Office of Highway Safety Bridge Load Rating Dan Walsh.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Case Study: Minneapolis Bridge Failure
Advertisements

Project Scheduling for Load Testing Bridges for ENCE 667 Course Project Spring 2001 Justin Myers.
Update - Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures Kelley Rehm, PE July 2011.
CEM-512 Value Engineering Highway Project: South Interchange.
Rating of Local Bridges for SHVs Using Virtis Software Virtis/Opis User Group Meeting August 3-4, 2010 Moises C. Dimaculangan, P.E. Minnesota Department.
Office of Research and Engineering Gusset Plate Inadequacy Carl R. Schultheisz.
MEPDG Overview & National Perspective CRSI Expert Task Group Meeting July 29, 2008 Gary Crawford Federal Highway Administration Office of Pavement Technology.
Asset Management Performance (Structures) Awtar Jandu Safe Roads, Reliable Journeys, Informed Travellers Bridge Owners Forum – Cambridge –16 Jan
TURNER-FAIRBANK HIGHWAY RESEARCH CENTER NDE Research Ongoing Projects and Response Based Load Rating The Office of Research, Development, and Technology.
Office of Highway Safety Girder Failure Dan Walsh.
National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS)
Impacts of “MAP-21”on the National Bridge Inspection Program Tribal Government Coordination Meeting Date August 7, 2014 Presented by: Gary Moss, P.E. Acting.
Things to look for and remember while preparing FD05 Estimates.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to FHWA’s Talking Freight Seminar presented by Michael Williamson Cambridge Systematics, Inc. April.
Virtis-Opis Update Virtis-Opis User Group Training Meeting Helena – August 2011.
Shear Capacity of Composite Steel Girder at Simple Support Virtis/Opis User Group Conference Nashville, TN, August 3-4, 2010 George Huang, PhD, PE California.
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OVERVIEW Lecture 2. n Provide a historical perspective of the evolution of PMS over the last 20 years n Describe the basic.
Office of Highway Safety Falsework Guidance Dan Walsh.
RPI Master’s Project Proposal Stephen Ganz – 5/15/2012 Structural Analysis of Bridge Gusset Plates: Steel vs. Composite.
Office of Research and Engineering Finite Element Analysis Carl R. Schultheisz.
Office of Highway Safety Bridge Inspections Dan Walsh.
Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to NCHRP Project Panel presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with PB Consult Inc. Texas Transportation.
Driving Indiana’s Economic Growth. Management and Preservation of Indiana's Historic Bridges: A Programmatic Approach Thanks to Mead & Hunt & FHWA-IN.
Value Engineering at FHWA
1of 27 GUSSET PLATE EVALUATION Tom Macioce, P.E. Chief Bridge Engineer April 2009 PennDOT Load Rating of Gusset Plates.
Office of Highway Safety Gusset Plate Inspection Issues Mark Bagnard.
LRFR vs. LFR Virtis Opis User Group Meeting, August 2, 2011
I. Truss Bridge Gussets Background
IRRPCC Meeting Albuquerque, NM November 8,  Clarification needed on applicability of these roads into the IRR Inventory  Assignment given to IRRPCC.
Physical Building Audit Physical Building Audit By; Engr.Dr.Attaullah Shah PhD ( Civil) Engg, MSc Engg ( Strs), BSc Engg ( Gold Medalist),), MBA, MA (
Office of Highway Safety Highway Factors David S. Rayburn.
Project Scoping Fundamentals Alan Lively Project Delivery Specialist Local Government Section April 6, 2010.
NBIS – National Bridge Inspection Standards National standards for the proper safety inspection and evaluation of all hwy bridges NBI – National Bridge.
PROJECT SCOPING FOR LOCAL AGENCY FEDERAL AID PROJECTS.
Office of Pipeline Safety Integrity Management Inspection Process Louisiana Pipeline Safety Seminar August 2003.
WELCOME! July 31, 2012 ODOT District July 31, 2012 PURPOSE OF TONIGHT’S MEETING Introduce the project –Reconstruct I-75.
I35W St Anthony Falls Old Bridge. 10th Avenue Bridge Minneapolis, MN.
BIM Bridge Inspection and Maintenance Technical Standards Branch Class B Bridge Inspection Course Inspection Policies and Procedures INSPECTION POLICIES.
Data Palooza Workshop May 9, 2013 Rabinder Bains, FHWA – Office of Policy and Government Affairs.
Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA) 2004 Renewal Competition.
A European campaign on Risk Assessment Common errors in Risk Assessment.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 and Its Revisions to PURPA November 11, 2005 Grace D. Soderberg Assistant General Counsel National Association of Regulatory.
Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville 101 Wyoming DOT Place guardrail when there is a fill slope of.
Office of Highway Safety Tunnel Inspections and National Standards.
2 3 4 Office equipment can include:  Computers and computer peripherals  Telephone, facsimile  Photocopies  Presentations equipment  Furniture.
Kansas DOT Research Project Implementation Presented By Rick Kreider (Chief of Research) Created By Susan Barker (T 2 Engineer)
Comments on Improving NSP Guidance Document Cambodia and the Philippines.
Design Project #1 Replacement of Vehicle Bridge over Spring Creek Centre County, PA Introduction to Engineering Design EDGSN 100 Section 002 The Bleeding.
LOADS 1.
Beam Design Beams are designed to safely support the design loads.
1 PennDOT Truss Gusset Plate Analysis and Ratings Spreadsheet Overview Karim Naji Assistant Structural Engineer FHWA PA Division
April 4, 2011 ITE Technical Conference Lake Buena Vista, Fl Implementation of AASHTO’s Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) 2016 Update from the.
KEY LEARNING from an Electrical Discharge [Dangerous Occurrence] that occurred on Thurs 03 October 2013.
Overview of SCOH Strategic Plan AASHTO Subcommittee on Design 2010 Annual Meeting Rick Land, Vice Chair AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Design and Chief.
A Paper from the Transportation Research Record
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® FIMS Annual Comprehensive Training Bridge File Content and Management May 2016.
Rating Grade Separations
BRIDGE LOADING AND RATING
INSPECTION POLICIES AND, PROCEDURES CLASS A CERTIFICATION REQUIREMNTS
Blatnik Bridge Management Study
(Additional materials)
Amended and Restated Ordinance 98.1 First Reading
Replacement of Vechicle Bridge over Spring Creek Centre County, PA
ABCD What’s New In Bridges
Management of Change Report Errors to Management.
LDV Real Driving Emissions: - Drafting of physical PEMS protocol –
TRTR Briefing September 2013
BRIDGE LOADING AND RATING
Replacement of Vehicle Bridge over Spring Creek
HSE Requirements for Pipeline Operations GROUP HSE GROUPE (CR-GR-HSE-414) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This rule defines the minimum HSE requirements related to the.
Presentation transcript:

