TA Evaluation of the Existing Bridges Based on the Load Bearing Capacity 1) Load Bearing Capacity of the Main Girder ‘The load bearing capacity and the degree of safety under the test load are calculated on the three representative RC bridges No. 1, No. 2 and No, 3 and two PC bridges No. 6 and No. 9, for a (otal of 5 bridges using the present AASHTO HS20-44 live load as described in 7.4.1. For the RC bridges the load on the main girder considers the load distribution calculation by the grid calculation method and the base factor f= 1.0 and the bending rupture factor (Wis determined, ‘The new Omant Uniform Load and Concentrated Load which uses a live load of AASHTO 11520-44 x 2, the load bearing capacily and safety factor is calculated to determine the load bearing capacity of the main girders. On the other hand, the live load system of Oman! Design Standard of 60 ton truck x 2 Is the largest live load, the actual load bearing capacity Is calculated, and the result compared with the allowable load bearing capacity to determine whether i{ ts within the allowable stress or to what degree it exceeds it, 2) Load Capacity of Decks ‘The bridge deck ts that component of a bridge that the live load is directly in contact with, and Js subject to repeated fatigue loads. The safety of the bridge fs calculated from its condition, and the design of the deck is based on the rear wheel load of truck loads. For the RC and PC bridges, load testing is performed with a 7.0 ton rear wheel Joad, and the heaviest AASHTO 7.26 (14) ton design standard from whieh the allowable load capacity Is compared for the slab In order to investigate bridge safely. ‘The bridge slab 15 subject to repeated loads and fatigue loads as stated previously, and the design standards used in Japan are used for the allowable valucs for this study, and the allowable stress for the concrete (ea) will be one-third of the 62g for dca = 71 kg/em? or 90 kg/em®, the allowable stress for reinforcing bar (da) for the slab is assumed for dsa = 1,400 kg/cm? at a low value where the normal stress is 1,800 kg/em?,3) Substructure Supports ‘There are cracks in the rigid frame picr of the substructure and so the live loads are calculated in accordance with the AASHTO live load systems and compared with the actual loads. Calculation of the Load Capacity under the Current AASHTO HS20-44 Live Load 1) The AASHTO Live Load Condition AASHTO 120-44 (32 ton) AASHTO HS20-44 (32 ton) (Slandard HS Truck) a) Analysis for Main Girder and Cross Beam AASHTO HS 20-44 (32 Ton) Pltective width Span bength oF 07172, 308 9413.05 6.72 i al ia | concentrated Losdip tt) i H Uniform Load(q t/n2) tote oT ree Uni.toad(q t/m?)_} H 7 + a Ti) center Concentrated Load: 8.16 ton per 1 Lone (Gon, Lood 216/308 + 2.604181) t/n= pe) ritorm Looe 0.96 ton mv per t Lone (Ue. Load 0.967505 = 0.310145) HAs tmpaet Lond FSISPL E38, LE Span Length to)D)_ Analysis for Bridge Slab ‘The new Omani Live Load Standard can be obtained by multiplying the AASHTO 120-44 Live Load Standard by 2 10 obtain the live load bending moment AASHTO HS 20-44 (32 TON)(STANDARD HS TRUCK) iow need ok 0.88 Ot san “Aeaton \-J4.52ton 14.52ton i [scr raion 4 Ly —TE-Lrront weet 1.82t0n voli hla, W = 40.000 Usa =18.150ton 2) Results of Caleulation of Bending Moment for Bridges by the AASHTO HS20- 44 Live Load ‘Table 7.20 Results of Bending Moment by AASHTO HS-20 (RC, PO) | aasio | ___Bending Moment (+m) | HH HS 20-44 |"Dead Load | LiveLoad | Total | Remarks Re | Girder G1 816 29.3 110.9 7 o2 82.8 40.9 ci} 1048 140.7 | f 78 | 946 | aoa | Re |Sirder Gi] 104.2 38.7 139.9 - ® o2 75.4 sas | 1099 | Gwrder Gi | 913.7 99.0 42.7 | 3 ao | ais | 870 | aia Gwrder G1 aa4 236 | 1070 “| ve (| G2 | er 27.8 118.2 a G3 81.0 31.2 118.2 i oa 818 32.9 147Calculation of Stress and Deflection in the RC Bridges by the AASHTO HS 20. 44 Live Load Criterta. ‘Table 7.21, Results of Strength and Deflection for Bridge No. 1 Bending Moment 4/4 [Delta es Bending Moment ci | a Bending Moment 3/4 [Della man oc kg/om oS, kg/em™ Bending Moment | ton.in 1/4 [Delta mm. [oe _ [gfe os, kg/em? ‘Bending Moment | ton. ci [Delta fam oc Kegon os kg/cm Bending Moment 3/4 [Delta 7 [oc os ~| Bending Moment 1/4 [Delta m oc kg/cm? os kg/m? Bending Moment | ton.m os | cL [Della ‘mm oe kg/ei os. kg/enr Bending Moment | ton.m 3/4 [Delta mm oc 7 keg/ em os kg/enr Bending Moment | ton.m 1/4 [Delta mam | 9 ____| ke/erm’ ‘os kg/cm Bending Mament—[ton.m ca] ce [Delta ‘mm “kg/m x kg/om® 1009 363 Bending Moment —~[ ton.m 61,59 17.15 3/4 Delta mm 274 0.85 oC, kg/cm 18.2 5.1 ‘os ‘g/em: 763 are‘Table 7.22 Results of Strength and Deflection for Bridge No. 2 Dead Load |_ (S26) Bending Moment [Ton 79.04 20.91 a4 [Bella ‘mum ABD, TAG. oe kg/cm "39.6 [10.5 L. os Ikg/em | 996 268 ‘Bending Moment | Yon.m 104.64 35.87 ci | cr [Delt mm 6.79, 2.09, oc [os 482] Bending Moment — [Ton 79.04 20.91 sya [Delta mm) 4.82 1.46 oc kg/m 30.6 |___ 10.5 08. kg/cm 996 263 ‘Bending Moment | ton.m 54.49. 22.36 1/4 [Delta mam 4.86 7.99 oc kg/em™ 44.0 18.0 os kg/em’ 746. 306 Bending Moment [Ton.m 75.77 34.56 ce | cL [Delta min 6.57 2.84 oc kg/en Git 27.9 5 kg/ent 1037 473 Bending Moment” ~[ion.m 54.49 22.36 3/4 [Della mm | 4.66 1.99 oc kg/em? 44.0 | 18.0} os, kg/em?