Utah Department of Transportation Bridge Management Manual

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

FOREWORD The Bridge Management Manual (BMM) has been developed to provide the Bridge Management Division staff and consultants with UDOT policies, procedures and practices. In general, the Bridge Management Division focuses on the responsible management of the in service bridge inventory. In addition, the BMM addresses the Structures Division’s emergency response plan and coordination with local governments. All criteria presented in the BMM is expected to be met to help fulfill UDOT’s mission of providing a safe and efficient transportation system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Bridge Management Manual was developed by the Bridge Management Division with assistance from the consulting firm of Roy Jorgensen Associates, Inc., Professor Dennis Mertz of the University of Delaware, and the consulting firms of H. Boyle Engineering, Inc., HNTB Corporation (Chapter 4) and URS Corporation (Chapter 5).

The BMM Review Committee included: Carmen Swanwick

Chief Structural Engineer

Joshua Sletten

Bridge Management Engineer

Cheryl Hersh-Simmons

Structures Design Manager

Mike Ellis

Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

Rebecca Nix

Bridge Program Manager

Jessica Rice

Bridge Planning Engineer

i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

REVISION PROCESS The BMM provides current policies and procedures for use in managing the in service bridge inventory. To ensure that the BMM remains up to date and appropriately reflects changes in UDOT’s needs and requirements, the contents will be updated on a periodic basis.

The Bridge Management Division is responsible for evaluating changes in the structural engineering literature (e.g., updates to the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation, the issuance of new relevant publications, revisions to federal regulations) and for ensuring that the changes are appropriately addressed through the issuance of revisions to the BMM. It is important that users of the BMM inform UDOT of any inconsistencies, errors, need for clarification or new ideas to support the goal of providing the best and most up to date information practical. Send comments and proposed revisions to the Bridge Management Engineer using the Structures Review Comment Resolution Form.

To propose a revision to the Bridge Management Manual, complete and return the Structures Review Comment Resolution Form to: Bridge Management Engineer Utah Department of Transportation 4501 South 2700 West PO Box 148470 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-8470 E-mail: structuremanuals@utah.gov (include “Bridge Management Manual” in subject line) Ensure that the submission addresses the following (attach additional sheets as necessary): • • •

Applicable BMM section number(s) Proposed revision Justification for revision

ii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

iii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................... ADMINISTRATION Chapter 2 ................................................................................ PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING Chapter 3 ................................................................................ BRIDGE INSPECTION PROGRAM Chapter 4 ........................................................... LOAD RATING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Chapter 5 ................................................................................. EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN Chapter 6 ............................................................................................... BRIDGE MAINTENANCE Chapter 7 .................................................................... LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATION

iv

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.1

FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ..................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1

Division Vision/Mission ................................................................................... 1-2 1.1.1.1 1.1.1.2

1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4 1.1.5 1.1.6 1.1.7 1.1.8 1.2

Bridge Management Vision ............................................................. 1-2 Bridge Management Mission .......................................................... 1-2

Federal Highway Administration Coordination ................................................ 1-2 Planning and Programming ............................................................................ 1-3 Bridge Inspection Program ............................................................................. 1-3 Load Rating Program ...................................................................................... 1-3 Emergency Response Plan ............................................................................ 1-4 Bridge Maintenance ........................................................................................ 1-4 Local Government Coordination ..................................................................... 1-4

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................ 1-5 1.2.1 1.2.2

Definitions ....................................................................................................... 1-5 Acronyms ........................................................................................................ 1-9

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 — ORGANIZATION CHART ................................................................................. 1-1

Administration

1-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

1-ii

Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 1 ADMINISTRATION This chapter presents an overview of the functions and responsibilities of the Bridge Management Division, and acronyms and definitions of key words commonly used throughout the UDOT Bridge Management Manual (BMM). The Bridge Management Division is part of the Structures Division.

1.1

FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

In general, the Bridge Management Division focuses on the responsible management of the in service bridge inventory. Figure 1.1 presents both the Bridge Management Division and Structures Project Delivery Division organization.

Figure 1.1 — ORGANIZATION CHART

Administration

1-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

1.1.1

February 2014

Division Vision/Mission

1.1.1.1

Bridge Management Vision

The Bridge Management Division provides data to support structure project prioritization for preservation, rehabilitation and replacement, and emergency services to ensure the safety of the traveling public.

1.1.1.2

Bridge Management Mission

The Bridge Management Division inspects, monitors, reports and effectively manages the structure inventory for a safe, reliable transportation system.

1.1.2

Federal Highway Administration Coordination

1.1.2.1

General

The Bridge Management Division ensures compliance with FHWA requirements related to managing the existing inventory of bridges. The National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) and 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §650 discuss several of the requirements. The BMM documents the UDOT policies and procedures (including submission requirements) to comply with the following FHWA requirements: • • • • • •

Bridge inspection program (e.g., qualifications, inspection frequencies) Plan of action (POA) for scour critical bridges Critical findings Quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA) Bridge inventory (e.g., maintenance of, annual submission to FHWA) Load rating

The Bridge Management Division and FHWA hold quarterly meetings to discuss the status on each of the FHWA requirements. The meetings address issues such as scheduled bridge inspections for the next few months.

1.1.2.2

Metrics

In 2010, Congress directed FHWA “to make more significant progress in improving its oversight of bridge conditions and safety.” In response, FHWA overhauled the “Metrics for the Oversight of the National Bridge Inspection Program.” The publication presents 23 metrics, which address the following topics: • • • • 1-2

State DOT organization and record keeping Qualifications of NBI personnel Bridge inspection frequency and procedures Load rating and bridge posting Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

One fundamental goal of the FHWA metrics is to set minimum requirements for FHWA reviews to promote a data driven, risk based approach to oversight during annual NBIS compliance reviews. The metrics are intended to present: • • •

1.1.3

Clear and uniform expectations for all states Consistent criteria for judging each metric Compliance determination based upon the criteria for each metric

Planning and Programming

Chapter 2 discusses the Structures Division’s planning and programming activities for bridge projects to preserve the infrastructure, optimize mobility, improve safety and strengthen the economy. Chapter 2 discusses the: • • • • •

1.1.4

UDOT strategic direction Funding sources Asset management Structures Division planning (e.g., bridge rehabilitation/replacement, bridge preservation, bridge scour) Bridge programs

Bridge Inspection Program

Chapter 3 discusses the bridge inspection program. The basic objectives are to ensure the structural integrity of bridges, to properly understand the overall condition of the bridges and to comply with the NBIS and 23 CFR §650. Chapter 3 discusses: • • • • •

1.1.5

General considerations (e.g., training, safety, equipment) Qualifications and responsibilities of Bridge Management Division positions Inspection types, frequency and procedures for inspections Bridge inventory Structure number

Load Rating Program

Chapter 4 discusses the load rating program. The basic objectives are to: • • • •

Determine which structures have substandard load capacities and require posting or other remedial action Effectively prioritize projects for rehabilitation or replacement Assist in the overload permit review process Satisfy FHWA requirements for submitting load ratings

Administration

1-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 4 topics include: • • • •

1.1.6

Policies on load rating, posting, permitting and QC/QA Detailed load rating procedures Guidelines on load rating for specific types of structures Documentation (e.g., load rating report)

Emergency Response Plan

Chapter 5 discusses the Structures Division’s emergency response plan. The basic objective is to provide a rapid, efficient and uniform method of ensuring the structural integrity of bridges after an event that potentially compromises a structure’s integrity. The plan includes: • • • • • • •

1.1.7

Safety plan and equipment checklists Communication plan Personnel roles and responsibilities Training Route prioritization plan for bridge inspections Basic inspection procedures Emergency field inspection report

Bridge Maintenance

Chapter 6 discusses the Bridge Management Division’s coordination with the Region maintenance stations to assist with routine bridge maintenance. The chapter discusses the: •

• •

1.1.8

Communication of maintenance recommendations from the Bridge Management System (BMS) to the maintenance stations (e.g., Structures Inspection Recommendations Report) Typical bridge maintenance activities Maintenance training

Local Government Coordination

The UDOT Local Government Engineer coordinates all federally funded local government projects. The UDOT Local Government Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Management Division for bridge related projects. The Bridge Management Division coordinates with local governments for bridge inspection and maintenance issues.

Chapter 7 discusses the local government’s responsibilities throughout the life of the bridge.

The chapter discusses the interaction between the Bridge Management Division and the local government on several issues, including:

1-4

Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • •

Bridge inspections Load ratings Emergency response Maintenance

1.2

DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS

1.2.1

February 2014

Definitions

1.

Anchored Walls (Soil Nails or Rock Anchors). Retaining walls consisting of horizontal soil reinforcing elements drilled into an existing fill to stabilize the soil and connected to a facing material to retain the soil. Anchored walls are typically constructed from the top down.

2.

Bridge. A structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway, or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads, and having a bridge length of more than 20 ft.

3.

Bridge File. Electronic directory of all bridge records located on an independent server.

Informally known as the bridge inventory.

4.

Bridge Folder. A tangible folder containing hard copies of inspection reports, plan sets, sketches and other pertinent bridge information.

5.

Bridge Health Index. A measure to describe the overall structural condition of each bridge; used as a tracking and planning tool.

6.

Bridge Length. The measurement taken at the centerline of the roadway between front faces of abutments, spring lines of arches, or extreme ends of openings for multiple boxes; bridge length can also include multiple pipes, where the clear distance between openings is less than half of the smaller contiguous opening.

7.

Bridge Load Rating Model. Software used to model the load rating analysis and calculations to comply with NBIS requirements and UDOT requirements in Chapter 4.

Also informally referred to as a bridge model or a BrR model.

8.

Bridge Load Rating Program. Program required by the NBIS for a state’s inventory of bridges to load rate all bridges; to meet NBIS requirements for a state DOT organization; and to meet NBIS requirements for the qualifications of load rating personnel.

9.

Bridge Management Software. Interface for database of bridge inventory and condition data specifically used in the BMS. Does not contain plans, etc.

10.

Bridge Management System. A collection of tools consisting of comprehensive bridge data, deterioration models, costs (agency and user), software and other tools, designed to provide decision support in optimizing the use of available resources for the inspection, maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement of bridges.

Administration

1-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

11.

Bridge Record. Electronic file of all bridge documents for a single bridge.

12.

Bridge Preservation. Actions or strategies that prevent, delay or reduce deterioration of bridges or bridge elements, restore the function of existing bridges, keep bridges in good condition and extend their life. Preservation actions can be preventive or condition driven.

13.

