Evaluation of Bridge Approach Slab and Dynamic Load Allowance Using Sub-mm 3D Laser Imaging Technology
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 28, Issue 7
Abstract
Current evaluation of bumps at bridge approaches is limited in scope and performance, and varies in practice at different state DOTs. This study intends to propose a general criterion specifically for bridge approach bump classification and develop a formula for dynamic load allowance (IM) estimation for bridges in Oklahoma. A total of 98 bridges in Oklahoma were studied using recently developed sub-mm 3D laser imaging technology that simultaneously collected inertial profiles, sub-mm 2D/3D images, and right-of-way images at highway speeds for roughness and distress analysis. A three-level criterion that evaluates maximum roughness within an approach or departure slab is established to classify approach bumps into Good, Fair, and Poor conditions. The threshold defined in the criterion considers both the field crew’s sensation during data collection and the surface distresses that cause or are associated with different levels of International Roughness Index magnitudes. The development of the formula for bridge IM estimation is based on the established criteria while incorporating the influences of bumps from approach slab and bridge deck. The results of evaluating approach bump and IM of 98 bridges demonstrate the ability of using sub-mm 3D laser imaging technology to evaluate bridge approach bumps and bridge IM in an efficient and effective manner.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the research project, “Bridge Approach Evaluation and Management,” sponsored by the ODOT. The opinions expressed in the paper are those of the authors, who are responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data herein, and do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the sponsoring agency. This paper does not constitute a standard, regulation, or specification.
References
AASHTO. 2017. Standard practice for evaluating faulting of concrete pavements. AASHTO R36-17. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
AASHTO. 2018. The manual for bridge evaluation. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Abu-Farsakh, M. Y., and Q. Chen. 2014. Field demonstration of new bridge approach slab designs and performance. FHWA/LA. 13/520. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana Transportation Research Center.
ASTM. 2021. Standard practice for computing international roughness index of roads from longitudinal profile measurements. ASTM E1926-08. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Bozozuk, M. 1978. “Bridge foundation move.” Transp. Res. Rec. 678: 17–21.
Briaud, J. L., R. W. James, and S. B. Hoffman. 1997. Settlement of bridge approaches (the bump at the end of the bridge). NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 234. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Cai, C. S., X. M. Shi, M. Araujo, and S. R. Chen. 2007. “Effect of approach span condition on vehicle-induced dynamic response of slab-on-girder road bridges.” Eng. Struct. 29 (12): 3210–3226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.10.004.
Das, S. C., R. M. Bakeer, J. Zhong, and M. Schutt. 1999. Assessment of mitigating embankment settlement with pile-supported approach slabs. LA. 01/349. New Orleans, LA: Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tulane Univ.
Deng, L., and C. S. Cai. 2010. “Development of dynamic impact factor for performance evaluation of existing multi-girder concrete bridges.” Eng. Struct. 32 (1): 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2009.08.013.
Deng, L., Y. Yu, Q. Zou, and C. S. Cai. 2015. “State-of-the-art review of dynamic impact factors of highway bridges.” J. Bridge Eng. 20 (5): 04014080. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000672.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2012. Bridge inspector’s reference manual. FHWA NHI 12-049. Washington, DC: FHWA.
Henderson, B., J. Dickes, G. Cimini, and C. Olmedo. 2016. FHWA LTPP guidelines for measuring bridge approach transitions using inertial profilers. FHWA-HRT-16-072. Washington, DC: FHWA.
Huang, D., T. L. Wang, and M. Shahawy. 1993. “Impact studies of multigirder concrete bridges.” J. Struct. Eng. 119 (8): 2387–2402. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1993)119:8(2387).
Lenke, L. R. 2006. Settlement issues–bridge approach slabs. Final Rep. Phase 1. Rep. No. NM04MNT-02. Albuquerque, NM: New Mexico Dept. of Transportation.
Li, Y., E. OBrien, and A. González. 2006. “The development of a dynamic amplification estimator for bridges with good road profiles.” J. Sound Vib. 293 (1–2): 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2005.09.015.
Long, J. H., S. M. Olson, T. D. Stark, and E. A. Samara. 1998. “Differential movement at embankment/bridge structure interface in Illinois.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1633: 53–60.
