This PDF is available at http://nap.nationalacademies.

org/23451

Extending Bridge Service Life Through

Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits
(2016)

DETAILS
65 pages | 8.5 x 11 | PAPERBACK
ISBN 978-0-309-43947-3 | DOI 10.17226/23451

CONTRIBUTORS
Fish, Philip E.; Schroeder, Curtis J.; and Robert J. Connor

BUY THIS BOOK

FIND RELATED TITLES SUGGESTED CITATION

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Extending
Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23451.

Visit the National Academies Press at nap.edu and login or register to get:
– Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of publications
– 10% off the price of print publications
– Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests
– Special offers and discounts

All downloadable National Academies titles are free to be used for personal and/or non-commercial
academic use. Users may also freely post links to our titles on this website; non-commercial academic
users are encouraged to link to the version on this website rather than distribute a downloaded PDF
to ensure that all users are accessing the latest authoritative version of the work. All other uses require
written permission. (Request Permission)

This PDF is protected by copyright and owned by the National Academy of Sciences; unless otherwise
indicated, the National Academy of Sciences retains copyright to all materials in this PDF with all rights
reserved.
Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM

NCHRP SYNTHESIS 489

Expanding Bridge Service Life
Through Field Welded
Repair and Retrofits

A Synthesis of Highway Practice

Consultants
Philip E. Fish
and
Curtis J. Schroeder
Fish & Associates, Inc.
Middleton, Wisconsin
and
Robert J. Connor
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana

S ubscriber C ategories
Bridges and Other Structures • Highways • Maintenance and Preservation

Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD

WASHINGTON, D.C.
2016
www.TRB.org

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP SYNTHESIS 489

Systematic, well-designed research is the most effective way to Project 20-05, Topic 46-09
solve many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. ISSN 0547-5570
Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be stud- ISBN 978-0-309-27209-4
ied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with Library of Congress Control No. 2015959603
their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth © 2016 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems
of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best
studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Associa-
Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and
tion of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the
1962 initiated an objective national highway research program using copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein.
modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce
Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes.
basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will
receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA,
Administration, United States Department of Transportation. or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is
The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Acad- expected that those reproducing the material in this document for
emies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment
AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRB’s of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the
recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research material, request permission from CRP.
practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many rea-
sons: TRB maintains an extensive committee structure from which
authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; NOTICE
TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication
federal, state, and local governmental agencies, universities, and according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation
industry; TRB’s relationship to the Academies is an insurance of Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences,
objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of specialists in Engineering, and Medicine.
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are
highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessari-
directly to those in a position to use them. ly those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of
The program is developed on the basis of research needs identi- Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors.
fied by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and trans- The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences,
portation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Topics of Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative
the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Standing Committee Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers.
Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are con-
on Research (SCOR), and each year SCOR’s recommendations are
sidered essential to the object of the report.
proposed to the AASHTO Board of Directors and the Academies.
Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP,
and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted propos-
als. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the
responsibilities of the Academies and TRB.
The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make
significant contributions to solving highway transportation prob-
lems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program,
however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or
duplicate, other highway research programs.

Published reports of the

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM

are available from

Transportation Research Board

Business Office
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001

and can be ordered through the Internet by going to

http://www.national-academies.org
and then searching for TRB

Printed in the United States of America

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non-
governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for
outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the
practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering.
Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National
Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions
to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent,
objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions.
The Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public
understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org.

The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing
leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is
objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000
engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of
whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies
including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested
in the development of transportation.

Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

TOPIC PANEL 46-09

DENNIS M. GOLABEK, Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee
MARY A GRIECO, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Boston
JAMIE GRIFFIN, Texas Department of Transportation, Austin
FREDERICK HEJL, Transportation Research Board
DAVID McQUAID, D.L. McQuaid and Associates, Inc., Canonsburg, PA
RONALD D. MEDLOCK, High Steel Structures, Inc., Lancaster, PA
TODD L. NIEMANN, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Oakdale
GREGORY R. PERFETTI, North Carolina Department of Transportation, Raleigh
SOUGATA ROY, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
JUSTIN M. OCEL, Federal Highway Administration (Liaison)

SYNTHESIS STUDIES STAFF

STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs
JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies
JO ALLEN GAUSE, Senior Program Officer
GAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer
DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer
TANYA M. ZWAHLEN, Consultant
DON TIPPMAN, Senior Editor
CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant
DEMISHA WILLIAMS, Senior Program Assistant
DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF

CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs
CHRISTOPHER HEDGES, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program
EILEEN P. DELANEY, Director of Publications

NCHRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 20-05

CHAIR
BRIAN A. BLANCHARD, Florida Department of Transportation

MEMBERS
STUART D. ANDERSON, Texas A&M University
SOCORRO “COCO” BRISENO, California Department of Transportation
DAVID M. JARED, Georgia Department of Transportation
CYNTHIA L. JONES, Ohio Department of Transportation
MALCOLM T. KERLEY, NXL, Richmond, Virginia
JOHN M. MASON, JR., Auburn University
CATHERINE NELSON, Salem, Oregon
ROGER C. OLSON, Bloomington, Minnesota
BENJAMIN T. ORSBON, South Dakota Department of Transportation
RANDALL R. “RANDY” PARK, Utah Department of Transportation
ROBERT L. SACK, New York State Department of Transportation
FRANCINE SHAW WHITSON, Federal Highway Administration
JOYCE N. TAYLOR, Maine Department of Transportation

FHWA LIAISON
JACK JERNIGAN

TRB LIAISON
STEPHEN F. MAHER

Cover figure: Repair of beam ends due to corrosion and section loss. Provided by the Massachusetts
Department of Transportation.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

FOREWORD Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor-
mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac-
tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence,
full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its
solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked,
and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat-
ing the problem.
There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and
engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with
problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evalu-
ating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway community, the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials—through the mecha-
nism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program—authorized the Transpor-
tation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Project 20-5,
“Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Problems,” searches out and synthesizes
useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on
specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series, Synthesis of
Highway Practice.
This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format,
without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report
in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures
found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems.

PREFACE This synthesis documents practices associated with field welded repairs on existing steel
By Jo Allen Gause bridges used by bridge owners. The information presented includes the extent to which
Senior Program Officer field welding is performed on existing bridges, common types of field welded repairs and
Transportation retrofits, specifications, and quality control practices.
Research Board Information used in this study was gathered through a literature review and a survey of
state departments of transportation. Follow-up interviews with selected agencies provided
additional information.
Philip E. Fish and Curtis J. Schroeder, Fish & Associates, Inc., Middleton, Wisconsin,
and Robert J. Connor, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, collected and synthe-
sized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowl-
edged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records
the practices that were acceptable with the limitations of the knowledge available at the
time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will
be added to that now at hand.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

CONTENTS

1 SUMMARY

5 CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION
Background, 5
Synthesis Objectives, 6
Synthesis Scope and Approach, 6
Synthesis Organization, 6

8 CHAPTER TWO   LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction, 8
Overview, 8
Extent of Field Welding, 8
Current Manuals and Specifications for Field Welding, 10
Quality Control and Quality Assurance, 12
Performance of Repairs and Retrofits, 15
Summary, 17

19 CHAPTER THREE   STATE OF THE PRACTICE

Overview, 19
Survey Content, 19
Extent of Field Welding, 19
Current Manuals and Specifications, 22
Quality Assurance and Quality Control, 24
Performance of Repairs and Retrofits, 26
Summary, 28

29 CHAPTER FOUR   CASE EXAMPLES

Introduction, 29
Case Example 1—Connecticut Department of Transportation, 29
Case Example 2—Illinois Department of Transportation, 32
Case Example 3—Maine Department of Transportation, 34
Case Example 4—Massachusetts Department of Transportation, 36
Case Example 5—Tennessee Department of Transportation, 37
Case Example 6—Texas Department of Transportation, 38
Summary, 39

41 CHAPTER FIVE  CONCLUSIONS

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

44 GLOSSARY

46 REFERENCES

48 APPENDIX A Department of Transportation Links

49 APPENDIX B Survey Questionnaire

57 APPENDIX C Summary of Survey Results

Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to
grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org)
retains the color versions.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

EXTENDING BRIDGE SERVICE LIFE THROUGH

FIELD WELDED REPAIR AND RETROFITS

SUMMARY The objective of this synthesis is to document practices and solutions associated with field
welded repairs on existing steel bridges used by owners. The report is intended to help bridge
owners evaluate and implement solutions for successfully extending the service life of their
bridges. The information gathered for this synthesis included, but was not limited to, the
extent to which field welding is performed on existing steel bridges, the common types of
field welded repairs and retrofits, and manuals or specifications for field welded repairs and
retrofits. Quality assurance and quality control practices are also investigated including
welder qualifications and testing, material identification, welding procedure development
and qualification, and verification inspection. Finally, the in-service performance of repairs
and retrofits and effective practices are presented.

In the United States, welding on bridge structures was first implemented in the late 1940s
and 1950s, but was primarily limited to highway bridge structures, not other bridge structures
such as railroad bridges. During this time, bridge design and construction transitioned from
members comprised of multiple components joined using mechanically fastened members
(rivets or bolts) to a few elements joined using welds. Welding took place in fabrication
shops and sometimes in the field, depending on how the bridge member and/or structure was
designed and fabricated. Some agencies chose mechanical fasteners when members were
joined together in the field, whereas others allowed field welding in lieu of mechanical fasteners.
Field welding consisted of welding bridge girders at field splices, welding bracing in place,
attaching bearings, etc.

With construction of the Interstate Highway System in the 1960s, numerous steel bridges
were built that contained welded fatigue-prone details with limited consideration for fatigue
compared with current standards. Field welding for the purposes of repair and retrofit is often
performed as a repair strategy to mitigate cracks that occurred as a result of these various
conditions. Repair and retrofit field welding has also been used to mitigate distortion-induced
and out-of-plane fatigue cracking and to strengthen areas of section loss or a limited capacity
rating. Although field welding has been used successfully by some agencies, it is still not widely
implemented because of concerns regarding long-term performance, cost, or lack of knowledge
and experience.

Information for this synthesis was obtained from three sources:

1. A literature review was performed to provide background information on the state of

practice of field welding for repair and retrofit and to uncover previous research that
was performed on this topic.
2. A survey was distributed to voting members of the AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges
and Structures (SCOBS) requesting information on their field welding practices.
A total of 43 state departments of transportation (DOTs) responded to the survey, an
86% response rate.
3. Telephone interviews with representatives from six DOTs were conducted to acquire
additional information on effective practices and specific field welding projects, which
are used as case examples.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

2

The six DOTs that were selected for the phone interviews were chosen based on several
factors, including an expressed willingness to provide additional information; details on their
specific field welded project(s) including type of damage, type of bridge, and type of bridge
member; and varied geographic locations.

The literature review found that field welding presents special challenges when compared
with original shop fabrication. Concerns regarding overhead positioning of many field welding
repairs were raised in multiple sources. Another of these challenges is the weldability of the
steel, because it may be of unknown composition. The American National Standards Institute
(ANSI)/American Welding Society (AWS) defines weldability as the capacity of material to
be welded under the imposed fabrication conditions into a specific, suitably designed structure
performing satisfactorily in the intended service. Any adverse fabrication conditions present
in the field must be accounted for during a determination of the weldability of a material for
field welding. Field welded repairs and retrofits will also likely involve welding of steels that
have ASTM specifications that are out of date compared with current specified bridge steels.
Of the 43 state DOT survey respondents, 32 (74%) noted that their agency allows for planned
field welded repairs and retrofits to be performed. Of the 11 agencies (26.6%) that do not
allow planned field welded repairs and retrofits, two have previously done field welding. The
remaining nine agencies have never done field welding and do not currently allow it. States
as far north as Alaska, North Dakota, Minnesota, and Maine allow field welding, and overall,
there does not appear to be a correlation between lowest anticipated temperatures and general
geographic location and the propensity for field welding.

The survey results determined that two primary welding codes are used for the structural
welding of steel structures in the United States: AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5 and AWS
Structural Welding Code D1.1. AASHTO/AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5 is the welding
code required for new fabrication of bridges by the AASHTO bridge design specification.
AWS Structural Welding Code D1.1 is the welding code that is required for fabrication of
buildings and other structures. The specific welding code to be applied to bridge field welding
may vary from state to state.

Various state DOT manuals that cover field welding were reviewed to determine any
aspects that are typically included in these manuals. In general, welder qualification programs
are instituted by each state DOT in which the welder qualification tests are conducted or
witnessed by state representatives. Records of field welders who have successfully passed
the qualification test are entered into the department’s database.

The literature review revealed that one of the greatest concerns of field welding is the
quality. Field welding requires the same quality control measures as shop welding; however,
quality control is more difficult to maintain under field conditions. As discovered during
the literature review, this concern was expressed in multiple references. One report stated
that the inspection of repair welds is to be at least as thorough as when the bridge was orig-
inally fabricated. This includes matching the current requirements for the methods and
extent of the inspection compared with current bridge fabrication practices. According
to the same report, visual welding inspection is the most important inspection method and
is used on all repair welds, independent of the utilization of any other inspection methods.
Welding inspectors are typically provided with the repair procedure and details, drawings
or sketches, and acceptance criteria. Visual inspection is performed before, during, and after
welding.

The agencies surveyed for the case examples stress the importance of good inspection by
qualified people. Each of these agencies perform visual inspection in-house by a Certified
Weld Inspector or an experienced individual. Nondestructive testing (NDT) varied; some
agencies contracted all testing out, whereas others performed a portion of the testing in-house
and/or contracted the remainder out.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 3

Agencies surveyed emphasized the importance of quality welders. The ability of a welder
to produce a weld of acceptable quality can be verified through the use of welder performance
qualification tests specified in the applicable welding code. The qualification is typically
indefinite provided that the welder carries out similar work within a certain time period.
However, this may vary depending on specific agency requirements. The agencies interviewed
for the case examples often require additional welder qualification tests.

The agencies surveyed for the case examples all stressed the importance of good procedures
and proper qualifications. They required field procedures, welder qualifications, inspection
procedures, visual and NDT inspector qualifications, and emphasized the importance of
following the inspection requirements.

Most of the agencies surveyed reported good results from field welded repairs. Agencies
were asked whether there have been any major problems associated with the field welded
repairs and retrofits. This question was put to all agencies that answered that they either
allow planned field welded repairs and retrofits or have performed them previously, a total of
34 agencies. Twenty-four of the 34 agencies responded that there have been no major problems
associated with repairs and retrofits specifically because they were field welds. Six agencies
reported that it was not known whether there have been any major problems specifically
because they were field welds and agencies that they have had major problems specifically
because they were field welds.

The most common issue with field welding among the small number of agencies that
reported having major problems was premature cracking, which was selected by three of the
four agencies. Improper welding and quality workmanship issues were the next most common,
selected by two of the four agencies. Installation not in accordance with the plans and speci-
fications was selected by one agency.

All six agencies surveyed for the case examples reported good results from the welded repairs.
Each of these agencies endorses the use of field repair welding and plan on continuing to do
such repairs. They also reported that field welding is an economical repair method.

The synthesis revealed that many agencies identified a lack of experienced inspectors and/or
a lack of qualified agency supervisors or administrators to allow field welded repairs and retrofits
in their program.

The results of the synthesis identified the following gaps in current knowledge that could
be addressed by further research activities:

• Identifying the effective practices performed by the states that have used field welding
successfully;
• The second activity is monitoring actual field welded repairs; and
• Recording data on how the fatigue life of the repair is influenced by the environment,
vibration, dead load and live load stresses, and quality.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 5

chapter one

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND NCHRP in the 1970s to study the effect of cyclic loading on

the fatigue performance of welded connections (Fenves et al.
Prior to World War II, individual components of bridges in 2005). As a result, design requirements were revised to include
the United States were connected using mechanical fasteners, consideration for fatigue in welded connections for shop and
primarily rivets. During the war, welding became more pro- field welding.
nounced in the fabrication of members owing to improvements
in welding equipment, knowledge regarding the process, and Field welding on bridges began to occur more frequently
welding applications to support the war effort. The significant in the early 1960s and into the 1970s. During this time, steel
transition to welded bridge structures took place post-World bridges were designed with a goal of assembling bridges in the
War II. field without the use of permanent bolts. Girders were prefabri-
cated in a shop and delivered to the construction site for erection.
Welding on bridges was introduced as early as 1934, In many cases, the only bolts needed were the erection bolts to
when the first all-welded bridge was built in Middlesbrough, help secure in place the various components such as girders
England (Sapp 2015). In 1936, the first specification for Design, and bracing. Once erected, the girders were temporarily sup-
Construction, Alteration and Repair of Highway and Railway ported so that field splices on the girders could be field welded
Bridges was issued by the American Welding Society (AWS) in the erected position. In general, these were intended to be
(Sapp 2015). complete joint penetration (CJP) groove welds that included
the webs, top flanges, and bottom flanges. The bracing sys-
Welding on bridges in the United States was implemented tems, both vertical and lateral bracing, were connected with
in the late 1940s and 1950s, but was primarily limited to field welds, often fillet welds. Field welding differs from shop
highway structures. During this time, bridge design and con- welding for two main reasons: (1) the welding environment
struction transitioned from members comprised of multiple is not as controlled, and (2) the steel to be welded cannot be
components joined using mechanically fastened members manipulated into position as easily as in the shop. Some of the
(rivets or bolts) to fewer elements joined using welds. Welding in-service issues of field weld cracking and field weld failure
took place in fabrication shops and sometimes in the field, could possibly be attributed to a lack of welding knowledge,
depending on how the bridge member and/or structure was inadequate knowledge of fatigue details, poor quality work,
designed and fabricated. Some agencies required that mechan- lack of nondestructive testing (NDT) to identify initial defects,
ical fasteners be used when members were joined together and a lack of quality oversight. At this time, CJP welds were
in the field, whereas others allowed field welding in lieu of not often ground smooth, and there was no type of weld-access
mechanical fasteners. Field welding included, for example, holes between the web and flange of the girders. Because of
welding bridge girders at field splices, welding bracing in the field conditions, there was often a significant misalignment
place, and attaching bearings. of members and, as mentioned previously, the erection bolt
holes were often plug welded with poor quality welds.
The transition from built-up, mechanical fastened mem-
bers and connections to all welded members and connections Field welding for the purposes of repair and retrofit is
led to issues with fatigue and fracture. Often, the same often performed as a repair strategy to mitigate cracks that
types of connection details were used, except that welds occurred as a result of these varied conditions. Repair and
were substituted for mechanical fasteners. Because of the retrofit field welding has also been used to mitigate distortion-
increased stiffness associated with welded joints, typically induced and out-of-plane fatigue cracking, and to strengthen
lower fatigue resistance, and general lack of understanding areas of section loss or a limited capacity rating. Although field
regarding fatigue of welded joints, unexpected cracking was welding has been used successfully by some agencies, it is still
observed. With construction of the Interstate Highway System not widely implemented because of concerns (both substanti-
in the 1960s, numerous steel bridges were built containing ated and unsubstantiated) regarding long-term performance,
welded fatigue-prone details, with limited consideration for cost, or a lack of knowledge and experience.
fatigue compared with current standards. As a result of the
observed cracking during the AASHO Road Test and on sev- Agencies that allow field welding find that it is an effective
eral in-service bridges, considerable research was funded by tool for completing repairs within a short time. A design can