Bridge Rehabilitation. Work required to restore the structural integrity or correct safety deficiencies.

14.

Bridge Replacement. Total replacement of a bridge with a new facility constructed in the same general traffic corridor. The replacement structure must meet the current geometric, material and structural standards required for the types and volume of projected traffic on the facility over the design life.

15.

Clearance Sign. A sign either attached to the structure or on the roadway before the structure warning vehicles of the allowable vertical clearance under the structure.

16.

Condition Rating. An overall assessment of the physical condition of the deck, the superstructure and the substructure of a bridge or culvert. General condition (NBI) ratings range from 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent condition).

17.

Construction Load Ratings. Special request load rating for local construction loads.

18.

Criticality Score. Reflects the overall numerical value of the importance of the bridge based on a summation of the individual scores of each importance factor.

19.

Culvert. A structure that is designed to convey water and provide a path under an obstruction. Most culverts have a structural floor and are covered with embankment material. However, buried three sided structures, arches, pipes, boxes, etc., are also culverts if the structures are designed to convey water. If the structure is designed to convey water and has a structural floor, but is not covered with embankment material, the structure is still a culvert. The Structures Division assigns a structure number to all culverts requiring design plans; which typically applies to any box culvert with a span or rise greater than 12 ft.

20.

Deck. The riding surface of the bridge.

21.

Federal Aid Highway. Highways on the Federal Aid Highway System (the National Highway System and the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways) and all other public roads not classified as local roads or rural minor collectors.

22.

Fracture Critical Bridge. A bridge containing a fracture critical member. A bridge that does not contain redundant supporting elements.

23.

Fracture Critical Member. A steel member in tension, or with a tension element, whose failure would likely result in a total or partial bridge collapse.

1-6

Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

24.

Functionally Obsolete. A bridge that was built to standards that do not meet the minimum federal functional requirements for a new bridge. The bridges are not necessarily rated as structurally deficient nor are they inherently unsafe. Functionally obsolete bridges include those that have substandard geometric features such as narrow lanes, narrow shoulders, poor approach alignment or inadequate vertical clearance.

25.

Importance Factors (AADT, Significance and Bridge Length). Measure the functional and operational significance of the bridge for a specific area of need. Factors are scored based on the perspective of the consequences incurred if the bridge is out of service.

26.

Inventory Level Rating (LRFR). Generally corresponds to the rating at the design level of reliability for new bridges in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, but reflects the existing bridge and material conditions with regard to deterioration and loss of section.

27.

Inventory Rating (LFR). Load ratings based on the inventory level allow comparisons with the capacity for new structures and, therefore, results in a live load that can safely utilize an existing structure for an indefinite period of time.

28.

Legal Level Rating (LRFR). This second level rating provides a single safe load capacity (for a given truck configuration) applicable to AASHTO and state legal loads. Live load factors are selected based on the truck traffic conditions at the site. Strength is the primary limit state for load rating; service limit states are selectively applied. Use the results of the load rating for legal loads as a basis for decision making related to load posting or bridge strengthening.

29.

Load Limit Posting Sign. A sign indicating a weight limit that the structure is capable to carry.

30.

Load Posting. The necessary regulatory action to provide restrictive signing in advance of a bridge when the maximum legal load under state law exceeds the safe load carrying capacity of a structure.

31.

Load Rating. The determination of the live load carrying capacity of a bridge. Bridges are rated at two different stress levels referred to as Inventory Rating and Operating Rating.

32.

Load Testing. The observation and measurement of the response of a bridge subjected to controlled and predetermined loadings without causing changes in the elastic response of the structure.

33.

LRFD Specifications. The national standard for bridge design. Establish minimum requirements consistent with current nationwide practices that apply to common highway bridges and other structures such as retaining walls and culverts; long span structures can require additional design provisions. Present a load and resistance factor design methodology for structural design.

Administration

1-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

34.

MSE Wall. Retaining walls consisting of horizontal soil reinforcing elements connected to a facing material to retain the soil. MSE walls are constructed from the bottom up; see Figure 7.4.

35.

National Highway Performance Program. A federal aid transportation program to provide support for the condition and performance of the NHS, provide support for the construction of new facilities on the NHS and ensure that the investments of federal aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a state’s asset management plan for the NHS.

36.

National Highway System. Consists of roadways important to the nation’s economy, defense and mobility. The NHS includes the following subsystem of roadways — interstate, other principal arterials, strategic highway network, major strategic highway network connectors and intermodal connectors.

37.

Operating Level Rating. Maximum load level to which a structure may be subjected.

Generally corresponds to the rating at the operating level of reliability in past load rating practice.

38.

Operating Rating. Load ratings based on the operating level generally describe the maximum permissible live load to which the structure may be subjected. Allowing unlimited numbers of vehicles to use the bridge at operating level may shorten the life of the bridge.

39.

Permit Level Rating. Permit load rating checks the safety and serviceability of bridges in the review of permit applications for the passage of vehicles above the legally established weight limitations.

40.

Project Site. Within the context of the load rating program for existing bridges, the location within the bridge record to which the results of the bridge load ratings, reports and comments are posted.

41.

Roadway Undercrossing. A grade separation where the subject road passes under an intersecting road or railroad. Also referred to as an underpass. Also a structure meeting the definition of a culvert except it is not designed to convey water. These are commonly used for pedestrian access under a roadway.

42.

Scour. Erosion of streambed or bank material due to flowing water; often considered as being localized around bents and abutments of bridges.

43.

Scour Critical. A bridge with a foundation element that has been determined to be unstable for the observed or evaluated scour conditions.

44.

State Highway. A public road owned by a state agency.

45.

Structurally Deficient. Bridges that have a general condition (or NBI) rating for the deck, superstructure, substructure or culvert as 4 or less, has insufficient load carrying capacity or if the roadway approaches regularly overtop due to flooding.

1-8

Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

46.

Substructure.

The system of elements that support the superstructure.

The substructure transfers the loads to the earth and retains material behind the supports.

Substructure elements include abutments, bents, footings, piles, wingwalls, backwalls, etc.

47.

Sufficiency Rating. The method of evaluating highway bridge data by calculating four separate factors to obtain a numeric value that is indicative of bridge sufficiency to remain in service. The result of this method is a percentage in which 100% represents an entirely sufficient bridge and 0% represents an entirely deficient bridge.

48.

Superstructure. The system of elements that spans the feature being crossed. The superstructure rests on the substructure. The superstructure includes the deck, parapets and girders or other support elements (e.g., trusses, arches, box girders).

49.

Surface Transportation Program. A federal aid transportation program to provide flexible funding that can be used by the states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the condition and performance on any federal aid highway, bridge or tunnel project on any road, pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure or transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals.

50.

Tunnel. An enclosed roadway with vehicle access that is restricted to portals regardless of type of structure or the method of tunnel construction

51.

Vulnerability Score. Measures the overall risk of a structure based on the physical condition of the structure.

1.2.2

Acronyms

AADT AASHTO ABC ABET ADCI ADTT AFB AMS ASD ATMS BHI BLM BMM BMS BMT BrR CDL CID CFR CPR CPR Administration

Average Annual Daily Traffic American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Accelerated Bridge Construction Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology Association of Diving Contractors International Average Daily Truck Traffic Air Force Base Asset Management System Allowable Stress Design Advanced Transportation Management System Bridge Health Index Bureau of Land Management Bridge Management Manual Bridge Management System Bridge Management Team AASHTO Bridge Rating Commercial Driver’s License Charge Identification Number Code of Federal Regulations Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Collaborative Peer Review 1-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

DOT dTIMS DW EIT EOC EOP EOR ePM ERMG FCM FEM FEMA FHWA FO FTA FY GASB IM LFD LFR LR LRFD LRFR LRS MAP-21 MBE MPO MSE MUTCD NBI NBIS NCEES NDT NICET NHI NHPP NHS OMS OSC OSHA PE PIN POA POI PMT PS&E QC QA QC/QA RFQ 1-10

February 2014

Department of Transportation Deighton Total Infrastructure Management System Dead Weight Engineer in Training Emergency Operations Center Emergency Operations Plan Engineer of Record Electronic Program Management Emergency Response Management Group Fracture Critical Member Finite Element Method Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Highway Administration Functionally Obsolete Federal Transit Administration Fiscal Year Government Accounting Standards Board Dynamic Load Allowance Load Factor Design Load Factor Rating Operating Load Rating Load and Resistance Factor Design Load and Resistance Factor Rating Operating Load Rating Score Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation Metropolitan Planning Organization Mechanically Stabilized Earth Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices National Bridge Inventory National Bridge Inspection Standards National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying Nondestructive Testing National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies National Highway Institute National Highway Performance Program National Highway System Operational Management System Operations Section Chief Occupational Safety and Health Administration Professional Engineer Project Identification Number Plan of Action Point of Interest Pavement Management Team Plans, Specifications and Estimate Quality Control Quality Assurance Quality Control / Quality Assurance Request for Qualifications Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

S&E SD SDDM SHV SI SI&A SPMT SR STIP STP STRAHNET TEP TOC TRANSMAT UBIC UDOT UHP UPRR USGS

Administration

February 2014

Scope and Estimate Structurally Deficient Structures Design and Detailing Manual Specialized Hauling Vehicle International System of Units (Metric) Structure Inventory and Appraisal Self Propelled Modular Transporter Sufficiency Rating Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Surface Transportation Program Strategic Highway Network Transportation Education Program Traffic Operations Center Transportation Asset Management Team Under Bridge Inspection Crane Utah Department of Transportation Utah Highway Patrol Union Pacific Railroad United States Geological Survey

1-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

1-12

Administration

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.1

SYSTEMS PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING .......................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4

UDOT Strategic Direction ................................................................................. 2-1 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program ............................................. 2-1 STIP Timeline ................................................................................................... 2-2 Funding Sources .............................................................................................. 2-2 2.1.4.1 2.1.4.2 2.1.4.3

2.2

Definitions ....................................................................................... 2-2 Federal Funding — MAP-21 ........................................................... 2-4 State Funding ................................................................................. 2-5

BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ............................................................................ 2-5 2.2.1 Asset Management System ............................................................................. 2-6 2.2.2 Deighton Total Infrastructure Management System ......................................... 2-6 2.2.2.1 2.2.2.2 2.2.2.3

Overview ......................................................................................... 2-6 Data Collection ............................................................................... 2-8 Analysis .......................................................................................... 2-8

2.2.3 AASHTOWare Bridge Management ................................................................. 2-8 2.2.3.1 2.2.3.2 2.3