Lu, Q., M. Li, M. Gunaratne, C. Xin, M. Hoque, and M. Rajalingola. 2018. Best practices for construction and repair of bridge approaches and departures. Rep. No. BDV25-977-31. Tampa, FL: Univ. of South Florida.
McGhee, K. 2002. A new approach to measuring the ride quality of highway bridges. VTRC 02-R10. Charlottesville, VA: Virginia Transportation Research Council.
Mishra, D., J. McAtee, S. Chowdhury, B. Chittoori, E. Tutumluer, and J. Nicks. 2021. Statistical analysis of pavement profiler data to evaluate the bump at the end of the bridge. FHWA-HRT-21-037. McLean, VA: Federal Highway Administration. Office of Infrastructure Research and Development.
Moghimi, H., and H. R. Ronagh. 2008. “Impact factors for a composite steel bridge using non-linear dynamic simulation.” Int. J. Impact Eng. 35 (11): 1228–1243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2007.07.003.
Mohseni, I., A. Ashin, W. Choi, and J. Kang. 2018. “Development of dynamic impact factor expressions for skewed composite concrete–steel slab-on-girder bridges.” Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2018: 4313671. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4313671.
Mulat, H. 2019. Determination of dynamic load allowance factor for reinforced concrete highway bridges. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Addis Ababa Institute of Technology.
Nazef, A., A. Mraz, S. Lyer, and B. Choubane. 2009. “Semi-automated faulting measurement for rigid pavements: Approach with high-speed inertial profiler data.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2094 (1): 121–127. https://doi.org/10.3141/2094-13.
ODOT. 2020. BRM bridge inspection field manual for Oklahoma bridges. Oklahoma City: ODOT Bridge Division.
Olmedo, C., B. Henderson, G. Cimini, and J. Springer. 2015. “Bump determination at bridge approach transitions using inertial profilers.” In Proc., Transportation Association of Canada 2015: Getting You There Safety. Ottawa: Transportation Association of Canada.
Park, Y. S., D. K. Shin, and T. J. Chung. 2005. “Influence of road surface roughness on dynamic impact factor of bridge by full-scale dynamic testing.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 32 (5): 825–829. https://doi.org/10.1139/l05-040.
Peterson, M. L., C. G. Chiou, and R. M. Gutkowski. 1999. A simple analysis of the effect of construction materials on bridge impact factors. MPC Rep. No. 99-105. Laramie, WY: Dept. of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Univ. of Wyoming.
Puppala, A. J., S. Saride, E. Archeewa, L. R. Hoyos, and S. Nazarian. 2009. Recommendations for design, construction, and maintenance of bridge approach slabs. Report 0-6022-1. Austin, TX: Univ. of Texas.
Sayers, M. W. 1998. The little book of profiling: Basic information about measuring and interpreting road profiles. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. of Michigan, Transportation Research Institute.
Wahls, H. E. 1990. Vol. 159 of Design and construction of bridge approaches. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, National Research Council.
Walkinshaw, J. L. 1978. “Survey of bridge movements in the western United States.” Transp. Res. Rec. 678: 6–12.
Wang, G., K. C. P. Wang, G. Yang, Y. Liu, Q. Li, and W. Peters. 2022. “Nondestructive bridge deck evaluation using sub-mm 3D laser imaging technology at highway speeds.” J. Bridge Eng. 27 (6): 04022045. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001888.
Wang, K. C. P., L. Li, and Q. Li. 2014. “Automated joint faulting measurement using 3D pavement texture data at 1 mm resolution.” In Proc., 2nd Transportation & Development Congress, 498–510. Reston, VA: ASCE.
White, D., S. Sritharan, M. T. Suleiman, and S. Chetlur. 2005. Identification of the best practices for design, construction, and repair of bridge approaches. CTRE Project 02-118. Ames, IA: Iowa State Univ.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 28 • Issue 7 • July 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 31, 2022
Accepted: Mar 7, 2023
Published online: Apr 19, 2023
Published in print: Jul 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Sep 19, 2023
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.
Cited by
- Guolong Wang, Kelvin C. P. Wang, Guangwei Yang, Joshua Qiang, Performance Evaluation of Bridge Approach Slabs and Joints through Sub-mm 3D Laser Imaging System, International Conference on Transportation and Development 2024, 10.1061/9780784485514.065, (742-754), (2024).