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

6

be developed quickly along with a simple set of specifications, welders are certified according to the requirements of
and base material can be ordered to the required size. Concur- the applicable welding code.
rently, welding procedures, required welder qualifications, • The typical quality assurance and quality control prac-
acquisition appropriate weld metal, and access equipment tices including welder qualifications and qualification
needs can all be identified. When properly executed, a high- programs, welding procedure development and quali-
quality repair can be undertaken in a minimal amount of time fication, inspection requirements and procedures, and
with less disruption to the traveling public. inspector qualifications.
• The in-service performance of field welded repairs and
retrofits including the number of agencies that have
SYNTHESIS OBJECTIVES had projects with major problems and the typical prob-
lems that occur.
The objective of this synthesis is to document planned field • The effective practices and lessons learned by agencies
welded repair and retrofit solutions and practices that owners that have performed field welded repairs and retrofits.
have used on existing steel bridges. The information contained
in this document is intended to help bridge owners evaluate Information for this synthesis was obtained from three
and implement solutions for successfully extending the service sources.
life of their bridges.
1. A literature review was performed to provide back-
ground information on the state of practice of field
SYNTHESIS SCOPE AND APPROACH welding for repair and retrofit and previous research
that was performed on this topic.
This synthesis addresses various aspects of projects where field 2. A survey was distributed to voting members of the
welding is being considered. The emphasis of this synthesis is AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures
planned field welded repairs and retrofits where consideration (SCOBS) for each of the 50 states and the District of
was given to design, specifications, procedures, qualifications, Columbia requesting information on their field welding
and inspection requirements before performing work. Infor- practices. A total of 43 states (86%) responded to the
mation has been collected regarding when to implement this survey.
technique; current related manuals, codes, and specifications; 3. Finally, telephone interviews with representatives from
quality assurance and quality control practices; performance six departments of transportation (DOTs) were con-
of field welded repairs and retrofits; and effective practices ducted to acquire additional information on effective
for field welding. practices and lessons learned, along with information on
specific field welding projects, which are used as case
This synthesis presents current practice in the following examples.
specific areas:
These six DOTs were chosen based on several factors,
• General information on field welding internal policies including an expressed willingness to provide additional
and practices of each agency surveyed; whether they information; details on their specific field welded project(s)
allow field welding currently, allowed it previously, or including type of damage, type of bridge, and type of bridge
will not allow field welded repairs and retrofits on their member; and varied geographic location.
bridges.
• The agencies that have standard field welding plans,
specifications, procedures, or details and the frequency SYNTHESIS ORGANIZATION
of field welded projects that have plans or specifications
prepared before field welding is performed. This synthesis is organized into five chapters:
• The typical requirements for characterizing the chemistry
and grade of the base metal, as well as the typical tech- • Chapter one introduces the synthesis, providing back-
niques used to verify weldability of the base material. ground information and summarizing the scope and
• How often governing specifications and welding codes organization of the document.
are specified for field welded projects and the typical • Chapter two presents and summarizes the findings from
welding codes used for field welding. the literature review.
• Types of field welded repairs and retrofits and the fre- • Chapter three presents the results of the survey of the
quency of each type. state of the practice. The results are presented in the
• Information on the typical field welding design and following topic areas:
welding staff, including whether the welders are from –– Extent of field welding,
internal staff or outside contractors and whether the –– Current manual and specifications,

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 7

–– Quality assurance and quality control, and • Chapter five concludes the reports with a summary of
–– Performance of repairs and retrofits. key observations from the findings and suggestions for
• Chapter four summarizes the information provided by further research and outreach in field welding.
the six agencies that were interviewed for the case exam- • Three appendices are included: Appendix A provides
ples. The results are presented in the following topic links to the responding DOT agencies, Appendix B
areas: provides a copy of the questionnaire that was dis-
–– Extent of field welding, tributed electronically to the state participants, and
–– Current manual and specifications, Appendix C presents the responses by state for each
–– Quality assurance and quality control, of the questions posed to the survey participants. All
–– Performance of repairs and retrofits, and appendices are available in the online version of the
–– Effective practices and lessons learned. report.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

8

chapter two

LITERATURE REVIEW

INTRODUCTION improvement, capacity strengthening, and corrosion and impact

damage repairs or retrofits.
The literature review process began with a search of the Trans-
port Research Information Database (TRID) for documents
related to field welding of highway bridges. The keywords Fatigue Improvement
and phrases that were searched included “field welding,”
“field weld,” and “repair weld.” Additional Internet searching This typically includes retrofit of out-of-plane and distortion-
was performed to find documentation from individual trans- induced cracking by welding the connection stiffener to the
portation agencies on field welding practices. The bridge and flange. In most cases, the welding is on the tension flange.
structural welding codes were also reviewed for any additional Welding of the transverse stiffeners and cross-brace connection
information or references. It was found that there is limited plates to the tension flange was avoided prior to the early
published research or literature on the topic of field welding to mid-1980s because of concerns over fatigue cracking or
and field repair welds. brittle fracture of the tension flange (Zhao and Roddis 2004;
Connor and Fisher 2007). As a result, a rigid connection
between the girder flange and web-mounted stiffeners and
OVERVIEW connection plates was generally not provided. The lack of a
positive connection often resulted in cracking from out-of-
Field welding is welding of a material outside of a fabrication plane distortions, as shown in Figure 1, in a plane parallel to
shop. Field welding typically occurs at the bridge site. The the primary loading stress (Zhao and Roddis 2004).
emphasis of this synthesis is on planned field welded repairs
and retrofits where consideration was given to design, speci- In hindsight, not welding the connection plate to the tension
fications, procedures, qualifications, and inspection require- flange led to out-of-plane cracking of the web within the small
ments considered before performing work. web gap between the web-to-flange weld and termination of
the connection plate to web fillet weld, as shown in Figure 2
(Fish et al. 2015). At present, the current AASHTO LRFD
EXTENT OF FIELD WELDING design provisions (AASHTO 2014) require that the connection
plate be welded or bolted to both the compression and tension
There is limited literature on the extent of field welding per-
flanges to resist out-of-plane cracking. Stiffening of the web gap
formed on steel bridges. Only one research document was
by welding the connection plate to the tension flange is one of
found that specifically talked about the amount of field weld-
many common retrofit endorsements (Zhao and Roddis 2004).
ing performed in the bridge industry; NCHRP Report 321
(Gregory et al. 1989) found that most states would use welding
This retrofit strategy is simpler than a bolted retrofit; how-
as a repair method if it was proven in advance to be successful
ever, it requires that the connection plate extend completely to
and if guidance was available on the subjects of inspection
the tension flange. Because the connection plates were often
and quality control. They also reported that only one bridge
trimmed short of the tension flange, another plate may be
owner claimed that they would never use welding for repair
required to be attached to the stiffener, which is then welded
of cracks. According to this report, the agency’s confidence
to the flange. This retrofit strategy also requires that the stress
appeared to be the key to repair welding because “Those
ranges in the flange not exceed the limits given by AASHTO
states that did not like to weld in the field all stated that it was
Fatigue Detail Category C, which is the applicable detail
impossible to obtain welding and inspection personnel of a
category. If present, existing cracked welds are typically gouged
sufficiently high standard to produce a sound welded repair”
out before the new welds are applied. It is important that
(Gregory et al. 1989).
finish grinding be performed after completion of welding to
provide a smooth final surface. The use of field welding to
Types of Field Welded Repairs repair out-of-plane and distortion-induced cracking is often
not recommended by many DOTs as a result of the expen-
The literature review revealed that field welded repairs are sive labor necessary to ensure good weld quality and smooth
performed on structures for three primary reasons: fatigue surface grinding, along with the fear of introducing another

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 9

In the 1970s, Fisher et al. studied the use of gas tungsten

arc welding (GTAW), also known as tungsten inert gas (TIG)
welding, to remelt the metal at the weld toe to improve the
fatigue resistance. This method was only validated using cover
plate termination details. In this process, a small volume of
fillet weld and base metal is remelted by manually moving
the tungsten electrode along the weld toe. This process can be
used to improve the fatigue resistance at uncracked weld toes
and to melt the volume containing existing shallow surface
cracks to fully remove the crack. This research is documented
in NCHRP Report 206 (Fisher et al. 1979).

Capacity Strengthening

This process typically involves a retrofit to increase capacity

resulting from a poor load rating such as adding stiffeners
to increase shear resistance. These repairs are undertaken in
cases where the members were designed to support a lighter
FIGURE 1 Out-of-plane and distortion-induced cracking
load than required under current specifications and are dis-
in web gap (adapted from Fisher and Keating 1989). tinguished from those where damage of some kind exists.

Corrosion and Impact Damage Strengthening

fatigue-sensitive detail in a primary load carrying member.
Therefore, this method is often the last choice when other This includes repair or retrofit of damaged members. These
repair methods are not effective at stopping crack growth members may have corrosion damage that has resulted in
(Zhao and Roddis 2004; Hu et al. 2006). Hu et al. (2006) noted significant section loss and either requires additional stiff-
that the use of field welding to repair out-of-plane cracking, ening or complete replacement of the member. Corrosion is
while convenient, should be minimized as a result of several typically repaired with the addition of reinforcing material
potential problems. This includes overhead welding position, or section replacement (Gregory et al. 1989). Impact damage
extensive cleaning to remove corrosion and dirt buildup, and frequently results in distorted and damaged members, which
preheat requirements that may be difficult with the large may also include cracking or tearing of the bridge member.
concrete mass above the top flange. Repair of impact damage normally involves straightening,
with some welding or bolting of new or additional material
(Gregory et al. 1989; Connor et al. 2008).

NCHRP Report 321 (Gregory et al. 1989) found that the rate
of the occurrence of these damage types varied from state to
state. In some states, corrosion was the major problem with
steel bridges, whereas others had major problems with accident
damage and fatigue cracking.

Field Welding Design Considerations

Field welding presents special challenges when compared

with original shop fabrication. Concerns regarding overhead
positioning of many field welding repairs were raised in
multiple sources (Miller 1993; Zhao and Roddis 2004; Hu
et al. 2006). Another challenge is the weldability of the steel,
because it may be of unknown composition. According to
ANSI/AWS A3.0-2010, weldability is defined as the capacity
of material to be welded under the imposed fabrication condi-
tions into a specific, suitably designed structure performing
satisfactorily in the intended service. Therefore, the weldability
FIGURE 2 Out-of-plane and distortion-induced cracking of a material for field welding must account for any adverse
(Snyder 2015). fabrication conditions that are often present in the field.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

10

Field welded repairs and retrofits will likely involve the –– For quenched and tempered steels such as ASTM A514
welding of types of steels where the ASTM specifications and A517, a separate table for minimum and maxi-
are out of date compared with current specified bridge steels; mum preheat temperatures is provided. Overheating
therefore, the current welding codes may not account for owing to high preheat and interpass temperatures
special requirements of these steels. When the composition and high heat input can possibly reduce the specified
of the steel is unknown or in doubt, it is necessary that analysis tensile and yield strengths, along with toughness.
be performed so that a welding engineer can determine whether –– The recommended minimum preheat temperature for
it is suitable for welding. It is imperative to know the chemical ASTM A7 steel when carbon content is below 0.4%
composition of the steel being joined (Miller 1993). was 350°F. Because carbon content was not specified
for ASTM A7 steels, a lower preheat and interpass
Weld-access holes are used to provide access for repair temperature may be used for lower carbon contents.
welds in the flange of a girder and are placed in the web of the • Whenever possible, preheating should be maintained
girder at the weld location. It is important that weld-access throughout the duration of the repair.
holes have adequate space to allow the welder to produce a • A preheating temperature of 100°F below the recom-
good quality weld in this region. Run-off tabs and backing bars mended preheat and interpass temperatures could be
are utilized in welds requiring a CJP weld because this will help used before air-carbon arc gouging.
to eliminate the lack of penetration or lack of fusion from the • To reduce the chance for delayed hydrogen cracking,
welds. Generally run-off tabs and backing bars are taken off steels with carbon content of greater than 0.4% may
by grinding to remove any stress concentrations and to aid require additional heating immediately after welding is
in inspection. completed to maintain an elevated temperature for an
extended period of time.
Adverse fabrication conditions in the field include a sus- • Whenever possible, chemical or spectrographic analysis
ceptibility to cracking when the steel base material is under of a drilling or piece of steel should be performed even if
high restraint. The rigidity of the structure or member does the specification of the steel is known or mill test reports
not allow for movement derived from shrinkage of the weld, are available, because the steel may have been supplied
which results in large shrinkage or residual stresses in the
out of specification or incorrect mill reports may have
weld metal. Under conditions of high restraint, the likelihood
been supplied. This report included two tables for the ten-
of hydrogen cracks also increases, generally in the weld metal.
sile and chemical properties of the most commonly used
This type of cracking may occur up to several hours after
steels in bridge construction over the previous 50 years
welding has been completed because the hydrogen in the weld
before the publication of the report. This list does not
metal will diffuse into the heat affected zone (HAZ) when
include current ASTM specifications for bridge steels
the weld cools. Adequate preheat and welding sequences are
such as ASTM A709.
the critical components to resisting weld cracking resulting
from shrinkage stresses by slowing down the cooling rate
and limiting the restraint. Other factors that affect hydrogen CURRENT MANUALS AND SPECIFICATIONS
cracking are the thickness of the material and the type of FOR FIELD WELDING
joint because this influences the degree of restraint, the com-
position of the steel, and the hydrogen content of the weld Two primary welding codes are used for structural welding
metal. The use of low hydrogen electrodes, which are dried at of steel structures in the United States: AWS Bridge Weld-
high temperatures before welding, can also aid in the preven- ing Code D1.5 (AASHTO/AWS 2010) and AWS Structural
tion of hydrogen cracking. Welding Code D1.1 (AWS 2010b). AWS Bridge Welding
Code D1.5 is required for new fabrication of bridges by the
NCHRP Report 321 (Gregory et al. 1989) identified effec- AASHTO bridge design specification. AWS Structural Weld-
tive field welding practices that can be used to improve the ing Code D1.1 is required for fabrication of buildings and other
welded repair of cracks in steel members. It can be noted that structures. The specific welding code to be applied to bridge
this research was initiated before the publication of the first field welding may vary from state to state. Each welding code
edition of the AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code. contains requirements for the design of welds, qualification of
Therefore, any requirements in AASHTO/AWS D1.5 will welders and welding procedures, qualification of inspectors,
take precedent over recommendations in this report. and inspection and workmanship requirements.

NCHRP Report 321 recommended the following: AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5:2010 does not make a
distinction between shop and field welds and does not con-
• Because of the high levels of restraint typically present tain any additional requirements for the strengthening and
during field welded repairs and retrofits, minimum pre- repairing of existing structures. When this code is specified
heat temperatures of no less than 250°F should be used on a field welding project, it is implied by the engineer that
except when the steels are of quenched and tempered all of the code requirements for shop welds are also required
types. for field welding including quality control requirements, having

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 11

qualified welding operators, written and qualified welding ate welding techniques. The current, voltage, travel speed,
procedures, and workmanship requirements. and technique used to deposit the weld metal will control the
heat input from welding that can affect the toughness of the
AWS Structural Welding Code D1.1:2010, Section 8, on base material, weld metal, and HAZ if it is not kept within
the other hand, includes additional requirements and guid- acceptable limits.
ance for field welding on existing structures. This section,
“Strengthening and Repairing Existing Structures,” is quite The ability of a welder to produce a weld of acceptable
brief, with only one and one-half pages of dialog. All of the quality is verified through the use of welder performance
requirements for shop welding elsewhere in the code apply to qualification tests. Typically, the qualification lasts indefinitely
field welding on existing structures, along with the additional provided that the welder carries out similar work in a certain
requirements in Section 8, which cover base metal, design of time period without interruptions. However, this requirement
repairs and retrofits, fatigue life enhancements, workmanship may vary depending on specific agency requirements.
and technique, and quality.
Various state DOT manuals that cover field welding were
AWS has published a guidance document for the strength- reviewed to determine any aspects that are commonly included
ening and repair of existing structures as AWS D1.7, Guide for in state manuals. Welder qualification requirements were
Strengthening and Repairing Existing Structures (AWS 2010). included in the Iowa (Iowa DOT Office of Materials 2011),
Although this document is not a prescriptive code and does North Carolina (North Carolina DOT Materials and Tests
not include acceptance criteria, it does contain a considerable Unit 2006), New York (New York Office of Structures 2008),
amount of useful information on what to consider before per- Ohio (Ohio Department of Transportation 2008), Oklahoma
forming a field welded repair. This document contains exten- (Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division 2012), and
sive discussion on weldability of steel, including descriptions Texas (Texas Department of Transportation 2004) DOT state
of the common classifications of structural steel, various car- manuals. Generally, welder qualification programs are insti-
bon equivalency equations, and common alloying elements. It tuted by each state DOT where the welder qualification tests are
also includes discussion on the means for determining an alter- conducted or witnessed by state representatives and a record of
nate acceptance criteria for discontinuities found on existing field welders who have successfully passed the qualification
structures that do not meet the current fabrication codes. test are entered into the department’s database. These DOTs
require that all personnel performing field welding on their
The qualified welding procedure has to meet the require- construction project pass the welder qualification process and
ments of the specified welding code and is based on mechan- be documented as qualified welders. In AWS D1.5, the welder
ical and nondestructive test results of weldments. According must be qualified for the position in which they will weld,
to AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code and AASHTO/AWS and a table was developed that lists the qualified positions
D1.5 Bridge Welding Code, welding procedures must be for each test position.
properly documented in a written format. This format, called
a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS), may either be Oklahoma DOT requires that all bridge welders test on a
prequalified if all requirements for prequalification in the fillet weld assembly in the vertical (3F) and overhead (4F)
applicable welding code are met or may be qualified by testing positions, along with groove weld assemblies in the horizontal
in accordance with the requirements of the applicable code. (2G), vertical (3G), and overhead (4G) positions (Oklahoma
Even if a WPS is prequalified, it must still be written and DOT Materials & Research Division 2012). North Carolina
available to those authorized to use or examine them. In D1.5 DOT requirements are very similar to Oklahoma DOT except
Bridge Welding Code all procedures, except shielded metal they do not require the horizontal (2G) position (North Carolina
arc welding (SMAW) that utilizes filler metals with a mini- DOT Materials and Tests Unit 2006). Texas DOT requires
mum specified yield strength less than or equal to 90 ksi, that bridge welders who perform groove welding pass the
must be qualified by testing. In D1.1 Structural Welding Code, qualification test for groove welds for plates in the vertical
SMAW; submerged arc welding; gas metal arch welding, (3G) and overhead (4G) positions along with other additional
except short circuit transfer mode; and flux cored arc weld- requirements (Texas Department of Transportation 2004).
ing processes may be prequalified if they meet the specified New York DOT requires that bridge welders who perform
requirements. groove welding pass the qualification test using either the
vertical (3G) and/or overhead (4G) positions depending on
If the actual parameters of the field welding differ from the the project required positions (New York Office of Struc-
prequalification requirements, the procedures must be qualified tures 2008). The Oklahoma, North Carolina, and Texas DOT
through testing. A written Procedure Qualification Record is requirements are tougher than the requirements in AASHTO/
required under the AWS D1.1 and D1.5 welding codes to AWS D1.5. Iowa DOT includes the same table for the quali-
qualify a WPS through testing. The main parameters that are fied positions as AASHTO/AWS D1.5 (Iowa DOT Office of
typically verified for accuracy are minimum preheat tempera- Materials 2011), and the Ohio DOT manual states that the
ture, minimum interpass temperature, welding current, voltage, welders must be qualified for the position in which they are
travel speed, proper protection of filler metals, and appropri- welding (Ohio Department of Transportation 2008).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

12

It was also found that many of the state agencies had field QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
welding inspection guides that included information to aid weld
inspectors. This includes, but is not limited to, information on One of the greatest concerns is the quality of the field welds.
the typical weld symbols, welding procedures, electrodes and Field welding requires the same quality control as shop weld-
electrode storage, preheat and interpass temperatures, weld ing; however, quality control is more difficult to maintain under
joint preparation and cleaning, weld inspections, equipment, field conditions. During the literature review, this concern was
and typical weld discontinuities. An example of good and bad expressed in multiple references (Gregory et al. 1989; Miller
weld beads from Oklahoma DOT is shown in Figure 3. 1993; Keating et al. 1996; Zhao and Roddis 2004).

