Time-Dependent Reliability-Based Methodology for Assessing Fracture Toughness Requirements for Highway Bridges
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 29, Issue 10
Abstract
The provisions for avoidance of brittle fracture in various bridge design codes vary in complexity, from the simple tables in North American codes, which present impact energy requirements as a function of steel grade, climate zone, and member type, to the more involved methods presented in the Eurocodes, which allow factors such as plate thickness, demand-to-capacity ratio, and strain rate to be considered. While these provisions generally appear to be meeting the needs of the code users, two issues are noteworthy. The first is that the North American provisions offer less flexibility and guidance for handling unusual situations than the Eurocode methods. The second is that very few studies can be found in the literature attempting to assess the level of reliability against brittle fracture provided by any of the existing design provisions. The current paper presents a study that attempts to make a first step in addressing both issues, using the Canadian design provisions as an example. Specifically, this paper describes a time-dependent Monte Carlo simulation (MCS)-based probabilistic model and then uses it to assess the extent to which the Canadian provisions provide consistent and adequate levels of reliability against brittle fracture over a range of steel grades, plate thicknesses, and climates. Based on the analysis results, areas of potential improvement of these requirements are identified.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some of the data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. This includes the analysis results and MATLAB code. Some of the data used during the study were provided by third parties. The historical temperature data are available to the general public through Environment Canada, as indicated in the References section. The gross vehicle weight data used to generate the live load statistical model were obtained from the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO). The corresponding author cannot provide the gross vehicle weight data, though direct requests may be made to the provider.
Acknowledgments
Financial support of this research project provided by the Canadian Institute of Steel Construction (CISC), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC), the Ontario Graduate Scholarship (OGS) Program, and the University of Waterloo is gratefully acknowledged. This work builds on a collaborative project with Prof. Bertram Kuehn from Technische Hochschule Mittelhessen (Germany), whose technical advice on implementation of the Eurocode fracture mechanics method for design against brittle fracture is also gratefully acknowledged. Lastly, the authors acknowledge that the analyses presented in this paper were performed with the aid of the SHARCNET consortium of supercomputer systems.
References
AASHTO. 2020. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. 9th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Agarwal, A., A. Au, D. Becker, R. Foschi, D. Gagnon, H. Hong, and A. Nowak. 2007. Calibration report for CAN/CSA-S6-06 Canadian highway bridge design code. Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
Altstadt, S., W. Wright, and R. Connor. 2014. “Proposed revisions to the current charpy V-notch requirements for structural steel used in U.S. bridges.” J. Bridge Eng. 19 (1): 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000486.
Artmont, F. A., and T. P. Murphy. 2018. Influence of material toughness on fracture reliability in steel bridges. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Record.
Barsom, J. M. 1975. “Development of the AASHTO fracture-toughness requirements for bridge steels.” Eng. Fract. Mech. 7: 605–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(75)90060-0.
Campbell, L. E., L. R. Snyder, J. M. Whitehead, R. J. Connor, and J. B. Lloyd. 2019. Probability of detection study for visual inspection of steel bridges: Volume 2—Full project report. Joint Transportation Research Program Publication No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2019/22. West Lafayette, IN. Purdue Univ.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). (2004). “Delivery requirements for surface condition of hot-rolled steel plates, wide flats and sections—Part 3: Sections.” EN 10163-3. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
Chien, M. Y. X., M. J. Tolou Kian, and S. Walbridge. 2022a. “Time-dependent probabilistic analysis on steel bridge brittle fracture.” In Proc., Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conf. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Chien, M. Y. X., S. Walbridge, and B. Kühn. 2022b. “Comparison of international brittle fracture design code provisions for steel bridges.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2676 (1): 676–687. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981211036678.
Chow, D. H. C., and G. J. Levermore. 2007. “New algorithm for generating hourly temperature values using daily maximum, minimum and average values from climate models.” Build. Serv. Eng. Res. Technol. 28 (3): 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143624407078642.
CISC (Canadian Institute of Steel Construction). 2002. Straight plate girder bridge design example 1. Markham, ON: CISC.
