Proposed Method for Determining the Interval for Hands-on Inspection of Steel Bridges with Fracture Critical Members
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 15, Issue 4
Abstract
The proposed assessment procedure presented in this paper may be used to establish inspection intervals for steel bridges with fracture critical members (FCMs) (if adopted by the Federal Highway Administration). The procedure proposed herein only applies to FCM inspections which are defined as follows: a hands-on inspection of a FCM or member components that may include visual and other nondestructive evaluations. The method is rather simple and provides an alternative procedure to the pure calendar based inspection methodology currently specified in the Code of Federal Regulations for all FCMs. There are only two requirements which must first be satisfied in order to use the assessment. The first is that the routine 24-month inspection must continue to be performed on the bridge under evaluation. The second is that a FCM inspection must be performed on the bridge or the FCM under evaluation prior to the implementation of the resulting inspection intervals given from this assessment. The “initial inspection” should be performed as a typical FCM inspection. The assessment procedure is intended to be applied to individual FCMs and not the entire bridge itself. However, on bridges with multiple FCMs, the “worst case” FCM may be evaluated using the assessment and the resulting inspection interval may be applied to all FCMs on the bridge (for simplicity and bookkeeping purposes). The decision of whether to apply the assessment to all FCMs or the bridge’s worst case FCM is left up to the owner or engineer. The approach is not based on more rigorous damage tolerant design concepts or other fracture mechanics based methods. Nevertheless, the method is a first step in providing a more rational alternative to calendar based inspection and allows owners to prioritize structures and resource allocation. Using engineering experience and judgment, the interval for the hands-on inspection of steel bridges with FCMs can then be selected based on upper limits established through a consensus. Although the focus is on fracture critical bridges and members, the writers believe that the concept could be extended to a variety of structure types and configurations.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers greatly appreciate the individuals who contributed their time and expertise in this research, specifically these following individuals who either participated in the workshop or provided valuable review comments to the final report: Mr. Randy Cox—Texas DOT, Mr. George Conner—Alabama DOT, Mr. George Christian—New York DOT, Mr. Gary Moss—FHWA, Mr. Finn Hubbard—Wisconsin DOT, Dr. Steve Lovejoy—Oregon DOT, Mr. Ralph Anderson—Illinois DOT, Dr. Bill Wright—FHWA, Mr. Gary Peterson—Minnesota DOT, Dr. Karl Frank—University of Texas at Austin, Mr. Tom Everett—FHWA, Mr. Phil Fish, Fish and Associates, and Mr. Phil Sauser, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
References
AASHTO. (2002). Guide for commonly recognized structural elements, guide for (CoRe) structural elements, AASHTO, Washington, D.C.
AASHTO. (2007). LRFD bridge design specifications, 4th Ed., AASHTO, Washington, D.C.
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). (2007). “National bridge inspection standards.” 23CFR650, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Connor, R. J., Dexter, R., and Mahmoud, H. (2005). “Inspection and management of bridges with fracture-critical details.” NCHRP Rep. No. 354, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Connor, R. J., Kaufmann, E. J., Fisher, J. W., and Wright, W. J. (2007). “Prevention and mitigation strategies to address recent brittle fractures in steel bridges.” J. Bridge Eng., 12(2), 164–173.
Demers, C. E., and Fisher, J. W. (1989). “A survey of localized cracking in steel bridges, 1981 to 1988.” ATLSS Rep. No. 89-01, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (1996). “Recording and coding guide for the structure inventory and appraisal of the nation’s bridges.” Rep. No. FHWA-PD-96-001, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Fisher, J. W., Kaufman, E. J., Wright, W. J., Xi, Z., Tjiang, H., Sivakumar, B., and Edberg, W. (2001). “Hoan Bridge forensic investigation failure analysis.” Final Rep. for Wisconsin DOT and FHWA, FHWA, Washington, D.C.
Kaufman, E. J., Connor, R. J., and Fisher, J. W. (2004). “Failure analysis of the U.S. 422 girder fracture—Final report.” ATLSS Rep. No. 04-21, Center for Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, Pa.
Mahmoud, H. N., Connor, R. J., and Fisher, J. W. (2005). “Finite-element investigation of the fracture potential of highly constrained details.” Comput. Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng., 20, 383–392.
National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). (1970). “Collapse of U.S. 35 Highway Bridge at Point Pleasant, West Virginia on December 15, 1967.” Highway Accident Rep., NTSB No. HAR-71/01, Washington, D.C.
Shakleton, D. N. (2006). “Reducing failure risk in welded components.” Welding in the world, Vol. 50, International Institute of Welding, Villepinte, France.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2010 ASCE.
History
Received: Apr 20, 2009
Accepted: Jul 2, 2009
Published online: Jul 4, 2009
Published in print: Jul 2010
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.