Oklahoma DOT Examples of Good and Bad Beads

Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW)

FIGURE 3 Oklahoma DOT weld quality examples (Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division 2004).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 13

This does not imply that the quality or quality control acceptance criteria of field welds. Typically, the requirements
requirements are different for field welds than for shop weld- of BS 7910 (British Standards 2013) or API 579 (American
ing. It simply means that it can be more difficult to maintain Petroleum Institute 2007) are applied to a fitness-for-service
quality control under field conditions. The control of field evaluation of steel structures.
welded repairs often relies heavily on the competency of the
contractor performing this work. Engineers tend to rely on the AWS D1.1 and D1.5 welding codes require that welding
contractor’s expertise, experience, and reputation to ensure inspectors be suitably qualified to one of the following stan-
quality workmanship. Even with an experienced contractor, dards and that this qualification be documented by:
the engineer and quality assurance inspectors must ensure that
they responsibly perform their duties. • Current or previous certification as an AWS Certified
Weld Inspector (CWI) in conformance with the provi-
sions of AWS QC1, Standard for AWS Certification of
Welder Qualification Welding Inspectors.
• Current or previous qualification by the Canadian Weld-
According to the AWS D1.1 and 1.5 welding codes, welding
ing Bureau in conformance with the requirements of
should only be permitted by individuals who have passed the
the Canadian Standard Association Standard W178.2,
appropriate qualification tests in accordance with the provi-
Certification of Welding Inspectors.
sions of the specified code. According to NCHRP Report 321
• An individual who, by training or experience, or both, in
(Gregory et al. 1989), the WPS and any applicable Proce-
metals fabrication, inspection, and testing, is competent
dure Qualification Record should be subject to the approval
to perform inspection of the work.
of the Engineer of Record for the repair welding before the
welding is conducted. This report goes on to state that a sim-
Visual testing welding inspection is the most important
ple test, such as the fillet weld break test, may be required
examination method and is applied to all repair welds, inde-
when the quality of the welder’s work does not appear to be
pendent of the utilization of any other inspection methods
up to the required standard. This report also advised that the
(Gregory et al. 1989). Welding inspectors are provided with
welder carry out a practice repair weld at the actual site of the
the repair procedure and details, drawings or sketches, and
repair that duplicates the conditions that will be encountered.
acceptance criteria. Visual inspection is typically performed
It is important that this rehearsal of the repair include appro-
before welding, during welding, and after welding.
priate plate thickness and arrangement of the plates to repro-
duce the access available on the actual bridge. The practice
Before welding, visual inspection includes confirmation
repair provides an opportunity to verify that the welder is suf-
of groove dimensions, cleanliness and surface finish of the
ficiently prepared and that the equipment is adjusted properly
groove, removal of any existing weld discontinuities, fit-up
before beginning the bridge welding. The rehearsal repair
of plates, and fit-up of backing bars (if present). During weld-
could include mock-up cracks marked on the plates and any
ing, visual inspection includes confirmation of preheat and
preheat, removal, and post-heat requirements. These welds
interpass temperatures, welding sequence, electrode require-
can be evaluated using NDT to verify their quality before
ments, storage and handling, welding variables, and post-weld
the actual repair welding is initiated. In addition, mechanical
heat treatment. After welding, visual inspection includes con-
properties may be required for welding on a fracture critical
firmation of backing bar removal, surface finish, size of welds,
member (FCM).
and lack of rejectable weld discontinuities.

Weld Inspection Typical NDT methods applied to field welded repairs and
retrofits include:
It is important that the inspection of repair welds be at least
as thorough as when the bridge was originally fabricated • Dye penetrant testing (PT),
(Gregory et al. 1989). This includes matching the current • Magnetic particle testing (MT),
requirements for the methods and extent of the inspection com- • Ultrasonic testing (UT), and
pared with current bridge fabrication practices. Acceptance • Radiographic testing (RT).
requirements for visual and NDT of the welds are included
in the AWS welding codes and, typically, the require­ments PT is a convenient and simple NDT method that is lim-
for AWS D1.1 or AASHTO/AWS D1.5 will be specified for ited to inspection of surface discontinuities. High or low
each project. The acceptance criteria in the AASHTO/AWS temperatures can affect the results of PT; therefore, NCHRP
welding codes include the size and distribution of welding Report 321 advised against using this method when the
discontinuities that are either permissible or rejectable. The steel temperature range is not within 40°F–110°F (Gregory
requirements in AWS D1.1 may be modified by the engineer et al. 1989).
through the project specifications and any additional require-
ments can be specified. Although unlikely, the engineer may MT is limited to inspection of surface or near surface
also decide to use a fitness-for-service approach to specify the discontinuities in ferromagnetic materials. This method can

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

14

be slightly more sensitive to tightly closed cracks; however, The cleanliness of the materials to be welded is frequently
it can be more time consuming and requires more skill to a problem when performing a field repair (Miller 1993).
differentiate actual discontinuities from false calls. MT can According to the welding codes, loose scale and rust must
be affected by wind. be removed, at a minimum, before welding. Wire brushing,
shot or sandblasting, or grinding are the typical methods used
Both UT and RT can be used to inspect for internal dis- to clean the steel.
continuities. These methods require advanced training to
properly perform the inspection and evaluate the results. AWS D1.1 and D1.5 welding codes require that welding
consumables that have been removed from the original pack-
Radiography in the field can have issues resulting from age be protected and stored so that the welding properties are
safety concerns and portability. Large thicknesses may require not affected. NCHRP Report 321 reported that it is important
different sources that may be less portable than iridium sources that the welding electrodes are dried at high temperatures
that can be used on thinner material. UT can also be affected before use on bridge repair to ensure that the weld metal will
by temperature because the couplant can either dry out if the have extra low hydrogen content (Gregory et al. 1989). The
steel is very hot or freeze if the steel is too cold. extra low hydrogen content (of less than 5 ml/100 g) is obtained
when low hydrogen electrodes are taken from hermetically
The AWS D1.1 and D1.5 welding codes require that per- sealed containers and dried at 700°F to 800°F for 1 h and
sonnel performing NDT other than visual be qualified in used within 2 h after removal.
accordance with the current edition of the American Society
for Nondestructive Testing, Recommended Practice Number Heated ovens are required by the AWS welding codes to
SNT-TC-1A as NDT Level II or as NDT Level I working store low hydrogen electrodes after the hermetically sealed
under the NDT Level II. containers are opened in order to maintain their low hydro-
gen characteristics. Because of the limited electrical power in
the field, especially for overnight storage, purchasing elec-
Welding Cleanliness trodes in a small container, such as a 10-lb, hermetically
sealed container, may preclude the need for drying ovens if
Adequate cleaning of the field weld location to remove paint,
the unused electrodes are thrown away after opening. Coiled
galvanizing, dirt, loose or thick scale, slag, rust, moisture,
electrodes must be protected from direct contact with moisture
grease, or other impurities is required by the AWS welding
and condensation.
codes. Scaling rust, pits, or other surface irregularities can
affect both the welding and subsequent NDT. Oklahoma
DOT (Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division 2004) Weld Fitup
states that one of the most practical tools to clean a weld joint
is a stiff wire brush. AWS welding codes allow mill scale that Fitup may be difficult for field welding because of the inability
can withstand vigorous wire brushing to remain. According to fixture the pieces or limited access. Field welds are to be
to the welding code, all finished welds must be cleaned as designed with consideration of the access and visibility for
well and recommends that multiple pass welds be cleaned the welder to perform a quality weld. Welding out of the typi-
between every pass (Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research cal position is likely because the structure cannot be moved
Division 2004). Typically, this is accomplished using a to a position of greatest advantage. It is best to select weld
chipping hammer and stiff wire brush. A grinder may also be joints that will minimize the amount of out-of-position welding
used with care for cleaning, but be used to avoid doing more (Miller 1993).
harm than good on the finished weld and base metal. Risks
associated with grinding include excessive removal of base Welding Environment
metal and blemishing over weld defects. Slag, which is a
byproduct of some welding processes and protects the weld Although the ambient environment where field welding occurs
when it is molten, must be removed between passes and at is typically not as controlled as the environment in a bridge
completion of the weld. Failure to clean the surfaces before fabrication shop, protection from wind and moisture can
welding may encourage the formation of porosity in the be provided by constructing a temporary enclosure around
welds or lack of fusion between the weld and parent material the welding location.
(Miller 1993).
Control of the ambient temperature in the immediate area
If a project will involve repairing a discontinuity in an surrounding the point of welding may be required if the tem-
existing weld, it is essential that the discontinuity be com- perature is below the limits in the welding code. AWS D1.1 and
pletely and fully removed prior to the subsequent weld- D1.5 require that the steel be preheated to 70°F if the ambient
ing. Grinding the location to bright metal and performing temperature drops below 32°F. Any additional requirements
NDT using PT or MT is ideal to ensure complete removal for preheat beyond this amount will still be required. Welding
(Miller 1993). is not to be performed at an ambient temperature below 0°F

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 15

in the immediate vicinity around the weld. It is suggested by effects by performing experimental testing of fatigue crack
Miller (1993) that the performance of the welders is negatively weld repair while under tensile stress or dynamic loading.
affected at such low temperatures and, hence, the practice is
discouraged. Protection from low temperatures can be pro- NCHRP Report 321 described experimental work on repair
vided by erecting a tent or other protection around the welding welded fatigue cracks (Gregory et al. 1989). This research
location. In this instance, the temperature requirements refer to included fatigue testing girders until cracks grew to a pre-
the temperature within the enclosure at the welding location determined length and then repair welding the cracks before
and not necessarily the temperature outside of the enclosure. performing additional fatigue testing. The tests demonstrated
It can also be noted that problems with equipment may occur that repair welds had at least the fatigue life as the original
at such low temperatures. For example, the lubricants in the shop weld. Fracture toughness testing was performed that
wire feeder gear boxes may thicken at low ambient tempera- demonstrated that multiple repair welds could be made with
tures, which could adversely affect delivery of the electrode minimal toughness reductions in the HAZ. The repair welds
to the arc. met the relevant AASHTO requirements for fracture tough-
ness; however, it was suggested that repairs on FCMs include
NCHRP Report 321 suggests that electric resistance heat- mechanical testing to qualify the welding procedures and ver-
ing elements with thermocouples and automatic temperature ify that the increased toughness requirements are met.
controllers and recorders be used when close control of pre-
heating temperatures is required or when extensive repairs Experimental work was undertaken to determine the effect
are being performed (Gregory et al. 1989). of repair welding under dynamic loading when the crack may
be opening and closing. It was found that it is possible to
Moisture must be controlled during field welding. The carry out repair welding under dynamic loading, but that the
base metal must be dry before weld metal is deposited. Pre- preferred procedure was to close the bridge to traffic while
heating the plates before welding can be used to ensure that the root pass and possibly a second pass of weld metal are
they are dry; however, an enclosure or cover may be necessary deposited. It was determined that welding is an effective and
to ensure that they stay dry. economic method for the repair of fatigue cracks if a good
quality weld can be guaranteed. It was stressed that the pres-
Wind can cause problems with gas arc shielding because ence of weld defects can severely reduce the fatigue strength
it will not allow for adequate coverage of the weld during of repair welds.
the welding process. Gas metal arc and gas-shielded flux
cored arc welding processes are most sensitive to this issue Another study of the performance of field welded repairs on
(Miller 1993). The use of self-shielding flux core or SMAW steel highway bridges was performed in 1984 by Matsumoto
is often preferred for field welding to avoid problems caused and Motomura (1984). This research evaluated the effect of
by wind. Where gas-shielded processes are required, a wind field welding under the influence of load-induced stresses
screen would be used to protect the gas shielding. and traffic-induced vibrations that may be present when field
welding is done while the bridge is open to traffic. Experimen-
tal tests were performed on plate girder bridges to simulate
PERFORMANCE OF REPAIRS AND RETROFITS these effects while rewelding fatigue cracks. The tests were
done on ASTM A572 Grade 50 and ASTM A678 Grade B
Little research or published literature was found that specifi- steel. This research found that the influence of low tensile
cally documented the performance of field welding, likely stresses on fillet weld defects was almost negligible and that
because the only inherent difference between field welding fillet welding can be applied to repair work performed under
and shop welding is where the welding takes place. The weld- the influence of tensile stresses. Fillet welding was per-
ing processes, welding parameters, inspection, and quality formed on web plates and flange plates under the influence
requirements are generally the same for field welding as they of vibration. It was concluded that fillet welding can be used
are for shop welding. to repair web plates and flange plates under the influence of
vibration if visual examination and the correction of defects
One difference between fabrication shop and field welding are performed carefully.
is the additional restraint that may be present in a field welded
repair or retrofit owing to the structural connections between Repair procedures for out-of-plane and distortion-induced
bridge members. Another difference is that field welding fatigue cracking utilizing gouging and rewelding of cracks
repair and retrofits may be performed while under active live were evaluated by Keating et al. in 1996. This study included
loading, which can cause vibration along with additional dead field investigation of repairs performed on an in-service bridge,
loading. This concern was mentioned by Zhao and Roddis along with laboratory fatigue testing of repairs on large-scale
(2004) and Hu et al. (2006) because micro-cracking could specimens and finite-element analyses. This method was
occur within the HAZ as a result of structure vibration dur- found to be a viable option for the repair of out-of-plane and
ing solidification from repairs carried out under traffic. Two distortion-induced fatigue cracking as long as proper proce-
research studies were found that attempted to capture these dures were followed to achieve a quality repair. The gouging

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

16

and rewelding technique required a high degree of skill and Fisher et al. (1979) performed GTAW to remelt the weld toes
inspection and, therefore, expense. This type of repair restored of precracked cover plate termination as reported in NCHRP
the cracked location to its uncracked state; however, without Report 206. It was found that the proper selection of shield-
an additional retrofit to lower or eliminate the out-of-plane ing gas and electrode cone angle was necessary to provide
stresses in this region, the crack would likely reappear. An adequate penetration to completely remelt the cracks. Mill
in-depth inspection including NDT can help ensure complete scale was removed before welding because it was found that
removal of the crack. undercutting would occur if the scale was not removed. Over-
head welding was undertaken to simulate the field conditions
As part of this study, field welding was also performed to for cover plate terminations. It was found that a several hours
connect the existing connection plates to the flange to pro- of training were required before welding personnel could
vide a rigid connection. Concerns with this retrofit included the achieve the desired retrofit condition. This research found
addition of a fatigue-sensitive detail and the quality of the field that GTAW remelting was a successful method for repairing
welding. Concerns also arose over the inability to adequately weld toes that have a crack growth less than 0.180 in. deep
clean the joint before welding if the connection plate is tight and 3 in. long, provided that adequate penetration is provided
fit to the flange. Additional grinding may be required to ensure and the operator performs a proper weld. It was also deter-
that no paint is in the tight-fit gap. mined that this method could be provided in field conditions
under normal traffic loading.
NCHRP Report 604: Heat-Straightening Repair of Dam-
aged Steel Bridge Girders: Fatigue and Fracture Performance GTAW (also known as TIG) remelting of weld toes to
(Connor et al. 2008) investigated the effect of multiple dam- repair fatigue cracks of fillet welds was also investigated by
age repair cycles on the fatigue and fracture performance of researchers in Japan (Natori et al. 1989). They had findings
steel girders. During this study, many girders required repair
similar to that of Fisher that the vibration of the bridge under
welds as a result of cracking induced from impact damage
normal service conditions did not affect the GTAW remelt.
applied in the lab. The impacts were all applied dynamically
They recommended the use of GTAW remelting as an effective
using a large drop-weight type system. Many of the repairs
retrofit technique for cracks less than 2 mm (0.08 in.) deep.
were significant because of tearing at stiffeners and cover
Using an assumed crack depth to length ratio of 1⁄5, it was
plate details. It was demonstrated that after heat straightening
estimated that cracks of up to 10 mm (0.39 in.) in length can
and placement of the repair welds, the repaired welded details
be removed by the GTAW remelting process.
did not perform any differently during fatigue testing when
compared with the original as-fabricated welds. Although the
Fisher et al. (1982) recommended the use of field welding
weld repairs were made in the laboratory, the authors indi-
to retrofit an out-of-plane cracking detail by welding a shear
cated that as long as the repair welds are performed properly
and utilize sound welding procedures, there should be no tab to the transverse connection plate and flange of curved,
concern as to the performance of the repair welds in terms of continuous box girder bridges in Baltimore, Maryland. This
fatigue or fracture limit states. retrofit was determined to be the only conceivable possibility
in the negative moment region, because cutting back the con-
Kelly and Dexter (1997) researched the fatigue perfor- nection plates to increase the web gap length and provide
mance of repair welds on details commonly implemented on additional flexibility would likely alter the structural behav-
ship structures. Fatigue tests were conducted on full-scale ior and result in increased adverse behavior. The retrofit was
welded beams with a variety of butt welds in the flanges and done in 1982, but cracking was observed in the welds dur-
weld-access holes in the webs. These welds would not meet ing a site inspection in 1984. It was later reported that the
AASHTO Category B requirements because some of the cracking was the result of undersized and poor quality welds
welds did not have the weld reinforcement ground smooth, (Demers and Fisher 1990). In 1986, the shear tabs were par-
backing bars removed, or were welded on one side without tially removed and retrofit holes were drilled in the crack tips.
backing. The results showed that the fatigue strength of these No additional cracks were reported.
butt welds corresponded to the AASHTO Category D S-N
curve. This fatigue strength was not affected by the type of Koob et al. (1985) investigated the cracking that occurred
steel, whether they were two-sided or one-sided welds, whether on the Poplar Street Bridge in St. Louis, Missouri. It was deter-
backing bars were present or removed, and with and without mined that this cracking occurred because of out-of-plane and
the edges ground flush. Weld-access holes required to make distortion-induced fatigue. Various retrofit strategies were
repairs may also be characterized as Category D details. investigated, including field welding the connection plates to
The research included multiple repairs at the same detail by the top flange of the girder. The main concerns for this repair
fatigue testing until cracking occurred between each repair were the weld quality of overhead welding under the field
cycle. The fatigue testing indicated that the weld repairs of conditions and the effect of traffic during welding. However,
through-thickness cracks have the same fatigue strength as the it was determined that a welded retrofit was worthy of evalua-
original new butt welds, even after repairing the same location tion owing to the ease of installation and the good performance
up to four times. record of welded connection plates. Because of concerns