Description ...................................................................................... 2-8 Application ...................................................................................... 2-9

STRUCTURES DIVISION PLANNING PROCESS...................................................... 2-9 2.3.1 General ............................................................................................................. 2-9 2.3.1.1 2.3.1.2 2.3.1.3 2.3.1.4 2.3.1.5 2.3.1.6 2.3.1.7

Objectives ....................................................................................... 2-9 Definitions ....................................................................................... 2-11 Bridge Management Team ............................................................. 2-11 Rehabilitation/Replacement List ..................................................... 2-11 Scope and Estimate Report ............................................................ 2-12 Project Delivery ............................................................................... 2-13 Project Closeout ............................................................................. 2-13

2.3.2 Bridge Condition ............................................................................................... 2-13 2.3.2.1 2.3.2.2 2.3.2.3 2.3.2.4

Sufficiency Rating ........................................................................... 2-13 Structural Deficiency ....................................................................... 2-13 Functional Obsolescence ............................................................... 2-14 Bridge Health Index ........................................................................ 2-15

2.3.3 Bridge Program Prioritization Process.............................................................. 2-16 2.3.3.1 2.3.3.2

Definitions ....................................................................................... 2-16 Prioritization .................................................................................... 2-16

Planning and Programming

2-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.3.3.3 2.3.3.4 2.4

February 2014

Vulnerability Scoring ....................................................................... 2-17 Criticality Scoring ............................................................................ 2-17

BRIDGE PROGRAMS ................................................................................................. 2-19 2.4.1 Program Funding Allocation ............................................................................. 2-19 2.4.1.1 2.4.1.2 2.4.1.3 2.4.1.4

Color Coding ................................................................................... 2-19 Orange Book Program .................................................................... 2-19 Purple Book Program ..................................................................... 2-20 Blue/Green Book Program .............................................................. 2-20

2.4.2 Bridge Rehabilitation/Replacement Program ................................................... 2-21 2.4.2.1 2.4.2.2

Objective ......................................................................................... 2-21 Program Development .................................................................... 2-21

2.4.3 Bridge Preservation Program ........................................................................... 2-22 2.4.3.1 2.4.3.2

Objective ......................................................................................... 2-22 Program Development .................................................................... 2-22

2.4.4 Bridge Scour Program ...................................................................................... 2-25 2.4.4.1 2.4.4.2

Objective ......................................................................................... 2-25 Program Development .................................................................... 2-25

2.4.5 In Service Bridge Requests .............................................................................. 2-26 2.4.5.1 2.4.5.2

Objective ......................................................................................... 2-26 Project Development ...................................................................... 2-26

2.4.6 Bridge Emergency Program ............................................................................. 2-27 2.4.6.1 2.4.6.2

Objective ......................................................................................... 2-27 Project Development ...................................................................... 2-27

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2.1 — STIP PROCESS ............................................................................................. 2-3 FIGURE 2.2 — FUNDING TYPE BASED ON ROUTE CLASSIFICATION ............................. 2-5 FIGURE 2.3 — OVERALL DTIMS PROCESS ........................................................................ 2-7 FIGURE 2.4 — PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ........................................................ 2-10 FIGURE 2.5 — STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES ...................................................... 2-14 FIGURE 2.6 — FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE BRIDGES ....................................................... 2-15 FIGURE 2.7 — CRITICALITY SCORING (AADT) ................................................................... 2-17 FIGURE 2.8 — CRITICALITY SCORING (SIGNIFICANCE FACTOR) ................................... 2-17 FIGURE 2.9 — CRITICALITY SCORING (TIME TO RESTORE — DELAY FACTOR)........... 2-18 FIGURE 2.10 — PRIORITIZATION PROCESS ...................................................................... 2-18 2-ii

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

FIGURE 2.11 — BRIDGE PRESERVATION PROGRAM PROCESS ..................................... 2-23 FIGURE 2.12 — BRIDGE PRESERVATION PROGRAM TIMELINE ...................................... 2-24 FIGURE 2.13 — EMERGENCY PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .............................. 2-28

Planning and Programming

2-iii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2-iv

February 2014

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 2 PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING 2.1

SYSTEMS PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING

The Systems Planning and Programming Division is the focal point for UDOT planning activities.

This section presents an overview of planning and programming information.

2.1.1

UDOT Strategic Direction

UDOT develops, and annually updates, the Department Strategic Direction and Performance Measures. The objective is to develop strategies to meet future transportation needs while retaining the current highway system in acceptable condition. To meet this challenge, UDOT focuses on four strategic goals:    

Preserve infrastructure Optimize mobility Zero fatalities (improve safety) Strengthen the economy

The Structures Division annually submits a report on the overall condition of bridges (i.e., good, fair, poor) to the UDOT Director/Deputy Director. The performance measures are based on bridge condition.

2.1.2

Statewide Transportation Improvement Program

The UDOT STIP is a five year plan of highway and transit projects for the state of Utah. The STIP includes transportation projects on the state, city and county highway system, and projects in the national parks, national forests and Indian reservations. The projects use various federal and state funding sources; see Section 2.1.4.

The STIP serves two basic purposes: 



Documents state compliance with the requirements of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), which provides the basis for approval of federal aid highway and transit funds by FHWA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Serves as the UDOT work plan for the development of projects through conception, environmental studies, right of way acquisition, planning, design and advertising for construction for all sources of funds

The STIP is sorted by Region or county. The STIP includes information such as Project Identification Number (PIN), project number, route, beginning mile post, length of project,

Planning and Programming

2-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

programmed funding shown over the length of the project, concept description and funding source(s).

The Structures Division evaluates bridge programs on an annual basis as part of the overall STIP process. See Section 2.4 for more discussion.

The Regions, in coordination with the Structures Division, compile a list of projects to complete with estimated budgets and schedules. Projects are selected and added to the STIP recommendations. The Transportation Commission and FHWA approve the STIP. The Bridge Program Manager identifies a federal or state funding source, assigns the PIN and originates the project in Electronic Program Management (ePM). The Systems Planning and Programming Division applies funding, assigns a project number and assigns a Charge Identification Number (CID).

2.1.3

STIP Timeline

The planning and programming process begins in February for the state fiscal year beginning the following July 1 and the federal fiscal year beginning the following October 1. For example, the process began in February 2010 for FY 2012. State FY 2012 began on July 1, 2011.

Federal FY 2012 began on October 1, 2011.

The STIP timeline is defined in the Asset Management Manual of Instruction and the Pavement Preservation Manual. The process incorporates Region workshops followed by a statewide workshop in April to prioritize and determine funding for upcoming projects. The Bridge Management Engineer and Bridge Program Manager attend the Region and statewide STIP workshops and summarize the proposed bridge programs. See Figure 2.1 for the full STIP process. See Section 2.3 for further discussion on the planning process by the Structures Division. In particular, Figure 2.6 graphically presents the timeline for the bridge preservation program process.

The timing and availability of funds is coordinated through the Systems Planning and Programming Division for both the preservation and rehabilitation/replacement programs. State and federal funds can be expended on the first day of the respective fiscal year.

2.1.4

Funding Sources

2.1.4.1

Definitions

Section 1.2 contains a complete list of definitions. The following definitions apply to funding sources: 1.

2-2

Federal Aid Highway. Highways on the Federal Aid Highway System (the National Highway System and the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways) and all other public roads not classified as local roads or rural minor collectors.

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.1 — STIP PROCESS

2.

National Highway System. Consists of roadways important to the nation’s economy, defense and mobility. The National Highway System (NHS) includes the following subsystem of roadways — interstate, other principal arterials, strategic highway network, major strategic highway network connectors and intermodal connectors.

3.

State Highway. A public road owned by a state agency.

4.

National Highway Performance Program. A federal aid transportation program to provide support for the condition and performance of the NHS, provide support for the construction of new facilities on the NHS and ensure that the investments of federal aid funds in highway construction are directed to support progress toward the achievement of performance targets established in a state’s asset management plan for the NHS.

5.

Surface Transportation Program. A federal aid transportation program to provide flexible funding that can be used by the states and localities for projects to preserve and improve the condition and performance on any federal aid highway, bridge or tunnel project on any road, pedestrian or bicycle infrastructure or transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals.

Planning and Programming

2-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.1.4.2

February 2014

Federal Funding — MAP-21

FHWA funds can be expended for replacement, rehabilitation, seismic retrofit, systematic preservation, scour countermeasures, inspection, training and administration and application of anti-icing or de-icing compositions to highway bridges on and off federal aid highways.

In 2012, MAP-21 became law. MAP-21 consolidated several FHWA funding programs, including the Highway Bridge Program, into the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP). The cornerstone of the MAP-21 highway program transformation is the transition to a performance and outcome based federal aid program. States will invest resources in projects to achieve individual targets that collectively make progress toward national goals.

For bridges, the US Secretary of Transportation, in consultation with States, MPOs and other stakeholders, will establish performance measures for bridge conditions. States (and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPOs), where applicable) will set performance targets in support of those measures, and state and metropolitan plans will describe how program and project selection will help achieve the targets.

MAP-21 establishes a performance basis for maintaining and improving the NHS: 





States are required to develop a risk and performance based asset management plan for the NHS to improve or preserve asset condition and system performance; the plan development process must be reviewed and recertified at least every four years.

The Secretary will establish performance measures for interstate and NHS pavements, NHS bridge conditions and interstate and NHS system performance. States will establish targets for these measures to be periodically updated.

MAP-21 requires minimum standards for conditions of interstate pavements and NHS bridges by requiring a state to devote resources to improve the condition until the established minimum is exceeded. MAP-21 establishes the minimum standards for NHS bridge conditions – if more than 10 percent of the total deck area of NHS bridges in a state is on structurally deficient bridges, the state must devote a portion (50 percent of the 2009 Highway Bridge Program apportionment) of NHPP funds to improve bridge conditions.

A portion of state STP funds (equal to 15 percent of the state fiscal year (FY) 2009 Highway Bridge Program apportionment) must be set aside for local bridges not on federal aid highways (local off system bridges), unless FHWA determines that the state has insufficient needs to justify this amount.

See Figure 2.2 for a general overview to which route classifications NHPP and STP funds can be applied.

