH III STRENGTH IV STRENGTH V EXTREME EVENT I EXTREME EVENT II SERVICE I SERVICE II SERVICE III SERVICE IV FATIGUE I LL, IM & CE ONLY FATIGUE II LL, IM & CE ONLY

LL IM CE BR PL LS 1.75 1.35 1.4 1.35 EQ 0.50 1.00 1.30 0.80 1.50 0.75

WA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

WS 1.40 0.40 0.30 0.70

WL 1.0 1.0

FR 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

TU 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20

TG TG TG TG TG TG TG

SE SE SE SE SE SE SE 1.0

EQ 1.00

IC 1.00

CT 1.00

CV 1.00

(T5 will discuss a suggestion on Strength IV to include TG and SE. The rest of the table remains unchanged.)

186

Item #4 In Table 3.4.1-2, 2nd row, 1st column, add Superstructures, and replace 1.50 with 1.40 as shown below:
Table 3.4.1-2Load Factors for Permanent Loads, p

Type of Load, Foundation Type, and Method Used to Calculate Downdrag DC: Component and Attachments DC: Strength IV Superstructure, only Piles, Tomlinson Method Piles, Method Drilled shafts, ONeill and Reese (1999) Method DW: Wearing Surfaces and Utilities EH: Horizontal Earth Pressure Active At-Rest AEP for anchored walls EL: Locked-in Construction Stresses EV: Vertical Earth Pressure Overall Stability Retaining Walls and Abutments Rigid Buried Structure Rigid Frames Flexible Buried Structures other than Metal Box Culverts Flexible Metal Box Culverts and Structural Plate Culverts with Deep Corrugations ES: Earth Surcharge DD: Downdrag

Load Factor Maximum Minimum 1.25 0.90 1.50 1.40 0.90 1.4 1.05 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.35 1.35 1.00 1.00 1.35 1.30 1.35 1.95 1.50 1.50 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.65 0.90 0.90 N/A 1.00 N/A 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.75

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: A reliability analysis was performed by Dr. Andrzej Nowak using various span lengths up to 200 ft, various structure types, and a limited range of dead load to total load ratios. The following four load combinations were used: (a) 1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) (b) 1.5 DC (c) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) (d) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM) His work indicates that when the live load is about 20% of the total load, the reliability indices are as low as 3.0 i.e. lower than the target value of 3.5 according to the current Specifications [load combinations (a) and (b), above]. A combination of (a) and (c) provides consistent reliability indices that are close to the target value of 3.5. Hence, combination (c) is being suggested to replace the current combination (b). Results of this study are indicated on the attached charts. Although LL/(LL+DL) ratios from 0 to 1.0 are shown, the bridges of concern with substandard reliability are just those with ratios between 0.15 and 0.25. The controlling target reliability, T, depends on the controlling load combination: Strength I or Strength IV. As stated in the Commentary, the Strength IV load combination currently governs for DL:LL ratios above 7 i.e. LL/(DL+LL) ratios below 0.13. If this ballot item passes, all bridges with DL:LL ratios above 3 i.e. LL/(DL+LL) ratios below 0.25 would then also be controlled

187

by Strength IV. The currently unacceptable target reliabilities for LL/(DL+LL) ratios between 0.15 and 0.25 are anticipated to then be greater than or equal to 3.5 i.e. acceptable. The required force effects for design, however, may increase 2-7% for all bridges with DL:LL ratios in excess of approximately 5 i.e. LL/(DL+LL) less than 0.17. T5 is divided on whether or not that is an acceptable increase, and on how often Strength IV should control.
DL:LL 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 DL:LL 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 LL/ (DL+LL) 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.50 Str. I if LL=1 1.25DL+1.75LL 14.25 13 11.75 10.5 9.25 8 6.75 5.5 4.25 3 Str. I if LL=1 LL/(DL+LL) 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.17 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.50 1.25DL+1.75LL 14.25 13 11.75 10.5 9.25 8 6.75 5.5 4.25 3 Str.IV now 1.5DL 15 13.5 12 10.5 9 7.5 6 4.5 3 1.5 Str.IV now 1.5DL 15 13.5 12 10.5 9 7.5 6 4.5 3 1.5 Which controls? Str.I or IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I T 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.6 3 3.1 3.15 3.25 3.5 3.7 T 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.8 based on* (Nowak et al) 200-ft SteelComp 200-ft SteelComp 200-ft SteelComp 200-ft SteelComp 120-ft SteelComp 90-ft SteelComp 90-ft SteelComp 90-ft SteelComp 60-ft SteelComp 30-ft SteelComp based on* (Nowak et al) 200-ft Prestressed 200-ft Prestressed 200-ft Prestressed 200-ft Prestressed 200-ft Prestressed 120-ft Prestressed 90-ft Prestressed 90-ft ReinfCon 60-ft ReinfConc 30-ft ReinfConc Str.IV new 1.4DL+1.4LL 15.4 14 12.6 11.2 9.8 8.4 7 5.6 4.2 2.8 Str.IV new 1.4DL+1.4LL 15.4 14 12.6 11.2 9.8 8.4 7 5.6 4.2 2.8 Which controls? Str.I or IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.I Str.I T 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.7 T 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.8

Which controls? Str.I or IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I Str.I

Which controls? Str.I or IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.IV Str.I Str.I

*doesnt seem to differ by more than 0.15 if chart for incorrect span length is used
Minnesota applied the proposed load combination to on two three span steel bridges and a five-span approach. The first, a 220-340-220-ft haunched girder structure with 90-ft simple-span approaches, was still governed by Strength I throughout. However, Minnesota amplifies the Strength I load combination by 10% in negative moment regions. The second was a 249-362-249-ft steel box with 5 approach spans varying from 180 to 220 ft. The latter had Strength IV govern in bending by 2% at one location, and at most locations in shear by 3%. Caltrans investigated its cast-in-place post-tensioned box-girders because they are very economical structures in the west and have relatively high DL:LL ratios. Span lengths from 200 to 400 feet were studied. Case (c) appeared to be very close to the existing Strength I (case a): A maximum increase of 7% was observed for positive moment, negative moment, and shear. The 7% difference only occurs for negative moment for a two span structure and positive moment for a single span structure. Most of the differences are less than 5% with practically no difference for 400-ft spans. For an actual twospan CIP/PS bridge with maximum span length of 275 feet, the positive moment results for Strength I and IVc (1.4DC+1.4(LL+IM)) are within 1 % of each other. For negative moment in the same structure, Strength IVc is 5% to 6% more than Strength I; and shear per Strength IVc is from 3% to 5% higher than Strength I. Caltrans concluded that changing Strength IV drops the span range where that load combination controls positive bending down as far as 160 feet for a narrow simple span CIP/PS box girder bridge. Strength I still controlled for shear in a simple span bridge, and for positive moment, negative moment and shear in multiple span configurations. However, Strength I and IVc demands were very close to each other. These comparisons only look at the demand side of the equation and didnt consider Strength II with Caltrans P15. The current Strength IV load combination had been a concern of the segmental bridge community as being too conservative. Caltrans tested the ballot item on actual CIP segmental bridges and made the following observations: Bridge 1--span lengths of 249-426-590-426-249. For the end-spans, Strength I and IVc were about the same for positive and negative moment. For the 426 ft spans, Strength I is barely greater than Strength IVc for positive moment, and Strength IVc is barely greater than Strength I for negative moment. For the 590 ft span Strength I and IVc are the same for positive moment; the beta drops from 3.9 to 3.7. Negative moment for Strength IVc is greater than Strength I by 12% and greater than Strength IV by 7%. Shear was not compared.

188

Bridge 2--span lengths of 354-558-443. Strength I controlled positive bending in all spansand by 10% for the 558 ft span. Negative moment was controlled by Strength IVc by a maximum of 7% more than Strength I for the 354 ft span to a minimum of 4% more than Strength I in the 558 ft span. Shear was controlled by Strength IVc by a maximum of 7% more than Strength I.

Since formal calibration efforts have not been done for substructure elements as has been done for bridge girders, the requirement was revised to only apply to superstructures. It should be noted that efforts are underway by the FHWA to develop design criteriaincluding loads--for long-span bridges. As a part of that effort, Dr. Andrzej Nowak has processed 50 million weigh-in-motion data records coming from 6 different States and examined the force effects of bumper-to-bumper traffic i.e. traffic jam condition. Preliminarily, he sees the HL93 as being appropriate for the LL itself on long spans, 100% of HL93 in one lane with 50% in the remaining lanes. However, this calibration study did not consider this alternate loading or make any adjustments to the coefficients of variation.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: More appropriate and consistent design.

REFERENCES: NCHRP Report 368 Calibration of Bridge Design Code, TRB, Washington, DC 1999

OTHER:

Prestressed concrete
Span 200 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.4(DL+LL) 1.5 DL DC


1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL + DC) LL/(LL+DL)


Span 120 ft

189

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.4(DL+LL)


1.5 1.5DL DC 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL + DC) LL/(LL+DL)


Span 90 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.4(DL+LL) 1.5 1.5DC DL 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM) 1.5(DL+LL)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL + DC) LL/(LL+DL)


Span 60 ft

190

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 30 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Reinforced concrete
191

Span 120 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 90 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 60 ft

192

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 30 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

193

Steel Non Composite


Span 200 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 120 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

194

Span 90 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 60 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

195

Span 30 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Steel Composite
Span 200 ft

196

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 120 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 90 ft

197

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 60 ft
5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

Span 30 ft

198

5.0

4.0

3.0

2.0
1.25 DC + 1.75 (LL + IM) 1.25DL1+1.5DL2+1.75LL

1.0

1.4(DL+LL) 1.4 DC + 1.4 (LL + IM) 1.5 DC DL 1.5 1.5(DL+LL) 1.5 DC + 1.5 (LL + IM)

0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

LL/(LL+DL) LL/(LL + DC)

199

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 31 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 8, Articles 8.3.4 and C8.4.1.1 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-4 Construction /T-10 Concrete
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 08/12/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Add the following paragraph to the end of Article 8.3.4: Reactive or potentially alkali-silica reactive aggregate may be used in concrete having low-alkali cements or a combination of portland or blended cement and pozzolanic materials and/or slag cement. Item #2 Add the new Commentary to Article 8.3.4: C8.3.4 Aggregate reactivity is generally determined by past field performance or by tests (ASTM C 295, AASHTO T 303, and/or ASTM C 1293) made on aggregates prior to their use. Refer to Table 56X-l-B of AASHTO's ASR Guide Specification (AASHTO 2001) for quantities of reactive constituents (ASTM C 295) and expansion limits (AASHTO T 303 and ASTM C 1293) that are considered potentially reactive. Reference is also made to FHWAHIF-09-001. If aggregates of limited reactivity are used, then the effectiveness of a particular cementitious materialsaggregate combination to mitigate ASR is generally evaluated by ASTM C 1567. Data from past field performance and/or ASTM C 1293 can also be used to demonstrate satisfactory performance. Item #3 Add the following to the 3rd paragraph of Article C8.4.l.l: Where required, the specified properties should include resistance to aggregate reactivity. More guidance on this is contained in ACI 201.2R and Caldarone et al. (2005). Item #4 Add the following references: AASHTO. 2001. Guide Specification For Highway Construction SECTION 56X, Portland Cement Concrete Resistant to Excessive Expansion Caused by Alkali-Silica Reaction. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. http://leadstates.transportation.org/asr/library/gspec.stm