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 17

about micro-cracking in the HAZ during solidification when SUMMARY

welding under live loading, a decision was made to stop traf-
fic during the welding operation for the trial retrofits. Slight The literature review revealed that field welded repairs are
undercutting was noted in the top flange weld toe and debris performed on structures for three primary reasons: fatigue
between the stiffener and the top flange caused impurities improvement, capacity strengthening, and corrosion and impact
in the root pass. Poor quality locations were ground out and damage repairs or retrofits.
rewelded. It was determined that sand blasting may not be
• Fatigue improvement typically includes retrofit of out-
the most effective method for paint removal because this
of-plane and distortion-induced cracking by welding
might have contributed to the trapped debris. A carbide burr
the connection stiffener to the flange. In most cases, the
grinder was used to weld the toe ground to provide a smooth welding is on the tension flange. Along with field welded
transition; however, weld toe peening was not done in the retrofits for out-of-plane cracking, GTAW or TIG weld-
trial retrofit. This retrofit was found to eliminate out-of-plane ing, to remelts the metal at the weld toe to improve the
displacement of the web gap; a trial bolted retrofit was also fatigue resistance.
tested in this study and not found to eliminate out-of-plane • Capacity strengthening typically involves a retrofit
displacement of the web gap. In the end, a softening technique to increase capacity resulting from a poor load rating
where the web gap is increased to decrease the stresses was such as adding stiffeners to increase shear resistance.
recommended over the field welded retrofit because of con- These repairs are used in cases where the members were
cerns over the quality of the field welds. designed to support a lighter load than required under
current specifications and are distinguished from those
Kansas DOT performed field welding to repair out-of-plane where damage of some kind exists.
cracking in the Westgate Bridge, a two-girder bridge consisting • Corrosion and impact damage strengthening include
of a girder/truss floorbeam/stringer system (Zhao and Roddis repair or retrofit of damaged members. Such members
2004). The two girders are 1,758 ft long and are fabricated may have corrosion damage that has resulted in significant
from A36 material. The bridge was built in 1977, and by section loss and either requires additional stiffening or
1994 nine of the 11 girder spans had developed horizontal or complete replacement.
horseshoe cracks at the interior floorbeam to girder connec-
tions. Along with 1-in. stop crack holes being drilled at the Two primary welding codes are used for structural welding
end of the cracks, field welding was performed to repair the of steel structures in the United States:
cracking. In positive moment regions, the web gap locations
were stiffened by placing 5⁄16-in. fillet welds to connect the • AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5 is required for new
stiffeners to the top flanges. In negative moment regions, 3⁄4 in. fabrication of bridges by the AASHTO bridge design
stiffener plates were added on the other side of the girders specification.
to resist the out-of-plane distortion. Field welds were placed • AWS Structural Welding Code D1.1 is required for
to weld the existing stiffeners to the bottom (compression) fabrication of buildings and other structures. The specific
flange; however, no welding was placed on the top (tension) welding code to be applied to bridge field welding may
flange. The new stiffeners were tight fit to the top flange and vary from state to state.
cut short where they intersected with existing longitudinal
AWS has published a guidance document for the strength-
stiffeners. No new crack development has been reported
ening and repair of existing structures as AWS D1.7 Guide for
since the bridge was repaired. Strengthening and Repairing Existing Structures. Although
this document is not a prescriptive code and does not include
Cracking on the Blanchette Bridge over the Missouri River,
acceptance criteria, it does contain useful information on
owned by the Missouri DOT, was noted on stringers after the things to consider before performing a field welded repair.
concrete deck was replaced with a steel grid deck (Marianos
et al. 2006). This cracking stemmed from field welds that Many state DOTs sponsor welder qualification programs
connected the shim plates of the grid deck to the top flange where the welder qualification tests are conducted or wit-
of the stringers. The stringers conformed to the requirements nessed by state representatives and a record of field welders
of ASTM A7 steel, whereas the shim plates were ASTM A36 who have successfully passed the qualification test can be
steel. ASTM A7 steel is generally considered weldable, and found in the department’s database. These DOTs require that
no previous indication of welding issues was found during all personnel performing field welding on construction projects
inspection of the fillet welds. An in-depth study was performed pass the welder qualification process and be documented as
by Missouri DOT to determine the cause of cracking. It was qualified welders. Many of the state agencies had field weld-
determined that the cracking was the result of open shim butt ing inspection guides that included information to aid weld
joints where the shim plate was not spliced before being fil- inspectors.
let welded to the stringers. This type of cracking would have
occurred independent of whether the fillet weld was performed The quality of the field welds is a concern that was raised
in the field or the shop. in multiple references. Quality control is more difficult to

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

18

maintain under field conditions; however, the quality require- for fracture toughness; however, it was suggested that
ments are the same for field welds as shop welds. repairs on FCMs include mechanical testing to qualify the
welding procedures and verify that the increased toughness
Research on field welding has been performed using requirements are met. Research has also demonstrated that
experimental testing of fatigue crack weld repair while under after heat straightening and placement of the repair welds
tensile stress or dynamic loading. These studies found that it the repaired welded details did not perform any differently
is possible to carry out repair welding under dynamic load- during fatigue testing when compared with the original
ing; however, the preferred procedure is to close the bridge as-fabricated welds.
to traffic while the root pass and possibly a second pass of
weld metal are deposited. Other research performed on the Field welded repairs and retrofits that have been imple-
fatigue resistance of field welds found that repair welds had mented on steel bridges and documented in literature have
at least the fatigue life of the original shop weld, as long as performed well in service. Only one issue with a field welded
proper procedures were followed to achieve a quality repair. repair or retrofit was found during the literature review and
The repair welds met the relevant AASHTO requirements this was attributed to undersized and poor quality welds.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 19

chapter three

STATE OF THE PRACTICE

OVERVIEW installation, and quality control and quality assurance

requirements for field welding projects. The following
To better understand the current (2015) field welding practices design requirements were investigated:
used by state transportation agencies, a survey of practice was –– Plan and specification preparation, and
conducted through NCHRP in cooperation with AASHTO. –– Base material properties.
Each of the voting members of the AASHTO Subcommittee The following installation requirements were reviewed:
on Bridges and Structures (SCOBS) was by e-mail for the –– In-house versus contracted welders,
survey. SCOBS voting members were encouraged to for- –– Certified welders, and
ward the survey to the individual in their agency who would –– Welding and inspection procedures.
be most familiar with that agency’s field welding practices.
The following installation requirements were inves-
E-mail reminders were sent to encourage participation. Forty-
tigated:
three state DOTs completed the survey, an 86% response rate.
–– Welding inspector requirements, and
–– NDT requirements.
This chapter summarizes the current practices as derived
• Field Weld Performance and Case Examples—This
from the survey. The information is presented in various for-
section of the survey focused on the performance of field
mats, including both tables and graphs, as appropriate. A copy
welded repairs and retrofits and whether the respondents
of the survey questionnaire is included in Appendix B and
had experienced field welding that could be shared as
the agency responses are presented in Appendix C.
either a successful or not successful field welded project
case example. The first question in this section asked
SURVEY CONTENT whether agencies have had any major problems asso-
ciated with repairs and/or retrofits specifically because
Survey questions were organized into the following three they were field welded. If yes, respondents were asked
categories: to describe such issues. Respondents were then asked
whether they had an experience with field welding on
• Policy on Field Welding—The first question in this a project, either successful or not, which could be used
section asked participants whether their agency allows as a case example. Additional information was then col-
planned field welding repairs or retrofits. If not, partici- lected on the specific field welded project and whether
pants were asked why they chose not to and if they had the respondent was satisfied or not with the field welding
ever performed planned field welding. If their agency on this project.
currently does not allow planned field welding and has
not ever performed planned field welding, participants Survey results are presented in the remainder of this
were finished with the survey. If their agency either chapter. Representatives from six state DOTs were interviewed
allows planned field welding or has performed planned to develop case examples of specific field welded projects,
field welding, participants completed the remainder of which are presented in chapter four.
the survey. These participants were asked whether their
agency has any standard plans, specifications, proce-
dures, or details for certain field welded repairs. If yes, EXTENT OF FIELD WELDING
they were asked to provide such information by upload- Field Welding Policy
ing them electronically or provided a link to any hosted
files. Participants were then asked if there was a govern- Of the 43 state DOTs that responded to the survey, 32 (74%)
ing specification or welding code and, if so, what welding reported that their agency allows planned field welded repairs
code was applied. Finally, participants were requested to and retrofits to be performed. Of the 11 agencies (26%) that
describe the types of field welded repair and retrofits that do not allow planned field welded repairs/retrofits, two (5%)
their agency has performed. have previously performed field welding. The remaining
• Field Welding Project Details—This section of the nine agencies (21%) have never performed and do not currently
survey gathered information about the typical design, allow field welding. Figure 4 shows which agencies allow field

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

20

FIGURE 4 Allowance of field welding.

welding currently, allowed field welding previously but do not Figure 5 displays the reasons that 11 state DOTs do not
currently allow it, and which agencies have never allowed allow field welding that included:
field welding.
• Lack of experienced inspectors,
States as far north as Alaska, North Dakota, Minnesota, • Lack of qualified agency supervisors or administrators,
and Maine allow field welding; there does not appear to be a • Quality of work,
correlation with lowest anticipated temperatures and general • Unfamiliarity with appropriate welded details,
geographic location and the propensity for field welding. • Past issues,

FIGURE 5 Reasons for not allowing field welding.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 21

• Expense or time consuming, often resulted in cracking from out-of-plane distortions in a

• Unfamiliarity with process and/or welding, and plane parallel to the primary loading stress.
• Other (please specify).

The most common reason for why agencies do not allow Capacity Strengthening
field welding was concerns regarding the quality of work, as
indicated by eight of the 11 agencies. The other most often The typically involves a retrofit to increase capacity as the
cited responses were a lack of experienced inspectors and a result of a poor load rating such as adding cover plates to a
lack of qualified agency supervisors or administrators. Three rolled beam bridge. These members are not necessarily dam-
agencies selected “other” with the following explanations: aged and may have been designed to support a lighter load
than under current specifications.
• Past performance,
• Welding to a member that is under stress or load, and
Corrosion and Impact Damage Strengthening
• Preferred approach is to provide a structural bolted
connection, and the use of field welding is only used as This includes repair or retrofit of damaged members. These
a last resort where there is insufficient room to develop members may have corrosion damage that has resulted in sig-
a bolted connection. nificant section loss and either requires additional strengthen-
ing or complete replacement of the member. Impact damage
The rest of the survey included questions only provided typically results in distorted and damaged members, including
to the 34 agencies that either currently allow field welding or cracking or tearing of the bridge member.
have previously performed planned field welding.
To better understand the most common reasons for field
welding, the agencies were asked to select each of the com-
Reasons for Field Welding
mon types of field welding projects they have performed or
Most field welding projects can be grouped into the following provide any others that do not fall into these categories. The
three categories. results are shown in Figure 6. The most common type of field
welded project performed was corrosion and impact damage
strengthening, with 30 of the 34 possible respondents (88%)
Fatigue Improvement reporting that they have performed this type of field weld-
ing project. The second most common choice was capacity
This typically includes retrofit of out-of-plane and distortion- strengthening.
induced cracking by welding the connection stiffener to the
tension flange. Welding of the transverse stiffeners and con- “Other” was selected by one agency, and it elaborated
nection plates to the tension flange was avoided prior to the on this choice by describing the use of field welding to
early to mid-1980s owing to concerns over fatigue cracking. reconnect secondary members and to add plates in com-
As a result, a positive rigid connection between the girder pression zones. This would likely fall into both the capacity
flange and web-mounted stiffeners and connection plates was strengthening and corrosion and impact damage strength-
generally not provided. The lack of a positive connection ening categories.

FIGURE 6 Types of field welding projects.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

22

3
9%

11
32%

20
59%

In-house Contracted Out Both FIGURE 8 Agencies with standard field

welding plans, specifications, procedures,
FIGURE 7 Staff performing field welding. or details.

Field Welding Staff field welded repairs. Figure 8 displays the response to this
question. A majority of agencies reported that they do not
Some agencies may use field welding often enough that they have this type of information for certain field welded repairs.
have in-house welders. For other agencies who undertake field
welding less often, this may not be economical when compared Although most of the agencies do not have standard field
with hiring an outside contractor to perform these duties. The welding plans or specifications, it was determined that the
agencies were asked whether they do field welding with an majority always prepare plans or specifications before per-
in-house welding staff, outside contractors, or both depending forming field welding, as shown in Figure 9. No agencies ever
on the project. Figure 7 shows the answers to this question. require plans or specifications before field welding.
It was found that most agencies (20 of 34) contract out their
field welding projects. Some agencies use both outside con-
tractors and internal staff, whereas only three use in-house. Welding Code Requirements

The 34 agencies that currently perform or previously per-

CURRENT MANUALS AND SPECIFICATIONS
formed field welding were asked whether they use a govern-
Standard Plans or Specifications ing specification or welding code for field welding projects.
Figure 10 displays the responses to this question. Most agen-
The 34 agencies that currently perform or previously per- cies (27) responded that they “always” require a governing
formed field welding were asked whether they have any stan- specification or welding code for field welded projects. The
dard plans, specifications, procedures, or details for certain second most frequent response was that the use of a governing

FIGURE 9 Preparation of plans and specifications before welding.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 23

FIGURE 10 Use of governing specification or welding code.

specification or welding code was “sometimes” required. No satisfactorily in the intended service. The weldability of steel
agencies reported that they never require such a governing is often verified before field welding is initiated. Weldability
specification or welding code. is determined through review of the base material properties.

Although most agencies require the use of a governing The agencies were asked about the frequency of projects
specification or welding code, the code most often specified for which the base material properties were determined before
by far is the AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code, as field welding, and the results are shown in Figure 12. An
shown in Figure 11. Eighty-one percent of the agencies noted identical number of agencies (14) responded that they either
that they specify AWS D1.5, whereas only 13% responded that “always” or “sometimes” require base material property deter-
they specify the AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code, which mination before field welding. Five agencies responded that it
would be expected because the welding on a bridge com­ponent was not known how often base material properties are deter-
in a fabrication shop would require that this code be followed. mined before field welding, and one agency responded that
Two agencies choose “other” and further explained this choice: they never require base material determination before field
welding.
• Combination of D1.5 and internal standard specifica-
tions and job special provisions. In a follow-up question, those agencies that responded
• NYS Steel Construction Manual. that they either “always” or “sometimes” require base material
properties to be determined before field welding were asked
Base Metal Weldability to select each of the following typical methods used:

Weldability is defined as the capability of a material to be • Shop drawings,

welded under the fabrication conditions imposed and to perform • Mill test reports,

FIGURE 11 Governing welding code.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

24

FIGURE 12 Base material properties determination prior to field welding.

• Material samples, Unlike material sampling and the information provided in

• Using date built information, or a Mill Test Report, the use of date built information and shop
• Other (specify). drawings will not provide the actual chemical makeup of the
material. However, such methods can be effective in deter-
This question was presented to 28 agencies and the mining the base metal weldability based on historical data or
results are shown in Figure 13. The most common method previous experience, but they replace true material sampling
for determining base material properties was using date built to determine base metal properties. When put in the context of
information (20). The use of shop drawings, which generally the previous question, fewer than half of the agencies always
includes information on the ASTM specification and grade of determine base material properties before performing field
the steel, and the removal of material samples from the bridge welding. Two of the most commonly reported methods to
for chemical analysis or coupon testing were the second most determine base material properties do not involve testing of
common at 17. Utilization of mill test reports, which include the actual base material.
the chemical components of the heat of steel used in the man-
ufacturing of the steel plates, was the least frequently cited
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
method at 11. Four agencies also selected “other” and further
explained as follows: Qualification of Welders

• Design drawings, A review of welder qualifications is a common requirement

• As-built drawings, in quality assurance and quality control programs. Such require-
• Contract plans (mill test reports are not available on ments are specified in the applicable welding code. It was
many old bridges), or found that the large majority of agencies used welders certified
• Plans. according to the controlling welding code for the field weld-

FIGURE 13 Methods to determine base material properties.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 25

agencies responded that they did not know the frequency of

projects that had these procedures submitted before welding,
and one that it never required field welding procedures and/
or inspection procedures before performing field welding.

In a follow-up question, the 28 agencies that responded

that they either “always” or “sometimes” require field weld-
ing and/or inspection procedures before field welding were
requested to select one or more of the following items that
are typically included in the field procedures:

• Weld procedures,
• Inspection procedures,
• Welder qualifications,
• Visual inspector qualifications (quality assurance and
quality control), and/or
FIGURE 14 Qualification of welders. • NDT qualifications (quality assurance and quality control).

Once again, most agencies receive welder qualification as

ing on their projects, as shown in Figure 14. Four agencies part of a field procedure package (93%) as shown in Figure 16.
noted that it was not known whether the welders were certi- The second most frequently chosen item was weld procedures,
fied according to the controlling welding code and one stated followed by inspection procedures, NDT qualifications, and
that it did not use welders who were certified according to visual inspector qualifications, all used by at least 50% of
this code. respondents.