2-4

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.2 — FUNDING TYPE BASED ON ROUTE CLASSIFICATION

2.1.4.3

State Funding

The state collects revenue for highway and bridge work from several sources, including:    

State user fees State sales and use tax earmarks General fund appropriations Local option sales and use taxes and fees

UDOT state funding is used for two basic purposes:  

To match federal aid funds For 100% state funded capital projects and maintenance

2.2

BRIDGE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The BMS is a collection of tools used for managing the full inventory of bridges in the state. The BMS is a component of the Department asset management program that prioritizes projects based on the strategic direction. The BMS and asset management program assist the planning and programming process by: Planning and Programming

2-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

  

February 2014

Improving decision making, supported by policies, performance based goals, performance measures and appropriate maintenance levels Basing decisions on accurate data, engineering and economic analyses Providing a long term view of assets

The BMS includes an inventory and condition database, decision support software and additional tools for project prioritization and program development. Each component supports the decision making process; it does not render a decision. No ranking system can entirely reflect all project attributes. The process assists the Department, Structures Division and Transportation Commission by prioritizing projects in an approximate order of importance.

This section discusses various tools that combine to make up the BMS.

2.2.1

Asset Management System

Asset management is not simply a set of computer tools that enable the economic analysis of assets within and across all asset groups but, rather, a broad based business approach to managing assets that links UDOT actions to specific measurable goals and objectives.

Decision support software assists decision makers in achieving the strategic transportation goals and objectives.

The UDOT Strategic Highway Transportation Asset Management Implementation project (completed in 2006) concentrates on the implementation of an asset management system, allowing for cross asset analysis and optimization across funding groups (e.g., pavement, bridge, safety, maintenance, mobility). One of the project outcomes was to establish Transportation Asset Management Team (TRANSMAT), which includes senior leaders, members from the Asset Management Division and the asset groups (e.g., the Structures Division). TRANSMAT oversees and approves asset management activities and initiatives within UDOT. Senior leaders and Region Directors meet quarterly to discuss policy, procedures and processes related to pavement/bridge management, performance measures, targets and goals.

AMS analyzes condition data and deterioration curves for various assets to determine treatment strategies that provide the most benefit to the system as a whole. Asset Management System (AMS) estimates future asset conditions based on selected funding levels and optimized treatment strategies. The information is presented to TRANSMAT and the Transportation Commission to support decision making for asset and Region funding levels.

2.2.2 2.2.2.1

Deighton Total Infrastructure Management System Overview

The Asset Management Division uses the dTIMS modeling system for AMS analysis. The system is decision support software for making consistent, accurate and informed decisions for the life cycle of assets. dTIMS is an integrated approach with multiple inputs and a series of complex tradeoff decisions to optimize the overall system condition with the available funding.

2-6

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The dTIMS system provides the flexibility to continuously make adjustments to the process and to respond to changes in how the Department wants to do business.

The model is primarily used to forecast the future condition with a given funding scenario, and to suggest the set of treatment strategies that provide the highest overall benefit to the system condition. This can be performed for the full statewide system or for a Region level subsystem.

The Asset Management Division uses dTIMS to produce a list of bridge preservation/ rehabilitation/replacement projects, which is submitted to the Structures Division. See Section 2.3 for more discussion.

The model is configured at several levels to reflect the asset management strategy, considering:      

Bridge component Deterioration rates Condition data Treatments based on condition level Costs of the treatments Resulting change in condition from the selected treatment

Figure 2.3 illustrates the overall process.

Figure 2.3 — OVERALL dTIMS PROCESS

Planning and Programming

2-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.2.2.2

February 2014

Data Collection

Three types of data are imported into dTIMS from the bridge inventory database:   

Bridge construction history provides the year/age for the last repair work completed and last major rehabilitation for each structure.

Bridge inventory data provides information on the structure type, number of lanes, functional classification and administrative items.

Bridge condition data provides information on the physical condition of the bridge.

2.2.2.3

Analysis

dTIMS integrates the bridge condition data with the bridge inventory and construction history data. The system analyzes the data for each bridge and recommends treatments that provide the greatest benefit to the bridge system as a whole. The model analyzes an unlimited number of scenarios for the statewide network or for each Region, including:   

Predicting future network or bridge condition at various funding levels Identifying the funding required to maintain the network in a status quo condition or the funding needed for various condition levels Recommending candidate preservation, rehabilitation and replacement projects based on a given funding level

The model recommends the optimum preservation, rehabilitation or replacement treatment for each bridge based on the available funding. The Asset Management Division provides the recommendations to the Structures Division to help develop the structure projects for the STIP. The Structures Division, in coordination with the Regions, uses the condition data, dTIMS recommendations and Structures Division prioritization to develop annual bridge preservation and rehabilitation/replacement programs; see Section 2.3.

2.2.3 2.2.3.1

AASHTOWare Bridge Management Description

AASHTOWare Bridge Management (formerly Pontis) is bridge management software that records bridge inventory and inspection data, develops optimal preservation recommendations, simulates conditions, generates work candidates and, ultimately, develops a bridge program.

Originally developed for FHWA, AASHTOWare Bridge Management is now owned by AASHTO and is one component of the AASHTOWare Bridge Suite.

AASHTOWare Bridge Management represents a bridge as a set of structural elements. For each element, the user can specify owner specific feasible actions, costs and deterioration rates.

AASHTOWare Bridge Management can recommend the optimal work candidates for each element based on the bridge specific data.

2-8

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.2.3.2

February 2014

Application

The Bridge Management Division uses AASHTOWare Bridge Management for:   

Storage of bridge inventory data Information collected from bridge inspections Bridge maintenance recommendations to Region maintenance stations

The Bridge Management Division does not currently use the analysis functionality of AASHTOWare Bridge Management. The AASHTOWare database of bridge inventory and condition data is imported into dTIMS for analysis to develop project and program recommendations.

2.3

STRUCTURES DIVISION PLANNING PROCESS

2.3.1

General

2.3.1.1

Objectives

UDOT strives to maintain a safe transportation system by managing the bridge infrastructure.

The Structures Division is responsible for delivering the bridge program for major and minor projects. The basic objectives are to:  

Address the needs of the existing, in service bridge inventory Prioritize the use of the available funds

The Structures Division evaluates bridge programs on an annual basis as part of the overall STIP process and more frequently if needed. This section discusses the internal planning process within the Structures Division for the following programs:     

Bridge rehabilitation/replacement Bridge preservation Bridge scour In service bridge requests* Bridge emergencies* *As required

The Bridge Management Division prioritizes bridges in need within each of the first three bridge programs. After review, evaluation and revision by the Bridge Management Team (BMT), the Structures Division approves the programs and coordinates with the Regions and the Systems Planning and Programming Division. Figure 2.4 presents the project development process with respect to the Structures Division.

Planning and Programming

2-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.4 — PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 2-10

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.3.1.2

February 2014

Definitions

Section 1.2 contains a complete list of definitions. The following definitions apply to the type of bridge work: 1.

Bridge Preservation. Actions or strategies that prevent, delay or reduce deterioration of bridges or bridge elements, restore the function of existing bridges, keep bridges in good condition and extend bridge life. Preservation actions can be preventive or condition driven.

2.

Bridge Rehabilitation. Work required to restore the structural integrity or correct safety deficiencies.

3.

Bridge Replacement. Total replacement of a bridge with a new facility constructed in the same general traffic corridor. The replacement structure must meet the current geometric, material and structural standards required for the types and volume of projected traffic on the facility over the design life.

2.3.1.3

Bridge Management Team

The BMT includes:   

Chief Structural Engineer Bridge Management Engineer Structures Design Manager

The primary functions of the BMT are to: 

   

Meet quarterly to: ○ Discuss and update the rehabilitation/replacement list ○ Discuss and prioritize the bridge program lists Determine participation in established Region projects (i.e., Orange and Purple Book projects) Identify candidate stand alone bridge projects Develop the bridge replacement program of projects for the next five years Reach consensus on the bridge preservation and scour programs for the next fiscal year

2.3.1.4

Rehabilitation/Replacement List

The rehabilitation/replacement list is a tool that the Bridge Planning Engineer maintains and the BMT uses to prioritize each state owned and, in some cases, local government owned bridge for rehabilitation or replacement projects. The goal of the tool is to provide a reliable, data driven process to evaluate each structure. The prioritization methods attempt to minimize subjectivity by using structural characteristics and biennial bridge inspection data. The tool uses a systematic process to prioritize each bridge based on the vulnerability (risk) and criticality (importance). The bridges on the list are separated into three primary sections: Planning and Programming

2-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

  

February 2014

All bridges eligible for NHPP funds State owned bridges not eligible for NHPP funds Local owned bridges on the federal aid highway system but not eligible for NHPP funds

The list also identifies bridges that have already been programmed for work.

The list documents the bridge identification and location, funding status, funding type required and anticipated scope of work (e.g., deck rehabilitation, bridge replacement).

The Bridge Planning Engineer must evaluate the list, compare the list to the plan for every structure and develop Scope and Estimate (S&E) reports as applicable. The Bridge Planning Engineer also updates the plan for every structure to align with the S&E reports.

The Bridge Program Manager coordinates with the Systems Planning and Programming Division as proposed projects are approved by the BMT. Refer to Section 2.3.3 for the bridge program prioritization process.

2.3.1.5

Scope and Estimate Report

The Bridge Planning Group develops an S&E report for the:    

Top 30 bridges from the rehabilitation/replacement list (for bridge rehabilitation/ replacement program); see Section 2.4.2 Proposed bridges on the draft bridge preservation program; see Section 2.4.3 Proposed bridges on the bridge scour program; see Section 2.4.4 In service bridge requests (as required); see Section 2.4.5

Chapter 2 of the Structures Design and Detailing Manual (SDDM) discusses the content and format for the S&E report. The report defines the project scope and develops a preliminary cost estimate; Chapter 4 of the SDDM discusses cost estimates. The development of the S&E report involves the following tasks:    

Compile and review the structure information Conduct a desk audit or field review of the bridge Complete the S&E report Submit the report to the Bridge Management Engineer

After a scoping review meeting with the Bridge Management Engineer, the Bridge Planning Group completes the S&E report and submits the report to the Bridge Management Engineer before requesting the BMT approval.

The Bridge Planning Engineer ensures that QC procedures are followed and that all documents are complete. This includes both the standard UDOT QC/QA procedures and the Structures Division QC/QA procedures, as documented in Chapter 5 of the SDDM. The Bridge Management Engineer conducts the QA review based on standard procedures and Chapter 5 of the SDDM.

2-12

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.3.1.6

February 2014

Project Delivery

The Structures Design Manager assigns the Structures Design Lead, designers and drafters, as required, to advance the project through the delivery process. The Structures Design Lead follows the standard Project Delivery Network, Orange Book or Purple Book process to deliver the project. For projects in each bridge program, the Structures Design Lead identifies the activities within the Project Delivery Network that apply to each project (e.g., geotechnical, hydraulics, environmental).

