Comparison of Bridge Rating Methods
Publication: Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 110, Issue 7
Abstract
The working stress, load factor and autostress methods are applied to the rating of composite and noncomposite steel beam and girder bridge structures. These three methods are developed and used to rate a series of 16 representative bridges with a wide range of span lengths. The rating factors resulting from these analyses are compared to each other and correlated with the span length by means of a linear regression. The results of the regression allow the engineer to predict the increase in the rating factor obtained by utilizing load factor and autostress methods over that given by the universally recognized working stress method.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
AASHTO, “Manual for Maintenance, Inspection of Bridge,” 3rd ed., 1978, Washington, D.C.
2.
AASHTO, “Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges,” 12th ed., Washington, D.C.
3.
Beedle, L. S., “Plastic Design of Steel Frames,” John Wiley & Son, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1958.
4.
Carskadden, P. S., and Haaijer, G., “Bridge Design by the Autostress Method,” Bridge Engineering, Vol. 1, Transportation Research Record 664, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1978.
5.
“Continuous Beam Program Documentation,” Maryland Department of Transportation, State Highway Admin., of Bridge Development, 1978.
6.
Documentation of Bridge Analysis and Rating System (BARS),” Control Data Corporation, Mar., 1972.
7.
“Documentation of Bridge Analysis and Rating (BRRAT),” Chapt. 14, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.
8.
“Documentation of Bridge Inventory Rating Computer Program,” No. 12, Oklahoma State Highway Dept., Okla.
9.
“Documentation of Bridge Rating Program,” New York Department of Transportation.
10.
“Effects of Maryland Legal Weight Limits on Highways and Bridges,” Department of Civil Eng., University of Maryland, College Park, MD for Federal Highway Administration, Feb., 1981.
11.
Fu, C. C., Schelling, D. R., “Computer Programs for Bridge Rating,” Univ. of Virginia Press.
12.
Fu, C. C., Schelling, D. R., “Methods and Software for the Rating of Bridge Structures,” ASCE Spring Convention, Preprint 3154, Pittsburgh, Pa Apr 24–28, 1978.
13.
Galambos, T. V., “Probabilistic Approach to the Design of Steel Bridges,” Transportation Research Record 711, National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C., 1979.
14.
Ghani, A. F. M. R., “Shakedown Analysis of Nonprismatic Beams,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 93, No. ST6, Dec., 1964, p. 25.
15.
Haaijer, G., Carskadden, P. S., Grubb, M. A., “Autostress Design of Steel Bridges,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 1, Jan., 1983, p. 188.
16.
Haines, L. D., “Structural Rating Analysis, Users and Quality Control Guide (Program No. H891),” Vermont Department of Highways, Jan. 1, 1977.
17.
Masonnet, C. E., and Save, M.A., “Plastic Analysis and Design,” Blaisdell Publishing Co., N.Y., 1965.
18.
Ponter, A., “On the Relationship between Plastic Shakedown and the Repeated Loading of Creep Structures,” Transaction of the ASCE, June, 1971, p. 437.
19.
Vincent, G. S., “Tentative Criteria for Load Factor Design of Steel Highway Bridges,” AISI Bulletin No. 15, Mar., 1969.
20.
White, K. R., Minor, J., “Overload Route Systems,” Final Report, New Mexico State Univ., Sept. 12, 1974.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Structural Engineering
Volume 110 • Issue 7 • July 1984
Pages: 1447 - 1466
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1984
Published in print: Jul 1984
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.