Welding and Inspection Procedures Inspection Requirements

A detailed welding procedure may be required by an agency Agencies were asked whether welding inspectors are required
before field welding to ensure that the contractor has made on site. For this question, no distinction was made as to whether
the appropriate preparations and accounted for job-specific these inspections occurred during or upon completion of
requirements. Inspection procedures are often included in the welding operation. Figure 17 shows the responses. Twelve
a quality assurance and quality control program and may agencies (35%) responded that they “sometimes” require
be included in a bid package or with project specifications. on-site welding inspectors and 11 agencies (32%) that they
The agencies were asked about the frequency that they require “always” require on-site welding inspectors. Four agencies
field welding procedures and/or inspection procedures before “never” require on-site welding inspectors for field welding
performing field welding. As shown in Figure 15, it was projects.
determined that the most common response was to “always”
require field welding procedures and/or inspection procedures, Typical NDT methods performed on field welds include
followed by “sometimes” requiring these procedures. Five surface techniques such as dye penetrant testing (PT) and

FIGURE 15 Require field welding and/or inspection procedures.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

26

FIGURE 16 Information typically included with field procedures.

magnetic particle testing (MT) and subsurface techniques no major problems associated with repairs and retrofits spe-
such as ultrasonic testing (UT) and radiographic testing (RT). cifically because they were field welds; six agencies that it
Agencies were asked whether NDT is required on field welds. was not known whether there have been any major problems
No distinction was made regarding the specific types of NDT because they were field welds, and only four agencies that
methods required. As shown in Figure 18, the most frequent they have had major problems specifically because they were
response was that NDT is “sometimes” required on field welds field welds.
(17), closely followed by NDT is “always” required (14).
Only one agency responded that NDT is “never” required on In a follow-up question, the four agencies that had major
field welds. problems with repairs and retrofits specifically because they
were field welds were asked to select one or more of the
following items that were at fault:
PERFORMANCE OF REPAIRS AND RETROFITS

The agencies were asked whether there have been any major • Premature cracking,
problems associated with the repairs and retrofits specifically • Improper welding,
because they were field welds. This question was asked of • Quality workmanship (good workmanship practices
all the agencies that answered that they either allow planned not followed),
field welded repairs and retrofits or have previously per- • Not installed in accordance with plans or specifications,
formed field welded repairs and retrofits. Results are shown and
in Figure 19. Seventy percent responded that there have been • Other (please specify).

FIGURE 17 Welding inspectors required on site.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 27

FIGURE 18 NDT required.

6 4 The most commonly reported issue with field welding

18% 12% was premature cracking, which was selected by three of the
four agencies, and is shown in Figure 20. Improper welding
and quality workmanship issues were the next most com-
mon, selected by two of the four agencies. Installation not in
accordance with the plans and specifications was selected by
one agency.

Further investigation was undertaken on the responses

of the four agencies reporting major problems with repairs
and retrofits specifically because they were field welds. All
four currently allow planned field welding on their bridges.
24 Also, all four use welders certified to internal requirements or
70% the applicable welding code, and all four specify AASHTO/
AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code for their field welding proj-
Had Problems No Problems Unknown ects. Three of the four agencies reported that they contract
FIGURE 19 Agencies with projects that had out the welding, whereas one agency reported that it uses
major problems as a result of being field welded. both in-house and outside contractor welding staff.

FIGURE 20 Reasons for major issues with field welding.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

28

SUMMARY • Fewer than half of the agencies reported that they always
require base material property determination before field
Forty-three agencies completed survey responses, an 86% welding:
response rate among state DOTs. The primary findings of the –– The most common method for determining base
survey of the state of practice are summarized as follows: material properties involved the use of date built
information.
• Seventy-four percent allow planned field welded repairs –– The use of shop drawings and removal of material
and retrofits to be performed. samples were the next most common method to
• Of those agencies that do not currently allow planned determine base material properties.
field welded repairs and retrofits, only two have previ- –– Use of date built information and shop drawings will
ously performed field welding. not provide the actual chemical makeup of the material.
• Six agencies provide case examples of field welded • It was found that the large majority of agencies used
projects (see chapter four). welders certified according to the controlling welding
• States as far north as Alaska, North Dakota, Minnesota, code for the field welding on their projects.
and Maine allow field welding: • Less than one-third of the agencies always require
–– There does not appear to be a correlation with lowest welding inspectors, including for inspections that may
anticipated temperatures and general geographic loca- not be performed until after the welding process has been
tion and the propensity for field welding. completed.
• Quality of work was the most common reason chosen • Seventy percent noted that there have been no major
for why agencies do not allow field welding. problems associated with repairs and retrofits specifi-
• Most agencies contract out their field welding projects. cally because they were field welds.
• Most agencies require the use of a governing specification • Only four agencies mentioned that they have had major
or a field welding code: problems with repairs and retrofits specifically because
–– 81% that require a weld code specify AASHTO/ they were field welds.
AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code. –– The most common issue with field welding was
–– 13% that require a weld code specify AWS D1.1 premature cracking, selected by three of the four
Structural Welding Code, although AASHTO/AWS agencies.
D1.5 is specifically developed for bridge welding and –– Improper welding and quality workmanship issues
is specified for bridge fabrication. were selected by two of the four agencies.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 29

chapter four

CASE EXAMPLES

INTRODUCTION to focus on a single field welded project performed by each

of the six agencies and highlights key field welded practices
Individuals from six state agencies were interviewed by phone implemented in these projects.
and e-mail for case examples in order to identify and collect
additional information on the field welding practices incorpo- Four of the six case examples involved repair cracking and
rated into specific projects. other damage resulting from a collision with a bridge girder.
One of the field welded case examples concerned repair cor-
Information collected through the interviews included: rosion damage on the ends of the beams and the sixth case
example was a field welded repair of out-of-plane bending.
• Bridge type, layout, and location;
• Field welding details;
• Consideration of cost, timing, access, complexity, and CASE EXAMPLE 1—CONNECTICUT
alternate repair details; DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
• Field welding staff;
Extent of Field Welding
• Design methodology and preparation of plans and
specifications;
Bridge Type, Layout, and Location
• Welding code requirements;
• Inspection requirements; Bridge No. 00299, which carries I-395 traffic southbound
• Quality control and quality assurance submittals: over Route 14 in Plainfield, Connecticut, is a three-span,
–– Welder qualification, steel, multi-girder bridge with a cast-in-place deck, with a
–– Weld procedure, total bridge length of 123 ft. The bridge was built in 1958 and
–– Inspection procedure, and rehabilitated in 1985.
–– Visual inspector and NDT qualifications;
• Field weld performance; and
• Suggested practices and lessons learned. Field Welding Details

The six state transportation agencies selected (Connecticut, The project involved the removal and repair in June 2014 of a
Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Tennessee, and Texas) were crack in the bottom flange of a non-FCM steel girder resulting
chosen based on several factors including expressed willing- from collision damage. Temporary jacking tower and jack-
ness to provide additional information; and details on a field ing assemblies were installed on either side of the crack. The
welded project including type of field welded repair, type of jacking loads were increased until the crack in the flange was
bridge, type of bridge member, year bridge was built, and completely closed. Shim plates were then installed on the
geographic location. This information was captured through towers and the jacks unloaded. After the crack was removed,
the state of practice survey and by direct contact. The survey the bottom flange was repaired with a CJP groove weld,
included additional questions for agencies that had experience which conforms to weld detail B-U2a from the welding code,
with field welding on a project that was or was not successful as shown in Figure 21. The backer bar was removed because
and expressed a willingness to discuss this experience. Case of bridge clearance issues. The weld was finished smooth and
example participants were then asked to provide the name flush with the base metal on all surfaces by grinding in the
and location of the project, contact information for someone longitudinal direction of the girder. After NDT was performed
involved in the project, the reason field welding was used, and accepted, the jacks were loaded again to remove the shim
the estimated number of welds, and whether the field weld- plates before releasing the jacking loads, removing the jacking
ing was or was not successful. A summary of the information assemblies, and painting the structural steel.
acquired during the state of practice survey and case example
interviews is presented in Table 1. Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access,
Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details
The information presented in this chapter does not provide a
comprehensive summary of the field welding practices of these There was easy access at the location because the repair
six state agencies; rather, these case examples are intended was done over a two-lane road; traffic was alternated on the

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

30

TABLE 1
CASE EXAMPLES INTERVIEWED
Estimated Success of
Project Location/ Reason for Field
State Bridge Type Number of Field
Name Year Built Welding
Welds Welding
I-395 Southbound over 3-span, steel, multi-
Bridge Crack in bottom flange very
Connecticut Route 14, Plainfield, CT girder with cast-in-place 1
No. 00299 from collision damage satisfied
1958 deck
Rotation of floorbeam
16-span, steel,
I-80 over Mississippi River top flange at stringers
Structure continuous, two-girder very
Illinois near Le Claire, IA caused fatigue cracking 828
No. 081-0011 with 12 steel, multi- satisfied
1966 at web-to-flange fillet
girder approach spans
weld toe of floorbeam
3-span, steel, multi-
I-95 NB over Hinckley Rd.
Hinckley Rd. girder, rolled beam Repair work on impact- very
Maine Clinton, ME 6
Repair composite with cast-in- damaged bridge satisfied
1964
place deck
I-195 over Taunton River 3-span, steel, continuous
Corrosion—beam end
Massachusetts Braga Bridge Fall River/Somerset, MA truss with steel, two- many satisfied
repairs
early 1960s girder approach spans
Demonbreun St. over I-40 2-span, steel, multi-
Demonbreun very
Tennessee Nashville, TN girder, welded plate Collision repair 6
St./I-40 satisfied
1969 girder
SH-124 over Intracoastal
SH-124 at Vessel impact caused
Waterway Multi-span, steel, three- very
Texas Intracoastal large cracks in plate 2
50 mi. NE of Houston, TX girder satisfied
Waterway girders
1978

FIGURE 21 Connecticut DOT CJP weld repair sketch.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 31

road below and a shoulder closure on the main road above. Quality Assurance and Quality Control
The entire repair was completed in one day. The DOT had
a contractor under contract for this kind of work; only addi- Inspection Requirements
tional line items on the contract needed to be approved by the
The DOT provided in-house oversight for the repairs. A qual-
contractor.
ified inspector was on site each day. The DOT implemented
visual inspection, ultrasonic testing of the repair weld, and
Field Welding Staff magnetic particle testing to verify that the crack had been
completely removed.
The DOT intended to perform the field welded repair with state
crews because the DOT has several certified field welders on
staff; however, it encountered staffing issues. Therefore, an Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals
outside contractor, paid on an hourly basis, was hired for the
Table 2 contains a summary of the quality control and quality
field welding.
assurance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications.

Current Manual and Specifications

Performance of Repairs and Retrofits
Design Methodology and Preparation
Performance of the Field Weld
of Plans and Specifications
To date, the DOT reports that there have been no issues with
The agency designed the field welded repair in-house; produc-
the repair and that it was cost-efficient. The crack was in a
ing jacking and welding procedures. The weldability of the steel
location of a previous bridge hit, a tension location that has
was considered during the design phase and was determined
not propagated.
by verifying the type of steel based on the original drawings.
This procedure included a sketch of the repair detail, as shown
in Figure 21, and notes on the specified welding code, repair Effective Practices
procedure, and NDT requirements. The repair procedures
were based on those that had been used on a previous project Connecticut DOT does a significant amount of field welding
remembered by the bridge design office. It was noted that the and endorses it as a satisfactory repair method. The DOT list
welding procedure was controlled by the requirements speci- of the most effective practices for field welding are:
fied in the AWS D1.1 welding code, the jacking procedure was
controlled by the AASHTO LRFD code for jacking loads, • Take the proper precautions and think about what needs
and the paint removal and re-application was done according to be done to support the repair welding, relieve the dead
to Connecticut DOT specifications. load and alleviate the live load if possible,
• Build temporary legs to support the girder on either side
of the damaged area, and
Welding Code Requirements • Move traffic from the lane over the affected girder.

The specified welding code used was AWS D1.1-1980 as

modified by the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Weld- Lessons Learned
ing of Structural Steel Highway Bridges. The welding details,
procedures, and testing methods conformed to these require- The agency reported it would not vary the procedure from
ments. This welding code was specified because it was on what they are currently doing. The design engineer noted that
the original plan set that was used as a basis for the welding he would have liked to have revised the welding code to the
procedure. latest version.

TABLE 2
CONNECTICUT DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y Written in-house and submitted to the contractor for review
and agreement
Welder Qualification Y Verified qualifications in-house
Weld Procedure Y Formal WPS was not provided by the contractor, but the
contractor used the owner submitted step-by-step procedures.
Inspection Procedure Y Performed in-house by the DOT
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y In-house visual
NDT Qualifications Y In-house NDT

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

32

CASE EXAMPLE 2—ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT

OF TRANSPORTATION

Extent of Field Welding

Bridge Type, Layout, and Location

I-80 over the Mississippi River near La Claire, Iowa, is a

16-span, continuous steel, two-girder bridge, with 12 steel,
multi-girder approach spans and a cast-in-place reinforced
concrete deck. Total bridge length is 3,483 ft. The structure
was built in 1966 and the current rehabilitation occurred
in 2010.

Field Welding Details

The two girder spans consist of girders, floorbeams, and string-

ers with a reinforced concrete deck. The bridge has cantilever FIGURE 23 Illinois DOT field weld details.
floorbeam brackets on the exterior side of the main girders.
An inspection performed in May 2009 discovered two top
flanges cracked on the floorbeam brackets and one cracked weld toe of the web-to-flange fillet weld. A maximum depth of
floorbeam bracket web adjacent to the top flange. This dam- ¼ in. was allowed for grinding, and any locations not meeting
age required immediate action to stabilize the affected areas. this criteria required additional engineering analysis.
Illinois DOT concluded that it was necessary to understand
the cause of the cracking before developing a rehabilitation Field welding consisted of fillet welding the stiffeners to
strategy. A consultant was hired to provide an analysis and the floorbeam top flange as shown in Figure 23. After fillet
detailed rehabilitation plans. welds were completed, mechanical treatment (ultrasonic impact
treatment) was performed on the toe of the fillet welds where
Following an extensive engineering analysis, the cracking the welds intersect the top flange to relieve tensile residual
was determined to be a result of rocking (out-of-plane bending) stress and apply a compressive residual stress on the surface
at the floorbeam stiffeners caused by live load on the stringers to improve the fatigue life of the welds.
(Figure 22 shows the locations). The stiffeners were originally
installed as a tight fit to the top flange (tension flange). At the
time this bridge was constructed, welding stiffeners to the Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access,
tension flange was not a common practice. The stiffeners had Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details
a small gap between the stiffener and top flange allowing the
flange to rotate, which induced fatigue cracks in the toe of The DOT considered alternate repair details; however, given
the web-to-flange weld. To repair this, it was necessary to field the extremely small movements that appeared to be the cause
weld the stiffeners to the top flange and grind out cracks in the of the cracking, welding provided the most assurance in stop-

FIGURE 22 Illinois DOT locations of field welding for out-of-plane cracking.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 33

ping the out-of-plane top flange movement. A bolted retrofit deck and floorbeam brackets at the joints. For the floorbeam
may have been possible at some but not all locations as a result brackets that were not removed, a detailed design was devel-
of congestion of other surrounding details. Slip critical bolted oped to perform field welding of the floorbeam stiffeners to
details might have worked; however, welding provided better the floorbeam top flange, which included material testing to
assurance of stopping the very small movements. The repair determine the steel weldability.
was reported to be cost-effective, including both the welding
and UIT. There were unique pay items for both; therefore, the
as-bid prices could be provided. For access, temporary working Welding Code Requirements
platforms were suspended below the superstructure.
All field welding was done in accordance with AWS Bridge
Welding Code D1.5:2008, with additional requirements noted
Field Welding Staff on the design plans. These additional requirements specified
that all welding be performed with SMAW and that electrode
Welders were required to be qualified for overhead position storage and handling be in accordance with AWS, which
in accordance with AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5:2008. required constant monitoring by the contractor quality con-
In addition, the contractor field welding staff was required to trol CWI.
perform a one-time, on-site, overhead fillet weld qualification
test. The test plate was the fillet weld T-plate in accordance
with AWS D1.5:2008 Clause 5.23.1.4. Visual inspection and Quality Assurance and Quality Control
fillet weld break tests were required. Qualification testing was
performed by the contractor’s quality control CWI. Inspection Requirements

The contractor was required to provide full-time quality control

Current Manual and Specification by qualified CWI personnel for the field welding. Full-time
visual inspection was required as work was performed. If
Detailed design drawings were developed from the engineer- the contractor worked at multiples locations, multiple CWIs
ing analysis. Specifications for work were noted on the design were necessary. Quality assurance was the responsibility of
drawing for field welding along with special provisions. Work the DOT engineer on site during the rehabilitation.
was performed under stringent and detailed requirements. The
contractor was required to submit WPSs, CWI qualifications,
and NDT qualifications for approval before beginning work. Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals
It was necessary that all welders be tested to additional require-
ments and approved before starting work. Work in the field Table 3 is a summary of the quality control and quality assur-
required extensive cleaning prior to welding, including the ance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications.
removal of paint at least 3 in. beyond the weld zone; no sur-
face rust was allowed and the blast surface needed to meet the
Performance of Repairs and Retrofits
requirements of SSPC-10. Continual monitoring by a qualified
CWI was required for welding preheat, electrode control, and Performance of Field Welds
the welders. Contractor quality control CWI was required to
perform visual inspection and NDT. The DOT reports that the repair has performed well in ser-
vice; no issues have been identified by follow-up inspec-
tions. The agency would use field welding again in a similar
Design Methodology and Preparation situation.
of Plans and Specifications

Extensive engineering analysis was undertaken to determine

Effective Practices
the cause of the cracking on the top flange of the floor beams
at the stringers. This involved evaluating locations where the The DOT prefers to have all welding requirements clearly
stringers were continuous over the floor beams and locations identified in the contract plans including, but not limited to,
where the stringers terminated at a floorbeam. This analysis weld preparation, preheat, weld procedure, welder qualifica-
included extensive field testing that involved strain gages, tion, contractor QC requirements, QC staff qualification, and
displacement sensors, tilt meters, and test trucks. From the field NDT requirements on all welds.
testing data, a three-dimensional global model was developed.
In addition, a three-dimensional local model was created uti-
lizing a single floorbeam and selected stringers. Lessons Learned

Rehabilitation design drawings were developed for the The DOT reported that it is not aware of anything that should
bridge that included partial removal and replacement of the be done differently on similar future projects.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

34

TABLE 3
ILLINOIS DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y Detailed procedures and design details provided on the design drawings
Welder Qualification Y Required to be qualified to AASHTO/AWS D1.5 with additional on-site
fillet weld test required
Weld Procedure Y Formal WPS was required to be submitted and approved prior to
performing work.
Inspection Procedure Y Detailed procedures were specified on the design drawings that required
full-time inspection.
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y Qualified CWIs were required to be approved prior to performing work
for all visual inspections per Clause 6 of the Bridge Welding Code.
NDT Qualifications Y Qualified personnel were required to be approved before performing work
in accordance with Clause 6 of the Bridge Welding Code.