After accepting the structural documentation package, the Structures Design Manager sends all applicable files to the Bridge Database Coordinator. During construction, the Structures Design Manager sends all project submittals (e.g., working drawings, as built plans) to the Bridge Database Coordinator to ensure that the necessary items are filed in the bridge file. At construction completion, the Bridge Management Engineer assigns a bridge inspection team to perform an initial bridge inspection and update the bridge inventory database.

2.3.1.7

Project Closeout

At construction completion, the Region Project Manager closes out the project and coordinates all funding aspects with the Bridge Program Manager and the Systems Planning and Programming Division.

2.3.2

Bridge Condition

2.3.2.1

Sufficiency Rating

UDOT submits to FHWA the Structure Inventory and Appraisal (SI&A) data based on bridge inspections. The Sufficiency Rating (SR) is based on SI&A data and is calculated for each bridge. The SR is based on a 0 to 100 scale (100 being best), and is calculated using a formula that incorporates four factors:    

Structural adequacy and safety (55%) Serviceability and functional obsolescence (30%) Essentiality for public use (15%) Special reductions (up to 13%)

2.3.2.2

Structural Deficiency

A bridge can be a candidate to be classified as structurally deficient (SD) if the bridge:   

Is in relatively poor condition due to deterioration Has insufficient load carrying capacity (whether due to the bridge being of older design or due to deterioration) Frequently floods, causing significant traffic delays

Planning and Programming

2-13

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

FHWA numerically defines SD as follows: 

A bridge component (e.g., deck, superstructure, substructure, culvert) with a NBI condition rating of 4 or less (poor condition) OR Structural evaluation or waterway adequacy rated a National Bridge Inventory (NBI) 2 or less (a bridge with a very low load rating capacity or a bridge that is subject to overtopping with significant or severe traffic delays)



For a structure to be considered SD, one of the following in Figure 2.5 must be true: NBI Condition Ratings NBI Item # Element Rating

58

59

Deck 4

60

Superstructure Substructure 4

Appraisal Ratings 62

67

71

Culvert

Structural condition

Waterway adequacy

4

2

2

4

Figure 2.5 — STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT BRIDGES

SD bridges can require significant maintenance attention, rehabilitation or replacement. SD bridges can require load posting; see Chapter 4. However, the classification of a bridge as structurally deficient does not usually mean that the bridge is in danger of collapse or that the bridge is unsafe.

2.3.2.3

Functional Obsolescence

Bridges are considered functionally obsolete (FO) when the deck geometry, load carrying capacity (e.g., comparison of the original design load to the current state legal load), clearance or approach roadway alignment no longer meet the usual criteria for the system for which the bridge is an integral part. FO means that the bridge was built to standards that are not used today. Examples of characteristics leading to a FO classification are:     

Low load carrying capacity Low waterway adequacy Deck geometry (i.e., insufficient deck roadway width) Insufficient horizontal and vertical clearances Poor approach roadway alignment

For a structure to be considered FO, one of the following in Figure 2.6 must be true:

2-14

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appraisal Ratings NBI Item # Element

67

71

68

69

Structural condition

Waterway adequacy

Deck geometry

Underclearances

3

3

3

3

Rating

72 Approach roadway alignment 3

Figure 2.6 — FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE BRIDGES

2.3.2.4

Bridge Health Index

The BHI is a measure to describe the overall condition of each bridge and is used as a tracking and planning tool. The BHI is calculated at the element level as a ratio of the value of the bridge in the bridge’s current condition to the value of the bridge in the best possible condition. A health index of an individual element is calculated as follows:

He 

 sk s qs  s qs

He s qs ks

= = = =

Where: health index of the individual element index of the condition state element quantity in sth state health index coefficient corresponding to the sth condition state

And:   

Elements with 5 condition states — k1 = 1, k2 = 0.75, k3 = 0.5, k4 = 0.25, k5 = 0 Elements with 4 condition states — k1 = 1, k2 = 0.66, k3 = 0.33, k4 = 0 Elements with 3 condition states — k1 = 1, k2 = 0.5, k3 = 0

The BHI of an entire bridge is calculated as a weighted average of the health indices of the bridge elements, where elements are weighted by the total quantity of the element and relative importance: BHI 

 eH e Q e We  e Q e We

Where: e Qe We

= = =

index of an element total quantity of the element e on the bridge weighting factor of the element e

Planning and Programming

2-15

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The BHI assigns weighting factors to each element depending on the relative importance of the element to the rest of the structure. The factors are the product of the element weight and element unit replacement costs.

2.3.3

Bridge Program Prioritization Process

2.3.3.1

Definitions

Section 1.2 contains a complete list of definitions. prioritization:

The following definitions apply to

1.

Importance Factors (AADT, Significance and Bridge Length). Measures the functional and operational significance of the bridge for a specific area of need. Factors are scored based on the perspective of the consequences incurred if the bridge is out of service.

2.

Criticality Score. Reflects the overall numerical value of the importance of the bridge based on a summation of the individual scores of each importance factor.

3.

Vulnerability Score. Measures the overall risk of a structure based on the structure’s physical condition of the structure.

2.3.3.2

Prioritization

The prioritization of structures based on vulnerability and criticality is primarily intended to identify candidates for rehabilitation or replacement. The prioritization method is not intended to identify candidates for other bridge programs. The bridge data used for prioritization is directly from the BMS to ensure that all condition and load rating data are current. Figure 2.10 graphically illustrates the prioritization process.

Quantifying structure vulnerability is the first stage of prioritization. Vulnerability measures the physical condition and load carrying capacity for each structure. The physical condition of the structure is captured by the BHI, and the load carrying capacity is defined by the operating load rating. Rehabilitating or replacing deficient structures is a high priority. Therefore, deficient structures are only eligible to receive half of the calculated BHI score. Vulnerability scoring is fully described in Section 2.3.3.3.

The second stage of prioritization is to quantify the criticality, or importance, of the structure.

Criticality is determined by measuring three distinct parameters: AADT, bypass length and bridge length. Criticality is intended to further prioritize structures of similar vulnerability, but is bypassed in the procedure when structure vulnerability becomes significant. Any structure with an NBI rating of 3 or less, or an operational load rating of 0.5 or less, has the highest priority and is not ranked on criticality.

2-16

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.3.3.3

February 2014

Vulnerability Scoring

A vulnerability score is assigned to each bridge using a summation of the following:  

BHI Score: Operating Load Rating Score: Total:

75 pts max 25 pts max 100 pts max

Vulnerability Score = 0.75(BHI) + LRS The LRS is directly dependent on the controlling operating load rating for each structure. A structure with an operating load rating (LR) equal to or greater than 1.0 receives a LRS of 25. A structure with an LR equal to or less than 0.3 receives a LRS of 0. For structures with a LR between 0.3 and 1.0, a linear reduction of LRS is given based on the following: LRS = (LR – 0.3) / 0.028

2.3.3.4

Criticality Scoring

A criticality score for each bridge is assigned using a summation of the individual scores of each importance factor.

2.3.3.4.1

Average Annual Daily Traffic Factor

The AADT is the volume of traffic on a route annualized to a daily average. The AADT for the bridge is measured for the route the bridge carries.

Do not consider the route crossed (intersected).

AADT values for specific routes are generated by the Systems Planning and Programming Division and are available in the bridge database. See Figure 2.7.

AADT

Score

Nontraffic 1 – 124 125 – 249 250 – 499 500 – 999 1000 – 1999 2000 – 2999 3000 – 4999 5000 – 9999 10,000 – 19,999 20,000 – 49,000 50,000 – 99,999 100,000 – above

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36

Figure 2.7 — CRITICALITY SCORING (AADT)

2.3.3.4.2

Significance Factor

The significance factor is a score determined by the length to bypass an out of service bridge. Large bypass lengths can be indicative of the importance of the bridge to any particular community. This helps to ensure that bridges on routes with relatively low AADT are not overlooked when being compared to bridges on high AADT routes. See Figure 2.8.

Planning and Programming

Impact

Bypass Length Score

No direct impact Less than 1 mi 1 – 4.9 mi Minimal (local or regional) 5 – 14.9 mi Moderate (local or regional) 15 – 24.9 mi Significant (local or regional) 25 – 34.9 mi Severe (statewide) Extreme (regional or national) More than 35 mi

2 8 16 24 32 36

Figure 2.8 — CRITICALITY SCORING (Significance Factor) 2-17

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.3.3.4.3

Time to Restore – Delay Factor

The time to restore is a measure of the cost of downtime from not having a bridge in service.

Do not use the actual time to replace the bridge.

The measure assumes the time to replace is a function of overall bridge length. See Figure 2.9.

February 2014

Overall Bridge Length

Score

 20′ > 20′, but  60′ > 60′, but  150′ > 150′, but  200′ > 200′

0 7 14 21 28

Figure 2.9 — CRITICALITY SCORING (Time to Restore — Delay Factor)

Figure 2.10 — PRIORITIZATION PROCESS

2-18

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.4

February 2014

BRIDGE PROGRAMS

2.4.1

Program Funding Allocation

This section briefly summarizes the bridge programs.

The Structures Division maintains a prioritized program of bridge preservation, rehabilitation and replacement needs. Bridge preservation projects can be either stand alone projects or bridge preservation activities combined with established Region projects (i.e., Orange/Purple Books).

Bridge funds can be added to established Region projects to fund the bridge items of work. See Section 2.3 for further discussion.

2.4.1.1

Color Coding

UDOT uses the following color coded system to identify the types of projects: 

     

Green (state)/Blue (federal) – New construction, reconstruction, major rehabilitation, minor rehabilitation with complications, widening, operational safety spot improvement, bike trails, park and ride, landscaping and enhancement Orange – Contractual pavement preventative maintenance Green – Bridge preservation Red – Operational safety spot improvement Green – Advanced transportation management system (ATMS) Purple (federal only) – Minor pavement preservation without complications Yellow – Bridge emergency

2.4.1.2

Orange Book Program

The Orange Book program is designated funding for preservation projects. The projects provide cost effective treatments to the existing highway system that preserve the system but do not substantially increase structural capacity. Each Region provides a prioritized list of eligible projects based on dTIMS recommendations and annual Region inspections. The Systems Planning and Programming Division distributes available funds to the Regions according to priority. The Transportation Commission approves the Orange Book program on a program level, rather than on an individual project level. The hard surface maintenance portion of the program is limited to preventive maintenance, routine maintenance and minor corrective maintenance. The program does not include rehabilitation or reconstruction type projects. See the Orange Book Requirements to Enhance the Effectiveness of UDOT’s Pavement Preservation Program Considering a Balanced Perspective for additional information and requirements.