_ 306, Bending Moment [tom 22.36 1/4 [Della mm 1.99, oc iz kg/em? 18.0 os glen 306__| Bending Moment | ton.m 34.56 ca | cL [Delia mm, 2.84 ac kg/ere! 27.5) 98 kg/em2_| 473__| [ Bending Moment | ton.m 22.36 3/4 [Della min 1.99 oc ‘Thg/em 18.0 | os kg/cm! 306. ‘Bending Moment [ton.m 20.91 aa [Delia mn. 146 oc kg/cm’ 10.5 os kg/em 263 Bending Moment | ton.m | 35.87 ca | cL [Delia m 2.09 | kage 18.0 |. kg/em 452 tonm 20.91 3/4 mm, 146 | kg/em™ 10.8 kg/env 263‘Table 7.23 Results of Strength and Deflection for Bridge No. 5, 8 Dead Load |" (H1S20) Bending Moment [ton.m [78.37 20.79 1/4 [Della mm 4.80 oe kg/em® | 41.6 3, kg/em? | 1234 | Bending Moment | fon.m 104.07 | ci | cy [Delta mn 6.76 oc ego 55.3 9s eg/em? | _1639 ‘Bending Moment | ton.m 78.38 | 3/4 [Della mm 4.78 14a oc kg/m? i16 TL. os. kg/em i234 327 r ‘Bending Moment | ton. 54.35, 2227 v/a [Delta mim) 4.65. 1.96 oc [glen 46.9 19.2 os kg/em? | 924 379 ‘Bending Moment | ton.m z co | cL [Della mm 7 oc kg/env os. Jeg/em* ‘Bending Moment —{ ton.m 3/4 [Della mm ‘oc eg/em' os | kg/em? Bending Moment —|ton.m 1/4 [Delta mm oc. kg/m os kg/em’ ‘Bending Moment | ton.m cs | cu [Delta mm se kg/ent os igen Bending Moment —[ton.m | 3/4 [Delta mann kg/om kg/em’ ton.m 1/4 [Delta mm oC Ikg/em™ os ikgsem™ Bending Moment | ton.m ca | cu [Della mim oc a kkg/om? os kg/omt | Bending Moment [ton 3/4 | Delta mm | oe = Jorn! os, ‘eg/em 7Load Bearing Capacity of Slab for the 4 Bridge Type. ‘The calculation results are shown in the Table, ‘Table 7.24 Calculation Results of Sinb for the Bridges eee : EE [~ Br. No. 7,9 Br nor | BeNeea | “Gastin | “ceetin |e vo. 6 _| ne Slab onty| precast Sab Slab Span tad Ba 2a 0.8 0.8 ie {impact os os os os os Slab Thickness ¢ (cm) Wz 7 ett ie | 18 “| SlabCondition —_| continuous | simple | _stmple | _simple_| continous wa tm) 0.4 054 oa cases P0868 Md (t/m) 0.311 0.345, 0.035 0.045 0.204 wi Fao =7a5" | 2.338 2781 rset] 861 1946 | Pesanto| 1.731 2.083 L009 Laas ‘MeMd+Mt | P20 2.64 3.13 | 4.40 215 fet ; 2.01 a Loa 1.65. ¢ (mm) 38 a6 oe d (em) 13.2, 13.3 94 15, 14 As (em?) l6cte 12.5cm] el4cte 10cm | e8cte 20cm e14cte 10cm |select6.08 | 10014=16.30 Po as7ed aoi22 | 00116 | 0.00267) 0.00528] 0.0110 enetp? 4 209 np easo oaat oa | 025 | 04a 0.850 0.63 oo | oar | oes6 7 S87 28 88 08 i168 60 15.84 627 voa7 na 19.63 77 467 aaa Bei] och 70 ou 40.8 783 50.2 toad | onsvasel og] 1461 1768 e403 row 16s “Sassumed| P=5.99 | ge 614 724 104.2 32.2 45.4 toad [oar |e} 120 tore | ane | toon 204 Allowable Design nm 7 7 a nan | Comprestve Strength = oa ‘towable Design Tensile | a0 7 Suengh » 05a ‘lovable tual [eae [Bae [Bas Compressive Srengt b70/a=98” | 990/3--1n1 [21/9 =70 | s20/9 Notes: *1: In case of non-bonding between upper slab (cast in place) and lower slab (precast) "2: In case of bonding belwcen upper slab (cast in place) and lower slab (precase) +3: These values of P are based on calculation of AASHTO load by as-built drawing and assumed load of 7 ton equivalent to test truck load, (<1.3) indicates impact factor.[oive 7 vont Clie Heicoe _ 6: | 72.2 G2 45.4 | 63.9 Ga | 45.4 G4 o2.5 | 72.2 (Reaction Force on the Pier ) 6502 700 2700 2700 659 a a ar 1 2 400 Saas 9 400 Section Calculation for Beam 1070 Bee ae pey eet et tenn ecto Bon | voree OM 4 140100 tt =| oe thot ed seen oe Ket ont Section a-a os, Wetven eee o8" Ret/ont eo bso Gea keffont a Kel/ent sereonn Fa" Eitloat Wein le gow Tes ear een} si THE STUDY ON ROAD | JAPAN. INTERNATIONAL |Fig. 7.13. Calculation Results| DEVELOPMENT PROJECT | COOPERATION AGENCY for Substructural Beam 7-363 Resulls of Safely Ratio and Load Bearing Capacity of Main Girders for RC Bridges ‘The results of the safety ratio and load bearing capacity of the main girders in RC Bridges are given in Table 7.28.(sisqeuy som ourery pr) O'T = OMTeAy se=mng uw 09 = 760-9 = MSY “yy L082 = ROLEX SIO, Z_ x ooze x epg = (L282*980, Zp) hoesy= ny -smON fg = 269-9 = MSY “ury 1:08 = 9.01 x ( SEROLAIO x © 11) x once xe49 SSray PP MOesv= OW sa0N [Gor] Ter A 7 Te | vot | ese | grt 18% espe sole oreo | ve | 2 | oggipxe 680. sez | 860 eee see ote vue | ero] 19 | ONSW) | ost eee | 67% es s98t ever sve | wee | zo ozea| ° Lert ges | oot soe | west evee_| ese | cror| to | OnHSW : a : Te : 801 ge | ort sez sore gtee wes | es | 20 | gceuxe | 60 vez | wo ose. e008 eats siz | svor| to | CHEW ost ose | sve oss | ot | ose) eer osst ove | eee | zw oes} * aut ess | yet weet ote ese | sor] to | OLHSYY 060) vez | e60 e6Le vere ete | se | 20 | ocoue Itt gtr | ort | e887 ozs ges | ois | to | OLHSY eet ge. | of e0re 6°60 6or | szs | zo ese ett ert ves 19% s'est eezt e6z | 91s | to | OlHSW i xen weondced : e . ory | Compnt | was'spwe't | er) | wary | con ON, Bees bistusuahd feo aK = Tn st) TH | pan |sepst0 ON PEO | osu Axpedeo Sayreag peor pus juawmow Suipuag sIewIA Jo OTR As9FuS Jo SHNSTN z"2 OGL4) Results of Calculation of Load Bearing Capacity of Main Girders of PC Bridges. ‘The load bearing capacity of main girders of PC Bridges have been calculated for the ultimate bending safety ratio and given in Table 7.26 and Table 7.27. ‘Table 7.26 Safety Ratio of Load Bearing Capacity for Bridge No, 6 (PC Bridge) Po CABLE: nc tm) (tm) (on) | Mn2 | ma | ma | 313.7990 | aasuto [G2 | 330.8 [e875 HS20 G3 | 329.4 [313.7 AASHTO | G2 | 330.8 2x20) F¢3 | 920.4 + Ap(0.98 apy) = 0.850 ¢k + 0.8% + b, = 1.868 x 15000886:2 _ 16 assem < (=18em % Sp 1.368 «25 x x cou Spe = 1, gpa Ap ao(a- 2 + oboe > > 15000x36.2 183 x 150001962 x (109 -0.55 x 30088852) «19 X y Ope _ 183-16.48 , 285 _yosse> cut Fee Tgas — * 0.0035 + 5,198 ~ 0.0358 > 0.015 + Mu =0.93 opu put 93 apn Ar(d- 0.85 + STP) = 890.7 tm‘Table 7.27 Safety Ratio of Load Bearing Capacity for Bridge No. 7. 