CASE EXAMPLE 3—MAINE DEPARTMENT when an aerial lift on a truck struck the bridge. The damage
OF TRANSPORTATION included gouges, cracks, and holes punched through the
Extent of Field Welding web by the diaphragms. In three of the beams, the dam-
age required that a portion of the web and bottom flange
Bridge Type, Layout, and Location be replaced by a “T” piece with a partial joint penetration
(PJP) weld on the web and a CJP weld on the flanges, as
Bridge #5995 carries I-95 northbound over Hinckley Road in shown in Figure 24. This process involved the use of jack-
Clinton, Maine. This bridge is a three-span, steel, multi-girder, ing on the damaged beams during the repair. A ceramic
rolled beam bridge composite with a cast-in-place deck, backing bar was used for the CJP weld on the flanges. The web
consisting of six beam lines. This bridge was built in 1964 and was welded first with a double bevel groove weld before
rehabilitated in 1994. creating the weld-access holes for the flange CJP weld. The
flange CJP welds were then performed and, after NDT was
Field Welding Details performed and accepted, the backup bars were removed
and the weld was ground smooth. The new diaphragms
This case example involved the repair in fall 2008 of five were added and the necessary portions of the bridge were
of the six non-FCM rolled beam girders that were damaged repainted.

FIGURE 24 Maine DOT CJP weld repair sketch.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 35

Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access, Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details
Inspection Requirements
A bolted splice was considered; however, this type of repair
would lower the vertical clearance by 2 in., which would The agency performed in-house visual inspection of all fit-up
increase the risk of this bridge getting hit again. The DOT likes before welding for CJP and PJP welds. Magnetic particle test-
to control the length of time that a repair is being performed ing was done in-house between weld layers on PJP welds and
to limit the impact to the public. In total, the repair took four visual inspection was done throughout the repair process with
weeks, with total costs controlled by using an in-house crew qualified CWIs. Radiographic testing on the CJP welds was
performed by a qualified outside contractor.
to fit-up and prepare the weld location. No road closures were
required because the only disruption was the jack posts on
either side of the repair. Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals

Table 4 contains a summary of the quality control and quality

Field Welding Staff assurance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications.
The field welding was contracted out to an experienced outside
contractor that had been used previously on similar work. To Performance of Repairs and Retrofits
help control costs, an in-house crew was used to fit-up and
prepare the welding locations. Performance of Field Welds

The DOT reports that the repairs are performing well; their
Current Manual and Specifications intention is to follow-up with a hands-on inspection to ensure
that there are no issues. Routine inspections have been per-
Design Methodology and Preparation formed on the repair every two years and no issues were found.
of Plans and Specifications The repair was cost-effective and the agency would do it again.
The welding cost was $8,000, steel $5,400, inspection $2,760;
The design for the field welded repair was done in-house and
and the total cost including heat straightening was $155,000.
produced detailed design sketches and a repair plan, a portion
of which is shown in Figure 24. The repair included step-
by-step procedures for traffic control, repair implementation, Effective Practices
and NDT requirements, along with jacking design plans, paint
removal locations, and repair details. Previous field weld repair Maine DOT endorses field welding and reports good success
projects and experience was utilized in the development of with field welded repairs. The most effective practices for field
the repair procedure and sketches. The weldability of the welding are: find the most efficient welder you can and provide
steel was determined based on the age of the bridge, which the welder with large access holes; employ ceramic backers
was constructed in 1964 and steel from this era tends to have to aid the welder; use temporary web holders for tight fit-up
reasonable weldability. WPS was developed for this project. (take off and place the bolt in hole later); employ a good
experienced and enthusiastic crew, and use good equipment
(jacking posts and beams).
Welding Code Requirements

A mixture of AASHTO/AWS D1.5 and AWS D1.1 welding Lessons Learned

codes was used. Most of the requirements came from AWS
D1.5; however, it was supplemented with some requirements The DOT reported that it is important to ensure that access
from AWS D1.1. holes are large enough for the welder.

TABLE 4
MAINE DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y On PJP welds, MT performed on each layer of weld with visual
inspection at the completion of the weld. The CJP welds required RT.
Welder Qualification Y Require appropriate qualifications
Weld Procedure Y Welder and DOT worked together to develop the procedure
Inspection Procedure Y In-house procedures
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y DOT CWI
NDT Qualifications Y Qualified in RT
PJP = partial joint penetration.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

36

CASE EXAMPLE 4—MASSACHUSETTS If the web is not buckled and only corroded, a bolted retrofit
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION using sandwiched plates is performed. The deciding factor
Extent of Field Welding
in determining whether to field weld was that the webs were
already buckled and each new piece was to be custom fitted
Bridge Type, Layout, and Location to match the geometry. It was noted that a bolted connection
was never considered for the buckled locations because of
Charles M. Braga Jr. Memorial Bridge carries I-195 over the the complexity of the geometry.
Taunton River connecting Fall River, Massachusetts, with
Somerset, Massachusetts. The bridge is 5,780 ft long, which
includes a three-span continuous truss and two-girder approach Field Welding Staff
spans. The three-span continuous truss, which includes FCMs,
has 420-ft end spans with an 840-ft main span, the longest The agency contracted out all repairs through a typical bid
single span in Massachusetts. The two-girder approach spans package.
consist of fracture critical riveted girders. Bridge construc-
tion began in 1959 and was completed in 1966. The deck was
Current Manual and Specifications
replaced in the 1980s.
Design Methodology and Preparation
Field Welding Details of Plans and Specifications

This case example involves an ongoing repair of corroded and Massachusetts DOT contracted out the design for the field
buckled non-FCM stringer ends caused by leaking deck joints. welded repair to a consultant. This design consultant devel-
Approximately 30% of the repairs were performed under a oped a bid package with contract documents for this repair.
previous contract, which was terminated two and a half years The contract drawings included repair steps and step-by-step
ago, and a new contract put in place to finish the rehabilitation procedures for jacking and shoring. The original base material
of the bridge. This contract covers fixing the deck joints, which was matched for replacement material. The DOT standard
leaked on the stringers and corroded the stringer ends caus- repair specification was utilized for this project and did not
ing some of them to buckle. The repair involves the removal include any specific sections on field welding. The weldability
of the buckled end of the beams on the approach and main of the steel was verified through material sampling. Base
spans and replacement of the existing stringer end geometry metal samples were taken to run bend, hardness, and chemi-
with a WT section that has a CJP weld to the web and flanges, cal testing. Carbon equivalent was also computed to verify
as shown in Figure 25. The stringers ends are cut after jacking weldability. This level of testing was more extensive than the
with the top flange left in place. There are 16 stringers in the typical material sampling tests that usually only include chem-
bridge cross section of the bridge, and approximately 130 to ical testing.
150 stringer end locations require replacement.

Welding Code Requirements

Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access,
Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details Massachusetts DOT specified AASHTO/AWS D1.5 as the
welding code for the field welding.
The DOT has two repair details for the corroded stringer ends.
If the web is buckled, the field welded repair is implemented.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control

Inspection Requirements

Massachusetts DOT repair welding was done in two phases.

For the first phase of the repair, inspections were performed
in-house with a qualified CWI. When a new contract was issued
to complete the rehabilitation on the bridge, the contractor
provided a CWI to perform visual inspection and an outside
qualified agency performed 100% UT on the repair welds.
The agency also supplied a CWI to spot check the work.

Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals

Table 5 contains a summary of the quality control and quality

FIGURE 25 Massachusetts DOT stringer beam end repairs. assurance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 37

TABLE 5
MASSACHUSETTS DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y The contract plans show the repair steps including procedures
for jacking and shoring.
Welder Qualification Y Submitted to the DOT for approval. Mass DOT has an internal
welder qualification program that is required for all welders.
Weld Procedure Y The contractor developed the weld procedure and it is approved
by the DOT.
Inspection Procedure Y Listed in the contract documents
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y Outside contractor provided qualifications for DOT approval.
NDT Qualifications Y Outside contractor provided qualifications for DOT approval.

Performance of Repairs and Retrofits bridge. The damage resulted in two tears in the web at the
diaphragms and required that portions of the web be replaced
Performance of Field Weld by CJP welds for the web-to-web splice and fillet welds for the
web-to-flange welds. The flanges and web were heat straight-
The DOT started the repair of stringer ends in 2010 and con-
ened; next a 2-ft by 2-ft and a 3-ft by 4-ft section of the web
tinued with repairs into 2011. The repairs are performing as
was removed and replaced by welding new sections of the
expected and no issues have been noted. The repair was cost-
web and stiffeners. This bridge had previously been struck
effective; considerably less costly than replacing the entire
several times and was struck again in 2004 after the 2001
stringer.
repair. After this hit, the fascia beam that was struck each time
because the slope of the roadway below was redesigned with
Effective Practices a shallower beam.

Massachusetts DOT endorses field welding. A considerable

amount of field welding is undertaken on a routine basis. The Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access,
DOT intends to let another project to perform similar stringer Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details
end repairs as described in this case example. Its most effective
The DOT did not consider alternate repair details and went
practices for field welding are: use certified welders, have a
straight to field welding because this approach had previously
CWI on-site, outline very clear requirements in the contract,
been used on this bridge. During the 2001 repair, the replace-
and be as specific as possible.
ment of the girder was evaluated as a result of it being hit
repeatedly; however, this was not done at that time owing to
the additional cost and because a traffic lane would have to be
Lessons Learned
closed for too long. The beam was later replaced with a shal-
The agency reports that it is very important to have correct lower beam in 2004 after being hit again. For the 2001 repair,
details (plans) and specifications for a project. It stressed the the cost, timing, access, and complexity were considered and it
need for all projects to have plans and specifications, especially was determined that field welding was the most effective repair
the small projects. method. Field welding can save time because the repairs were
completed over two weekends when a lane could be closed.

CASE EXAMPLE 5—TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT

OF TRANSPORTATION Field Welding Staff

Extent of Field Welding Tennessee DOT contracted out the welding because flux cored
arc welding (FCAW) was performed.
Bridge Type, Layout, and Location

This bridge carries Demonbreun Street over I-40 in downtown Current Manual and Specifications
Nashville, Tennessee, and is a two-span, steel, multi-girder,
welded plate girder bridge with span lengths of 102 and 112 ft. Design Methodology and Preparation
The bridge was built in 1969 and consists of 11 beam lines. of Plans and Specifications

The agency designed the field welded repair in-house and

Field Welding Details created a set of construction plans and drawings. The AASHTO
design specification was referenced, along with the specified
This case example involved the repair in 2001 of a non-FCM- AASHTO/AWS D1.5 welding code and an internal specifi-
welded plate girder, which was damaged by impact to the cation for heat straightening. The weldability of the steel was

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

38

determined by noting the material specification from the design experience in bridge welding, especially if the welders come
drawing that showed that it was weldable steel from 1969. from a shop; and require written weld procedures.
Most of the bridge is ASTM A36 steel, with one section of
ASTM A441 Grade 50 steel that previously had been welded.
Lessons Learned

Welding Code Requirements Tennessee DOT noted the importance of ensuring that the
contractor is experienced in field work. Some contractors may
Tennessee DOT specified AASHTO/AWS D1.5 as the welding have been experienced in the shop, but not for field welding.
code required for field welding. The agency is planning on having a CWI on site at all times
in place of in-house inspectors who cannot be there full time.
The DOT stressed the importance of full-time observation of
Quality Assurance and Quality Control the welders.
Inspection Requirements
CASE EXAMPLE 6—TEXAS DEPARTMENT
Tennessee DOT provided in-house inspectors who were OF TRANSPORTATION
deemed to be qualified owing to several years of experience,
but were not necessarily AWS-certified CWI. Inspection was Extent of Field Welding
done on the weld preparation for fit-up. DOT inspectors were
on site 100% of the time while weld repairs took place and per- Bridge Type, Layout, and Location
formed visual inspection on the CJP and fillet welds. Ultrasonic
This bridge, built in 1978, carries SH-124 traffic over the Intra-
testing was contracted out to a qualified contractor.
coastal Waterway and is located 20 miles south of Winnie,
Texas, or 50 miles northeast of Houston, Texas. The multi-span,
Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals steel, three-girder portion of the bridge is 690 ft long with a
290-ft center span. The total length of the bridge including
Table 6 contains a summary of the quality control and quality approach spans is 4,300 ft. Because the three-girder portion of
assurance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications. the bridge has a 20-foot spacing between girders, these gird-
ers are considered to be FCM in accordance with Texas DOT
requirements (spacing of 20 ft or more for three-girder bridges).
Performance of Repairs and Retrofits

Performance of Field Weld Field Welding Details

Tennessee DOT reports that the 2001 repair has been replaced, This case example involves December 2013 repair of a FCM
but that it was in service for 3 years without any problems. girder that was damaged by impact on the bottom flange from
This beam had been repaired several times since 1969, and no a crane on a vessel that struck the bottom flange of the bridge.
weld repairs had ever torn following subsequent hits. There This bridge is the primary access for residents of the Bolivar
were no issues reported for this repair and the agency stated Peninsula to mainland Texas. The damage caused cracking in
that it was cost-effective. the bottom flange and stiffener, and required that portions of the
fillet welds be gouged out and rewelded with new fillet welds.

Effective Practices
Consideration of Cost, Timing, Access,
Tennessee DOT has performed multiple field repair welds Complexity, and Alternate Repair Details
and endorses the continued use of field welding. The agency
has found that the most effective practices for field welding Texas DOT went directly to a field weld repair because the
are: perform good inspection; require qualified welders with damage was not stress-induced or caused by fatigue. The

TABLE 6
TENNESSEE DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y Contractor submitted a heat straightening plan (general procedures)
and weld procedures.
Welder Qualification Y AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Weld Procedure Y AWS D1.5
Inspection Procedure Y AASHTO/AWS D1.5 for visual and UT
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y In-house inspectors internally qualified, not necessarily a CWI
NDT Qualifications Y Verified by the DOT

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 39

repair was simple because the cracked fillet weld only had graphic tested by a qualified firm. For the CJP welds and fillet
to be gouged out and rewelded. This type of repair was cost- welds, a qualified CWI performed visual inspection.
effective because it did not require a bid package and was
performed in-house.
Quality Control and Quality Assurance Submittals

Field Welding Staff Table 7 is a summary of the quality control and quality assur-
ance repair and inspection procedures and qualifications.
The DOT performed the field welding in-house; however,
they typically will contract out most of their field welding.
Over time, less of their field welding has been performed in- Performance of Repairs and Retrofits
house rather than contracted out.
Performance of Field Weld

Current Manual and Specifications TxDOT reports that the repair performed in-service with very
good results. The repair was located at mid-span, in the main
Design Methodology and Preparation span, but was not the result of a stress-induced crack. There
of Plans and Specifications have been no issues noted in follow-up inspections. The repair
was as cost-effective as possible and took only a few hours.
The DOT reported that this repair approach was more casual
than usual owing to the urgency of the repair because this bridge
is the primary access to the Bolivar Peninsula. No specific retro­ Effective Practices
fit details or drawings were developed before the repair was
performed, which is unusual for TxDOT. The agency typically TxDOT endorses field repair welding, and field welding is
designs most repairs in-house and is strict about developing used often on its projects. Their most effective practices for
project-specific details and specification; however, the TxDOT field welding include a welder certification program, because
standard specification was used on the example project, which every welder employed by TxDOT must be certified through
includes a section on welding and welding requirements. this program. The DOT emphasized enforcing and adhering
AASHTO/AWS D1.5 welding code was specified and relied to the program. It is not sufficient to simply specify a code or
on for additional welding requirements. The weldability of the specification, the agency requires the presence of an expert
steel was determined based on the age of the bridge and weld- CWI on site, full time while work is being performed.
ing previously performed on the bridge. The steel for this
bridge was ASTM A588 weathering steel from 1978.
Lessons Learned
Welding Code Requirements The DOT noted that nothing would be different other than
monitor gouging out a weld and rewelding more closely.
TxDOT specified AASHTO/AWS D1.5 as the welding code
for field welding and also referenced Item 448 of its internal
standard specification, which covers structural field welding. SUMMARY

Quality Assurance and Quality Control The six case examples discussed a variety of the types of field
welded repairs that can be performed in the field. Included
Inspection Requirements were repairs for impact damage, corrosion, and out-of-plane
bending. Each of the agencies interviewed reported a positive
The DOT often replaces a segment of a girder where impact outcome from the field welded repair and plan to continue to
damage has taken place. The CJP welds were 100% radio- utilize field welded repairs on future work. They reported that

TABLE 7
TEXAS DOT QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE SUBMITTALS
Submittals Y/N Comments
Field Procedures Y No, not in this case. Normally requires contractor to show their
intentions in step-by-step procedures, but do not require a formal
WPS for field welding.
Welder Qualification Y All welders must be certified by the DOT program.
Weld Procedure N For this project only—WPSs required on all other projects.
Inspection Procedure Y Not on this project, normally require a procedure.
Visual Inspector Qualifications Y In-house CWI was used; TxDOT does in-house quality control
for field welding with four CWIs on staff.
NDT Qualifications Y UT was performed in-house, RT is contracted out.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