200

ACI Committee 201. 2001. Guide to Durable Concrete (ACI 201.2R-0l), American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI. Caldarone, Michael A., Peter C. Taylor, Rachel J. Detwiler, and Shrinivas B. Bhide. 2005, Guide Specification for High-Performance Concrete for Bridges. EB233, 1st edition, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, IL, 64 pages. FHWA. 2009. Report on Determining the Reactivity of Concrete Aggregates and Selecting Appropriate Measures for Preventing Deleterious Expansion in New Concrete Construction, Federal Highway Administration, Report FHWA-HIF-09-001.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: 8.3.4 Consistent with Design Specifications. Change second paragraph to allow combinations of portland or blended cements and pozzolans and/or slag to be tested for potential ASR mitigation. AASHTO M 240 blended cement and AASHTO M 302 ground granulated blast furnace slag are commonly used to mitigate ASR and should be added to the currently allowed regular portland cement and pozzolans. See for example AASHTO Guide Spec http://leadstates.transportation.org/asr/library/gspec.stm for more information. C8.3.4 (New Commentary) Delete ASTM C 227 as recommended test method. Instead list AASHTO T 303 and ASTM C 1293 as recommended methods for aggregate testing and ASTM C 1567 and C 1293 as recommended methods for cementitious materials-aggregate testing. There are a number of problems associated with ASTM C 227. It may pass reactive aggregates or measure expansion that may not be due to ASR. It is difficult to attain a high level of humidity in the containers without promoting the leaching of alkalies from the mortar bars. Alkali leaching can lead to an underestimation of the expansion of certain combinations, especially if the reactive component of the aggregate reacts relatively slowly. Refer to ACI 201.2R for more information. The shortcomings of ASTM C 227 prompted development of rapid test methods for assessing potential reactivity of aggregate, AASHTO T 303 or ASTM C 1260, Test Method for Potential Alkali Reactivity of Aggregates, and ASTM C 1567 Test Method for Determining the Potential Alkali-Silica Reactivity of Combinations of Cementitious Materials and Aggregate, offer relatively rapid (16-day) tests to supplement lengthier test methods. Both test methods involve measuring the length change of mortar bars stored in a strongly alkaline solution at an elevated temperature. AASHTO T 303 measures potential aggregate reactivity, ASTM C 1567 measures reactivity of the job-specific cement-aggregate combination. The tests severity makes it useful for identifying slowly reacting aggregates. However due to the severe test conditions, aggregates or cementitious materials/aggregate combinations with good field performance and no history of ASR can sometimes test to be reactive. This is because aggregates in field concrete are rarely exposed to the severe alkali and temperature conditions of the test method. Thus, aggregates identified as potentially reactive by AASHTO T 303 may perform well in practice when exposed to more reasonable alkali levels and temperature conditions. ASTM C 1293 should be used to supplement results obtained from AASHTO T 303 and ASTM C 1567 and has the potential to resolve uncertainties about results obtained with those two test methods. ASTM C 1293 is currently considered the most representative test

method when compared to structures in the field. The test duration, however, is very long with one year for testing aggregate reactivity and two years for testing cementitious materials-aggregate combinations.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improve durability

201

REFERENCES: AASHTO, Guide Specification For Highway Construction SECTION 56X, Portland Cement Concrete Resistant to Excessive Expansion Caused by Alkali-Silica Reaction, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2001. http://leadstates.transportation.org/asr/library/gspec.stm FHWA, 2009, Report on Determining the Reactivity of Concrete Aggregates and Selecting Appropriate Measures for Preventing Deleterious Expansion in New Concrete Construction, Federal Highway Administration, Report FHWA-HIF-09-001. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pavement/concrete/asrprotocols.cfm Michael A. Caldarone, Peter C. Taylor, Rachel J. Detwiler, and Shrinivas B. Bhid; Guide Specification for HighPerformance Concrete for Bridges, EB233, 1st edition, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, USA, 2005, 64 pages. Interpretation of Accelerated Test Method ASTM P214 Test Results (1993), and A Kinetic-Based Method for Interpreting ASTM C1260 (1998) are available from Daniel P. Johnston, South Dakota Department of Transportation.

OTHER: None

202

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 32 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 11, Article 11.4.9.1 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-4 Construction / T-14 Steel
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 11/23/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Article 11.4.9.1 as follows. 11.4.9.1 General Pins and rollers shall be accurately turned to the dimensions shown on the drawings and shall be straight, smooth, and free from flaws. Pins and rollers more than 9.0 in. (225 mm) in diameter shall be forged and annealed or normalized and tempered. Pins and rollers 9.0 in. (225 mm) or less in diameter may be either forged and annealed or normalized and tempered, or be cold-finished carbon-steel shafting. In annealed pins larger than 9.0 in. (225 mm) in diameter, a hole not less than 2.0 in. (50 mm) in diameter shall be bored full-length along the axis after the forging has been allowed to cool to a temperature below the critical range, under suitable conditions to prevent injury by too rapid cooling, and before being annealed. Normalized and tempered pins do not require the bore hole along the full-length of the axis. Item #2: Add new Commentary to Article 11.4.9.1 as follows. C11.4.9.1 The ASTM A 668 Class C, D, and G material has the same requirements for strength, ductility and stressrelieved state in the normalized and tempered condition as in the annealed condition. Normalizing improves the grain size and toughness for larger diameter forgings, and tempering relieves residual stresses incurred from the normalizing or quenching processes. Boring a full-length hole along the axis will not result in any benefit in properties for normalized and tempered pins since any residual stresses that remain after normalizing are released by the tempering process.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, Article 6.4.2 Pins, Rollers, and Rockers.

203

BACKGROUND: Dr. Alan W. Pense, Professor and Provost Emeritus, Lehigh University on mechanical and metallurgical properties of ASTM A 668 Class G steel, heat treatment by annealing vs. normalizing and tempering: The ASTM A 668 Class G material has the same strength, ductility and stress-relieved state in the normalized and tempered condition as in the annealed condition. However, tempering creates superior impact toughness. The same yield strength, tensile strength, elongation and reduction in area for Class G products over 12 in. thick is required with any one of the three heat treatment options. None of these required properties of the steel are increased or diminished by selection of one of the three heat treatment options over another. Only the microstructure and stress state properties are different as a result of the different cooling rates. The annealed material has a larger grain size and less residual stress from the slower cooling process. The normalized material has smaller grain size and may have (depending on the size of the product) larger residual stress because it was air cooled. If the product is tempered after normalizing, this second heat treatment releases any residual stress from the initial cooling and results in a product that not only equivalent to the annealed one in specified properties and stress state, but is actually better with a smaller grain size and a higher Charpy V-notch impact toughness. Pin diameters greater than 9 in. require a minimum 2 in. hole for annealed treatment. This is to relieve residual compressive stresses in the interior of an annealed product. Residual tensile stresses on the surface occur but cracking is unlikely. Since larger masses will cool more slowly, this is not a concern as the diameter increases. Boring the hole will not result in any benefit in properties for normalized and tempered pins since any residual stresses that remain after normalizing are released by the tempering process. In previous years this hole was also used in large forgings to remove potential entrapped inclusions.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Fabricators are not restricted to only the annealing heat treatment method. Normalizing and tempering creates as good or better a product and does not require a bore hole along the axis of the pin.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

204

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 33 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 11, Articles 11.4.12.2.6 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-4 Construction/T-14 Steel
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 12/22/09 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise the following paragraph in Article 11.4.12.2.6 as follows: Girders shall be cambered before heat-curving. Camber for rolled beams may be obtained by cold cambering (cold bending) or heat-cambering methods approved by the Engineer. For plate girders, the web shall be cut to the prescribed camber with suitable allowance for shrinkage due to cutting, welding, and heat-curving. However, subject to the approval of the Engineer, moderate deviations from specified camber may be corrected by a carefully supervised application of heat. Item #2 Add new Commentary to Article 11.4.12.2.6 as follows: C11.4.12.2.6 Cold cambering, or introduction of camber by cold bending, is a customary means of achieving camber in rolled beams. While all steel bending operations, heated and cold (ambient temperature), alter steel base metal properties to some extent, the relatively small strains associated with cold cambering result in minimal effect. To avoid impact damage to the steel, it is appropriate to introduce bending pressure in a controlled fashion. For a useful reference, see "Cold Bending of Wide-Flange Shapes for Construction", Reidar Bjorhovde, Engineering Journal, Fourth Quarter, 2006. Item #3 Add a new Reference as follows: "Cold Bending of Wide-Flange Shapes for Construction," Reidar Bjorhovde, AISC Engineering Journal, Fourth Quarter, 2006.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: Coordination and review by T-14.

205

BACKGROUND: The specifications expressly allow cold bending of plates (11.4.3.3.2) and cold bending for straightening (11.4.7) but are silent on cold bending for shapes to introduce camber (11.4.12.2.6). Article 11.4.7 gives no guidance but only states when permitted by the Engineer. Controlled bending which eliminates impact damage (dynamic loading) should be allowed. Dr. Al Pense of Lehigh presented at T-4 last year on cold bending and physical properties.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Allow the use of controlled cold bending for rolled shapes in bridge structures.

REFERENCES: Added new references

OTHER: None

206

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 34 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 14, Article 14.7.6.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-2 Joints and Bearings
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/06/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 14.7.6.2, replace the 1st paragraph with the following: The elastomeric-type materials for PEP, FGP, and steel reinforced elastomeric bearings shall satisfy the requirements of Article 14.7.5.2, except as noted below: Hardness on the Shore A scale may be used as a basis for specification of bearing material. The specified shear modulus for PEP, FGP, and steel-reinforced elastomeric bearings with a PTFE or equivalent slider on top of the bearing shall be between 0.080 ksi and 0.250 ksi, or the nominal hardness shall be between 50 and 70 on the Shore A scale. The specified shear modulus for steel-reinforced elastomeric bearings without a PTFE or equivalent slider on top of the bearing designed in accordance with the provisions of Article 14.7.6 shall be between 0.080 and 0.175 ksi, or the nominal hardness shall be between 50 and 60 on the Shore A scale.