9 (PC Bridge) thin | mna 1.7iMdeMa) | Gl 2 181.9 aasuro | G2 ; 195.8 HS20 [gg is G1 aasuTo | G2 2x(HS20) G3 __|ea + Ap(0.93 opu) = 0.85aeK + 0.8K +b, Spu x= 1.368 x 2! 1so00K24 ee 1,368 x3) 5x176— = 14.5em < =170m ax dx Ope 105-14.5 5 5 7875 tape ecu t epe = taut Bee yg.g | ¥0-0085 + 95,796 = 0.0222 > 0.018 ty =0:98 999 40(3- 5 a) cement 0.55 - Se) = 926.2 in2. Study of Allowable Stress by the Omant Design Standard ‘The theoretical calculation (grid calculation method) by the new Omant Design Standards for live loads (60 ton ‘Truck x 2} has been performed for the three representative RC bridges (Bridge No. 1, No. 2, No, 5) and two PC bridges (Bridge No, 6, No. 9), A comparison of the allowable stress and actual stress has also been calculated and presented in Tables 7.28 and 7.29,[ 82 esse | xer | eect | eet] sve | veo | & { [os | vtec | teet | eset | zee | ua | rea |v ve 4406 | scot | ecot | got] ess | eso) a 7a Baooat = Gan Bios = 5], 4 | Cama/Saor Gea = 215 x 1/3 kg/cm? and exceeds Tequirements. g is within allowable limits, Both 9¢ and 95 exceed allowable limits for slab concrete, but opr and 92g are Jess than 75% of requirement, Overall Evaluation Girder Do Slab Co Relnforcing bar exposed in main girder and rust and scale of Telnforcing bar need checking. Restriction of heavy traffic may need to be considered. Remarks Scheduled inspection of main girder and slab should be made for cracks, Iferacks increase, consider strengthening with steel sheets.Table 8.4 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 3 Evaluation Item Category Rating Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration c [+ Main girder has cracks from bending, and many cracks extend through ‘the girder. + Although there are few cracks in the slab, there are cracks on the pavement surface. © Bridge supports are exposed from scouring action of the river. Quality of Conerete & Reinforcing bar 1 + Concrete neutralizing fs progressing and Is not. watertight. + Reinforcing bar exceeds strength requirements. f-value from Load ‘Test 1 * f= 1.07 (deflection), and concrete has durability but the f-value is low due to cracks in the main girder. + Reinforcing bar has sufficient ‘strength and can sustain the bridge live loads. Load Bearing Capaclty: Safety Ratio 1 © Same as Bridge No. 2 Allowable Stress a + Same as Bridge No. 2 Overall Evaluation Girder_ | + Scheduled inspection required for Co main girder, and load restriction Slab should be considered. Co * Bridge footings and substructure exposed from scouring and counter~ measures should be considered for protection. Remarks * Same as for Bridge No. 2.‘Table 8.8 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 4 Evaluation Item Rating Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration E/D [+ ‘The main girder has cracks from bending of which most pass through the beam, and the bridge can fall. Many cracks appear in the cross beams, sab and pavement (reinforcing bar in the cross beams are corroded). Quality of Concrete & un |+ Neutratization of conerete ts Reinforcing bar progressing, and the concrete is ne longer water-tight ‘© Reinforcing bar meets strength requirement. -15 (deflection) and the rigidity is low due (o cracks in main beam, and the f-value is low. f-value from Load Test in . ‘+ Reinforcing bar exceed standard strength requirements, and are not rusted Load Bearing Capacity: Safety Ratio of Ultimate u | + Simtlar to Bridge No. 2 BM. Allowable Stress u | Similar to Bridge No. 2 Overall Evaluation Girder | * Load Limit Restriction should be Eo imposed due to cracks in the main Slab girder, slab panels and reinforcing Do bar, Bridge needs to be strengthened. Remarks + Bridge needs regular inspection, Load Limit imposed, and the bridge should be replaced or strengthened.‘Table 8.6 Detailed Evaiuation for Bridge No. 5 Category Evaluation Item Rating Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration c Quality of Concrete & Reinforcing bar " ‘There are many cracks from bending and many cracks penetrate the girder, and there are many cracks in the bridge slab. ‘There are many cracks in the substructure but do not affect the bridge capability. Neutrallaing of concrete Is progress ing and water-tightness is affected. Reinforcing bars meet the requirements of standard strength. fvalue from Load Test m f = 0.90 (deflection), and durability of conerete is affected by the many cracks in the main girder, Load Bearing Capacity: Safely Ratio of Ultimate BM. Allowable Stress 1 Safety Ratio F = 1.18, and ts considered safe against Live Loads. gc = 94.8 kg/em? and os = 2201 kg/em? for the main girder and exceeds requirements, and Gpr and 9g are within 75% of the limits, ‘The slab also exceeds the require- ments, and opr and egg are within 75% of the limits Overall Evaluation Girder Co Slab Co ‘The main girder requires scheduled Inspection due to the existing eracks and traffic restrictions should be considered for the bridge. Remarks Perform scheduled inspection of the bridge and cracks, and if cracks and size increase, consider strengthening with sleel sheets.