40

there were no follow-up problems with the field welded repairs tices for field welding include its welder certification
and the repairs were reported to be cost-effective. program, because every welder who works for TxDOT
must be certified through this program. The agency also
• Connecticut DOT does a significant amount of field emphasized the importance of having an expert CWI
welding and endorses it as a repair method. on site full time while work is being performed.
• Illinois DOT stressed the importance of clearly iden-
tifying all welding requirements in the contract plans. Similar points of emphasis were reported by the agencies
• Maine DOT endorses field welding and reports good when asked what was important in achieving a positive out-
success with field welded repairs. come to a field welded repair or retrofit. When asked to share
• Massachusetts DOT endorses field repair welding and some lessons learned, the agencies suggested a variety of items
reports that its most effective practices for field welding they either corrected, would do differently, or would not change
are the use of certified welders, use of approved weld- on future projects.
ing procedures, having a CWI on site, and having very
clear and specific requirements in the contract. • Illinois, Connecticut, and Texas DOTs stated that they
• Tennessee DOT has previously undertaken multiple would do nothing different.
field repair welds and endorses its continued use. The • Massachusetts DOT emphasized the importance of
agency has found that the most effective practices for correct details and specifications.
field welding are efficient inspections, requiring qualified • Maine DOT reiterated the importance of good weld
welders with experience in bridge welding, and requiring access holes for the welder.
written weld procedures. • Tennessee DOT stressed the importance of hiring a
• TxDOT endorses field repair welding, and it is often used contractor who was experienced in field welding and
on its projects. It reported that the most effective prac- the importance of qualified inspectors.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 41

chapter five

CONCLUSIONS

The objective of this synthesis was to document practices and remelt the metal at the weld toe to improve the fatigue
solutions associated with field welded repairs on existing steel resistance.
bridges that owners have used. The information gathered dur- • Capacity strengthening typically involves a retrofit to
ing this synthesis included the extent to which field welding increase capacity resulting from a poor load rating, such
is performed on existing steel bridges, the common types as adding stiffeners to increase shear resistance. These
of field welded repairs and retrofits, and manuals or speci- repairs are employed in cases where the members were
fications used for field welded repairs and retrofits. Quality designed to support a lighter load than required under
assurance and quality control practices were also investigated, current specifications and are distinguished from those
including welder qualifications and testing, material identifi- where damage of some kind exists.
cation, welding procedure development and qualification, and • Corrosion and impact damage strengthening include
verification inspection. The in-service performance of repairs repair or retrofit of damaged members. These members
and retrofits was also reviewed. may have corrosion damage that has resulted in signifi-
cant section loss and either require additional stiffening
Field welding is welding of a material outside of a fabri- or complete replacement of the member.
cation shop and typically occurs at a bridge site. Welding on
bridge structures in the United States was implemented in the The specific welding code to be applied to bridge field
late 1940s and 1950s, but was primarily limited to highway welding may vary from state to state. Two primary welding
structures. Historically, field welding on highway bridges codes are used for structural welding of steel structures in the
began to occur on a more frequent basis in the early 1960s into United States:
the 1970s. During this time, bridge design and construction
transitioned from members comprised of multiple components • AWS Bridge Welding Code D1.5 is the welding code
joined using mechanically fastened members (rivets or bolts) required for new fabrication of bridges by the AASHTO
to few elements joined using welds. Welding took place pri- bridge design specification.
marily in fabrication shops and sometimes in the field. Field • AWS Structural Welding Code D1.1 is the welding
welding differs from shop welding for the following reasons: code required for fabrication of buildings and other
the welding ambient environment where field welding occurs structures.
is not as controlled as the environment in a bridge fabrication
shop and the configuration of the steel to be welded cannot be The American Welding Society (AWS) has published a
manipulated into position easily. Protection from wind and guidance document for the strengthening and repair of existing
moisture can be an issue, although protection can be provided structures as AWS D1.7 Guide for Strengthening and Repairing
by constructing a temporary enclosure around the repair site. Existing Structures.
Vibrations from live load traffic and dead load residual stress
can also be an issue. Field welding for the purposes of repair Welder qualification programs are instituted by many state
and retrofit is often performed as repair strategy to mitigate departments of transportation (DOTs) where the welder qual-
cracks that occurred as a result of these various conditions. ification tests are conducted or witnessed by state represen-
tatives and a record of field welders who have successfully
The literature review revealed that field welded repairs are passed the qualification test are entered into the department’s
performed on structures for three primary reasons: fatigue database. These DOTs require that all personnel performing
improvement, capacity strengthening, and corrosion and impact field welding on their construction project pass the welder
damage repairs or retrofits. qualification process and be documented as qualified welders.
Many of the state agencies had field welding inspection guides
• Fatigue improvement typically includes retrofit of that included information to aid weld inspectors.
out-of-plane and distortion-induced cracking by weld-
ing the connection stiffener to the flange. In most cases, The quality of the field welds is a concern that was raised
the welding is on the tension flange. Along with field in multiple references. Quality control can be more diffi-
welded retrofits for out-of-plane cracking, gas tungsten cult to maintain under field conditions; however, the qual-
arc welding, also known as TIG welding, can be used to ity requirements are the same for both field welds and shop

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

42

welds. Similar quality control systems and practices are • Fewer than half of the agencies responded that they
not in place in the field environment as they are in the shop “always” require base material property determination
environment. before field welding:
–– The most common method for determining base
Research on field welding has been performed that utilized material properties was by using date built information.
experimental testing of fatigue crack weld repair while under –– The use of shop drawings was the second most com-
tensile stress or dynamic loading. These studies found that it mon method to determine base material properties
is possible to carry out repair welding under dynamic loading, with removal of material samples.
but that the preferred procedure was to close the bridge to –– Use of date built information and shop drawings
traffic while the root pass and possibly a second pass of weld will not provide the actual chemical makeup of the
metal are deposited. Other research performed on the fatigue material.
resistance of field welds has determined that repair welds had • A majority of agencies used welders certified according
at least the fatigue life as the original shop weld, as long as to the controlling welding code for the field welding on
proper procedures were followed to achieve a quality repair. their projects.
• Less than one-third of the agencies “always” require
Field welded repairs and retrofits that have been imple- welding inspectors, including inspections that may not
mented on steel bridges and documented in literature have be done until after the welding process is complete.
performed well in-service. Only one occasion of problems • Seventy percent of survey respondents reported that
with a field welded repair or retrofit was found during the there have been no major problems associated with
literature review and this was attributed to undersized and repairs and retrofits specifically because they were field
poor quality welds. welds.
• Only four agencies mentioned that they have had major
To better understand the current field welding practices problems with repairs and retrofits specifically because
used by state transportation agencies, a survey of practice was they were field welds:
conducted through NCHRP in cooperation with AASHTO. –– The most common issue was premature cracking,
The survey was distributed to AASHTO Subcommittee on which was selected by three of these four agencies.
Buildings and Structures (SCOBS) voting members, who –– Improper welding and quality workmanship issues
were encouraged to forward it to the person within the agency were the next most common, selected by two of the
who would be most familiar with that agency’s field welding four agencies.
practices.
The six case examples discussed a variety of types of field
The main findings of the survey are summarized as follows: welded repairs. Included were repairs for impact damage,
corrosion, and out-of-plane bending. All of the agencies inter-
• Seventy-four present of the agencies surveyed allow viewed reported a positive outcome from the field welded
planned field welded repairs and retrofits to be performed. repair and plan to continue to implement field welded repairs
• Of the agencies that do not currently allow planned field on future work. There were no follow-up problems reported
welded repairs and retrofits, only two have previously with the field welded repairs and these repairs were reported
performed field welding. to be cost-effective.
• Although a large number of agencies responded that
they allow planned field welded repairs and retrofits, • Connecticut DOT does a significant amount of field
only six provided case examples of field welded projects welding and endorses it as a repair method.
that met the scope of this project. • Illinois DOT emphasized that it is important to clearly
• States as far north as Alaska, North Dakota, Minnesota, identify all welding requirements in the contract plans.
and Maine allow field welding. There does not appear to • Maine DOT reported good success with field welded
be a correlation between lowest anticipated temperatures repairs.
and general geographic location and the propensity for • Massachusetts DOT endorses field repair welding and
field welding. reports the following effective practices: the use of cer-
• Quality of work was the most common reason chosen tified welders, the use of approved welding procedures,
for why agencies do not allow field welding. and having a certified weld inspector on site.
• Most agencies contract out their field welding projects. • Tennessee DOT has performed multiple field repair
• Most agencies require the use of a governing specification welds and endorses the continued use of field welding.
or welding code: The agency has found that the most effective practices
–– Eighty-one percent that require a weld code specify for field welding are: good inspections, requiring quali-
AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code. fied welders with experience in bridge welding, and
–– Thirteen percent that require a weld code specify requiring written weld procedures.
AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code even though • Texas DOT frequently performs field repair welding on
AASHTO/AWS D1.5 is specifically developed for existing bridges. The agency has a welder certification
bridge welding and is specified for bridge fabrication. program and allows only certified welders to perform

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 43

field welding. All welders are to be certified. The agency • Maine DOT highlighted the importance of good weld-
emphasized the importance of having an expert certi- access holes for the welder.
fied weld inspector on site full time while the work is • Tennessee DOT emphasized the importance of hiring a
being done. contractor that was experienced in field welding and the
importance of qualified inspection.
Similar points of emphasis were reported by the agen-
cies when asked what was important in achieving a positive The results of the synthesis identified the following gaps
outcome to a field welded repair or retrofit. When asked to in current knowledge that could be addressed by the research
share some lessons learned, the agencies suggested a variety activities:
of items they either corrected, would do differently, or would
require on future projects. • Identify the effective practices performed by the states
that have used field welding correctly.
• Illinois, Connecticut, and Texas DOTs reported that they • Monitor actual field welded repairs and record data on
would not do anything different. how the fatigue life of the repair may be influenced by
• Massachusetts DOT stressed the importance of correct environment, vibration, dead load and live load stresses,
details and specifications. and quality.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

44

GLOSSARY

Adapted from AWS A3.0 (AWS 2010). altered by the heat of welding, brazing, soldering, or thermal
cutting.
Arc strike—A discontinuity resulting from an arc consisting Inspection—Examination by the Owner or the Fabricator of
of any localized remelted metal, heat-affected metal, or processes and products to verify conformance with contract
change in surface profile of any metal object. requirements.
Back gouging—Removal of weld metal and base metal from Mill Test Report (MTR)—A quality assurance document
the weld root side of a welded joint to facilitate complete used to certify a material’s chemical and physical properties
fusion and complete joint penetration upon subsequent and that states the material’s compliance with an international
welding from that side. standards organization specific standard.
Backing—A material or device placed against the back side Nondestructive examination (NDE)—The act of determin-
of the joint to support and retain molten metal. A material or ing the suitability of some material or component for its
device placed against the back or the side of the joint adja- intended purpose using techniques that do not affect its
cent to the joint root or at both sides of a joint in electroslag serviceability.
and electrogas welding, to support and shield molten weld Nondestructive testing (NDT)—Analysis techniques used
metal. Material may be partially fused or remain unfused to establish the properties of a material or identify defects
during welding and may be either metal or nonmetal. in a material or member without causing damage to the
Base material (metal)—Material to be welded. material or member.
Base metal—Metal or alloy that is welded, brazed, soldered, Partial joint penetration (PJP)—A joint root condition in
or cut. a groove weld where weld metal extends partially through
Carbon equivalent (CE)—An empirical value in weight the joint thickness. Joint penetration that is intentionally
percent, relating the combined effects of different alloying less than complete. A portion of the joint is not fused.
elements used in the making of carbon steels to an equiva- Porosity—Cavity-type discontinuities formed by gas entrap-
lent amount of carbon. This value can be calculated using ment during solidification or in a thermal spray deposit.
a mathematical equation. Preheating—Application of heat to the base metal immedi-
Certified Weld Inspector (CWI)—An AWS-certified weld ately before welding brazing, soldering, thermal spraying,
inspector performs visual inspections on welded steel pieces or cutting. The heat applied to the base metal or substrate
to be used in the construction of bridges and other structures. to attain and maintain preheat temperature.
They must be able to detect possible welding defects, use Procedure Qualification Record (welding)—A document
test and measuring instruments, and monitor any repairs providing the actual welding variables used to produce an
to faulty welds. acceptable test weld and the results of tests conducted on
CJP (complete joint penetration) groove weld—A joint root the weld to qualify a Weld Procedure Specification.
condition in a groove weld in which weld metal extends Quality assurance (QA)—Quality assurance encompasses the
through the joint thickness. A groove weld that has been activities undertaken by the Owner to verify that the final
made from both sides or from one side on a backing having product satisfies contract requirements, including verifying
complete penetration and fusion of weld and base metal that quality control is performed effectively.
throughout the depth of the joint. Quality control (QC)—Activities undertaken by the Con-
Crack—A fracture type discontinuity characterized by a tractor or Fabricator to ensure a product is provided that
sharp tip and high ratio of length and width to opening meets contract requirements.
displacement. Residual stress—Stress present in a joint member or material
Engineer—A duly designated individual who acts for and/or that is free of external forces or thermal gradients.
in behalf of the owner on all matters within the scope of Undercut—A groove melted into the base metal adjacent to
the work. the weld toe or weld root and left unfilled by weld metal.
Fatigue—Weakening or breakdown of a material as a result Weld Procedure Specification (WPS)—The demonstration
of repeated cycles of stress. that welds made by a specific procedure can meet prescribed
Field welding—Welding that occurs outside of a fabrication standards. A document providing the required welding
shop. Welds made at a location other than the shop or the variables for a specific application to ensure repeatability
place of initial construction. by properly trained welders and welding operators.
Fracture critical member—Steel tension members or steel Weldability—Capacity of a material to be welded under
tension components of members whose failure would the fabrication conditions imposed into a specific, suit-
be expected to result in the partial or full collapse of the ably designed structure and to perform satisfactorily in the
bridge. intended service.
Heat affected zone (HAZ)—Portion of the base metal where Welder—One who performs a manual or semiautomatic
the mechanical properties or microstructure have been welding operation.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 45

Welder certification—Written certification that a welder has with or without the application of pressure or by the appli-
produced welds meeting a prescribed standard of welder cation of pressure alone, and with or without the use of
performance. filler metal.
Welder performance qualification—The demonstration Welding electrode—A component of the welding circuit
of a welder’s ability to produce welds meeting prescribed through which current is conducted and that terminates at
specified standards. the arc, molten conductive slag, or base metal.
Welding—A joining process that produces coalescence of Welding symbol—A graphical representation of the specifi-
materials by heating them to the welding temperature, cations for producing a welded joint.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

46

REFERENCES

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Fisher, J.W., D.R. Mertz, and K.C. Wu, “Displacement-
Officials (AASHTO), AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Spec- Induced Fatigue Cracking of a Box Girder Bridge,” Inter­-
ifications, 7th ed., AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2014. national Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Symposium, Washington, D.C., 1982, pp. 71–76.
Officials/American Welding Society (AASHTO/AWS), Gregory, E.N., G. Slater, and C.C. Woodley, NCHRP Report
D1.5M/D1.5:2010 Bridge Welding Code, 6th ed., AWS, 321: Welded Repair of Cracks in Steel Bridge Members,
Miami, Fla., 2010. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,
American Petroleum Institute (API), API RP 579-1/ASME Washington, D.C., 1989.
FFS-1 Fitness-for-Service, 2nd ed., API, Washington, D.C., Hu, Y., C.K. Shield, and R.J. Dexter, Use of Adhesives to
2007. Retrofit Out-of-Plane Distortion Induced Fatigue Cracks,
American Welding Society (AWS), AWS A3.0M/A3.0 Standard Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, 2006.
Welding Terms and Definitions, 12th ed., AWS, Miami, Iowa DOT Office of Materials, Qualification Tests for Field
Fla., 2010. Welders, Des Moines, 2011 [Online]. Available: http://www
American Welding Society (AWS), AWS D1.7/D1.7M Guide .iowadot.gov/erl/archiveoct2011/IM/content/560.pdf.
for Strengthening and Repairing Existing Structures, 1st Keating, P., S. Wilson, and T. Kohutek, Evaluation of Repair
ed., AWS, Miami, Fla., 2010. Procedures for Web Gap Fatigue Damage, Texas Trans-
American Welding Society (AWS), D1.1/D1.1M:2010 Struc- portation Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station,
tural Welding Code—Steel, 22nd ed., AWS, Miami, Fla., 1996.
2010. Kelly, B.A. and R.J. Dexter, Performance of Repair Welds,
British Standards, BS 7910: Guide to Methods for Assessing Theses and Dis­sertations, Lehigh University, Bethleham, Pa.,
the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures, London, 1997 [Online]. Available: http://preserve.lehigh.edu/etd/478.
England, 2013. Koob, M.J., P.D. Frey, and J.M. Hanson, Evaluation of
Connor, R.J. and J. Fisher, “Identifying Effective and Ineffec- Web Cracking at Floor Beam to Stiffener Connections of
tive Retrofits for Fatigue Cracking in Steel Bridges Using the Poplar Street Bridge Approaches, FAI Route 70, East
Field Instrumentation,” Journal of Bridge Engineering, St. Louis, St. Clair County, Illinois, Wiss, Janney, Elstner
Vol. 11, 2007, pp. 745–752. Associates, Inc., Northbrook, Ill., 1985.
Connor, R.J., M.J. Urban, and E.J. Kaufmann, NCHRP Marianos, W.N., G. Chen, N. Galati, and F. Matta, Investiga-
Report 604: Heat-Straightening Repair of Damaged Steel tion of Cause of Cracked Stringer on Blanchette Bridge,
Bridge Girders: Fatigue and Fracture Performance, Trans- Missouri Department of Transportation, Jefferson City,
portation Research Board of the National Academies, 2006.
Washington, D.C., 2009. Matsumoto, T. and S. Motomura, “Test of Welding Technique
Demers, C.E. and J.W. Fisher, Fatigue Cracking of Steel Bridge for Repair of Steel Highway Bridges,” Transportation
Structures, Volume I: A Survey of Localized Cracking in Research Record No. 950, Transportation Research Board,
Steel Bridges—1981 to 1988, Federal Highway Adminis- National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1984,
tration, Washington, D.C., 1990. pp. 157–163.
Fenves, S.J., J.W. Fisher, and I.M. Viest, “Bridges of the Miller, D.K., “Ensuring Weld Quality under Field Repair and
AASHO Road Test: A Unique and Historic Research Retrofit Conditions,” Symposium on Practical Solutions
Endeavor,” TR News, No. 241, 2005, pp. 16–23. for Bridge Strengthening and Rehabilitation, Des Moines,
Fish, P., C.J. Schroeder, R.J. Connor, and P. Sauser, Fatigue Iowa, April 1993, Iowa State University, Ames, 1993,
and Fracture Library for the Inspection, Evaluation, and pp. 259–262.
Repair of Vehicular Steel Bridges, Purdue University, West Natori, T., M. Fukazawa, and H. Terada, Method of Repair
Lafayette, Ind., 2015. for Fatigue Damage in Steel Bridges, Durabilty of Struc-
Fisher, J.W. and P.B. Keating, “Distortion-Induced Fatigue tures. International Association for Bridge and Structural
Cracking of Bridge Details with Web Gaps,” Journal of Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, 1989.
Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 12, Nos. 3–4, 1989, New York Office of Structures, Field Welder Qualification
pp. 215–228. Process, New York State Department of Transportation,
Fisher, J.W., H. Hausammann, M.D. Sullivan, and A.W. Pense, New York City, 2008 [Online]. Available: https://www.dot
NCHRP Report 206: Detection and Repair of Fatigue .ny.gov/divisions/engineering/structures/repository/files
Damage in Welded Highway Bridges, Transportation /FW_Brochure_12-08_update.pdf.
Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, North Carolina DOT Materals and Tests Unit, Qualification
D.C., 1979, 85 pp. Testing for Field Welders, North Carolina Department

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 47

of Transportation, Raleigh, 2006 [Online]. Available: Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division, Qualifica-
https://connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Materials/Materials tion Testing of Field Welders, Oklahoma Department of
/Field%20Welder%20Certification.pdf. Transportation, Oklahoma City, 2012 [Online]. Available:
Ohio Department of Transportation, OHDOT Field Welding http://www.odot.org/materials/pdfs/FWELDR.pdf.
Inspection Guide, Ohio Department of Transportation, Sapp, M.E., Welding Timeline Years 1900–1950, A History of
Columbus, 2008 [Online]. Available: https://www.dot.state Welding Website, 2015 [Online]. Available: http://welding
.oh.us/Divisions/ConstructionMgt/Materials/Miscellaneous history.org/whfolder/folder/wh1900.html [accessed May 15,
/Field-Welding-Inspection-Guide.pdf. 2015].
Oklahoma Department of Transportation, Two Cities Now One Snyder, L.R., Procedures to Simulate Fatigue Cracks in Steel
Community Again as Purcell/Lexington Bridge Reopens, Bridge Specimens for Use in a Probability of Detection
ODOT News and Media Information Press Releases, Study, MS Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Ind.,
Oklahoma City, June 13, 2014 [Online]. Available: http:// 2015.
www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/2014/14-026 Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), TXDOT
_Two_cities_now_one_community_again_as_Purcell Item 448 Structural Field Welding, TxDOT, Austin, 2004
_Lexington_bridge_reopens.pdf [accessed Aug. 19, 2015]. [Online]. Available: http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info
Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division, Field Accep- /cmd/cserve/specs/1995/standard/m448.pdf.
tance of Field Welding Guide, Oklahoma Department of Zhao, Y. and W.M. Roddis, Fatigue Prone Steel Bridge Details:
Transportation, Oklahoma City, 2004 [Online]. Available: Investigation and Recommended Repairs, Kansas Depart-
http://www.odot.org/materials/pdfs/GFA-FW.pdf. ment of Transportation, Topeka, 2004.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

48

APPENDIX A
Department of Transportation Links

Iowa DOT Office of Materials, Qualification Tests for Field Ohio Department of Transportation, OHDOT Field Welding
Welders, Iowa Department of Transportation, Des Moines, Inspection Guide, Ohio Department of Transportation, Colum-
2011 [Online]. Available: http://www.iowadot.gov/erl/archive bus, 2008 [Online]. Available: https://www.dot.state.oh.us
oct2011/IM/content/560.pdf. /Divisions/ConstructionMgt/Materials/Miscellaneous/Field
-Welding-Inspection-Guide.pdf.
Iowa DOT Office of Materials, Structural Field Welding &
Inspection, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, 2011 Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division, Field Accep-
[Online]. Available: http://www.iowadot.gov/erl/archiveoct tance of Field Welding Guide, Oklahoma Department of
2011/im/content/558.pdf. Transportation, Oklahoma City, 2004 [Online]. Available:
http://www.odot.org/materials/pdfs/GFA-FW.pdf.
New York Office of Structures, Field Welder Qualification Pro-
cess, New York State Department of Transportation, New Oklahoma DOT Materials & Research Division, Qualification
York City, 2008 [Online]. Available: https://www.dot.ny.gov Testing of Field Welders, Oklahoma Department of Transpor-
/divisions/engineering/structures/repository/files/FW_Brochure tation, Oklahoma City, 2012 [Online]. Available: http://www
_12-08_update.pdf. .odot.org/materials/pdfs/FWELDR.pdf.

