CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presents the relevant literature and studies both local and foreign sources.
This is to strengthen the claims and the research project design analysis for the following
chapters.

Foreign Studies

The bridge loading test is mainly to identify the actual working state by solving and
measuring the stress and deformation of the bridge structure under the static or dynamic test
load. It is the most effective method to test the actual performance of bridge structure, such as
the strength and rigidity of the structure. According to Tang Weidong, Li Junyu and Mo Haihua,
have identified and examined the current span structure by static load test, dynamic load test, and
dynamic-static load test separately, which given reference and premise to the location,
distinguishing proof and further upkeep and support of the current scaffold structure. As per Shi
Zhou, they investigated the diversion and stress of the built up reinforced concrete bridge
through static and dynamic load test, and checked the support impact. According to the author, in
order to examine the structural performance for the bridge, the static test of precast prestressed
concrete bridge hollow slab was completed by four phase static stacking test. Under the state of
elastic working, the flexural bearing limit, crack propagation and relative residual displacement
of the primary control segments of the empty slab are fundamentally examined.

Bridge construction has always been a crucial part and a building block of any society
towards national development. This research aims to evaluate past related studies to determine
the best practice in the field as well as pitfalls in the bridge construction which we all could learn
from.

A study by Taricska (2014), a graduate student of Ohio State University, viewing bridge
failures through the lens of their ages allows for the failure causes to be better understood. In,
addition observing the material used in the construction of the bridges that helped address the
issue of the design triggering cause. He stated that knowing which type of material will fail
easiest should be of great concern for the designer when selecting a material to use in the
construction of a future bridge.
 The figure shows that steel is the most common material to fail followed by concrete, that
can be explained by a combination of contributing factors. Understanding the history of steel’s
use in bridges helps give a sound backdrop into the discussion of failed bridge materials.

One potential explanation that came to his mind is that since steel is the main contributor
into unleashing of Industrial revolution in America, therefore majority of the bridges were made
of steel. The popularity of steel and the fact that the bulk of construction years for bridges which
failed over the studied timeframe of the years 2000 to 2012 show that steel’s failure is not due to
it potentially being a weak material but that it is a popular material used in most of the United
States’ bridges, and statistically, would exhibit the most failure.

As for the concrete material used, several studies are being conducted to identify what is
the causes of failure in concrete bridge.

According to the past studies conducted by University of Toronto (Wei et al, 2015), in
their article covering the design of reinforced concrete bridges and past experience from
construction failures, the reasons behind the failure of the worldwide De la Concorde overpass in
Canada killing five people and seriously injuring six others resulted from the (a) poor quality of
concrete (b) incorrectly placed 6 diagonal bars which eventually generated a zone of weakness
and (c) improperly designed steel reinforcement in the concrete slab.

The success or failures of bridge construction have formulated questions about the critical
success factors that lead to success, efficiency and overcoming failures. Based on the research
conducted by Fariba and Gamaleldin (2015), the critical success factors for efficient bridge
construction include (a) innovative material, (b) innovative design and project, (c) fast assembly
and productivity, and (d) management of construction process. Finding the right balance among
these 4 factors contribute to the full efficiency of bridge construction.

According to Hussain and Jan (2016), Engineers have studied many bridge failures,
seeking the lessons from these failures, hoping to avoid the future demise and avoid costly
repairs in the future. Proper inspection and necessary maintenance is necessary for the bridges to
keep them functional. There is need to understand the reasons of the past failures and the ways to
avoid such failures. The physical cause such as erosion, reversal of the stresses, impact,
vibration, wind and extreme events are usually increasing the threat to the structures. Their study
analyzed the bridges which fail in September 2014 floods in Jammu and Kashmir region, and
stated that the bridges failed due to negligence in inspection and proper maintenance and lack of
proper designing. They identified that failures occur due to the disintegration of the material over
the period of time, design deficiency, lack of periodic maintenance or regular inspection.

Studies by Chryssanthopoulos et al. (2018), a professor in University of Surrey, showed

that rigorous bridge assessment within a risk-based system needed an estimate of the likelihood
of various hazards occurring, accompanied by an evaluation of the bridge’s vulnerability to such
hazards, as well as a quantification of the implications of possible failure. Their research
presented a 8 statistical review of past failures of metallic bridges that can help assess the
dominant risks affecting bridges and their related vulnerability. The study found that natural
hazards, construction flaws and limited expertise are among the most common causes of metallic
bridge failure, accompanied by accidents and forms of human error other than design.

Cook and Barr, and Halling (2003), civil engineer professors from New Mexico Tech and
Utah State University, identified scour as a principal cause of failure, but later on it was found
out that 57% of the bridges that failed due to it were given wrong scour vulnerability ratings
suggesting that they were stable.
Figure 2:. Percentage of the causes of bridge failures in 11 states

Figure 3 shows that hydraulic action as the leading cause of failure is followed by
collision. This caused 11.7% of failures and are significantly lower than hydraulic causes. In this
data, set bridges were impacted by 14 trucks, three trains, 10 10 ships and barges, with 32
collision causes remaining unknown. A later study which included 9 pedestrian bridge failures
found out that 8 failed due to collision and only one among 9 failed due to lack of lateral bracing
in construction.