‘Table 8.7 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 6 Category Evaluation Item Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration ‘There are no cracks or damages noticed which can attribute to the lowering of the capacity. ‘The bridge is structurally sound, Quality of Concrete & Reinforeing bar u ‘The neutralizing of concrete Is progressing and it is no longer water-tight. E-value from Load Test Load Bearing Capacity: Safely Ratio of Ultimate BM. Allowable Stress 1.44 (deflection) and the durability of concrete is sound. Safely Ratio F = 1.26 and the bridge Is sound against Live Loads. ‘The slab ts within the allowable Innits against Live Loads and ts considered sound. Overall Evaluation Girder ‘Ao Slab ‘Ao Remarks Due to disfigurement of the shoe scheduled inspection is necessary. ‘There are no problems in connection with the superstructure or the substructure, 8-10Table 8.8 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 7 Category Evaluation Tem Rating Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration Quality of Concrete & Reinforcing bar Main girder ts sound, ‘There are no connections between cast-in-place slab panels and precast panels, ‘The concrete has lost some of its strength, fvalue from Load Test Load Bearing Capacity: Safety Ratio of Ultimate BM. Allowable Stress Mm £ = 0.92 (deflection) and there is loss of durability. Main girder and slab panels seems to have lost some of their durability. mM ty Rallo F = 1,67 and is sound inst Live Loads, Where cast-in-place stab panels (23cm) and precast slab panels (Scm) are not connected integrally. allowable stress and limit stress are over the Iimtt against Live Loads. Overall Evaluation Due to lack of cross girders to distribute the Live Loads, the superstructure lacks some rigidity. ‘The slab panels are not connected integrally with the precast panels, Remarks g-11 Slab should be inspected as often as required, and replaced when any parts are found missing. It is strongly recommended to add cross girders at supporting ends of the main girders to increase rigidity.‘Table 8.9 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 8 Evaluation item Category Rating Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Detertoration | + Many cracks in main girder, slab panels and cross girders; many ‘cracks in main girder extend through the girder (reinforcing bar are rusted). + Substructure is damaged from flowing rocks and sand. Quality of Concrete & u —_|* Water absorption and water concrete Reinforcing bar fs high and conerete is not water- tight. ‘© Reinforcing bar meets strength requirements. 1.94 (deflection) and concrete does not meet strength requirements due to many cracks in main girder. f-value from Load Test m fe ‘+ Reinforcing bar exceeds strength requirements and is satisfactory. Load Bearing Capacity: Safety Ratio of Ultimate — }* Same as Bridge No. 5 BM. Allowable Stress 1 |+ Same as Bridge No. 5 Overall Evaluation Girder | * Scheduled inspection necessary due Ao to many cracks in main girder. Should consider load restriction on bridge. Slab |+ Repair substructure (meets with ‘Ao strength requirements. Remarks, + Inspect superstructure for cracks and if increase Is noticed, check reinforcing bar for rust, and consider strengthening by repairs. 8-12Table 8.10 Detailed Evaluation for Bridge No. 9 Category Evaluation ftem Overall Evaluation & Adjudication Degree of Deterioration Quality of Concrete & Reinforcing bars Main girder ts sound. Some lower precast slab panels are damaged. Some of the substructure is damaged, Neutralization of concrete is progressing and fs lacking in water~ Uighiness. Evalue from Load Test Load Bearing Capacity: Safety Ratio of Ultimate BM. Allowable Stress f= 1.54 (deflection) and super- structure is sound. ‘Same as Bridge No. 7 Cast-in-place slab panels (18em) are integrally connected with precast slab panels (Sem), so actual stress is within allowable requirements. Overall Evaluation. Girder ‘Ao Slab ‘Ao Bridge lacks rigidity due to no cross. girders to distribute loads, and bridge slab is a combination of cast-in-place and precast slab panels but are not integrally connected, Remarks Perform scheduled inspection of slab panels, and if any are found missing, make structural changes to bridge. Add cross girders at main girder supporting ends to increase rigidity to bridge. 8-138.3 Control of Heavy Vehicle Traffic on the Bridges due to the New Design Live Load ‘The new Oman! design standards for the live loads are as follows: (1) Twice the current AASHTO H1S20-44 live load system (2) The live load system with two Omant 60 ton Truck Loads running tn parallel in adjoining lanes. ‘The theoretical calculations for the above changes have been performed for the existing RC and PC bridges in Chapter 7. As the live load systems for the existing bridges in Oman were performed in accordance with the design loads established by the U.S, AASHTO live toad specifications, the calculation methods for the main girder and slab are as follows: + Main Girder 1) AASHTO HS20-44 Live Load Load Bearing Ratlo (a), Rupture Safety () 2) ‘Twice the Live Load of AASHTO: Load Bearing Ratio (a), HS20-44 x 2 Rupture Safety (F) 8) Live Load of Oman Truck 2 Actual Load Capacity and 60 Ton x2 Allowable Values + Slab 1) 7.0Ton Wheel Load by Load = Actual Load Capacity and ‘Tests Allowable Values 2) AASHTO HS20-44 Live Load =: (Same as above) 7.26 Wheel Load (Hi) 8.3.1 Load Bearing Capacity of Main Girder ‘The Rupture Safety Factor (F) of 9 bridges are all in excess of 1.0 against the present live load of AASHTO HS20-44 under the original design. and the main girders have strength to spare. 