PEP, FGP, and steel reinforced elastomeric bearings with or without a PTFE or equivalent slider on top of the bearing shall conform to the requirements of Article 18.2 of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications and AASHTO M 251. If the material is specified by its hardness, the shear modulus for design purposes shall be taken as the least favorable value from the range for that hardness given in Table 14.7.6.2-1. Intermediate values may be obtained by interpolation. If the material is specified by shear modulus, it shall be taken for design purposes as the least favorable from the value specified according to the ranges given in Article 14.7.5.2. Other properties, such as creep deflection, are also given in Table 14.7.6.2-1. Item #2 Revise the footnote under Table 14.7.6.2-1 as follows:
1

Only fFor PEP, and FGP, and steel-reinforced elastomeric bearings with a PTFE or equivalent slider on top of the bearing only.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

207

BACKGROUND: Clarification was provided on the permissible hardness of elastomers used for bearings with a PTFE (or equivalent) sliding surface. Elastomers with a Shore A Hardness of 70 are now expressly permitted for Method A steel reinforced elastomeric bearings that have a PTFE (or equivalent) sliding surface on top. Previously, the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications were unclear on this issue as commented on by the state of Kansas. The basic content of this paragraph was also rearranged for clarity, and to ease interpretation and readability.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved design and performance of bearings.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

208

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 35 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 14, Article C14.7.8.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-2 Joints and Bearings
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/06/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: In Article C14.7.8.2, revise the 1st paragraph as follows: AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications, Article 18.3.2, provides material specifications for recognizes two polyether urethane compounds that have performed satisfactorily.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: The revisions make the LRFD Bridge Design and LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications consistent and reflects revisions made to the LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications in 2009. Two polyether urethane compounds are no longer recognized by the LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications for disc bearings.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved construction and fabrication practices for disc bearings.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

209

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 36 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 14, Article 14.7.9.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-2 Joints and Bearings
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/06/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 14.7.9.2, revise the 1st paragraph and 1st bullet as follows: Guides or restraints shall be designed at the strength limit state for the larger of either: Item #2 In Article C14.7.9.2, revise the 1st paragraph and delete the 3rd paragraph as follows: The 15 percent factor applied to the service limit state vertical load approximates a minimum strength limit state horizontal design force. The minimum horizontal design load This design force, taken as 10 percent of the factored vertical load, is intended to account for responses that cannot be calculated reliably, such as horizontal bending or twisting of a bridge deck caused by nonuniform or time-dependent thermal effects. The 15 percent factor applied to the service limit state vertical load approximates a strength limit state horizontal design force. The horizontal force from applicable strength load combinations specified in Table 3.4.1-1, or but shall not be taken less than

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Clarification was provided in the code and commentary concerning the limit state design language for the design of guides and restraints for bearings. The language is now consistent with the standard limit state language used throughout the rest of the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved design and performance for bearings.

210

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

211

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 37 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications: Section 14, Article 14.8.3.1 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-2 Joints and Bearings
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/06/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 In Article 14.8.3.1, revise the 1st paragraph as follows: All load distribution plates and bearings with external steel plates shall be positively secured to their supports associated superstructure or substructure element by bolting or welding. Item #2 In Article C14.8.3.1, revise the 3rd paragraph as follows: Uplift should be prevented both among the major elements, such as the girder, bearing, support, and between the individual components of a bearing. If it was allowed to occur, If uplift occurs, some parts of the structure could be misaligned when contact was is regained, causing damage.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Clarification was provided on the connection of load distribution plates and bearings with external steel plates to superstructures and substructures. The current language in the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications occasionally produced some questions from designers. As such, the language was improved upon so that the intent of the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications is more easily and readily understandable. The intent is not to necessarily have the top bearing plate connected directly to the substructure, but positively secured consistent with the intended load path.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved detailing and construction practices for bearings.

212

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

213

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM: 38 SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications: Section 18, Article 18.1.4.2 TECHNICAL COMMITTEE: T-2 Joints and Bearings/T-4 Construction
REVISION DESIGN SPEC MANUAL FOR BRIDGE EVALUATION DATE PREPARED: DATE REVISED: 01/06/10 ADDITION CONSTRUCTION SPEC SEISMIC GUIDE SPEC OTHER NEW DOCUMENT MOVABLE SPEC COASTAL GUIDE SPEC

AGENDA ITEM: Item #1 Revise Articles 18.1.4.2 as follows: Plain elastomeric pads and laminated bearings shall be built as specified in the contract documents within the tolerances of AASHTO M 251. Other fabrication tolerances are given in Table 18.1.4.2-1. The classes of tolerances given in Table 18.1.4.2-1 shall be as follows: Class A = 0.001 nominal dimensions Class B = 0.002 nominal dimensions Class C = 0.005 nominal dimensions

Load plate overall dimensions for flatness tolerance and surface finish shall apply only to surfaces in contact with the bearing. Item #2 Add the following commentary to Article 18.1.4.2: C18.1.4.2 Some of the tolerances have been changed to relative values because an absolute tolerance, such as 0.0625 in., may be overly large for a small bearing and unrealistically small for a large bearing. Parallelism of the two faces of a single layer is controlled by the limitation of the thickness at any point. Each bearing type has one or more tolerances which are particularly important. In bearings which depend on rocking or rolling surfaces, it is most important to ensure that the curvature of the curved surface is constant to within a fine tolerance. This is more important than the actual value of the radius of curvature. In nested roller bearings, it is also important that all the rollers have exactly the same radius of curvature to ensure that the load will be equally shared among them. In flat PTFE sliding surfaces, the surface finish of the mating surface, usually stainless steel, is particularly important. A #8 mirror finish or better is recommended in all cases. In bearings which depend on the sliding of one curved surface over another, such as curved PTFE sliding bearings, curved bronze sliding bearings, or pins and bushings which allow rotation, the difference in diameter of the two curved surfaces is the most important tolerance. The out-of-round or the variation in curvature of the

214

curved surface is also important, and again the actual value of the radius of curvature is less important. If two parts of the bearing are made by different Fabricators, machining by fitting the two parts is not possible and it is necessary to machine each part to a specific radius within a very high accuracy. In the past, bearings made of components which are fabricated by different Manufacturers have given problems because of lack of a good fit. In pot bearings, the most important tolerances are those on the clearance between the pot and the piston and on the vertical clearance between the upper and lower parts of the bearing.

OTHER AFFECTED ARTICLES: None

BACKGROUND: Classes of tolerances (A, B and C) and the commentary concerning fabrication tolerances for bearings were reinstated after inadvertent deletion in 2006. This inadvertent deletion several years ago occurred during T-2s efforts to refer to AASHTO M 251 for a number of tolerances for elastomeric bearings instead of the LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications for consistency. During this process, T-2 overlooked the fact that Articles 18.1.4.2 and C18.1.4.2 also deal with other bearing types.

ANTICIPATED EFFECT ON BRIDGES: Improved construction and fabrication practices for bearings.

REFERENCES: None

OTHER: None

215

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Design Specifications Editorial revisions and additions to various articles of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications 2010 EDITORIAL CHANGES DESIGN
Location of Change Article 14.7.2.1, 3rd paragraph, last sentence Current Text Lubricant shall be silicone grease, which satisfies Military Specification MIL-S-8660. Proposed Text Lubricant shall be silicone grease, which satisfies Military Specification MIL-S-8660 Society of Automotive Engineers Specification SAE-AS8660. 1/30/10 T-14 PROPOSED EDITORIAL CHANGES to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification Section 6 (for the 2010 SCOBS Agenda) 1. Revise the first sentence of the sixth paragraph of Article C6.6.1.2.3 as follows: The values in Table 6.6.1.2.3-2 were computed using the values for A and (F)TH specified in Tables 6.6.1.2.5-1 and 6.6.1.2.5-3, respectively, a fatigue design life of 75 years, and a number of stress range cycles per truck passage, n, equal to one. Add the following sentence before the last sentence of the sixth paragraph of Article C6.6.1.2.3: For other values of the fatigue design life, the values in Table 6.6.1.2.3-2 should be modified by multiplying the values by the ratio of 75 divided by the fatigue life sought in years. 2. Revise the second sentence of Article 6.10.1 as follows: These provisions cover the design of composite and noncomposite sections, hybrid and nonhybrid sections, and constant and variable web depth members as defined by and subject to the requirements of Articles 6.10.1.1 through 6.10.1.8. and revise the following definition given in Article 6.2 as follows: Hybrid Girder Section A fabricated steel girder section with a web that has a specified minimum yield strength lower than one or both flanges. In the first sentence of the seventh paragraph of Article C6.13.6.1.4c, change the words hybrid girders to hybrid sections. 3. Add the following to the end of the first paragraph of Article 6.10.1.1.1b: Concrete on the tension side of the neutral axis shall not be considered effective at the strength limit state. Revise the third sentence of the second paragraph of Article 6.10.1.1.1b as follows: Where moments due to the transient and permanent loads are of opposite sign at the strength limit state, the associated composite section may be used with each of these moments if the resulting net stress in the concrete deck due to the sum of the unfactored moments is compressive.

216

4.

In the next-to-the-last sentence of the fourth paragraph of Article C6.10.1.6, replace the word staggered with the word discontinuous. Revise the sixth sentence of the second paragraph of Article C6.10.1.10.1 as follows: These assumptions are similar to those used in the development of a separate Rh equation for composite members sections in prior AASHTO Specifications.

5.

6.

Revise the last sentence of Article 6.10.3.2.4 as follows: and fr shall be taken as the modulus of rupture of the concrete determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.7 5.4.2.6 and shall be taken as the appropriate resistance factor for concrete in tension specified in Article 5.5.4.2.1.

7.

At the end of the first bullet item in Article 6.10.4.2.1, change the reference from Article 5.4.2.6 to Article 6.10.1.7. Revise Article 6.10.8.2.1 as follows: For unbraced lengths in which the member is prismatic, the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange, Fnc, shall be taken as the smaller of the local buckling resistance determined as specified in Article 6.10.8.2.2, and the lateral torsional buckling resistance determined as specified in Article 6.10.8.2.3. Otherwise, Eq. 6.10.8.1.1-1 shall be satisfied for both local buckling and lateral torsional buckling using the appropriate value of Fnc determined for each case as specified in Articles 6.10.8.2.2 and 6.10.8.2.3, respectively.

8.

9.

Add the following paragraph to the end of Article C6.10.10.2: The values of (ADTT)SL specified in this Article were determined by equating infinite and finite life resistances with due regard to the difference in load factors used with the Fatigue I and Fatigue II load combinations. A fatigue design life of 75 years and a number of stress range cycles per truck passage, n, equal to 1.0 were also assumed. For other values of the fatigue design life, the specified value of (ADTT)SL for stud shear connectors should be modified by multiplying the value by the ratio of 71,768 divided by the fatigue life sought in years, and the specified value of (ADTT)SL for channel shear connectors should be modified by multiplying the value by the ratio of 138,488 divided by the fatigue life sought in years. For other values of n, the values of (ADTT)SL should be modified by dividing by the appropriate value of n taken from Table 6.6.1.2.5-2.

10. Revise the last bullet item of Article 6.13.2.2 as follows: v or vu for connected material in shear

11. Revise Article A6.3.1 as follows: For unbraced lengths in which the member is prismatic, the nominal flexural resistance based on the compression flange, Mnc, shall be taken as the smaller of the local buckling resistance determined as specified in Article A6.3.2, and the lateral torsional buckling resistance determined as specified in Article A6.3.3. Otherwise, Eq. A6.1.1-1 shall be satisfied for both local buckling and lateral torsional buckling using the appropriate value of Mnc determined for each case as specified in Articles A6.3.2 and A6.3.3, respectively. 12. In the first sentence of Article B6.2 and in the first sentence of Article CB6.2, replace the word staggered with the word discontinuous. Also, in the first sentence of Article B6.2, replace the word radial with the word normal.

