Load and Resistance Factor Rating

of Concrete Segmental Bridges

AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation provisions and special considerations
by Lubin Gao, Joey Hartmann, Reggie Holt, and Thomas Saad, Federal Highway Administration

Concrete segmental construction has

provided a durable and economical
solution for many bridges and, as a result, Unknown = 5
more than 250 of these types of bridges 10%
have been built since the early 1970s in
the United States. Concrete segmental Yes = 12
construction has been used successfully No = 35 23%
in the construction of interchanges with 67%
complex geometric constraints and
long-span bridges across navigational
waterways.

Many concrete segmental bridges provide

critical links in the U.S. highway system.
Consequently, the economic impact
resulting from unforeseen closure of Percentage of states that have used the LRFR method to load rate concrete segmental
one of these bridges due to functional bridges. All drawings: Federal Highway Administration.
or safety concerns will be significant.
Therefore, it is important to load rate permitting programs and practices using should include the design notional load
these bridges to ensure the safety of the LRFR method. The responses to the (HL-93), legal vehicles, or permit vehicles,
the structure and the traveling public. questionnaire demonstrated that 23% depending on the purpose of the rating.
Furthermore, load rating will safeguard (12) of the states had started to use the
the bridge from premature deterioration LRFR method to rate segmental bridges. Legal loads are the vehicles legally allowed
due to unintended overloads. to use bridges in the United States or
To further support the national in a specific state. The Bridge Formula
Bridge load rating and posting are also implementation of LRFR load rating of in Section 658, Title 23 of the Code of
mandated by Federal Regulation 23 CFR segmental bridges, an informational Federal Regulations defines the limits
650 Subpart C: National Bridge Inspection webinar was conducted on January on configuration and axle weight for a
Standards (NBIS). The AASHTO Manual 19, 2012, by FHWA. More than 150 vehicle that can legally operate on an
for Bridge Evaluation (MBE) further individuals from across the nation interstate highway without special
defines the methology and procedures participated in this webinar. permission (such as a state-issued permit).
for load rating and posting, including MBE includes the configuration and axle
provisions for segmental bridges. LRFR Methodology weight of some common vehicle types
to be considered during load rating such
A c c o rd i n g t o t h e F H WA P o l i c y Limit States as the Routine Commercial Vehicles Type
Memorandum for Bridge Load Ratings Since the major concern for bridge load 3, 3S2, and 3-3, and Specialized Hauling
for the National Bridge Inventory dated rating is determining the vehicular live Vehicles SU4, SU5, SU6, and SU7. Most
October 30, 2006, new bridges and load capacity of the structure under states also have state-specific legal loads
totally replaced bridges designed after its permanent load condition, other that also need to be considered. Permit
October 1, 2010, must be load rated transient loads (wind, ice, earthquake, load rating should be conducted based on
with the load and resistance factor rating and the like) are generally not required the actual configuration and axle weight
(LRFR) method. to be included in the analysis. Table of a permit vehicle or vehicle group.
6A.4.2.2-1 of the MBE further defines
A questionnaire was sent to Federal the limit states that should be considered Dynamic load allowance should also be
Highway Administration (FHWA) Division when load rating different bridge types. included in a load rating analysis. LRFR
Bridge Engineers in September 2011 to allows the use of a reduced dynamic load
collect information about the status of Loads allowance for legal and permit load rating
the national implementation of the LRFR Load rating should consider live loads based on the riding surface condition.
method. The data collected was used to in the presence of all permanent loads
develop recommendations and services applied to the structure and other loads Structural Reliability
to aid FHWA Division Bridge Engineers in that may affect the live load carrying In the calibration of LRFR/load and
the oversight of load rating, posting, and capacity of the structure. Live loads re s i s t a n c e f a c t o r d e s i g n ( L R F D ) ,

30 | ASPIRE, Spring 2013

 deterioration will increase more rapidly
District of Columbia
once deterioration initiates.
Puerto Rico
Structural Redundancy
Structural redundancy affects the
probability of system failure. In LRFR,
the system factor, φs, is used to account
for the impact of structural redundancy
of the complete superstructure system
on load rating. Segmental bridges
are different than conventional multi-
girder bridges and have unique aspects
of system redundancy. These aspects
Yes
include longitudinal and transverse
No
continuity, and the number of tendons
Unknown
and webs.
States that have rated concrete segmental bridges.
Special Considerations for
Segmental Bridges
District of Columbia
Contract plans, construction and
Puerto Rico erection plans, as-built drawings,
previous inspection and condition
evaluations, and most current inspection
reports are the main information
sources for load rating. The load rating
should always be conducted at current
structural and loading condition.