8-148.3.2 Under the revised new design criteria of AASHTO HS20-44 x 2, with the exception of the two PC bridges No. 7 and No, 9, the Rupture Safety Factors (F) are all less than 1,0 and there 1s no spare load capacity for the main girders. Hence, from the restrictions of live loads for the main girders, the rear axle load will be less than 14.52 ton for the AASHTO HS Truck, and will be similar to the axle oad stated in Chapter 7.4.1. 1) b) For the live load system under the Oman Truck 60 Ton x 2 case, the bridges have not the load capacities. © Oman Truck 60 Ton x 2 Live Load Case ‘The existing RC and PC bridge load capacities all exceed the allowable value of the actual load capacity. Even when the values exceed the allowable values, they can be accepted as the stress prior to deformation, and the values given tn Chapter 6 can be used as a guide. Bending Stress in Concrete. ge $ a8 x 0.75 when 62g = 270 kg/cm?, 202 kg/em?, 69g = 215 ky/em?, 161 kg/em?. ‘Tensile Strength of Gg $ Gpy (Wield Point) x 0.75 = 3,180 kg/em? Reinforcing bar or opr = 4,200 kg/em?. From the above, the stresses in RC bridges do not exceed the limits of stress (a8 x 0.75, opr x 0.75). But when there are many cracks in the main girders and slab the live load system is not suitable. In PC bridges the stresses In the lower side of the main girders will be in excess of the allowable limits, and under the live load system itis easier for cracks to propagate in the future. The Allowable Load Capacity of Slab The slab load capacity has been given in Table 7.24 in the previous chapter for the present live load under the present AASHTO HS20-44 for the original design conditions, The rear axle load P20 = 7.26 (1 + 1) ton the load will be slightly in excess of the allowable stress except for Bridge No, 6, and against wheel load systems for repeated stresses and fatigue loads the load bearing capacities fall with the result that there are more cracks and failures in the slab planks causing traffle 8-158.3.3 problems. PC Bridges No. 7 and No. 9 have structural problems with thelr slabs construction, and apart from their load bearing capacities, the replacement of their decks is recommended. Recommendations to Restrict Traffic on Bridges ‘The superstructure of the bridges consisting of the main girder and conercte slabs were checked for a maximum rear axle load of 17.60 Lons at the time of traffie survey. In checking against the load capacity and stresses, the present AASHTO live load ts the maximum load that the bridges can bear. For this reason, the bridges on main trunk routes and where the bridge damage 1s reat, it is recommended to perform axle load checks from time to time, and as described in the previous chapter, to post a sign on the bridge for an axle load limit in accordance with AASHTO HS20-44, However, Iimiled axte load in Omant regulation is 13.0 ton maximum as shown in Fig. 8.1 It ts proposed that the bearing capacity of axle load and total truck load for 9 bridges shall be restricted for both the main girder and the slab as listed in Table 8.11. AXLE LOAD LIMIT Wig. 8.1 Example for Sign of Axle Limit Table 8.11 Capacity of Axle Load and Total Truck Load for 9 Bridges Bridge No. Slab (Axle Load) Ton | Girder (Total Truck Load) Ton, Br, No, 1 us 32 equivalent Br. No, 2,3, 4, 5,8 108 24 (Comparing AASHTO HS20-44) Br. No. 6 145 1520-44) Br. No, 7,9 108 24 (Comparing AASHTO 1820-44) 8-168.3.4 How to Maintain Bridges in Oman under the New Live Loads ‘The existing 9 bridges and other bridges on the main trunk roads are of RC and PC construction all with similar types and spans. These bridges were planned using the AASHTO design standards at the time of ther original construction, and the vehicles have grown larger and heavier while the bridges themselves have grown older. New and improved design standards for live loads passing over the main girders and concrete slab are required to bear further damaging loads. ed use, It 1s necessary to In order to ensure the existing bridges for further contin take protective measures from circumstantial forces that cause the bridges to deteriorate by restricting heavy weight vehicles and rerouting special vehicles to other routes, making special inspections and special checks of the bridges, and make immediate repairs to the bridges depending on the degree of damage caused,CHAPTER 9 PROPOSED REPAIR PLAN FOR EXISTING BRIDGES.CHAPTER 9 PROPOSED REPAIR PLAN FOR EXISTING BRIDGES Repair Plan ‘The repair of damages to bridges will differ with the damages sustained by the bridges, usage and the surrounding conditions of the bridges, and the degree of damage to the bridge components, ‘The methods to be used and the degree of repair will suit the various conditions. “The repairs to be performed will be based on the results of the damage or disorders revealed by the investigation. Repair required will be based on the load tests, durability of the structure, and the safety of the bridge, and be suitable for the damaged components, the degree, and cause of the damage. 