When a bridge is within the project limits, the Region Pavement Management Team (PMT) requests a S&E report from the Structures Division before moving an Orange Book project into a funded year. The report identifies the rehabilitation needs of all bridges within the project Planning and Programming

2-19

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

limits. The S&E report typically limits the bridge work to pothole patching, concrete sealant and wearing surface placement/replacement, but occasionally includes minor structure repairs (e.g., joints, deck drains, touch up paint). Orange Book projects do not normally include bridge deck replacements. The BMT determines if structures funding is added to the project to cover structural work items before the Transportation Commission approval of the program. See Section 2.4.3 for more discussion.

2.4.1.3

Purple Book Program

The Purple Book program designates funding for rehabilitation projects, which are more extensive than the Orange Book preservation projects, but still within the existing right of way.

Each Region provides a prioritized list of eligible projects (typically, 10 to 15 each year), based on dTIMS recommendations and annual Region inspections. The Systems Planning and Programming Division distributes available funds to individual projects according to priority. The prioritized list is provided to the Transportation Commission for review and approval. The Purple Book program is intended to provide timely, cost effective rehabilitation treatments. The scope of the projects is intentionally limited to addressing only the pavement surface or bridge deck. Work items are limited to pavement resurfacing and rehabilitation and other work that is necessitated by the resurfacing. See the Purple Book Scoping and Development Process Guidelines for additional information.

When a bridge is within the project limits, the Region PMT requests a S&E report from the Structures Division before moving a Purple Book project into a funded year. The report identifies the rehabilitation needs of all bridges within the project limits. The S&E report typically limits the bridge work to pothole patching, concrete sealant and wearing surface placement/replacement, but occasionally includes minor structure repairs (e.g., joints, deck drains, touch up paint). Purple Book projects do not normally include bridge deck replacements.

The BMT determines if structures funding is added to the project to cover structural work items before the Transportation Commission approval of the individual projects. See Section 2.4.3 for more discussion.

2.4.1.4

Blue/Green Book Program

The Blue/Green Book program is the traditional construction/reconstruction project program.

The types of projects include full-depth pavement reconstruction, widening projects, bridge replacements and major rehabilitation, capacity projects and projects on new location.

Blue Book projects are typically large, multidisciplinary projects that require a concept report. If bridges are included in the project, the Structures Division is represented on the multidisciplinary team. The Region or the Structures Division can initiate a Blue Book project.

See Chapter 2 in the SDDM for a discussion on concept reports. See Section 2.4.2 for more discussion.

2-20

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

2.4.2

February 2014

Bridge Rehabilitation/Replacement Program

2.4.2.1

Objective

The Structures Division prioritizes projects from the rehabilitation/replacement list; see Section 2.3.1.4 for the bridge rehabilitation/replacement program based on Section 2.3.3.

2.4.2.2

Program Development

The Structures Division develops the bridge rehabilitation/replacement program based on the following process: 1.

Initial Prioritization. The Bridge Planning Engineer prepares the initial list of candidate projects. The Bridge Planning Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Management Engineer and Bridge Inspection Engineer to evaluate the bridge inspection records and identify bridge rehabilitation/replacement needs. Section 2.3 discusses the factors considered in the initial prioritization.

2.

Coordination with Region Projects. The Bridge Program Manager coordinates with the Regions through the STIP process. See Section 2.1. The Bridge Program Manager compares the initial list of bridge rehabilitation/replacement projects to the proposed Region projects and the long range plan to identify overlapping projects with the potential to be combined.

3.

Draft Bridge Rehabilitation/Replacement Program. The Asset Management Division provides bridge rehabilitation/replacement recommendations from dTIMS. The Bridge Planning Engineer compares the list from the Asset Management Division to the initial prioritized list of candidate bridge rehabilitation/replacement projects. At a quarterly meeting, the BMT reviews and adopts the draft program of bridge rehabilitation/ replacement projects for implementation in the next funded year, four years out. Bridge projects from the rehabilitation/replacement list that are not funded (i.e., years five and forward) are in the queue for inclusion in the rolling four year program The Bridge Program Manager develops the draft program considering the:   

Structures Division initial list of candidate bridge rehabilitation/replacement projects Output from dTIMS; see Section 2.2.2 Proposed Region projects and the long range plan

4.

S&E Report. The Bridge Planning Engineer oversees the development of the S&E reports in accordance with Section 2.3.1.5.

5.

Final Bridge Rehabilitation/Replacement Program. After the S&E reports are developed, the BMT meets and finalizes the list of bridge rehabilitation/replacement projects.

Planning and Programming

2-21

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

6.

Program Development. The Bridge Program Manager sets up ePM for stand alone bridge rehabilitation/replacement projects and coordinates with the Regions. For the Regions, the Bridge Program Manager:  

7.

February 2014

Summarizes the project information for the Region STIP workshops; see Section 2.1.2 Coordinates with the Region Program Manager to assign a Region Project Manager to each project

Project Delivery. The project moves into the project delivery phase.

2.4.3

Bridge Preservation Program

2.4.3.1

Objective

The objective of the bridge preservation program is to maintain and preserve the state bridges.

Bridge preservation projects include stand alone projects or bridge preservation activities combined with established Region projects.

Preservation activities, such as rehabilitating bridge decks and routine maintenance, aid in extending the life of a bridge for relatively limited cost; inaction can increase the rate of bridge deterioration, reduce the bridge life expectancy and require major bridge rehabilitation or replacement at a much higher cost. This is consistent with the UDOT approach to asset preservation that Good Roads Cost Less.

2.4.3.2

Program Development

Figure 2.11 presents the bridge preservation program process. Figure 2.12 presents the process timeline. The Structures Division develops the bridge preservation program based on the following process: 1.

Initial Prioritization. The Bridge Planning Engineer prepares the initial list of candidate projects. The Bridge Planning Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Management Engineer and Bridge Inspection Engineer to evaluate the bridge inspection records and identify bridge preservation needs. Section 2.3 discusses the factors considered in the initial prioritization.

2.

Coordination with Region Projects. The Bridge Planning Engineer obtains the proposed list of Region preservation and rehabilitation projects (Orange and Purple Books) from the Region Program Managers or PMT. See Section 2.4.1 for Orange and Purple Book program development. The Bridge Planning Engineer compares the initial list of bridge preservation projects to the proposed Region projects to identify overlapping projects with the potential to be combined.

2-22

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.11 — BRIDGE PRESERVATION PROGRAM PROCESS Planning and Programming

2-23

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.12 — BRIDGE PRESERVATION PROGRAM TIMELINE 2-24

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.

February 2014

Draft Bridge Preservation Program. The Asset Management Division provides bridge preservation recommendations from dTIMS. The Bridge Planning Engineer compares the list from the Asset Management Division to the initial prioritized list of candidate bridge preservation projects. At a quarterly meeting, the BMT reviews and adopts the draft program of bridge preservation projects for implementation during the next fiscal year.

The Bridge Planning Engineer develops the draft program considering the:   

Structures Division initial list of candidate bridge preservation projects Output from dTIMS; see Section 2.2.2 Orange/Purple Book proposed projects

4.

S&E Report. The Bridge Planning Engineer oversees the development of the S&E reports in accordance with Section 2.3.1.5.

5.

Final Bridge Preservation Program. After the S&E reports are developed, the BMT meets and finalizes the list of bridge preservation projects.

6.

Program Development. The Bridge Program Manager sets up ePM for stand alone bridge preservation projects and coordinates with the Regions. For the Regions, the Bridge Program Manager:  

7.

Summarizes the project information for the Region STIP workshops; see Section 2.1.2 Coordinates with the Region Program Manager to assign a Region Project Manager to each project

Project Delivery. The project moves into the project delivery phase.

2.4.4

Bridge Scour Program

2.4.4.1

Objective

Scour critical bridges are structures with abutment or bent foundations with a scour code NBI rating of three or less. Bridges rated as scour critical have a POA document that identifies bridge specific deficiencies, provides recommended countermeasures and describes instructions for monitoring the structure during and after a flood event. The Hydraulics Engineer updates scour POAs when significant site condition changes are observed during the bridge inspection.

2.4.4.2

Program Development

The Structures Division develops the bridge scour program based on the following process: 1.

Initial Prioritization. The Bridge Planning Engineer develops a list of scour critical bridges with input from the Hydraulics Engineer. The list is based on the rating for NBI

Planning and Programming

2-25

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Item 113 for the scour vulnerability of each bridge, from the POAs and from the bridge inspection reports. The list includes the top 50 bridges, and each bridge is classified as high, medium or low risk.

2.

Draft Bridge Scour Program. The BMT and Hydraulics Engineer develop the bridge scour program during a quarterly meeting.

3.

S&E Report. The Bridge Planning Engineer oversees the development of the S&E reports in accordance with Section 2.3.1.5.

4.

Final Bridge Scour Program. After the S&E reports are developed, the BMT meets and finalizes the list of bridge scour projects.

5.

Program Development. The Bridge Program Manager sets up ePM for stand alone bridge scour projects and coordinates with the Regions. For the Regions, the Bridge Program Manager:  

6.

Summarizes the project information for the Region STIP workshops; see Section 2.1.2 Coordinates with the Region Program Manager to assign a Region Project Manager to each project

Project Delivery. The project moves into the project delivery phase.

2.4.5

In Service Bridge Requests

2.4.5.1

Objective

In service bridge requests provide Region District Engineers and Region maintenance personnel an opportunity to address concerns (e.g., structural integrity) of an in service bridge with the Bridge Management Engineer. The bridges are not currently programmed for any type of preservation, rehabilitation or replacement work. The Regions can use contingency funds for this type of work, or request federal aid or structures funding.

2.4.5.2

Project Development

1.

In Service Bridge Requests. The Bridge Management Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Inspection Engineer to evaluate the condition of the in service bridge and to determine if any action is warranted by the Structures Division. If yes, the Bridge Management Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Program Manager and Structures Design Manager for further action.

2.

S&E Report. The Bridge Planning Engineer oversees the development of the S&E report in accordance with Section 2.3.1.5, if warranted by the Bridge Management Engineer. The Bridge Planning Engineer submits the final S&E report to the appropriate Region contact.

2-26

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.

Final In Service Bridge Request Projects. After the S&E report is developed, the BMT and the Region personnel determine project priority and assign funding if warranted.

4.