Loads
In addition to dead and live loads,
segmental bridges should also consider
Attended the following in their load rating:
Did not attend • Locked-in forces in the structure
during construction, related to:
– construction sequence;
Geographic distribution of attendees at the webinar on load rating of concrete
– e re c t i o n o r c o n s t r u c t i o n
segmental bridges.
equipment such as segment
lifting system and form-
target reliability indices were used For annual routine permits and escorted travelers; and
in adjusting the probabilistic models single-trip permits, a reliability index – t e m p o r a r y s t re s s i n g a n d
of loads and resistances in order to of 2.5 was initially targeted, and load temporary supports.
ensure a consistent level of safety. factors in the MBE were calibrated for • Primary effects of prestressing and
this level of reliability. For single-trip and post-tensioning
The LRFR method adopted two levels multiple-trip special permits allowed to • Secondary load effects from
of reliability for different rating mix with traffic, a reliability index of 3.5 prestressing and post-tensioning,
vehicles based on the expected was used. creep, shrinkage, and other time-
duration of exposure. Inventory level dependent behavior
rating for the notional design load (HL- Structural Deterioration • Temperature and temperature
93 ) used the same target reliability Load rating should be based on gradient
index of 3.5 as used in the AASHTO the current physical condition of the • Other applicable loads that may
LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. structure. If there is any structural lower the live load capacity of the
Operating level rating of the design deterioration or section loss, the bridge
load was based on a reduced reliability deterioration or section loss must be
index of 2.5. considered in load rating. The section When applying live loads for operating
loss or other localized deterioration level rating of the design load, legal
To s t r i k e a re a s o n a b l e b a l a n c e can be taken into account in load, and permit load at service limit
between safety and economy, a lower, computing section resistances. For states, the number of load lanes may be
operational target reliability of 2.5 and global deterioration, the condition taken as the number of striped lanes.
a duration of exposure of five years factor, φc, is used to account for the However, the loads shall be positioned
were initially used for legal load rating increased uncertainty in the capacity so as to create maximum effects
at the strength limit state in the LRFR of deteriorated members and the including, for example, on shoulders if
calibration. likelihood that some forms of necessary.

ASPIRE, Spring 2013 | 31

 Also, in accordance with MBE Article stages. The change in restraints or concrete bridges. As mentioned previously,
6A.5.11.3, the multiple presence factor constraints will redistribute forces within strength limit states in LRFR/LRFD have
for single lane loaded may be limited the structure. The analysis should be able been calibrated for uniform reliability;
to 1.0 for operating level rating of to capture any locked-in forces during however, service limit states have not.
the design load and legal load in the construction and any load redistributions Because of the growing numbers of
transverse direction. resulting from time-depenent material segmental bridges that owners are
behavior. incorporating in their bridge network,
Longitudinal Analysis the initial drafts of the LRFR methodology
Dead load effects in a segmental Transverse Analysis and the current rating provisions in the
bridge are affected by a wide variety of Segmental box girders shall also be MBE provided type-specific guidance for
parameters, such as load rated for transverse behavior. It is segmental bridges that had not existed
• construction sequence, possible that transverse load rating, such previously. The results of the ongoing
• construction equipment, as tensile stresses (Service III) in the top and future research may result in even
• loading and erection age of slab, governs the live load capacity. more specific criteria in the AASHTO
segments, rating guidelines that bridge owners and
• creep and shrinkage of concrete, and Limit States engineers will use to better assess the
• relaxation of prestressing steel. According to MBE Articles 6A.5.11.4, operational performance of segmental
6A.5.11.5.1, and 6A.5.11.5.2, Strength I bridges under ever-changing loading
Because of the time-dependent behavior, (or II for permit load rating), Service I, and conditions and traffic demands.
the dead load state of a segmental bridge Service III limit states shall be checked for ____________
changes with time. In order to rate a the design, legal, and permit load rating
segmental bridge, dead load effects of segmental bridges. Service III limit Lubin Gao is senior bridge engineer–
at the time of load rating should be state specifically includes the principal load rating, Joey Hartmann is principal
determined through an analysis including tensile stress check of LRFD Article 5.8.5. bridge engineer and team leader, and
the effects from construction sequence, Reggie Holt is senior bridge engineer–
time-dependant material properties, Closing Remarks concrete bridge specialist with the Office
and loading history. Note that restraints For segmental bridges, service limit states of Bridge Technology, Federal Highway
and constraints should be appropriately will likely control the load rating, which Administration (FHWA). Thomas Saad
applied to the analysis model to capture is contrary to what typically controls the is a senior structural engineer with the
the real structural behavior at different load rating of conventional nonprestressed Resource Centers, FHWA.

Remember these dates....

April 15-16
2013 Grouting Certification
T r a i n i n G
J.J. Pickle Research Campus
University of Texas, Austin
Join Us for a Very Special
25th Annual
Convention
at the Marriott Downtown Waterfront, Portland, Oregon

2013 October 28-29

Promoting Segmental Bridge Construction

in the United States, Canada and Mexico
For Membership information or For Further Details, Visit www.asbi-assoc.org

12544_ASBI_ASPIRE_2013_Spring_1/2p.indd 1 3/4/13 3:47 PM

32 | ASPIRE, Spring 2013