1) The Classification of the Damage Corrective Measures ‘The method of repairs to the damages can be classified into the repatr, reinforcement or replacement depending on the degree of the damage. Repair ———— To restore the function of the bridge excepting durability, watertightness and strength. Reinforcement — To upgrade the damaged ‘component to its original strength Corrective and cross section, add or replace Methods» —] the component to'sustain the generated stress, or restore the loss of strength against loads. {Replacement — To replace the bridge if parts of the bridge are determined to be irrepalrable or too costly to strengthen for the component Guperstructure or substructure) to maintain the durability or safety.1 Selection of Corrective Measures In general damaged bridges are restored by either performing repairs or strengthening, However, depending on the degree of damage, in order {9 matntain the structural reliability, economies and administratively it may be more effective to replace the bridge outright. ‘The selection of the corrective measures may be better than to simply repair or strengthen the bridge, and tt will be important to view the situation from an overall viewpoint () Structural Studies In making repairs or strengthening of the bridge components, it will be necessary to remove the cause of the damage of the bridge by determining the factors which brought about the damage. 1t will be important to find out whether the materials required to make the repairs or strengthening are available, and to make the necessary of the recortls and files pertaining to the bridge. For this sludy the following materials will be required: + As-built drawings and documents + Files and records of the bridge + Records of bridge repairs + Records of detailed bridge examinations {2) Discussions to Select Bridge Repair Methods, Discussions will be required to be held to decide the construction methods: + Conditions at the bridge site + Methods of construction + Time required to make repairs + Detours and other traffic monitoring methods + Types of vehicle trate and restrictions * Safety of pedestrians around construction site (3) Administrative Discussions Discussions should be held for overall studies of future bridge plans, improvements and repairs to the river, importance of (he road route over the bridge (emergency transport routes, by-pass roads). ete(4) Economte Studies ‘The most economical method of construction should be studied, (5) Other Related Matters. Alternate methods of construction should be studied together with other related matters, ‘The selection of other methods can be selected as described in Fig. 9.1<< Bata Suetent to Soiet Perfor Additional —Pethatiusion Nethes > Ne | inwesgntion epee EEE EEE EEE EEE ERS EEE Select Alternative Select Alternative ‘Repair Method Repair Method ‘Compare Alternative| [Compare Alternative ‘Repair Methods Repalr Method ‘Select Final Sclect Final Repair Method Repair Method Examine Method Selected from Overall Viewpoint of Bridge Replace Bridge {Sultable of Not) ‘Select Repair Select Strengthening| Select Bridge Method Method [Replacement Method eee I ‘Compare Methods of Replacement —T Select IConstruction Method] of Replacement I Decide Method of Bridge Replacement Prepare Detalled Design Perform Construction £ Prepare As-Bullt Drawings Record Construction Activities: Fig. 9.1 Flow of Selection of Alternative Methods 9-4‘Structural Components of Bridge ‘The structural components of reinforced-concrete bridges have been broken down into the classification given in Fig. 9.2 to make the selection of construction methods easy. Concrete Superstructure ~~ Major —P Main Beam ~~ Flange Cons tetecents eee Slab L cross Beam Secondary —7~ Supports Main Components [ Memnber ‘Support Bearing ‘= Expansion Steel Joint Member Rubber Other [- Railings Related Components | [~ Curve [+ Surface Paving (Wearing Surface) \ Drainage Fittings Subotrugture | —7- Abutment —Y~ Hain Body Foundation Piers = —~7~ Matin Body / Foundation Fig. 9.2 Structural Components of BridgesDamage to Structural Components Although the damage to the structural components of bridges and the causes thereto differ, the damages sustained do have some common features. ‘The relation of structural components and the relation of damages sustained can be deserted in Table 9.1. ‘Table 9.1 Concrete Bridge Components and Damages Sustained Structural Component Damages Sustained Main structural member Cracks slab Delamination, exposed reinforcing Common Conerete | Secondary concrete members, Component Other concrete members Abutments, pler concrete columns Abutment, pler footing and foundation Popouts, honeycombs Colouring, deterioration ‘Water leaks Breakage, cracks Main concrete member Abnormal vibration, bending Secondary concrete members Footing