North Carolina DOT Materials & Tests Unit, Field Welding Pro- Texas Department of Transportation, TXDOT Item 448 Struc-
cedures, 4th ed., North Carolina Department of Transportation, tural Field Welding, Texas Department of Transportation,
Raleigh, 2011 [Online]. Available: https://connect.ncdot.gov Austin, 2004 [Online]. Available: http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub
/resources/Materials/MaterialsResources/Field%20Welding /txdot-info/cmd/cserve/specs/1995/standard/m448.pdf.
%20Procedures%20Manual.pdf.
Vermont Department of Transportation, Field Welding Manual,
North Carolina DOT Matierals & Tests Unit, Qualification Vermont Department of Transportation, Montpelier, 2014
Testing for Field Welders, North Carolina Department of [Online]. Available: http://vtransengineering.vermont.gov/sites
Transportation, Raleigh, 2006 [Online]. Available: https:// /aot_program_development/files/documents/publications
connect.ncdot.gov/resources/Materials/Materials/Field%20 /VTrans%20Field%20Welding%20Manual.pdf.
Welder%20Certification.pdf.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 49

APPENDIX B
Survey Questionnaire

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

50

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 51

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

52

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 53

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

54

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 55

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

56

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 57

APPENDIX C
Summary of Survey Results

TABLE C1
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 1. DOES YOUR AGENCY
ALLOW PLANNED FIELD WELDING REPAIRS/RETROFITS?
State Yes/No State Yes/No
Alaska Yes Nebraska Yes
Arizona Yes Nevada Yes
Arkansas Yes New Hampshire Yes
California Yes New Jersey No
Connecticut Yes New Mexico Yes
Delaware Yes New York Yes
Florida Yes North Carolina Yes
Hawaii Yes North Dakota Yes
Idaho No Ohio Yes
Illinois No Oregon Yes
Indiana No Pennsylvania No
Iowa No Rhode Island Yes
Kansas Yes South Carolina Yes
Kentucky No South Dakota Yes
Louisiana No Tennessee Yes
Maine Yes Texas Yes
Maryland Yes Utah No
Massachusetts Yes Vermont Yes
Michigan Yes Washington No
Minnesota Yes Wisconsin Yes
Missouri Yes Wyoming Yes
Montana No

TABLE C2
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 2. WHY NOT?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 was “no”)
Expensive or Time
Lack of Qualified

Unfamiliar With

Unfamiliar With
Quality of Work

Process and/or
Supervisors or
Experienced

Appropriate

Consuming
Past Issues
Inspectors

Welding
Lack of

Admin

Details

Other
State (Please Specify)
Idaho X Note 1
Illinois X X
Indiana X X
Iowa X X X
Kansas
Kentucky X X X
Louisiana X X X X
Montana X X X X
New Jersey X
Pennsylvania X Note 2
Utah X X X X
Washington Past performance
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Note 1: Welding to a member that is under stress/load.
Note 2: A structural bolted connection is preferred. Field welded repairs are only used as a last resort
where there is no room to develop a bolted connection.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

58

TABLE C3
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 3. HAS YOUR AGENCY EVER
PERFORMED PLANNED FIELD WELDING IN THE PAST?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 was “no”)
State Yes/No State Yes/No
Idaho No Nebraska
Illinois No Nevada
Indiana No New Hampshire
Iowa No New Jersey No
Kentucky No Pennsylvania Yes
Louisiana Yes Utah No
Montana No Washington No

TABLE C4
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 4. DOES YOUR AGENCY HAVE
STANDARD PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, PROCEDURES, OR DETAILS FOR
CERTAIN FIELD WELDED REPAIRS?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
State Yes/No/Unknown State Yes/No/Unknown
Alaska No Nevada Yes
Arizona Yes New Hampshire Yes
Arkansas Yes New Mexico Yes
California Yes New York No
Connecticut No North Carolina Yes
Delaware No North Dakota No
Florida No Ohio Yes
Hawaii No Oregon No
Kansas No Pennsylvania Yes
Louisiana No Rhode Island No
Maine Yes South Carolina Unknown
Maryland No South Dakota No
Massachusetts No Tennessee No
Michigan Yes Texas No
Minnesota No Vermont No
Missouri Yes Wisconsin Yes
Nebraska No Wyoming Yes

TABLE C5
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 5. WAS THERE A GOVERNING SPECIFICATION
OR WELDING CODE?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State
Never/Unknown State Never/Unknown
Alaska Always Nevada Always
Arizona Always New Hampshire Always
Arkansas Sometimes New Mexico Always
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Always North Dakota Always
Florida Unknown Ohio Always
Hawaii Always Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Unknown
Louisiana Sometimes Rhode Island Always
Maine Always South Carolina Sometimes
Maryland Always South Dakota Always
Massachusetts Always Tennessee Always
Michigan Always Texas Always
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Always
Missouri Always Wisconsin Always
Nebraska Always Wyoming Always

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 59

TABLE C6
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 6. WHAT WAS THE GOVERNING
SPECIFICATION OR WELD CODE?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 5 was “always”
or “sometimes”)
State Response
Alaska AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code
Arizona AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Arkansas AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
California AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Connecticut AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code
Delaware AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Hawaii AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Kansas AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Louisiana AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Maine AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Maryland AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Massachusetts AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Michigan AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Minnesota AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Other (Combination of AASHTO/AWS D 1.5 and
Missouri
Internal Standard Specifications and Job Special Provisions)
Nebraska AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code
Nevada AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
New Hampshire AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
New Mexico AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
New York Other (NYS Steel Construction Manual)
North Carolina AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
North Dakota AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Ohio AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Oregon AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Rhode Island AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
South Carolina AASHTO/AWS D1.1 Structural Welding Code
South Dakota AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Tennessee AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Texas AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Vermont AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Wisconsin AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code
Wyoming AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code

TABLE C7
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 7. HAVE YOU PERFORMED THE FOLLOWING TYPES
OF FIELD WELDED REPAIR/RETROFITS? CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)

Fatigue Capacity Corrosion/Impact Other

State Improvement1 Strengthening2 Damage Strengthening3 (Please Specify)
Alaska X X
Arizona X X
Arkansas X X X
California X X X
Connecticut X
Delaware X
Florida X
Hawaii X
Kansas X X X
Louisiana X
Maine X X
Maryland X
Massachusetts X X X
Michigan X
Minnesota X
Missouri X X X
(continued on next page)

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

60

TABLE C7
(continued)

Fatigue Capacity Corrosion/Impact Other

State Improvement1 Strengthening2 Damage Strengthening3 (Please Specify)
Nebraska X
Nevada X X
New Hampshire X X
New Mexico X X X
New York X X X
North Carolina X X X
North Dakota X
Ohio X
Oregon X X X
Pennsylvania X X Note 1
Rhode Island X X X
South Carolina Note 2
South Dakota X X X
Tennessee X
Texas X X X
Vermont X X
Wisconsin X X X
Wyoming X X
1
Out-of-plane/distortion-induced cracking, etc.
2
Ex. Adding cover plates to a rolled beam bridge.
3
Ex. Repair/retrofit of damaged members.
Note 1: Field welded strengthening repairs have been commonly used to address corrosion of old steel truss bridges
>90 years of age) especially on locally owned ones. The repairs are typically on the bottom chord as it is more
susceptible to corrosion.
Note 2: Reconnect secondary members and add plates in compression zones.

TABLE C8
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 8. WAS/IS FIELD WELDING PERFORMED
BY IN-HOUSE STAFF OF WAS/IS IT CONTRACTED OUT?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
State Response State Response
Alaska Both Nevada Contracted out
Arizona Contracted out New Hampshire Contracted out
Arkansas Both New Mexico Contracted out
California Contracted out New York Both
Connecticut Contracted out North Carolina Both
Delaware Contracted out North Dakota Contracted out
Florida In-house Ohio Contracted out
Hawaii Contracted out Oregon Contracted out
Kansas Contracted out Pennsylvania Both
Louisiana In-house Rhode Island Contracted out
Maine Contracted out South Carolina In-house
Maryland Contracted out South Dakota Contracted out
Massachusetts Contracted out Tennessee Contracted out
Michigan Both Texas Both
Minnesota Both Vermont Both
Missouri Both Wisconsin Both
Nebraska Contracted out Wyoming Contracted out

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 61

TABLE C9
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 9. WERE WELDERS CERTIFIED
ACCORDING TO THE CONTROLLING WELDING CODE?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
State Yes/No/Unknown State Yes/No/Unknown
Alaska Yes Nevada Yes
Arizona Yes New Hampshire Yes
Arkansas No New Mexico Yes
California Yes New York Yes
Connecticut Yes North Carolina Yes
Delaware Yes North Dakota Yes
Florida Unknown Ohio Yes
Hawaii Unknown Oregon Yes
Kansas Yes Pennsylvania Unknown
Louisiana Unknown Rhode Island Yes
Maine Yes South Carolina Yes
Maryland Yes South Dakota Yes
Massachusetts Yes Tennessee Yes
Michigan Yes Texas Yes
Minnesota Yes Vermont Yes
Missouri Yes Wisconsin Yes
Nebraska Yes Wyoming Yes

TABLE C10
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 10. WERE PLANS/SPECIFICATIONS PREPARED
BEFORE THE WORK WAS PERFORMED?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State State
Never/Unknown Never/Unknown
Alaska Sometimes Nevada Always
Arizona Always New Hampshire Always
Arkansas Sometimes New Mexico Always
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Unknown North Dakota Always
Florida Unknown Ohio Always
Hawaii Always Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Sometimes
Louisiana Sometimes Rhode Island Sometimes
Maine Always South Carolina Sometimes
Maryland Sometimes South Dakota Always
Massachusetts Always Tennessee Always
Michigan Sometimes Texas Always
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Always
Missouri Always Wisconsin Sometimes
Nebraska Always Wyoming Always

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

62

TABLE C11
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 11. WERE FIELD WELDING AND/OR
INSPECTION PROCEDURES PREPARED BEFORE WORK WAS PERFORMED?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State State
Never/Unknown Never/Unknown
Alaska Sometimes Nevada Always
Arizona Sometimes New Hampshire Always
Arkansas Sometimes New Mexico Always
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Unknown North Dakota Sometimes
Florida Unknown Ohio Never
Hawaii Unknown Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Sometimes
Louisiana Unknown Rhode Island Always
Maine Always South Carolina Sometimes
Maryland Always South Dakota Always
Massachusetts Always Tennessee Always
Michigan Sometimes Texas Sometimes
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Always
Missouri Sometimes Wisconsin Sometimes
Nebraska Unknown Wyoming Always

TABLE C12
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 12. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS WERE
TYPICALLY INCLUDED IN THE FIELD PROCEDURES? CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.
(Question only available for response if answer to question 11 was “always” or “sometimes”)

Visual Inspect
Weld Inspection Welder or Qualifications NDT Qualifications
State Procedures Procedures Qualifications (QA/QC) (QA/QC)
Alaska X X X X X
Arizona X X
Arkansas X X
California X X X X X
Kansas X X X X X
Maine X X X X X
Maryland X X X X X
Massachusetts X X X
Michigan X X X X
Minnesota X X X X X
Missouri X X X
Nevada X X X X X
New Hampshire X X X X X
New Mexico X X X X X
New York X X X X X
North Carolina X X
North Dakota X
Oregon X X X X X
Pennsylvania X X
Rhode Island X X
South Carolina X X X X X
South Dakota X X X X X
Tennessee X X X X
Texas X X
Vermont X X
Wisconsin X X
Wyoming X X

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 63

TABLE C13
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 13. ARE WELDING INSPECTORS REQUIRED
ON-SITE TO INSPECT FIELD WELDS?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State State
Never/Unknown Never/Unknown
Alaska Sometimes Nevada Always
Arizona Sometimes New Hampshire Sometimes
Arkansas Never New Mexico Always
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Unknown North Dakota Never
Florida Unknown Ohio Never
Hawaii Unknown Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Sometimes
Louisiana Unknown Rhode Island Sometimes
Maine Sometimes South Carolina Sometimes
Maryland Sometimes South Dakota Sometimes
Massachusetts Always Tennessee Always
Michigan Unknown Texas Always
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Sometimes
Missouri Never Wisconsin Unknown
Nebraska Unknown Wyoming Always

TABLE C14
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 14. IS NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING REQUIRED
ON FIELD WELDS?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State State
Never/Unknown Never/Unknown
Alaska Sometimes Nevada Always
Arizona Always New Hampshire Always
Arkansas Sometimes New Mexico Sometimes
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Unknown North Dakota Never
Florida Unknown Ohio Sometimes
Hawaii Sometimes Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Sometimes
Louisiana Sometimes Rhode Island Sometimes
Maine Always South Carolina Sometimes
Maryland Sometimes South Dakota Sometimes
Massachusetts Sometimes Tennessee Always
Michigan Always Texas Sometimes
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Always
Missouri Sometimes Wisconsin Sometimes
Nebraska Always Wyoming Always

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

64

TABLE C15
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 15. ARE BASE METAL MATERIAL PROPERTIES
DETERMINED PRIOR TO FIELD WELDING?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
Always/Sometimes/ Always/Sometimes/
State State
Never/Unknown Never/Unknown
Alaska Sometimes Nevada Always
Arizona Always New Hampshire Always
Arkansas Always New Mexico Sometimes
California Always New York Always
Connecticut Always North Carolina Sometimes
Delaware Unknown North Dakota Never
Florida Unknown Ohio Sometimes
Hawaii Unknown Oregon Always
Kansas Always Pennsylvania Sometimes
Louisiana Unknown Rhode Island Sometimes
Maine Always South Carolina Always
Maryland Sometimes South Dakota Always
Massachusetts Sometimes Tennessee Always
Michigan Sometimes Texas Sometimes
Minnesota Sometimes Vermont Sometimes
Missouri Unknown Wisconsin Sometimes
Nebraska Sometimes Wyoming Always

TABLE C16
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 16. HOW WERE THE BASE METAL MATERIAL
PROPERTIES TYPICALLY DETERMINED FOR WELDABILITY? CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.
(Question only available for response if answer to question 11 was “always” or “sometimes”)

Shop Mill Test Material Samples Using Date Built Other

State Drawings Reports (Coupon Testing) Information (Please Specify)
Alaska X X
Arizona X
Arkansas X X
California X X
Connecticut X X Design drawings
Kansas X X X
Maine X X X X
Maryland X
Massachusetts X X X X
Michigan X X
Minnesota X X X
Nebraska X X X X
Nevada X X X
New Hampshire X
New Mexico X
New York X X X Note 1
North Carolina X As-built drawings
Ohio X X
Oregon X X X
Pennsylvania X X
Rhode Island X X X
South Carolina X Plans
South Dakota X X X X
Tennessee X X
Texas X X X X
Vermont X X X X
Wisconsin X X
Wyoming X
Note 1: Contract plans (Mill Test Reports are not available on old bridges).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

 65

TABLE C17
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 17. HAVE THERE BEEN ANy MAJOR PROBLEMS
ASSOCIATED WITH THE REPAIRS/RETROFITS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO
THE FACT THAT THEY WERE FIELD WELDS?
(Question only available for response if answer to question 1 or question 3 was “yes”)
State Yes/No/Unknown State Yes/No/Unknown
Alaska No Nevada No
Arizona Yes New Hampshire No
Arkansas No New Mexico Unknown
California Yes New York No
Connecticut No North Carolina Yes
Delaware No North Dakota No
Florida Unknown Ohio No
Hawaii No Oregon No
Kansas No Pennsylvania Unknown
Louisiana Unknown Rhode Island No
Maine No South Carolina No
Maryland Yes South Dakota No
Massachusetts No Tennessee No
Michigan Unknown Texas No
Minnesota No Vermont No
Missouri No Wisconsin No
Nebraska Unknown Wyoming No

TABLE C18
RESPONSES TO SURVEY QUESTION 18. WHAT WERE THE ISSUES? CHECK ALL THAT APPLY.
(Question only available for response if answer to question 17 was “yes”)

Premature Improper Quality Not Installed Other

State Cracking Welding Worksmanship1 Per Plans/Specs (Please Specify)
Arizona X
California X X
Maryland X X
North Carolina X X X
1
Good workmanship practices not followed.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications:

A4A Airlines for America
AAAE American Association of Airport Executives
AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials
AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America
ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
APTA American Public Transportation Association
ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
ATA American Trucking Associations
CTAA Community Transportation Association of America
CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOE Department of Energy
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015)
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012)
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials
NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program
NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act:
A Legacy for Users (2005)
TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program
TDC Transit Development Corporation
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998)
TRB Transportation Research Board
TSA Transportation Security Administration
U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Extending Bridge Service Life Through Field Welded Repairs and Retrofits

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

Washington, DC 20001
500 Fifth Street, NW
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD
NON-PROFIT ORG.

ISBN 978-0-309-27209-4
COLUMBIA, MD
PERMIT NO. 88

U.S. POSTAGE

90000
PAID

9 780309 272094

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.