217

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE SUBJECT: LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications Editorial revisions and additions to various articles of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications 2010 EDITORIAL CHANGES CONSTRUCTION
Location of Change Preface, Table i Frequently-Used Unit Abbreviations, Pages ix and x joule kilonewton kilopascal megapascal newton newton meter newton per meter pascal pascal second Current Text J kN kPa MPa N Nm N/m Pa Pa s joule kilonewton kilopascal megapascal newton newton meter newton per meter pascal pascal second Proposed Text J kN kPa MPa N Nm N/m Pa Pa s

218

2010 AASHTO BRIDGE COMMITTEE SUBJECT: Coastal Guide Specifications Editorial revision to the Guide Specifications for Bridges Vulnerable to Coastal Storms 2010 EDITORIAL CHANGES COASTAL
Location of Change Eq. 6.1.2.2.2-3
If

Current Text
Z Zc 0, then A = 0.0149 c + 0.0316 max max If 0

Proposed Text
Z Zc < 1, then A = 0.0149 c + 0.0316 max max

219

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures
Chair
Malcolm T. Kerley P.E. Chief Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219-2052 Phone Number Fax Number (804) 786-4798 (804) 786-2940

E-mail

mal.kerley@vdot.virginia.gov

Vice Chair
Kevin Thompson State Bridge Engineer California Department of Transportation Division of Engineering Services, Structure Design P.O. Box 168041 Sacramento, CA 95816-8041 Phone Number Fax Number (916) 227-8807 (916) 227-8149

E-mail

kevin_thompson@dot.ca.gov

Secretary
M. Myint Lwin Director, Office of Bridge Technology Federal Highway Administration Southeast Federal Center Bldg, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Phone Number Fax Number (202) 366-4589 (202) 366-3077

E-mail

myint.lwin@fhwa.dot.gov

Liaison
Kelley Rehm Engineering Management - Bridges and Structures American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 602 Idlewood Drive Mount Juliet, TN 37122 Phone Number Fax Number (859) 433-9623 (866) 301-1322

E-mail

krehm@aashto.org

Ken Kobetsky P.E. Program Director for Engineering American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Suite 249 444 North Capitol Street, N.W. Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001-1539

Phone Number Fax Number

(202) 624-5254 (202) 624-5469

E-mail

kenk@aashto.org

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 1 of 22

220

State Member
Alabama
John F. "Buddy" Black P.E. (Primary Member) Bridge Engineer Alabama Department of Transportation 1409 Coliseum Boulevard Montgomery, AL 36110-2060 Phone Number Fax Number

AL
(334) 242-6004 (334) 353-6502

E-mail Address: blackj@dot.state.al.us

Eric J. Christie P.E. (Member) Assistant State Maintenance Engineer for Bridges Alabama Department of Transportation Maintenance Bureau, Room H-101 1409 Coliseum Boulevard Montgomery, AL 36110-2060

Phone Number Fax Number

(334) 242-6281 (334) 242-6378

E-mail Address: christiee@dot.state.al.us

William "Tim" Colquett P.E. (Member) Assistant Bridge Engineer Alabama Department of Transportation 1409 Coliseum Boulevard Montgomery, AL 36110-2060

Phone Number Fax Number

(334) 242-6007 (334) 353-6502

E-mail Address: colquettw@dot.state.al.us

Alaska
Richard A. Pratt P.E. (Primary Member) Chief Bridge Engineer Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities P.O. Box 112500 Juneau, AK 99811-2500 Phone Number Fax Number

AK
(907) 465-8890 (907) 465-6947

E-mail Address: richard.pratt@alaska.gov

Arizona
Jean A. Nehme Ph.D., P.E. (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Arizona Department of Transportation 205 South 17th Avenue, Mail Drop 613E Phoenix, AZ 85007-3213 Phone Number Fax Number

AZ
(602) 712-7481 (602) 712-3056

E-mail Address: jnehme@azdot.gov

Arkansas
Phil Brand (Primary Member) Division Head, Bridge Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department State Highway Building P.O. Box 2261, 10324 Interstate 30 Little Rock, AR 72203-2261 Phone Number Fax Number

AR
(501) 569-2361 (501) 569-2623

E-mail Address: phil.brand@arkansashighways.com

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 2 of 22

221

California
Kevin Thompson (Vice Chair) State Bridge Engineer California Department of Transportation Division of Engineering Services, Structure Design P.O. Box 168041 Sacramento, CA 95816-8041 Phone Number Fax Number

CA
(916) 227-8807 (916) 227-8149

E-mail Address: kevin_thompson@dot.ca.gov

Susan Hida (Member) Technical Specialist for LRFD Implementation California Department of Transportation Division of Engineering Services, Structure Design P.O. Box 168041, MS9-3-3g Sacramento, CA 95816-8041

Phone Number Fax Number

(916) 227-8738 (916) 227-9576

E-mail Address: susan_hida@dot.ca.gov

Barton Newton P.E. (Member) Phone Number (916) 227-8841 State Bridge Maintenance Engineer Fax Number (916) 227-8357 California Department of Transportation Division of Maintenance, Structure Maintenance & Investigations 1120 N Street, MS 9-1/9I P.O. Box 942874 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 E-mail Address: barton_newton@dot.ca.gov

Colorado
Mark A. Leonard (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Colorado Department of Transportation 4201 East Arkansas Avenue Denver, CO 80222-3406 Phone Number Fax Number

CO
(303) 757-9309 (303) 757-9197

E-mail Address: mark.leonard@dot.state.co.us

Michael G. Salamon (Member) Tunnel Superintendent Colorado Department of Transportation 4201 East Arkansas Avenue Denver, CO 80222-3406

Phone Number Fax Number

(303) 512-5731 (303) 512-5799

E-mail Address: michael.salamon@dot.state.co.us

Connecticut
Julie F. Georges (Member) Principal Engineer, Bridge Design Connecticut Department of Transportation P.O. Box 317546 / 2800 Berlin Turnpike Newington, CT 06131-7546 Phone Number Fax Number

CT
(860) 594-3348 (203) 594-3375

E-mail Address: julie.georges@po.state.ct.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 3 of 22

222

Delaware
Jiten K. Soneji P.E. (Primary Member) Bridge Design Engineer Delaware Department of Transportation 800 Bay Road, Route 113 P.O. Box 778 Dover, DE 19903-0778 Phone Number Fax Number

DE
(302) 760-2170 (302) 739-2217

E-mail Address: jiten.soneji@state.de.us

Barry A. Benton P.E. (Member) Civil Engineer Delaware Department of Transportation P.O. Box 778 Dover, DE 19903-0778

Phone Number Fax Number

(302) 760-2311 (302) 739-2217

E-mail Address: barry.benton@state.de.us

District of Columbia
Nicolas Galdos (Primary Member) Chief Bridge and Tunnels District of Columbia Department of Transportation 64 New York Avenue, N.E., 1st Floor Washington, DC 20002 Phone Number Fax Number

DC
(202) 671-4678 (202) 671-4710

E-mail Address: nicolas.galdos@dc.gov

L. Donald Cooney (Member) Structural Engineer District of Columbia Department of Transportation Infrastructure Project Management Administration 64 New York Avenue, N.E., 1st Floor Washington, DC 20002

Phone Number Fax Number

(202) 671-4681 (202) 671-0655

E-mail Address: donald.cooney@dc.gov

Konjit "Connie" Eskender P.E. (Member) Project Engineer District of Columbia Department of Transportation Infrastructure Project Management Administration 64 New York Avenue, N.E. Washington, DC 20002

Phone Number Fax Number

(202) 671-4568 (202) 741-5269

E-mail Address: konjit.eskender@dc.gov

Florida
Marcus Ansley P.E. (Primary Member) Assistant State Structures Design Engineer Florida Department of Transportation Research/Bridge Testing Section Leader 2007 E. Paul Dirac Drive Tallahassee, FL 32308 Phone Number Fax Number

FL
(850) 921-7111 (850) 488-6189

E-mail Address: marc.ansley@dot.state.fl.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 4 of 22

223

Sam Fallaha P.E. (Member) Assistant State Structures Design Engineer Florida Department of Transportation Structures Design Office 605 Suwannee Street, MS 33 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450

Phone Number Fax Number

(850) 414-4296 (850) 414-4955

E-mail Address: sam.fallaha@dot.state.fl.us

Jeff Pouliotte P.E. (Member) Structural Maintenance Engineer Florida Department of Transportation Office of Maintenance Ryan Building, Suite 1B, MS-52 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, FL 32301

Phone Number Fax Number

(850) 410-5691 (850) 410-5511

E-mail Address: jeffrey.pouliotte@dot.state.fl.us

Georgia
Paul V. Liles Jr., P.E. (Primary Member) State Bridge and Structural Design Engineer Georgia Department of Transportation Office of Bridge Design One Georgia Center, 24th Floor 600 West Peachtree Street, NW Atlanta, GA 30308-3607 Phone Number Fax Number

GA
(404) 631-1985 (404) 631-1954

E-mail Address: pliles@dot.ga.gov

Hawaii
Paul T. Santo (Primary Member) Bridge Design Engineer Hawaii Department of Transportation 601 Kamokila Boulevard, Suite 611 Kapolei, HI 96707-2037 Phone Number Fax Number

HI
(808) 692-7611 (808) 587-7617

E-mail Address: paul.santo@hawaii.gov

Idaho
Matthew M. Farrar (Primary Member) Bridge Design Engineer Idaho Transportation Department P.O. Box 7129 Boise, ID 83707-1129 Phone Number Fax Number

ID
(208) 334-8538 (208) 334-8256

E-mail Address: matt.farrar@itd.idaho.gov

Illinois
Ralph E. Anderson (Primary Member) Chief of Bridges and Structures Illinois Department of Transportation 2300 S. Dirksen Parkway Springfield, IL 62764-0002 Phone Number Fax Number

IL
(217) 782-2124 (217) 782-7540

E-mail Address: ralph.anderson@illinois.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 5 of 22

224

Thomas J. Domagalski (Member) Engineer of Bridge Design Illinois Department of Transportation 2300 S. Dirksen Parkway Springfield, IL 62764-0002

Phone Number Fax Number

(217) 785-2913 (217) 782-7540

E-mail Address: thomas.domagalski@illinois.gov

Indiana
Anne M. Rearick (Primary Member) Manager, Structural Services Indiana Department of Transportation Division of Production Management 100 N. Senate Avenue, Room N 642 Indianapolis, IN 46204-2273 Phone Number Fax Number

IN
(317) 232-5152 (317) 233-4929

E-mail Address: arearick@indot.in.gov

Iowa
Norman L. McDonald P.E. (Primary Member) Director, Office of Bridges and Structures Iowa Department of Transportation 800 Lincoln Way Ames, IA 50010-6915 Phone Number Fax Number

IA
(515) 239-1564 (515) 239-1978

E-mail Address: norman.mcdonald@dot.iowa.gov

Kansas
Kenneth F. Hurst P.E. (Primary Member) Engineering Manager, State Bridge Office Kansas Department of Transportation Bureau of Design, 13th Floor Eisenhower State Office Building, 13th Floor 700 SW Harrison Topeka, KS 66603-3754 James J. Brennan (Member) Assistant Geotechnical Engineer Kansas Department of Transportation Materials and Research Center 2300 Van Buren Street Topeka, KS 66611-1195 Phone Number Fax Number

KS
(785) 296-3761 (785) 296-6946

E-mail Address: kenh@ksdot.org Phone Number Fax Number (785) 291-3858 (785) 296-2526