and Foundation: Foundation Pile Footings Caisson Foundation Base subsiding Subsiding Horizontal shitting Overturning, scouring Selection of Repalr and Strengthening Method In selecting the method of repair or strengthening it will be important to find the method best sulted for the cause of the damage. strengthening are given in Tables 9.2 and 9.3. ‘The methods for repair andTable 9.2 Methods to Correct Damage to Concrete Members Corrective Method Strengthening: | (10) Increase Cross Section of Conerete__| ()_| (21) Strengthen by Adding Reinforeements_| (p) (q) (02) Replace with New Materials o) (13)_ Increase Materials, Reduce Reaction __| (s) (1) (24)_Change Shape of Structure (s) (15) Consider Change of Structure or tu) Develop New Shape of Structure (16). Restrict Traflic Load ) ‘Type of Correction Code Method Name Repalrs: (2) Remove Defective Small Scate_| (a) (b]| (a) Surface Repatr Parts or Recast or Fill arge Scate__ | (e) (0 | (b) Injection Cover Cracks 7 (@)__| (© Grouting (3) Fill Cracks Width Small (@) Batching Method ase (e) Mortar Spray (4) _Add Concrete (9 Prepact Method (5) _ Full with Precast Grout (@) FRP Adhesive (©) Waterproof with Surfacing and Seal | (#) (K)| (h) Chloride Cathodle from Exterior Aunosphere Protection (7) Corrosionproofing or | Salt attack — | (i) | (i) Neutralization Cathodic Protection Neutralization |) ___| (Stop Reaction with Cl Ager Reaction with |() |) Waterproofing CLAggs (8)__Repainting _ ti (m)_} ) Inject PC Grout (9) Construct Barriers or Install Signs | {n)_| {m) Painting Other Methods, fo) Concrete Addition {p) Add Steel Plate (@) Add Prestressing (1) Layer Method {s) Increase Mils (Increase Cross (u) Study, Develop New Method ()_Other MethodsTable 9.3 Foundation Corrective Methods Corrective Method ‘Type of Correction Cade Strengthening: (Q) Strengthen by increasing concrete (a) _| (a) Addition Method of Member and/or steel volume @) Strengthen of stability by extend of | fa}__| (b) Strut Method footing {3) Reinforce of member which reduce the | (b) (c) | (¢) Additional Piles Method horizontal force (4) Reinforce of member which strengthen | (c) | (d) Barth Pressure Reduction the horizontal and vertical force Method ()__ Reduce of earth pressure (@ _ | (@) Protective Piles Method (6) _ Strengthen of bearing ground 0 | (0 Earth Improvement Method (7) Construction of protection structure or | (@) | (@) Foot Protection Method river bed (8) Countermeasure against to negative |(e) _| (h) Develop and Study of New friction Method (9) Replacing of concrete @) (10) Develop or study of new structural type | (h)Dismeter Sem ‘Methods of Repair and Strengthening of Concrete Bridges y Repair and Strengthening Methods for Conerete Members Surface Repalr Methods ‘This method {s best sulted for repair of eracks less than 0.2 mm wide. When the cracks are small or show no signs of progressing, apply a coat of resinous material or cementitious material over the cracked surface to enhance the waterproofing and durability of the concrete member. b. Injection Method ‘This method is to inject the resinous material or cementitious material in to the crack to prevent the entry of air and water and prevent the corrosion and deterioration of reinforcing bars. ‘This method will allow the parent concrete to regain some of its strength. which had been reduced by cracks. Crack Width (mm) [Pipe interval Under 0.3 50 - 100 03-05 100 - 200 0.5 -1.0 180 - 250 Over 1.0 200 - 300 Fig. 9.3 Injection Method©. Grouting Method Use when the cracks are more than 0.5 mm wide ‘This method is to cut the concrete surface along the crack and fill the crevice with resinous material or cementitious concrete repair materials. (1) When the Reinforcing Bars are Nol Corroded Cut the concrete along the concrete in a "U" or "V" shape approximately 10 mm wide, and fill with the repair material. oe 4 mm Approx mm Grouting Material Grouting Material rack Crack | (U Shape ) CV Shape ) Fig. 9.4 Repair Method When Reinforcing Bar Is Not Corroded (2) When the Reinforcing Bar is Corroded Remove (he conerete along the corroded bar, remove the rust from the bar with a cleaning agent, apply a primer and apply repair material ‘Chippin« whe Grouting _ Material petion Corroded Part of Reinforcement Bar_ Reinforcement Bara. Batching Repair Method. ‘This method Is used to repair delaminated or deteriorated conerete surfaces, and consists of Alling the void in the concrete with cement mortar or concrete. Repair with Gun Applied Mortar ment mortar or conerete with This method consists of applying ce: compressed alr. Prepakt Method ‘This method consists of filling pre-selected rough aggregates into a form and filling the interstices in the aggregate with cement mortar or resinous material, Adhesive Applied FRP Method ‘This repair method consists of applying Fiber Reinforced Plastic (FRP) materials with adhesive to the concrete surface. The FRP material ts used instead of the steel panel in the Adhesive Applied Stecl Panel and is used to enhance the waterproof and corrosion of the conerete surface. Chloride Corrosion Prevention Method ‘This method is used to remove the chloride ions within the concrete electrically. Provention of Neutralization of Concrete This method consists of applying