Office of Highway Safety Bridge Load Rating Dan Walsh

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Presentations 1. Bridge description and collapse 2. Construction activities on bridge at time of collapse 3. Gusset plate inadequacy 4. Finite element analysis 5. Design and review process 6. Bridge load rating and bridge load analysis 7. Bridge inspections 8. Gusset plate inspections

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Overview Terms used in load rating a bridge Overview of load ratings for I-35W bridge Load rating programs Guidance used for load ratings AASHTO guidance used by states to conduct load ratings – Does not consider gusset plates – Does not provide information on how to evaluate gusset plates

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Definition of Load Rating Safe load capacity of bridge Maintain safe use of bridge Arrive at posting and permit decisions

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Purpose of Load Rating Used by State DOTs Determine whether loads larger than legal loads can travel over bridge Legal weight limit for Interstate system is 40 tons Loads may be redirected to other routes

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Load Rating Requirements Significant change occurs that affects load-carrying capacity Renovation or rehabilitation project that increases dead load Inspection reveals deterioration that questions bridge safety

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Load Rating Terms Inventory - design level of stress Operating – maximum live load stress Expressed relative to legal load Lowest load rating referred to as controlling member of bridge Controlling members continue to be basis for subsequent load ratings

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Load Rating Methods Load ratings first introduced in 1970 AASHO manual – Established terms inventory and operating stress levels Allowable stress method – 1970 Load factor method – 1978 Load and resistance factor rating method

2008 AASHTO Manual Does not consider gusset plates No information on how to evaluate gusset plates Does not require load ratings on new bridges

Board Meeting HWY07MH Sverdrup & Parcel Rating Opened to traffic in 1967, prior to first edition of 1970 AASHO manual No documentation found to show that Sverdrup & Parcel calculated load rating Construction plans – Capacity of each member No information found on capacity of gusset plates

Board Meeting HWY07MH Mn/DOT Load Rating First load rating performed in 1979, 12 years after bridge put in service Reflect increased dead load – Added 2 inches of concrete Only documentation found was 1- page summary report No information found on capacity of gusset plates

Board Meeting HWY07MH Mn/DOT Load Rating Second load rating performed in 1995 Based on BARS load rating program – Used for 3 critical sections of bridge BARS program does not have capability of analyzing connections BARS program did not include or consider strength of gusset plates

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Controlling member located in Span Mn/DOT Load Rating

Board Meeting HWY07MH Mn/DOT Load Rating Third load rating performed in 1997 Based on BARS load rating program – New median barrier and outside traffic railings BARS program did not include or consider strength of gusset plates

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Controlling member located in Span Mn/DOT Load Rating

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Load Ratings for I-35W Bridge If gusset plates had been included in Mn/DOT load ratings – Should have revealed improperly designed gusset plates – Might have determined that improperly designed gusset plates were controlling members Mn/DOT believed controlling member was in south approach span

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Gusset Plate Treatment Gusset plates are assumed stronger than members they connect Survey of 14 State DOTs – 15 different load rating programs in use – None of these programs considered strength of gusset plates Bridge owners do not have opportunity to verify original design

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Load Ratings on New Bridges In 2007, Mn/DOT instituted policy to load rate new bridges AASHTO guidance: load rate bridges only when significant change occurs Had a load rating been performed, the design error might have been detected Might result in bridge owners not verifying load-carrying capacity of bridges before opening them to traffic

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 FHWA Technical Advisory Issued in response to Safety Recommendation H-08-1 Take certain actions to supplement AASHTO manual – New – “Check capacity of gusset plates as part of initial load ratings” – Existing – “Check capacity of gusset plates as a result of changes in bridge condition” – Review previous load ratings

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 FHWA – AASHTO Joint Study Proposed in May 2008 Guidance for developing proper design and rating of gusset plates Estimated to be completed in 24 months Will help ensure safety of new and existing bridges

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Concerns Long-term implementation of second item in FHWA’s Technical Advisory Guidance would go further if this item was included in the AASHTO manual The National Bridge Inspection Standards incorporate by reference the AASHTO Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges Replaced by AASHTO’s 2008 Manual for Bridge Evaluation

Board Meeting HWY07MH024 Summary AASHTO load rating manuals do not consider gusset plates No requirement to perform initial load ratings on new bridges Important opportunity to detect design defects

Board Meeting HWY07MH024