E-mail Address: brennan@ksdot.org

Loren R. Risch P.E. (Member) Bridge Design Engineer Kansas Department of Transportation Eisenhower State Office Building 700 SW Harrison Topeka, KS 66603-3754

Phone Number Fax Number

(785) 296-3761 (785) 752-8687

E-mail Address: loren@ksdot.org

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 6 of 22

225

Kentucky
Mark Hite P.E. (Primary Member) Director, Division of Structural Design Kentucky Transportation Cabinet 200 Mero Street Frankfort, KY 40622 Phone Number Fax Number

KY
(502) 564-4560 (502) 564-2581

E-mail Address: mark.hite@ky.gov

Marvin Wolfe P.E. (Member) Division of Structural Design Kentucky Transportation Cabinet 3rd Floor East 200 Mero Street Frankfort, KY 40622

Phone Number Fax Number

(502) 564-4560 (502) 564-2581

E-mail Address: Marvin.Wolfe@ky.gov

Louisiana
Hossein Ghara (Primary Member) Bridge Design Administrator Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development P.O. Box 94245 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9245 Phone Number Fax Number

LA
(225) 379-1302 (225) 379-1786

E-mail Address: Hossein.Ghara@la.gov

Arthur D'Andrea (Member) Assistant Bridge Engineer Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development P.O. Box 94245 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9245

Phone Number Fax Number

(225) 379-1319 (225) 379-1786

E-mail Address: Arthur.D'Andrea@la.gov

Paul Fossier (Member) Assistant Bridge Engineer Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development P.O. Box 94245 Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9245

Phone Number Fax Number

(225) 379-1323 (225) 379-1786

E-mail Address: Paul.Fossier@la.gov

Maine
David B. Sherlock P.E. (Primary Member) Manager, Bridge Program Maine Department of Transportation Transportation Building 16 State House Station Augusta, ME 04333-0016 Phone Number Fax Number

ME
(207) 624-3490 (207) 624-3491

E-mail Address: david.sherlock@maine.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 7 of 22

226

Jeffrey S. Folsom (Member) Bridge Designer, Bridge Program Maine Department of Transportation Transportation Building 16 State House Station Augusta, ME 04333-0016

Phone Number Fax Number

(207) 624-3394 (207) 624-3491

E-mail Address: jeff.folsom@maine.gov

Maryland
Earle S. Freedman (Primary Member) Director, Office of Structures Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration 707 N Calvert St Baltimore, MD 21202-3601 Phone Number Fax Number

MD
(410) 545-8060 (410) 209-5002

E-mail Address: efreedman@sha.state.md.us

Robert J. Healy (Member) Deputy Director, Office of Structures Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration 707 N Calvert St Baltimore, MD 21202-3601

Phone Number Fax Number

(410) 545-8063 (410) 209-5002

E-mail Address: rhealy@sha.state.md.us

Jeffrey L. Robert (Member) Project EngineerOffice of Structures Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration 707 N Calvert St Baltimore, MD 21202-3601

Phone Number Fax Number

(410) 545-8327 (410) 209-5002

E-mail Address: jrobert@sha.state.md.us

Massachusetts
Alexander K. Bardow P.E. (Primary Member) Director of Bridges and Structures Massachusetts Department of Transportation 10 Park Plaza, Suite 6430 Boston, MA 02116-3973 Phone Number Fax Number

MA
(617) 973-7571 (617) 973-7554

E-mail Address: alexander.bardow@state.ma.us

Shoukry Elnahal (Member) Deputy Chief Engineer for Bridges and Tunnels Massachusetts Department of Transportation 10 Park Plaza, Suite 6500 Boston, MA 02116-3973

Phone Number Fax Number

(617) 973-7995 (617) 973-8808

E-mail Address: Shoukry.Elnahal@state.ma.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 8 of 22

227

Michigan
Steven P. Beck (Primary Member) Supervising Engineer, Structures Michigan Department of Transportation P.O. Box 30050 Lansing, MI 48909-7550 Phone Number Fax Number

MI
(517) 373-0097 (517) 335-2731

E-mail Address: becks2@michigan.gov

David Juntunen (Member) Bridge Operations Engineer Michigan Department of Transportation P.O. Box 30050 Lansing, MI 48909-7550

Phone Number Fax Number

(517) 322-5688 (517) 322-5664

E-mail Address: JuntunenD@michigan.gov

Minnesota
Daniel L. Dorgan (Primary Member) Director, Office of Bridges Minnesota Department of Transportation 3485 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128-3307 Phone Number Fax Number

MN
(651) 366-4501 (651) 366-4497

E-mail Address: dan.dorgan@state.mn.us

Kevin Western (Member) Bridge Design Engineer Minnesota Department of Transportation Office of Bridges and Structures 3485 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128-3307

Phone Number Fax Number

(651) 366-4501 (651) 747-2108

E-mail Address: kevin.western@state.mn.us

Mississippi
Mitchell K. Carr (Primary Member) Bridge Design Engineer Mississippi Department of Transportation P.O. Box 1850 Jackson, MS 39215-1850 Phone Number Fax Number

MS
(601) 359-7200 (601) 359-7070

E-mail Address: mcarr@mdot.state.ms.us

B. Keith Carr (Member) Assistant Bridge Engineer Mississippi Department of Transportation P.O. Box 1850 Jackson, MS 39215-1850

Phone Number Fax Number

(601) 359-7200 (601) 359-7070

E-mail Address: kcarr@mdot.state.ms.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 9 of 22

228

Missouri
Dennis Heckman (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Missouri Department of Transportation P.O. Box 270 Jefferson City, MO 65102-0270 Phone Number Fax Number

MO
(573) 751-4676 (573) 526-5488

E-mail Address: dennis.heckman@modot.mo.gov

Michael Harms (Member) Assistant State Bridge Engineer Missouri Department of Transportation P.O. Box 270 Jefferson City, MO 65102-0270

Phone Number Fax Number

(573) 751-5126 (573) 526-5488

E-mail Address: michael.harms@modot.mo.gov

Montana
Kent M. Barnes (Primary Member) Bridge Design Engineer Montana Department of Transportation P.O. Box 201001 Helena, MT 59620-1001 Phone Number Fax Number

MT
(406) 444-6260 (406) 444-6155

E-mail Address: kbarnes@mt.gov

Nebraska
Mark J. Traynowicz (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Nebraska Department of Roads P.O. Box 94759 Lincoln, NE 68509-4759 Phone Number Fax Number

NE
(402) 479-4701 (402) 479-4325

E-mail Address: Mark.Traynowicz@nebraska.gov

Mark Ahlman (Member) Assistant Bridge EngineerDesign Nebraska Department of Roads P.O. Box 94759 Lincoln, NE 68509-4759

Phone Number Fax Number

(402) 479-3936 (402) 479-3752

E-mail Address: Mark.Ahlman@nebraska.gov

Fouad Jaber (Member) Assistant State Bridge Engineer Nebraska Department of Roads Bridge Division P.O. Box 94759 Lincoln, NE 68509-4759

Phone Number Fax Number

(402) 479-3967 (402) 479-3752

E-mail Address: Fouad.Jaber@nebraska.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 10 of 22

229

Nevada
Mark P. Elicegui P.E. (Primary Member) Chief Bridge Engineer Nevada Department of Transportation 1263 South Stewart Street Carson City, NV 89712-0002 Phone Number Fax Number

NV
(775) 888-7542 (775) 888-7405

E-mail Address: melicegui@dot.state.nv.us

Todd Stefonowicz (Member) Assistant Chief Bridge Engineer Nevada Department of Transportation 1263 South Stewart Street Carson City, NV 89712-0002

Phone Number Fax Number

(775) 888-7550 (775) 888-7405

E-mail Address: tstefonowicz@dot.state.nv.us

New Hampshire
Mark W. Richardson (Primary Member) Administrator, Bureau of Bridge Design New Hampshire Department of Transportation P.O. Box 483 Concord, NH 03302-0483 Phone Number Fax Number

NH
(603) 271-2731 (603) 271-2759

E-mail Address: mrichardson@dot.state.nh.us

David L. Scott (Member) In-House Design Chief, Bridge Design Bureau New Hampshire Department of Transportation P.O. Box 482 Concord, NH 03302-0482

Phone Number Fax Number

(603) 271-2731 (603) 271-2759

E-mail Address: dscott@dot.state.nh.us

New Jersey

NJ

Richard W. Dunne P.E. (Primary Member) Phone Number (609) 530-2557 Structural Engineering and Deputy State Transportation Engineer Fax Number (609) 530-5777 New Jersey Department of Transportation P.O. Box 600 Trenton, NJ 08625-0600 E-mail Address: richard.dunne@dot.state.nj.us

New Mexico
Raymond M. Trujillo P.E. (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer New Mexico Department of Transportation P.O. Box 1149 Santa Fe, NM 87504-1149 Phone Number Fax Number

NM
(505) 827-5532 (505) 827-5345

E-mail Address: raymond.trujillo@state.nm.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 11 of 22

230

Jimmy D. Camp (Member) Phone Number (505) 827-5532 Assistant Chief Engineer/Engineering Support Division Director Fax Number (505) 827-0086 New Mexico Department of Transportation P.O. Box 1149 Santa Fe, NM 87504-1149 E-mail Address: jimmy.camp@state.nm.us

New York
George A. Christian P.E. (Primary Member) Director, Office of Structures New York State Department of Transportation 50 Wolf Road, POD 4-3 Albany, NY 12232-2633 Phone Number Fax Number

NY
(518) 457-6827 (518) 485-7826

E-mail Address: gchristian@dot.state.ny.us

Donald F. Dwyer (Member) Associate Soils Engineer New York State Department of Transportation 50 Wolf Road, Mail Pod 3-1 Albany, NY 12232-2633

Phone Number Fax Number

(518) 457-4724 (518) 457-0282

E-mail Address: ddwyer@dot.state.ny.us

Arthur P. Yannotti (Member) Director, Structures Design Bureau New York State Department of Transportation 50 Wolf Road Albany, NY 12232-2633

Phone Number Fax Number

(518) 457-4453 (518) 485-7826

E-mail Address: ayannotti@dot.state.ny.us

North Carolina
Greg R. Perfetti (Primary Member) State Bridge Design Engineer North Carolina Department of Transportation 1581 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1581 Phone Number Fax Number

NC
(919) 250-4037 (919) 250-4082

E-mail Address: gperfetti@ncdot.gov

North Dakota
Terrence R. Udland (Primary Member) Bridge Engineer North Dakota Department of Transportation 608 E. Boulevard Avenue Bismarck, ND 58505-0700 Phone Number Fax Number

ND
(701) 328-1969 (701) 328-0103

E-mail Address: tudland@nd.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 12 of 22

231

Ohio
Timothy J. Keller P.E. (Primary Member) Administrator, Office of Structural Engineering Ohio Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street, 3rd Floor Columbus, OH 43223-1102 Phone Number Fax Number

OH
(614) 466-2463 (614) 752-4824

E-mail Address: tim.keller@dot.state.oh.us

Jawdat Siddiqi (Member) Assistant Administrator, Office of Structural Engineering Ohio Department of Transportation 1980 West Broad Street Columbus, OH 43223-1102