a coat of penetrating primer or a silicate ‘on the concrete surface to cure concrete cracks and joints to prevent water seepage or flow, by restoring the alkalinity of conerete which has become neutralized. Prevention of Chloride Reaction in Aggregates In order to prevent the chloride tons in aggregates from reacting with water, the waler penetrating into (he concrete can be prevented by injection of gels and application of waterproofing agents on the surlace of the conerete, 9-11m, Application of Waterproofing Agents ‘This method consists of applying or giuing on waterproofing materials to the concrete surface. Injection of PC Grout This method consisls of injecting grout into the sheath of the prestressing (endons. Painting Method ‘This method consists of painting the surface of the deteriorated concrete to improve the appearance of the concrete. Other Methods Construct protective facilities or install warning signs. Replacing of Conerete ‘This method consists of replacing a part or all of the damaged conerete with new concrete in order to improve the durability and strength. Steel Panel Application Method This method consists of applying a steel panel on the surface of the tension side of the structural concrete member to become an integral part of the member and increase its strength Injection Resin _Epoxy Resin for Sea! /adhesive =! Anchor Bolt ($10~9 13) Injection _ Pipe ¥ig. 9.6 Steel Plate Application Method 9-12Prestress Introduction Method ‘This method consists of introducing prestress to existing structure and reducing tensile stress in the member by application of compressive strength, It ts possible to increase the durability and the rigidity of the member, and decrease the widths of cracks. Member Lamination Method This method consists of adding an additional member and support the ‘member and thereby increase the strength of the member. Member Adding Method ‘This method consists of adding an additional beam, slab or cross beam and thereby increase the strength of the member. (1) Beam Adding Method: + Main Beam Adding Method: Add another beam and increase the strength. © Longitudinal Beam Method: Add additional longitudinal beams and tnerease the strength of deck panels, + Cross Beam Method : Add additional cross beams and increase the strength of the overall structure. (2) Column Adding Method: Add additional columns at the midpoint of beams to decrease the span of the beam to increase the load bearing capacity. Cross Section Increase Method ‘This method consists of inereasing the cross section of the structural steel or the concrete member and thereby increase the load bearing capacity of the member.u, Study and Development of New Methods Study and development of new methods of repair and strengthening for the safety, durability and construetability Other Methods Depending on the degree of damage to the bridge and the cause of the damage, emergency methods become necessary. Restrict the traffic on the bridge. ‘+ Limit passage of heavy vehicles + Close the bridge to all types of vehicles 2) Methods of Strengthening Sub-structure Increase Cross Sectional Area of Member In order to increase the capacity and strength of the concrete member, remove a part of the damage or whole of the member and replace with new concrete. b, Strut Support Method In order to arrest further changes of the foundation, install struts to connect the foundation to make it stable. ©. Drive Additional Piles In order to make the foundation more stable, and add to the number of piles or inadequate penetration of piles. drive additional piles to strengthen the foundation. @. Decrease Earth Pressures In order to reduce the pressure of earth backfills on the abutments or subsiding of the abutments, remove the existing backfill earth and increase slab beams or culverts to strengthen (he structure. 9-14Additional Protective Pile Method Drive new piles around existing pile foundation and reduce negative skin friction. Soils Improvement Method Strengthen the load bearing capactty of the foundation soils and prevent further subsiding of foundation and footings. ‘Strengthening of Foundation. Protect the bridge foundation from lowering of the river bed or scouring action. The improvement of the foundation will differ with the characteristics of the river, (0) Protection of the Foundation with Gabions: Use this method when the river bed is not stable. (see Fig. 9.7) (2) Protection of the Foundation with Concrete Blocks: Use [his method when the degree of river bed stability is comparatively small, (see Fig, 9.8) (3) Protection with Poured Concrete: Use this method when the width of the river is small and river bed fs not stable but the depth Is small, (sce Fig. 9.9) (4) Placement of Protection Stone in Forms: Use this method of foundation protection when the river bed 1s stable and depth of protection is small. (5) Protection with Cast Stone: Use this method of protection when the flows in the river is rapid and there is local scouring. (see Fig. 9.11) 9-15Concrete Block Fig. 9.7 Protection with Gablons Fig. 9.8 Protection with Concrete Blocks Stone Cast, Fig. 9.9 Protection with Concrete Slabs Fig. 9.10 Protection with Stone Cast in Forms Fig. 9.11 Protection with Cast Stone and Blocks 9-16