Collins, W., R. Sherman, R. Leon, and R. Connor. 2016. “State-of-the-art fracture characterization. II: Correlations between charpy V-notch and the master curve reference temperature.” J. Bridge Eng. 21 (12): 04016098. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000955.
CSA (Canadian Standard Association). 2018. “Welded steel construction.” W59-18. Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
CSA (Canadian Standard Association). 2019. “Canadian highway bridge design code.” CAN/CSA-S6-19. Rexdale, ON, Canada: CSA.
EC (Environment Canada). 2022. “Historical data.” Government of Canada. Accessed July 18, 2022. https://climate.weather.gc.ca/historical_data/search_historic_data_e.html.
Kala, Z., J. Melcher, and L. Puklický. 2009. “Material and geometrical characteristics of structural steels based on statistical analysis of metallurgical products.” J. Civ. Eng. Manage. 15 (3): 299–307. https://doi.org/10.3846/1392-3730.2009.15.299-307.
Kennedy, D. J. L., and M. G. Aly. 1980. “Limit states design of steel structures—performance factors.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 7: 45–77. https://doi.org/10.1139/l80-005.
Kennedy, D. J. L., and K. A. Baker. 1984. “Resistance factors for steel highway bridges.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 11: 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1139/l84-045.
Kühn, B. 2005. “Contribution to the standardization of the European regulations to avoid brittle fracture.” [In German.] Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering/Bauingenieurwesen, TU Aachen.
MacGregor, J. G. 1976. “Safety and limit states design for reinforced concrete.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 3 (4): 484–513. https://doi.org/10.1139/l76-055.
Newman, J., and I. Raju. 1981. “An empirical stress-intensity equation for the surface crack.” Eng. Fract. Mech. 15: 185–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(81)90116-8.
NRC (National Research Council). 2023. Toughness requirements for heat-affected zones of welded structural steels for highway bridges. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Sedlacek, G., et al. 2008. Commentary and worked examples to EN 1993-1-10 “Material toughness and through thickness properties” and other toughness oriented rules in EN 1993. EUR 23510 EN. Luxembourg: Joint Research Centre.
Soriano, M., J. R. Casas, and M. Ghosn. 2017. “Simplified probabilistic model for maximum traffic load from weigh-in-motion data.” Struct. Infrastruct. Eng. 13: 454–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2016.1164728.
Walbridge, S. 2005. A probabilistic study of fatigue in post-weld treated tubular bridge structures. Lausanne, Switzerland: École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne.
Walbridge, S., and A. Nussbaumer. 2007. “A probabilistic model for determining the effect of post-weld treatment on the fatigue performance of tubular bridge joints.” Int. J. Fatigue 29 (3): 516–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2006.04.006.
Wallin, K. 1992. “Guidelines for deriving fracture toughness estimates from normal and miniature size charpy-V specimen data.” J. Struct. Mech. 25: 24–40.
Wallin, K. 2002. “Master curve analysis of the “Euro” fracture toughness dataset.” Eng. Fract. Mech. 69 (4): 451–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00071-6.
Wright, W. J. 2002. “Fracture toughness requirements for highway bridges: Past and future trends.” Prog. Struct. Mater. Eng. 4 (1): 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/pse.99.
Zhao, Z., A. Haldar, and F. L. Breen Jr. 1994. “Fatigue-reliability evaluation of steel bridges.” J. Struct. Eng. 120 (5): 1608–1623. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1994)120:5(1608).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2024 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Oct 14, 2023
Accepted: May 22, 2024
Published online: Jul 17, 2024
Published in print: Oct 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Dec 17, 2024
ASCE Technical Topics:
- Bridge design
- Bridge engineering
- Bridge management
- Bridges
- Bridges (by material)
- Bridges (by type)
- Brittleness
- Construction engineering
- Construction management
- Continuum mechanics
- Cracking
- Design (by type)
- Engineering fundamentals
- Engineering mechanics
- Fracture mechanics
- Highway bridges
- Material mechanics
- Material properties
- Materials engineering
- Mechanical properties
- Plates
- Solid mechanics
- Standards and codes
- Steel bridges
- Steel plates
- Structural engineering
- Structural members
- Structural systems
- Wood bridges
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.