Phone Number Fax Number

(614) 728-2057 (614) 752-4824

E-mail Address: jawdat.siddiqi@dot.state.oh.us

Oklahoma
Robert J. Rusch (Primary Member) Division Engineer, Bridge Division Oklahoma Department of Transportation 200 N.E. 21st Street Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3299 Phone Number Fax Number

OK
(405) 521-2606 (405) 522-0134

E-mail Address: brusch@odot.org

Gregory D. Allen P.E. (Member) Assistant Bridge EngineerDesign Oklahoma Department of Transportation 200 N.E. 21st Street Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3299

Phone Number Fax Number

(405) 521-2606 (405) 522-0134

E-mail Address: gallen@odot.org

John A. Schmiedel P.E. (Member) Acting Assistant Bridge EngineerDesign Oklahoma Department of Transportation 200 N.E. 21st Street Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3299

Phone Number Fax Number

(405) 521-6488 (405) 522-0134

E-mail Address: jschmiedel@odot.org

Oregon
Bruce V. Johnson P.E. (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Oregon Department of Transportation Transportation Building, Room 301 355 Capitol Street NE Salem, OR 97301-3871 Phone Number Fax Number

OR
(503) 986-3864 (503) 986-3407

E-mail Address: bruce.v.johnson@odot.state.or.us

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 13 of 22

232

Hormoz Seradj (Member) Steel Standards Engineer Oregon Department of Transportation Transportation Building, Room 301 355 Capitol Street NE Salem, OR 97301-3871

Phone Number Fax Number

(503) 986-3346 (503) 986-3407

E-mail Address: hormoz.seradj@odot.state.or.us

Pennsylvania
Thomas P. Macioce P.E. (Primary Member) Bridge Engineer Pennsylvania Department of Transportation P.O. Box 2966 Harrisburg, PA 17105-2966 Phone Number Fax Number

PA
(717) 787-2881 (717) 346-0346

E-mail Address: tmacioce@state.pa.us

Lou Ruzzi (Member) District Bridge Engineer Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Bridge Quality Assurance Division 45 Thomas Run Road Bridgeville, PA 15017

Phone Number Fax Number

(412) 429-4893 (412) 429-5085

E-mail Address: lruzzi@state.pa.us

Puerto Rico
Vacant (Member) Puerto Rico Department of Transportation and Public Works Minillas Station P.O. Box 41269 San Juan, PR 00940-1269 Phone Number Fax Number

PR

E-mail Address:

Rhode Island
David Fish P.E. (Primary Member) Managing Engineer, Bridge Design Rhode Island Department of Transportation State Office Building 2 Capitol Hill Providence, RI 02903-1124 Phone Number Fax Number

RI
(401) 222-2053 (401) 222-1271

E-mail Address: dfish@dot.ri.gov

South Carolina
Barry W. Bowers (Primary Member) Structural Design Support Engineer South Carolina Department of Transportation P.O. Box 191 Columbia, SC 29202-0191 Phone Number Fax Number

SC
(803) 737-4814 (803) 737-0608

E-mail Address: bowersbw@scdot.org

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 14 of 22

233

Jeff Sizemore (Member) Geotechnical Design Support Engineer South Carolina Department of Transportation P.O. Box 191 Columbia, SC 29202-0191

Phone Number Fax Number

(803) 737-1571 (803) 737-0608

E-mail Address: sizemoreJC@dot.state.sc.us

South Dakota
Kevin Goeden P.E. (Primary Member) Chief Bridge Engineer South Dakota Department of Transportation Becker Hanson Building 700 East Broadway Avenue Pierre, SD 57501-2586 Phone Number Fax Number

SD
(605) 773-3285 (605) 773-2614

E-mail Address: kevin.goeden@state.sd.us

Tennessee
Edward P. Wasserman (Primary Member) Director, Structures Division Tennessee Department of Transportation Suite 1100 700 James K. Polk Building Fifth and Deaderick Nashville, TN 37243-0339 Phone Number Fax Number

TN
(615) 741-3351 (615) 532-7745

E-mail Address: ed.wasserman@tn.gov

Texas
David P. Hohmann P.E. (Primary Member) Director, Bridge Texas Department of Transportation Dewitt C. Greer State Highway Building 125 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78701-2483 Phone Number Fax Number

TX
(512) 416-2183 (512) 416-3144

E-mail Address: dhohmann@dot.state.tx.us

Keith L. Ramsey P.E. (Member) Field Operations Section Director, Bridge Division Texas Department of Transportation Dewitt C. Greer State Highway Building 125 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78701-2483

Phone Number Fax Number

(512) 416-2250 (512) 416-3144

E-mail Address: kramsey@dot.state.tx.us

Utah
Carmen Swanwick (Primary Member) Director of Research and Bridge Operations Utah Department of Transportation 4501 South 2700 West Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5998 Fred Doehring Deputy Structures Engineer Utah Department of Transportation 4501 South 2700 West Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5998 Phone Number Fax Number

UT
(801) 965-4981 (801) 965-4187

E-mail Address: Cswanwick@utah.gov Phone Number (801) 965-4981 Fax Number (801) 965-4187

E-mail Address: fdoehring@utah.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 15 of 22

234

Vermont
Wayne B. Symonds (Primary Member) Structures Design Engineer Vermont Agency of Transportation National Life Building, Drawer 33 Montpelier, VT 05633-5001 Phone Number Fax Number

VT
(802) 828-0503

E-mail Address: Wayne.Symonds@state.vt.us

Virginia
Malcolm T. Kerley P.E. (Chair) Chief Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219-2052 Phone Number Fax Number

VA
(804) 786-4798 (804) 786-2940

E-mail Address: mal.kerley@vdot.virginia.gov

Kendal "Ken" Walus P.E. (Primary Member) State Structure and Bridge Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219-2052

Phone Number Fax Number

(804) 786-4575 (804) 786-2988

E-mail Address: kendal.walus@vdot.virginia.gov

Prasad L. Nallapaneni P.E. (Member) Senior Structural Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219-2052

Phone Number Fax Number

(804) 371-2770 (804) 786-2988

E-mail Address: prasad.nallapaneni@vdot.virginia.

Julius F.J. Volgyi Jr., P.E. (Member) Assistant State Structure and Bridge Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219-2052

Phone Number Fax Number

(804) 786-7537 (804) 786-2988

E-mail Address: julius.volgyi@vdot.virginia.gov

Washington
Jugesh Kapur (Primary Member) State Bridge and Structures Engineer Washington State Department of Transportation P.O. Box 47340 Olympia, WA 98504-7300 Phone Number Fax Number

WA
(360) 705-7207 (360) 705-6814

E-mail Address: kapurju@wsdot.wa.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 16 of 22

235

Tony M. Allen (Member) Geotechnical Engineer Washington State Department of Transportation State Materials Laboratory P.O. Box 47365 Olympia, WA 98504-7365

Phone Number Fax Number

(360) 709-5450 (360) 709-5585

E-mail Address: allent@wsdot.wa.gov

Bijan Khaleghi (Member) Bridge Engineer, Concrete Specialist Washington State Department of Transportation P.O. Box 47340 Olympia, WA 98504-7340

Phone Number Fax Number

(360) 705-7181 (360) 705-6814

E-mail Address: khalegb@wsdot.wa.gov

West Virginia
Gregory Bailey (Primary Member) Director, Engineering Division West Virginia Department of Transportation Building 5, Room A317 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East Charleston, WV 25305-0440 Phone Number Fax Number

WV
(304) 558-9722 (304) 558-0605

E-mail Address: Gregory.L.Bailey@wv.gov

James D. Shook P.E. (Member) Assistant State Bridge Engineer West Virginia Department of Transportation Building 5, Room A317 1900 Kanawha Boulevard East Charleston, WV 25305-0440

Phone Number Fax Number

(304) 558-9747 (304) 558-0605

E-mail Address: James.D.Shook@wv.gov

Wisconsin
Scot Becker (Primary Member) Chief Development Engineer Wisconsin Department of Transportation P.O. Box 7916 Madison, WI 53707-7916 Phone Number Fax Number

WI
(608) 266-5161 (608) 266-5166

E-mail Address: scot.becker@dot.wi.gov

Beth A. Cannestra (Member) Director, Bureau of Structures Wisconsin Department of Transportation P.O. Box 7916 Madison, WI 53707-7916

Phone Number Fax Number

(608) 266-0075 (608) 266-5166

E-mail Address: beth.cannestra@dot.wi.gov

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 17 of 22

236

William Dreher (Member) Chief Structures Design Engineer Wisconsin Department of Transportation P.O. Box 7916 Madison, WI 53707-7916

Phone Number Fax Number

(608) 266-8489

E-mail Address: William.Dreher@dot.wi.gov

Wyoming
Gregg C. Fredrick P.E. (Primary Member) State Bridge Engineer Wyoming Department of Transportation 5300 Bishop Boulevard Cheyenne, WY 82009-3340 Phone Number Fax Number

WY
(307) 777-4427 (307) 777-4279

E-mail Address: gregg.fredrick@dot.state.wy.us

Keith R. Fulton P.E. (Member) Associate State Bridge Engineer Wyoming Department of Transportation 5300 Bishop Boulevard Cheyenne, WY 82009-3340

Phone Number Fax Number

(307) 777-4427 (307) 777-4279

E-mail Address: keith.fulton@dot.state.wy.us

U.S. DOT Member


FHWA
M. Myint Lwin (Secretary) Director, Office of Bridge Technology Federal Highway Administration Southeast Federal Center Bldg, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Phone Number Fax Number

DC
(202) 366-4589 (202) 366-3077

E-mail Address: myint.lwin@fhwa.dot.gov

Raj Ailaney (Member) Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology Southeast Federal Center Bldg, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590

Phone Number Fax Number

(202) 366-6749

E-mail Address: Raj.Ailaney@dot.gov

AASHTO
AASHTO DC
Ken Kobetsky P.E. (Liaison) Phone Number (202) 624-5254 Program Director for Engineering Fax Number (202) 624-5469 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Suite 249 444 North Capitol Street, N.W. Suite 249 Washington, DC 20001-1539 E-mail Address: kenk@aashto.org

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 18 of 22

237

Kelley Rehm (Liaison) Phone Number (859) 433-9623 Engineering Management - Bridges and Structures Fax Number (866) 301-1322 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 602 Idlewood Drive Mount Juliet, DC 37122 E-mail Address: krehm@aashto.org

Associate MemberBridge, Port, and Toll


Golden Gate Bridge
Kary H. Witt (Member) Deputy General Manager, Bridge Division Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District Box 9000, Presidio Station San Francisco, CA 94129-0601 Phone Number Fax Number

CA
(415) 923-2240 (415) 923-2011

E-mail Address: kwitt@goldengate.org

MDTA
Dan Williams (Member) Bridge Engineering Manager Maryland Transportation Authority Division of Engineering and Construction Management 300 Authority Drive Dundalk, MD 21222 Phone Number Fax Number

MD
(410) 537-7824

E-mail Address: dwilliams1@mdta.state.md.us

N.J. Turnpike Authority


Richard J. Raczynski P.E. (Member) Chief Engineer New Jersey Turnpike Authority P.O. Box 5042 Woodbridge, NJ 07095-5042 Phone Number Fax Number

