Load Distribution of Existing Solid Slab Bridges Based on Field Tests
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 4, Issue 3
Abstract
The load-carrying capacity of existing slab bridges is commonly calculated based on the equivalent width recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Interest in the field load testing of highway bridges has increased significantly in recent years. Load capacity of a bridge based on field testing is generally greater than that determined from standard rating calculations. The main parameters affecting the equivalent width were identified using the grillage analogy method. The results suggest that edge beam size should be considered in the equivalent width calculation. A simplified equation for the equivalent width is proposed for solid slab bridges with or without edge beams. The equivalent widths based on the AASHTO and LRFD cores was compared with those based on the field tests and analyses. The equivalent widths based on the grillage analogy and field tests are higher than those based on the AASHTO and LRFD codes, which indicates that the codes give a conservative estimate of the equivalent width. In the absence of field tests, the grillage analogy provides an accurate estimate for the equivalent width and bridge rating.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. (1994). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 1st Ed., Washington, D.C.
2.
Arockiasamy, M., and Amer, A. (1995). “Load distribution on highway bridges based on field test data.” Final Rep., HPR Study 0668, WPI 0510668, Florida Dept. of Transportation, Tallahassee, 182.
3.
Bakht, B., and Csagoly, P. F. (1980). “Diagnostic testing of a bridge.”J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 106(7), 1515–1531.
4.
Bakht, B., and Jaeger, L. G. (1990). “Bridge testing—A surprise every time.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 116(5), 1370–1382.
5.
Bakht, B., and Jaeger, L. G. (1985). Bridge analysis simplified. McGraw-Hill, New York.
6.
Cope, R. J., and Clark, L. A. (1984). Concrete slabs: Analysis and design. Elsevier Science, New York.
7.
Jaeger, L. G., and Bakht, B. (1989). Bridge analysis by microcomputer. McGraw-Hill, New York.
8.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). ( 1992). Distribution of wheel loads on highway bridges. Transportation Research Board (TRB) No. 187, May, 1–31.
9.
Stallings, J. M., and Yoo, C. H. (1993). “Tests and ratings of short span steel bridges.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 119(7), 2150–2168.
10.
Standard specifications for highway bridges. (1992). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 15th Ed., Washington, D.C.
11.
Tiedeman, J., Albrecht, P., and Cayes, L. (1993). “Behavior of two-span continuous bridge under truck axle loading.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 119(4), 1234–1264.
12.
Warren, G., and Malvar, L. J. (1993). “Lateral distribution of loads in one-way continuous navy pier decks.”J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 119(8), 2332–2348.
13.
Zokaie, T., Imbsen, R. A., and Osterkamp, T. A. ( 1991). “Distribution of wheel loads on highway bridges.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1290, Vol. 1, Bridges and Structures, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1191.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: Jun 10, 1997
Published online: Aug 1, 1999
Published in print: Aug 1999
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.