Overloading was the third primary cause of failure. A total of 8.8 percent of failures
resulted from bridges exposed to heavier loads. Due to overloading, both the two pedestrians in
this study failed. The interesting aspect of these failures is that six of the seven bridges in their
data set had load limits below the allowable maximum. Additionally, before the collapse, five of
these bridges were classified as structurally deficient before the failure. The authors then
concluded a strong relationship between load-prohibited bridges and failures because of
overloading. Therefore, it should be noted that overloaded vehicles are much less of a concern
than under-strength bridges with these failures. Now, the important thing is that 73.4% of the
failures are indicated by overloading, hydraulic, and the collision failures. The authors described
the cause of this enormous majority of failure as external events. The bridges were not able to get
by with the conditions in which they were subjected to. Similar findings were proposed in later
studies – the percentage of each cause may fluctuate a little but the primary causes of failure are
likely to be the same.

Assessing existing bridges is an important part of long-term infrastructure management. In

practice, established and standardized procedures are used to assess structural bridges, despite
the fact that these methods are known to generate conservative estimations. Furthermore, more
advanced approaches, such as nonlinear finite element (FE) analysis, are available for research
purposes and can more correctly mimic the structural behavior of bridges. As a result,
developing feasible and reliable procedures for refined assessments using these new tools would
be beneficial. This thesis proposes a procedure for structural analyses that focuses on the
ultimate load-carrying capability of existing concrete bridges. He basic aim is to improve the
evaluation as needed in order to accurately forecast bridge structural behavior. A multi-level
evaluation technique with four levels of structural analysis and an integrated framework for
safety verification is used in the procedure. Partial safety factor (PSF), global resistance safety
factor (GRSF), and complete probabilistic approaches are all part of the safety verification
framework. Verifications of intended safety margins can be carried out with varied degrees of
sophistication within each of these groupings. Comparative investigations based on full-scale
tests of a prestressed concrete bridge were conducted to demonstrate and evaluate the suggested
structural assessment process. In addition to a strategy for rationally refining the analysis and
assisting analysts in focusing on essential areas, specific nonlinear FE analysis recommendations
should be used to reduce analyst-dependent variability of results and (thus) model uncertainty.

Local Literature

Rehabilitation and Maintenance of Bridges Along Arterial Road

According to the beneficiary survey, residents in the project implementation areas

were faced with physical injuries from traffic accidents, vehicle collision accidents, and
congestion problems due to narrow bridge width before the project implementation. Even though
they felt uneasiness and danger from problems like bridge cracks and swaying during transit,
they had to use the bridge or roundabout detours. It is clear from the beneficiary survey that due
to the extended bridge widths after project implementation, it became possible for large trucks to
pass each other, and congestion from two-way traffic and the risk of collision accidents between
cars was avoided. Safety aspects improved, with the number of pedestrians injured by traffic
accident reduced through the installation of footpaths. Also, local people in all barangays
surveyed reported reduced travel time from their residences to public facilities like hospitals,
schools, municipal offices, markets, and churches, as well as improved safety and comfort. In
particular, they could use the bridges for quick access to the closest medical facilities in
emergencies. The previous bridges which remain are used as drying areas for corn and rice and
as children’s playgrounds. Over 90% of residents 5 in the beneficiary survey recognize that these
improvements in road traffic access, convenience and safety are due to the project’s bridge
rehabilitations.

In Phase I of the project, the project cost was increased due to considerable changes in
design. It is advisable to consider the ODA loan scheme for the project like this not to specify the
project targets so as to enable to adapt flexibly for changes without specifying the targets in the
project implementation stage. Moreover, contractors and consultants should combine their efforts
in confirming the appropriateness of construction timing, taking wet and dry seasons into
consideration in order to keep damage from natural disasters to a minimum. As was the case in
Phase II, such effort can shorten the work period and keep the effects from natural disasters on
project implementation to a minimum. Moreover, in this evaluation the EIRR was calculated
following the computation methods for project benefits employed by the JICA feasibility study
to keep consistency with the time of appraisal. The sunk costs due to time passage were not taken
into consideration in the assumptions used for calculating the EIRR in this evaluation. Due to
this and other factors, some bridges had excessively high figures.

Regarding the changes in environment following the rehabilitation of bridges, there were
reports from the beneficiary survey of new congestion and noise problems due to increased
traffic volume, as well as of increased traffic accidents caused by the increased traffic speed.
Safety measures for the rehabilitated bridges are called for by the DPWH, such as installation of
signs for weight and speed limits. Moreover, it is recommended that the DPWH continue with
the effective use of RMC and MBC. By encouraging the participation of nearby residents in
regular operation and maintenance activities, RMC is expected to lead to job creation, raise the
sense of ownership for operation and maintenance of the bridge in the community, and be
effective for sustainable operation and maintenance requiring only a few personnel.