Project Development. If the project is funded, the Bridge Program Manager sets up the ePM for stand alone in service bridge request projects and coordinates with the Regions.

5.

Project Delivery. The project moves into the project delivery phase.

2.4.6

Bridge Emergency Program

2.4.6.1

Objective

The objective of the Bridge Emergency Program is to address critical deficiencies in structures due to minor emergency events or severe deterioration. Minor emergency events include structural collisions, flooding and other events that do not affect a widespread area or a large number of bridges. Refer to Chapter 5 for the Structures Division emergency response plan.

Figure 2.13 presents the emergency project development process.

2.4.6.2

Project Development

1.

Bridge Emergency Project. The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator responds to minor emergency events and coordinates with the Bridge Management Engineer and Bridge Program Manager.

2.

Project Development. The Bridge Program Manager sets up ePM for bridge emergency projects and coordinates with the Regions.

3.

Project Delivery. The project moves into the project delivery phase. Bridge repair response times are dependent on the criticality of the bridge and the severity of the damage. The Structures Design Manager coordinates with the Bridge Program Manager and the Region Project Manager and provides the bid contract documents to the Bridge Management Engineer for final approval.

4.

Project Advertisement. If estimated construction costs are less than or equal to $500,000, the Bridge Management Engineer advertises the project through the bridge collision and emergency repair contractor pool. If the estimated construction costs exceed $500,000, the project is advertised through the standard advertising process, in coordination with the Region Project Manager.

5.

Program Funding Reimbursement. After completion of the project and project closeout, the Bridge Program Manager coordinates with the UDOT Risk Management Division and the Comptroller’s Office to recuperate all expenditures due to bridge collisions. All recuperated funds are returned to the Bridge Emergency Program.

Planning and Programming

2-27

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 2.13 — EMERGENCY PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 2-28

Planning and Programming

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.1

GENERAL .................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3

Federal Requirement ..................................................................................... 3-1 National Publications ..................................................................................... 3-1 Types of Structures ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.3.1 3.1.3.2 3.1.3.3 3.1.3.4 3.1.3.5 3.1.3.6 3.1.3.7 3.1.3.8 3.1.3.9 3.1.3.10 3.1.3.11

3.1.4 3.1.5

Coding Bridge Inspection Data ...................................................................... 3-4 Training/Safety .............................................................................................. 3-4 3.1.5.1 3.1.5.2 3.1.5.3

3.1.6

3.2

General ........................................................................................ 3-4 Inspection Certifications ............................................................... 3-5 Safety Training Certification ......................................................... 3-5

Equipment ..................................................................................................... 3-5 3.1.6.1 3.1.6.2

3.1.7

Bridges ......................................................................................... 3-1 Tunnels ........................................................................................ 3-2 Overhead Sign Structures ........................................................... 3-2 Culverts ........................................................................................ 3-2 Lighting Structures ....................................................................... 3-2 Signal Structures ......................................................................... 3-3 Out of Service Bridges ................................................................. 3-3 Retaining Walls ............................................................................ 3-3 Nonhighway Traffic Bridges ......................................................... 3-3 Railroad Bridges .......................................................................... 3-4 Privately Owned Bridges.............................................................. 3-4

Personal Protective Equipment.................................................... 3-5 Operational Equipment Requirements ......................................... 3-5

Traffic Control ................................................................................................ 3-6

BRIDGE INSPECTION ORGANIZATION; QUALIFICATIONS; RESPONSIBILITIES .................................................................................................... 3-6 3.2.1 3.2.2

Bridge Management Division......................................................................... 3-6 Team Leader ................................................................................................. 3-6 3.2.2.1 3.2.2.2

3.2.3

Bridge Management Engineer: Bridge Inspection Program Manager/ Load Rating Program Manager ..................................................................... 3-8 3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2

3.2.4

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-7 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-8

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-8 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-8

Bridge Inspection Engineer ........................................................................... 3-9

Bridge Inspection Program

3-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.4.1 3.2.4.2 3.2.5

Underwater Bridge Inspection Engineer ...................................... 3-12 Underwater Bridge Inspection Diver ............................................ 3-13

INSPECTION TYPE AND FREQUENCY..................................................................... 3-13 3.3.1 3.3.2

3-ii

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-12 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-12

Consultants.................................................................................................... 3-12 3.2.12.1 3.2.12.2

3.3

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-12 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-12

Crane Driver .................................................................................................. 3-12 3.2.11.1 3.2.11.2

3.2.12

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-11 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-11

Crane Operator.............................................................................................. 3-12 3.2.10.1 3.2.10.2

3.2.11

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-11 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-11

Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator................................................ 3-11 3.2.9.1 3.2.9.2

3.2.10

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-10 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-10

Bridge Database Coordinator ........................................................................ 3-11 3.2.8.1 3.2.8.2

3.2.9

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-10 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-10

Bridge Inspector I .......................................................................................... 3-10 3.2.7.1 3.2.7.2

3.2.8

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-9 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-9

Bridge Inspector II ......................................................................................... 3-10 3.2.6.1 3.2.6.2

3.2.7

Qualifications ............................................................................... 3-9 Responsibilities ............................................................................ 3-9

Bridge Inspector III (Supervisor) .................................................................... 3-9 3.2.5.1 3.2.5.2

3.2.6

February 2014

Initial Inspection ............................................................................................. 3-13 Inspection Schedule ...................................................................................... 3-16

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4

February 2014

INSPECTION PROCEDURES ..................................................................................... 3-16 3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3

General .......................................................................................................... 3-16 Bridge Inspection Report ............................................................................... 3-17 Bridge File ..................................................................................................... 3-18 3.4.3.1 3.4.3.2 3.4.3.3

3.4.4

Structure Number .......................................................................................... 3-20 3.4.4.1 3.4.4.2 3.4.4.3

3.4.5 3.4.6 3.4.7 3.4.8 3.4.9 3.4.10 3.4.11 3.4.12 3.4.13 3.4.14 3.4.15 3.4.16 3.4.17 3.4.18 3.4.19

General ........................................................................................ 3-20 State Owned Structures ............................................................... 3-20 Structures Owned By Local Governments ................................... 3-21

Routine Inspections ....................................................................................... 3-21 Underwater Inspections ................................................................................. 3-22 Fracture Critical Member Inspections ............................................................ 3-23 In-Depth Inspections...................................................................................... 3-24 Special Inspections........................................................................................ 3-25 Damage Inspections ...................................................................................... 3-25 Complex Bridge Inspections .......................................................................... 3-25 Critical Findings ............................................................................................. 3-25 Clearances .................................................................................................... 3-26 Railroad Right of Way.................................................................................... 3-26 Load Rating ................................................................................................... 3-27 Posted or Restricted Bridges ......................................................................... 3-27 Channel Cross Section .................................................................................. 3-27 Scour Assessment/Scour Critical Bridges ..................................................... 3-28 Quality Control/Quality Assurance................................................................. 3-29 3.4.19.1 3.4.19.2 3.4.19.3 3.4.19.4 3.4.19.5 3.4.19.6 3.4.19.7 3.4.19.8

Appendix 3A Appendix 3B

General ........................................................................................ 3-18 Bridge Record .............................................................................. 3-18 Inspection Records ...................................................................... 3-19

General ........................................................................................ 3-29 Forms and Lists ........................................................................... 3-36 Field Inspection Quality Control ................................................... 3-37 Bridge Inspection Report Quality Control (Office Review) ........... 3-37 Quality Control Independent Review (Field Evaluation) .............. 3-38 Quality Assurance Review (Office or Field Review) .................... 3-38 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Training ................................. 3-39 Monthly Inspection Quality, Planning and Review Meetings ....... 3-39

FHWA SUPPLEMENTAL GUIDELINES ...................................................... 3-40 MANAGER OF TRACK MAINTENANCE ..................................................... 3-49

Bridge Inspection Program

3-iii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.1 — Figure 3.2 — Figure 3.3 — Figure 3.4 — Figure 3.5 — Figure 3.6 — Figure 3.7 — Figure 3.8 — Figure 3.9 — Figure 3.10 — Figure 3.11 —

3-iv

ORGANIZATION CHART (Bridge Management Division) .............................. 3-7 INSPECTION TYPES AND FREQUENCIES .................................................. 3-14 COLOR CODING SYSTEM ............................................................................ 3-20 STRUCTURE TYPE DESIGNATIONS ........................................................... 3-21 COUNTY NUMBER IDENTIFICATION ........................................................... 3-22 NBI SCOUR RATING PROCESS ................................................................... 3-30 SCOUR DEPTH (NBI Item 113) ..................................................................... 3-31 HIGH FLOW ANGLES .................................................................................... 3-31 LOW FLOW ANGLES ..................................................................................... 3-32 FHWA CODES FOR SCOUR VULNERABILITY AT BRIDGES ..................... 3-33 FHWA CODES (For Culverts and Culvert Like Bridges) ................................ 3-35

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 3 BRIDGE INSPECTION PROGRAM 3.1

GENERAL

3.1.1

Federal Requirement

The CFR requires that State Departments of Transportation develop and monitor a bridge inspection program. The inspection program must meet or exceed the requirements of the NBIS and 23 CFR §650. The CFR requires the inspection of all structures classified as bridges.

The CFR also requires the development of statewide inspection policies and procedures, the development of QC/QA procedures, and the preparation and maintenance of a bridge file.

This chapter assists bridge inspectors in the interpretation and implementation of the procedures and practices within the bridge inspection program.

3.1.2

National Publications

FHWA and AASHTO have published several publications to implement the NBIS. Use these additional publications in conjunction with this chapter: • • • • •

FHWA Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation FHWA Inspection of Fracture Critical Bridge Members FHWA Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual AASHTO Manual for Bridge Element Inspection

3.1.3

Types of Structures

The Bridge Management Division operates, maintains and inspects a variety of structure types.

This section presents the Department’s practices based on the type of structure.

3.1.3.1

Bridges

A bridge is a structure with abutments, a deck and an opening (bridge length) greater than 20 ft measured along the centerline of the feature carried. Section 7.2 provides examples of how to properly determine the bridge length. Structures more than 20 ft in length are subject to the inspection program defined in this chapter. The Bridge Management Division inspects structures less than 20 ft in length on an as needed basis when deterioration is of concern or for project planning.

Bridge Inspection Program

3-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.1.3.2

February 2014

Tunnels

A tunnel is an enclosed roadway with vehicle access that is restricted to portals regardless of type of structure or the method of tunnel construction. Tunnels with a width (span) over 20 ft are subject to the inspection program defined in this chapter.