NJ
(732) 442-8600 (732) 293-1200

E-mail Address: raczynski@turnpike.state.nj.us

N.Y. State Bridge Authority


William J. Moreau P.E. (Member) Chief Engineer New York State Bridge Authority Mid Hudson Bridge Plaza P.O. Box 1010 Highland, NY 12528-8010 Phone Number Fax Number

NY
(845) 691-4077 (845) 691-7914

E-mail Address: bmoreau@nysba.state.ny.us

Penn. Turnpike Authority


James L. Stump P.E. (Member) Bridge Engineer Manager Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission P.O. Box 67676 Harrisburg, PA 17106-7676 Phone Number Fax Number

PA
(717) 939-9551 (717) 986-9645

E-mail Address: jstump@paturnpike.com

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 19 of 22

238

Associate MemberFederal
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Christopher H. Westbrook P.E. (Member) Structural Engineer, Bridge Safety Program Manager U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Department of the Army Attn: CECW-CE 441 G Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20314 Phone Number Fax Number

DC
(202) 761-7584 (202) 761-1960

E-mail Address: Christopher.H.Westbrook@usace.ar my.mil

Mr. Phillip W. Sauser, P.E. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CEMVP-EC-D 190 5th Street East, Suite 401 St.Paul, MN 55101-1638

Phone Number

651-290-5722

E-mail Address:

phillip.w.sauser@usace.army.mil

USDA Forest Service


Thomas Gillins P.E., S.E. (Member) Structural Engineer USDA Forest Service 324 25th Street Ogden, UT 84401 Phone Number Fax Number

UT
(801) 625-5236 (303) 625-5229

E-mail Address: tgillins@fs.fed.us

Associate MemberInternational
Alberta
Lloyd Atkin (Member) Director, Bridge Engineering and Water Management Alberta Transportation 2nd Floor, Twin Atria Building 4999 - 98th Avenue Edminton, AB T6B 2X3 Phone Number Fax Number

AB
(780) 415-4876 (780) 422-5426

E-mail Address: Lloyd.Atkin@gov.ab.ca

Korea
Eui-Joon Lee (Member) Tem Leader of Design Evaluation Team Korea Expressway Corporation Sujeong-gu, Seongnam-si 430, DaewangPangyoro (239-1, Geumto-dong) Gyeonggi-do, 461-703 Phone Number Fax Number (000) 000-0000

E-mail Address: lejlej@ex.co.kr

Sang-Soon Lee (Member) Senior Manager of Structure Inspection Team Korea Expressway Corporation Sujeong-gu, Seongnam-si 430, DaewangPangyoro (239-1, Geumto-dong) Gyeonggi-do, 461-703

Phone Number Fax Number

(000) 000-0000

E-mail Address: lssp@ex.co.kr

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 20 of 22

239

Nova Scotia

NS

Mark Pertus (Member) Phone Number (902) 424-6777 Manager of Structural Engineering Fax Number Nova Scotia Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal P.O. Box 186 Halifax, NS B3J 2N2 E-mail Address: pertusma@gov.ns.ca

Ontario
Bala Tharmabala (Member) Manager, Bridge Office Ontario Ministry of Transportation Garden City Tower, 2nd Floor 301 St. Paul Street St. Catherines, ON L2R 7R4 Phone Number Fax Number

ON
(905) 704-2341 (905) 704-2060

E-mail Address: bala.tharmabala@ontario.ca

Saskatchewan
Howard Yea (Member) Director, Bridge Services Saskatchewan Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure 1630 Park, 2nd Floor Regina, SK S4P 3V7 Phone Number Fax Number

SK
(306) 787-4830 (306) 787-9777

E-mail Address: hyea@highways.gov.sk.ca

Other
Newfoundland
Peter Lester (Rec. Info) Chief Bridge Engineer Newfoundland Dept. of Works, Services and Transportation P.O. Box 8700 St. Johns, NF A1B 4J6 Phone Number Fax Number

NF
(709) 729-3990 (709) 729-0283

E-mail Address:

TRB
Waseem Dekelbab Ph.D., P.E. (Member) Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board TRB Mail Room 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Phone Number Fax Number

DC
(202) 334-1409 (202) 334-2006

E-mail Address: WDekelbab@nas.edu

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 21 of 22

240

U.S. Coast Guard


Hala Elgaaly P.E. (Member) Administrator, Bridge Administration Program United States Coast Guard 2100 2nd Street, S.W Washington, DC 20166-6511 Phone Number Fax Number

DC
(202) 372-1511

E-mail Address: hala.elgaaly@uscg.mil

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Page 22 of 22

241

AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures


Technical Committee Membership
SCOBS Executive Committee
Member Name Chair Vice Chair Liaison Liaison Kerley, Malcolm T. Thompson, Kevin Rehm, Kelley Kobetsky, Ken Ghara, Hossein Anderson, Ralph E. Pratt, Richard A. Hurst, Kenneth F. Hida, Susan Liles, Paul V. Keller, Timothy J. Healy, Robert J. Johnson, Bruce V. Hohmann, David P. Domagalski, Thomas J. Fredrick, Gregg C. Dorgan, Daniel L. Wasserman, Edward P. Siddiqi, Jawdat Bailey, Gregory Bardow, Alexander K. Farrar, Matthew M. Lwin, M. Myint Grady, Erin Member Dept. Virginia California AASHTO AASHTO Louisiana Illinois Alaska Kansas California Georgia Ohio Maryland Oregon Texas Illinois Wyoming Minnesota Tennessee Ohio West Virginia Massachusetts Idaho FHWA AASHTO Region T-20 Chair

T-01 Chair T-02 Chair T-03 Chair T-04 and TT-05 Chair T-06 Chair T-07 Chair T-08 Chair T-09 Chair T-10 Chair T-11 Chair T-12 Chair T-13 Chair T-14 Chair T-15 Chair T-16 Chair T-17 Chair T-18 Chair Ex Officio Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 1 of 10

242

T-1 Technical Committee for Security


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Ghara, Hossein VACANT VACANT Liles, Paul V. Walus, Kendal "Ken" Heckman, Dennis Newton, Barton Kapur, Jugesh Ernst, Steve Duwadi, Sheila Witt, Kary H. Member Dept. Louisiana TBD New York Georgia Virginia Missouri California Washington FHWA FHWA Golden Gate Bridge Region Region II Region I Region II Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-2 Technical Committee for Bearings and Expansion Devices


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Anderson, Ralph E. Wasserman, Edward P. Robert, Jeffrey L. Hite, Mark Perfetti, Greg R. Bowers, Barry W. Leonard, Mark A. Traynowicz, Mark J. Seradj, Hormoz Rogers, Timothy Member Dept. Illinois Tennessee Maryland Kentucky North Carolina South Carolina Colorado Nebraska Oregon FHWA Region Region III Region II Region II Region II Region II Region II Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 2 of 10

243

T-3 Technical Committee for Seismic Design


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Pratt, Richard A. Thompson, Kevin Bardow, Alexander K. Fish, David Brand, Phil Liles, Paul V. Bowers, Barry W. Wasserman, Edward P. Anderson, Ralph E. Rearick, Anne M. Heckman, Dennis Barnes, Kent M. Elicegui, Mark P. Johnson, Bruce V. Kapur, Jugesh Manceaux, Derrell Member Dept. Alaska California Massachusetts Rhode Island Arkansas Georgia South Carolina Tennessee Illinois Indiana Missouri Montana Nevada Oregon Washington FHWA Region Region IV Region IV Region I Region I Region II Region II Region II Region II Region III Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

T-4 Technical Committee for Construction


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Hurst, Kenneth F. Liles, Paul V. Sherlock, David B. Healy, Robert J. Elnahal, Shoukry Dunne, Richard W. Symonds, Wayne B. Beck, Steven P. Dreher, William C. Santo, Paul T. Camp, Jimmy D. Goeden, Kevin Ger, Jeffrey Member Dept. Kansas Georgia Maine Maryland Massachusetts New Jersey Vermont Michigan Wisconsin Hawaii New Mexico South Dakota FHWA Region Region III Region II Region I Region I Region I Region I Region I Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 3 of 10

244

T-5 Technical Committee for Loads and Load Distribution


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Hida, Susan Bailey, Gregory Folsom, Jeffrey S. Dunne, Richard W. Macioce, Thomas P. Fallaha, Sam Western, Kevin Ahlman, Mark Becker, Scot Elicegui, Mark P. Rusch, Robert J. Kapur, Jugesh Saad, Thomas K. Tharmabala, Bala Member Dept. California West Virginia Maine New Jersey Pennsylvania Florida Minnesota Nebraska Wisconsin Nevada Oklahoma Washington FHWA Ontario Region Region IV Region II Region I Region I Region I Region II Region III Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-6 Technical Committee for Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Liles, Paul V. Soneji, Jiten K. Sherlock, David B. Yannotti, Arthur P. Ansley, Marcus Shook, James D. Beck, Steven P. Keller, Timothy J. Thompson, Kevin Triandafilou, Lou Member Dept. Georgia Delaware Maine New York Florida West Virginia Michigan Ohio California FHWA Region Region II Region I Region I Region I Region II Region II Region III Region III Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 4 of 10

245

T-7 Technical Committee for Guardrail and Bridge Rail


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Keller, Timothy J. Black, John F. "Buddy" Robert, Jeffery L. Ghara, Hossein Bowers, Barry W. Rearick, Anne M. Hurst, Kenneth F. Goeden, Kevin Fredrick, Gregg C. Wong, Waider Member Dept. Ohio Alabama Maryland Louisiana South Carolina Indiana Kansas South Dakota Wyoming FHWA Region Region III Region II Region I Region II Region II Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

T-8 Technical Committee for Moveable Bridges


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Healy, Robert J. Fossier, Paul Galdos, Nicolas Freedman, Earle S. Elnahal, Shoukry Richardson, Mark W. Dunne, Richard W. Dubin, Earl Elgaaly, Hala Member Dept. Maryland Louisiana District of Columbia Maryland Massachusetts New Hampshire New Jersey FHWA U.S.Coast Guard Region Region I Region II Region I Region I Region I Region I Region I Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-9 Technical Committee for Bridge Preservation


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Johnson, Bruce V. McDonald, Norman L. Freedman, Earle S. Healy, Robert J. Dunne, Richard W. Colquett, William "Tim" Pouliotte, Jeff Newton, Barton Virmani, Paul Y. Williams, Dan Member Dept. Oregon Iowa Maryland Maryland New Jersey Alabama Florida California FHWA MDTA Region Region IV Region III Region I Region I Region I Region II Region II Region IV Ex Officio Ex-Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 5 of 10

246

T-10 Technical Committee for Concrete Design


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Hohmann, David P. Farrar, Matthew M. Richardson, Mark W. Macioce, Thomas P. Ansley, Marcus Ghara, Hossein Wasserman, Edward P. Volgyi, Julius F.J. Risch, Loren R. Dorgan, Daniel L. Dreher, William C. Hida, Susan Jaber, Fouad Johnson, Bruce V. Khaleghi, Bijan Holt, Reggie Hartmann, Joey Member Dept. Texas Idaho New Hampshire Pennsylvania Florida Louisiana Tennessee Virginia Kansas Minnesota Wisconsin California Nebraska Oregon Washington FHWA FHWA Region Region IV Region IV Region I Region I Region II Region II Region II Region II Region III Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-11 Technical Committee for Research


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Domagalski, Thomas J. Perfetti, Greg R. Ansley, Marcus Walus, Kendal "Ken" Juntunen, David Nehme, Jean A. Thompson, Kevin Udland, Terrence R. Rusch, Robert J. Khaleghi, Bijan Friedland, Ian M. Tharmabala, Bala Sauser, Phillip Member Dept. Illinois North Carolina Florida Virginia Michigan Arizona California North Dakota Oklahoma Washington FHWA Ontario USACE Region Region III Region II Region II Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 6 of 10

247

T-12 Technical Committee for Structural Supports for Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals
Member Name Chair Vice Chair Fredrick, Gregg C. Risch, Loren R. Georges, Julie F. Soneji, Jiten K. Brand, Phil Fallaha, Sam Volgyi, Julius F.J. McDonald, Norman L. Leonard, Mark A. Santo, Paul T. Stefonowicz, Todd Sidhom, Samir Member Dept. Wyoming Kansas Connecticut Delaware Arkansas Florida Virginia Iowa Colorado Hawaii Nevada FHWA Region Region IV Region III Region I Region I Region II Region II Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

T-13 Technical Committee for Culverts


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Dorgan, Daniel L. Macioce, Thomas P. Benton, Barry A. Yannotti, Arthur P. Wolfe, Marvin Brennan, James J. Trujillo, Raymond M. Doehring, Fred Anderson, Scott Member Dept. Minnesota Pennsylvania Delaware New York Kentucky Kansas New Mexico Utah FHWA Region Region III Region I Region I Region I Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

T-14 Technical Committee for Structural Steel Design


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Wasserman, Edward P. Anderson, Ralph E. Christian, George A. Macioce, Thomas P. Perfetti, Greg R. McDonald, Norman L. Farrar, Matthew M. Seradj, Hormoz Hohmann, David P. Fredrick, Gregg C. Nguyen, Khoa Member Dept. Tennessee Illinois New York Pennsylvania North Carolina Iowa Idaho Oregon Texas Wyoming FHWA Region Region II Region III Region I Region I Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 7 of 10

248

T-15 Technical Committee for Substructures and Retaining Walls


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Siddiqi, Jawdat Allen, Tony M. Scott, David L. Dwyer, Donald F. Fish, David Black, John F. "Buddy" Sizemore, Jeff Shook, James D. Brennan, James J. Pratt, Richard A. Camp, Jimmy D. Nichols, Silas Member Dept. Ohio Washington New Hampshire New York Rhode Island Alabama South Carolina West Virginia Kansas Alaska New Mexico FHWA Region Region III Region IV Region I Region I Region I Region II Region II Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

T-16 Technical Committee for Timber Structures


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Bailey, Gregory Bardow, Alexander K. Symonds, Wayne B. Black, John F. "Buddy" Pratt, Richard A. Duwadi, Sheila Gillins, Tom Member Dept. West Virginia Massachusetts Vermont Alabama Alaska FHWA USDA Forest Service Region Region II Region I Region I Region II Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-17 Technical Committee for Welding


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Bardow, Alexander K. Liles, Paul V. Symonds, Wayne B. Carr, B. Keith Bailey, Gregory Dorgan, Daniel L. Newton, Barton Verma, Krishna K. Member Dept. Massachusetts Georgia Vermont Mississippi West Virginia Minnesota California FHWA Region Region I Region II Region I Region II Region II Region III Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 8 of 10

249

T-18 Technical Committee for Bridge Replacement Surveys and Inspection Standards
Member Name Chair Vice Chair Farrar, Matthew M. Newton, Barton Elnahal, Shoukry VACANT Christie, Eric J. Pouliotte, Jeff D'Andrea, Arthur Anderson, Ralph E. Juntunen, David Barnes, Kent M. Trujillo, Raymond M. Ramsey, Keith L. Fredrick, Gregg C. Everett, Thomas D. Tharmabala, Bala Elnahal, Kamal Member Dept. Idaho California Massachusetts New York Alabama Florida Louisiana Illinois Michigan Montana New Mexico Texas Wyoming FHWA Ontario U.S.Coast Guard Region Region IV Region IV Region I Region I Region II Region II Region II Region III Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex Officio Ex Officio

T-19 Technical Committee for Computers


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Hurst, Kenneth F. Fulton, Keith R. VACANT Christie, Eric J. Hite, Mark Carr, Mitchell K. Becker, Scot Nehme, Jean A. Leonard, Mark A. Trujillo, Raymond M. Rusch, Robert J. Ailaney, Raj Member Dept. Kansas Wyoming New York Alabama Kentucky Mississippi Wisconsin Arizona Colorado New Mexico Oklahoma FHWA Region Region III Region IV Region I Region II Region II Region II Region III Region IV Region IV Region IV Region IV Ex Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 9 of 10

250

T-20 Technical Committee for Tunnels


Member Name Chair Vice Chair Thompson, Kevin Johnson, Bruce V. Eskender, Konjit "Connie" Bardow, Alexander K. Dwyer, Donald F. Ruzzi, Lou Nallapaneni, Prasad L. Salamon, Michael G. Khaleghi, Bijan Rohena, Jesus Williams, Dan Member Dept. California Oregon District of Columbia Massachusetts New York Pennsylvania Virginia Colorado Washington FHWA MDTA Region Region IV Region IV Region I Region I Region I Region I Region II Region IV Region IV Ex Officio Ex-Officio

Monday, March 22, 2010

Page 10 of 10

251

Last updated February 04, 2010

FHWA OFFICERS AND EX-OFFICIO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LIAISONS OFFICERS M. Myint Lwin (Secretary) Director, Office of Bridge Technology Federal Highway Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Room E75-318 Washington, DC 20590 Raj Ailaney (Assistant Secretary) Senior Bridge Engineer Planning & Contracts Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Room E75-314 Washington, DC 20590 Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4589 (202) 366-3077 myint.lwin@dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(202) 366-6749 (202) 366-3077 Raj.Ailaney@dot.gov

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LIAISONS T-1, Bridge and Tunnel Security Steve Ernst Senior Bridge Engineer - Safety and Security Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Sheila Duwadi Research Structural Engineer Federal Highway Administration, HRDI-07 Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Office of Infrastructure R&D 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101 T-2, Bearings and Expansion Devices Timothy Rogers Division Bridge Engineer Federal Highway Administration 530 Center Street NE, Suite 100 Salem, OR 97301 T-3, Seismic Design Derrell Manceaux Senior Structural Engineer Federal Highway Administration FHWA Resource Center 12300 W Dakota Ave, Suite #340 Lakewood, CO 80228 Phone Fax Email (720) 963-3205 (720) 963-3232 Derrell.Manceaux@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (503) 587-4706 (503) 399-5838 timothy.rogers@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4619 (202) 366-3077 steve.ernst@dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(202) 493-3106 (202) 493-3442 sheila.duwadi@dot.gov

252

Last updated February 04, 2010

FHWA OFFICERS AND EX-OFFICIO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LIAISONS

T-4, Construction Jeffrey Ger Division Bridge Engineer Federal Highway Administration 545 John Knox Road, Suite 200 Tallahassee, FL 32303 T-5, Loads and Load Distribution Thomas Saad Bridge Engineer Federal Highway Administration FHWA Resource Center 4749 W Lincoln Highway (RTE 30) Suite 600 Matteson, IL 60443 T-6, Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites Lou Triandafilou High-Performance Structural Materials Engineer 10 South Howard Street Suite 4000 Baltimore, MD 21201 T-7, Guardrail and Bridge Rail Waider Wong Structural Design Engineer 10 South Howard Street Suite 4000 Baltimore, MD 21201 T-8, Movable Bridges Earl Dubin Structural Engineer Federal Highway Administration Leo W. OBrien Federal Building Room 719, Clinton Avenue & N. Pearl Street Albany, NY 12207 T-9, Bridge Preservation Paul Virmani Research Chemist Federal Highway Administration, HRDI-09 Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Office of Infrastructure R&D 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101 Phone Fax Email (202) 493-3052 (202) 493-3442 paul.virmani@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (518) 431-4125x229 (518) 431-4121 earl.dubin@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (410) 962-9252 (410) 962-3655 waider.wong@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (410) 962-3648 (410) 962-3655 lou.triandafilou@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (708) 283-3521 (708) 283-3501 thomas.saad@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (850) 942-9650x3039 (850) 942-9650 Jeffrey.Ger@dot.gov

253

Last updated February 04, 2010

FHWA OFFICERS AND EX-OFFICIO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LIAISONS

T-10, Concrete Design Reggie Holt Senior Bridge Engineer - Concrete Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-10 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4596 (202) 366-3077 Reggie.Holt@dot.gov

Joseph L. Hartmann Senior Research Structural Engineer Team Leader, Design and Construction Federal Highway Administration Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, Virginia 22101 T-11, Research Ian M. Friedland Technical Director, Bridge and Structures R&D Federal Highway Administration Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Room F-211, HRDI-03 6300 Georgetown Pike Mclean, VA 22101-2296 T-12, Structural Supports for Signs, Luminaires and Traffic Signals Samir Sidhom Bridge Design Team Leader Federal Lands Bridge Office 12300 W Dakota Ave, Suite 210 Lakewood, CO 80228 T-13, Culverts Scott Anderson Geotechnical & Hydraulic Tech. Service Team Leader 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 340 Lakewood, CO 80228 T-14, Structural Steel Design Khoa Nguyen Bridge Design Team Leader Federal Highway Administration Western Federal Lands Highway Division 610 E. 5th Street Vancouver, WA 98661

Phone Fax Email

(202) 493-3059 (202) 493-3086 joey.hartmann@dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(202) 493-3023 (202) 493-3086 ian.friedland@fhwa.dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(720) 963-3399 (720) 963-3379 samir.sidhom@dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(720) 963-3244 (720) 963-3232 scott.anderson@dot.gov

Phone Fax Email

(360) 619-7700 (360) 619-7846 Khoa.nguyen@dot.gov

254

Last updated February 04, 2010

FHWA OFFICERS AND EX-OFFICIO TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LIAISONS T-15, Substructures and Retaining Walls Silas Nichols Senior Bridge Engineer - Geotechnical Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-20 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 T-16, Timber Structures Sheila Duwadi Research Structural Engineer Federal Highway Administration, HRDI-07 Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Office of Infrastructure R&D 6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, VA 22101 T-17, Welding Krishna Verma Principal Bridge Engineer - Welding Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-10 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 T-18, Bridge Management, Evaluation, and Rehabilitation Thomas Everett Principal Bridge Engineer Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-30 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.. Washington, DC 20590 T-19, Computers Raj Ailaney Senior Bridge Engineer Planning and Contracts Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-1 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E, Washington, DC 20590 T-20, Tunnels Jesus Rohena Senior Bridge Engineer - Tunnels Federal Highway Administration Office of Bridge Technology, HIBT-10 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, DC 20590 Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4593 (202) 366-3077 jesus.rohena@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 366-6749 (202) 366-3077 raj.ailaney@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4675 (202) 366-3077 thomas.everett@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 366-4601 (202) 366-3077 krishna.verma@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 493-3106 (202) 493-3442 sheila.duwadi@dot.gov Phone Fax Email (202) 366-1554 (202) 366-3077 Silas.Nichols@dot.gov

255