3.1.3.3

Overhead Sign Structures

Overhead sign structures are structural elements designed to carry signs over the roadway and are attached to designed foundation elements. Roadside signs governed by or similar to the SN series of the standard drawings are not overhead sign structures.

Overhead sign structures do not require inspection under NBIS guidelines. The Structures Division assigns a structure number to all overhead sign structures and maintains design plans in the bridge file. The Structures Division inspects overhead sign structures at the completion of a construction project but does not inspect overhead sign structures as part of the NBIS program. The Structures Division conducts inspections of overhead sign structures on a case by case basis.

3.1.3.4

Culverts

A culvert provides a path under an obstruction. Culverts are usually covered with embankment material, convey water and include a structural floor, although some are supported on footings with an open floor. Buried three sided structures, arches, pipes, boxes, etc., are culverts.

Boxes that carry traffic over the top and are not covered with embankment material are also culverts.

Culverts with a bridge length over 20 ft are classified as bridges. Section 7.2 provides examples of how to properly determine the bridge length. Culverts with a bridge length less than 20 ft do not require inspection under NBIS guidelines. However, other divisions within UDOT (e.g., Asset Management, Maintenance, Hydraulics) can inventory and/or inspect culverts. UDOT can also inspect culverts as part of project planning.

The Structures Division assigns a structure number to all box culverts and maintains design plans in the bridge file. The Structures Division inspects culverts at the completion of a construction project but does not inspect culverts less than 20 ft long as part of the NBIS program. The Structures Division conducts inspections of culverts less than 20 ft long on a case by case basis.

3.1.3.5

Lighting Structures

Normal and high mast lighting structures are structural elements designed for roadway lighting.

Normal and high mast lighting structures and associated foundations are governed by the SL series of the standard drawings. High mast lighting structures and associated foundations are designed elements.

3-2

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Normal or high mast lighting structures do not require inspection under NBIS guidelines. The Structures Division does not assign a structure number to lighting structures nor are design plans maintained in the bridge file. The Structures Division inspects lighting structures at the completion of a construction project, but does not inspect lighting structures as part of the NBIS program. The Structures Division conducts inspections of lighting structures on a case by case basis.

3.1.3.6

Signal Structures

Signal structures are structural elements designed to carry traffic signals over the roadway.

Signal structures and associated foundations are governed by the SL series of the standard drawings.

Signal structures do not require inspection under NBIS guidelines. The Structures Division does not assign a structure number to signal structures nor are design plans maintained in the bridge file. The Structures Division inspects signal structures at the completion of a construction project but does not inspect signal structures as part of the NBIS program. The Structures Division conducts inspections of signal structures on a case by case basis.

3.1.3.7

Out of Service Bridges

The local and state systems include bridges that are out of service. The Structures Division does not inspect out of service bridges under the NBIS inspection program.

3.1.3.8

Retaining Walls

A retaining wall is any type of structure that retains earth. The NBIS does not require the inspection of retaining walls. The Structures Division assigns structure numbers and maintains plan sheets for retaining walls in the bridge file. Retaining walls receive an initial inspection at the completion of a construction project, but do not receive additional inspections as part of the NBIS program.

3.1.3.9

Nonhighway Traffic Bridges

Nonhighway traffic bridges do not carry vehicular traffic. Nonhighway traffic bridges include railroad bridges, pedestrian bridges, wildlife crossings, utility bridges or other structures. The Structures Division assigns a structure number to nonhighway traffic bridges crossing state roads. The Structures Division also assigns structure numbers to nonhighway traffic bridges constructed with state or federal funds.

The NBIS only requires the inspection of highway bridges that carry vehicular traffic loads. The Structures Division does not require NBIS inspections of nonhighway traffic bridges because these structures do not carry vehicular traffic. However, The Structures Division conducts a routine inspection of nonhighway traffic bridges that cross over state highways because they Bridge Inspection Program

3-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

can affect the operation of the highway system. The Structures Division does not inspect nonhighway traffic bridges that cross over local government roadways.

3.1.3.10

Railroad Bridges

Railroad bridges carry heavy rail, light rail and commuter rail over obstructions. The NBIS does not require the inspection of railroad bridges because the bridges do not carry vehicular traffic.

However, The Structures Division inspects railroad bridges that cross over state highways for operational and safety reasons. The Structures Division does not inspect railroad bridges that cross over local government roadways.

Section 3.4.14 discusses procedures related to the inspection of highway bridges over railroads and railroad bridges.

3.1.3.11

Privately Owned Bridges

Inspections for privately owned bridges are the responsibility of the owner. The Structures Division does not inspect privately owned bridges or bridges on private land.

3.1.4

Coding Bridge Inspection Data

FHWA and AASHTO provide rating systems to aid in the inspection of bridges. The two primary rating systems are the NBI rating system and the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Element Inspection. Both rating systems promote uniformity for rating the structural condition of a bridge. Each rating system relates the element distress found at the bridge to the effect on the structure strength and safety. The bridge inspector completes both a NBI and element level assessment of each bridge inspected.

The bridge inspector collects NBI data in accordance with the FHWA Recording and Coding Guide. A NBI inspection evaluates the deck, superstructure, substructure, channel, channel protection and culvert and waterway adequacy for each bridge.

The AASHTO Manual for Bridge Element Inspection describes the element based rating system. An element level inspection identifies each bridge component as a separate element, based not only upon function but also material type. The inspection evaluates each element by subdividing the total quantity into different condition states, or states of physical deterioration or damage.

3.1.5 3.1.5.1

Training/Safety General

The Structures Division requires that the bridge inspection staff receive training as required by 23 CFR ยง650 and relevant UDOT policies. Section 3.2 identifies the training requirements in the list of qualifications. The following provides additional information on training and safety.

3-4

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.1.5.2

February 2014

Inspection Certifications

The Bridge Inspection Program Manager and all bridge inspectors must meet the training and certifications required in 23 CFR §650. This includes participation in a FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course, on the job training and periodic bridge inspection refresher courses. The Bridge Inspection Program Manager and all bridge inspectors are required to participate in the bridge inspection refresher course if their performance is inadequate with respect to the responsibilities within the bridge inspection program. The Bridge Inspection Program Manager evaluates individual bridge inspector performance. Underwater inspection divers complete the FHWA underwater diver bridge inspection training course. Ultrasonic testing inspectors must have Level I inspection training to identify cracks and Level II inspection training to validate the crack.

3.1.5.3

Safety Training Certification

Structure inspections present risks to the inspector. The risks include slips and falls, traffic hazards, water hazards, confined spaces, electrocution, wildlife, noxious plants, bird droppings, equipment hazards and weather exposure. Inspectors attend and remain certified for mandatory training in the following safety areas: • • • • • • • • •

CPR training Personal protective equipment Traffic control Operation of the under bridge inspection crane (UBIC) Fall protection Defensive driving Confined space Biological hazards Railroad safety training

3.1.6 3.1.6.1

Equipment Personal Protective Equipment

All inspectors must carry and use personal protective equipment as specified in the annual personal protective equipment safety training. All inspections on active construction sites must meet any safety requirements of the construction site that exceed inspection safety requirements.

3.1.6.2

Operational Equipment Requirements

Bridge inspections require the use of passenger vehicles and the occasional use of lift equipment. Inspectors must attend periodic training on the operation of the inspection crane, which is provided by the crane manufacturer. Consultants must have the proper license and Bridge Inspection Program

3-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

training required to operate heavy equipment. Consultants not operating heavy equipment are not required to have a commercial driver’s license (CDL).

3.1.7

Traffic Control

The Team Leader coordinates with the Region Traffic Engineer or maintenance station to arrange temporary traffic control during the bridge inspection. All traffic control must conform to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Observe the following guidelines: • • • • • •

3.2

3.2.1

Schedule bridge inspections at low traffic periods.

On heavily traveled routes and where blind corners lead into a bridge, use advance warning signs to alert the traveling public of bridge inspection activities.

When approaching a bridge or when parked on the roadside, use emergency flashers and strobe light or use flashing bars on signal boards.

Park inspection vehicles behind a roadside barrier or off the shoulder as far as possible.

Use traffic cones to alert drivers while inspecting in the shoulder area.

When a lane closure is required, provide traffic control according to acceptable procedures.

BRIDGE INSPECTION ORGANIZATION; QUALIFICATIONS; RESPONSIBILITIES Bridge Management Division

The Bridge Management Division is responsible for the bridge inspection program in compliance with 23 CFR §650 Subpart C – NBIS. The Bridge Management Division performs inspections for all state and locally owned structures meeting the NBIS definition of a bridge. The Bridge Management Division is responsible for bridge inspection policies and procedures, bridge reporting, load ratings, quality assurance and the preparation and maintenance of the bridge file.

Figure 3.1 presents the Bridge Management Division organization specifically for the implementation of the bridge inspection program. The Bridge Management Division maintains a bridge inspection personnel qualifications list, which tracks bridge inspection personnel, year, certification level, experience, railroad safety training and inspection training.

3.2.2

Team Leader

23 CFR §650.309(b) defines the qualifications of a Team Leader. The Bridge Management Division designates a Team Leader for each bridge inspection. A Team Leader must meet the NBIS qualifications. Several positions within the Bridge Management Division are required to meet the qualifications of a Team Leader.

3-6

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 3.1 — ORGANIZATION CHART (Bridge Inspection Program)

3.2.2.1 • •

Qualifications

Registered professional engineer Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

OR • •

Completed five years of bridge inspection experience Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

OR •

•

Certified as a Level III or IV Bridge Safety Inspector under the National Society of Professional Engineer’s Program for National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies (NICET) Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

OR • • • •

Completed a bachelor’s degree in engineering from an Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) accredited establishment Completed the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) fundamentals of the engineering licensing examination Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course Completed two years of bridge inspection experience

OR Bridge Inspection Program

3-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • •

February 2014

Completed an associate’s degree in engineering from an ABET accredited establishment Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course Completed four years of bridge inspection experience

3.2.2.2

Responsibilities

A Team Leader’s responsibilities are defined in the base job position (e.g., Bridge Inspector III or II).

3.2.3

Bridge Management Engineer: Bridge Inspection Program Manager/ Load Rating Program Manager

The Bridge Management Engineer serves as the Bridge Inspection Program Manager and Load Rating Program Manager for implementation of the NBIS.

3.2.3.1 • •

Registered professional engineer or have 10 years bridge inspection experience Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

3.2.3.2 • • • • • • • • • • • •

3-8

Qualifications

Responsibilities

Administers the bridge inspection, reporting and inventory program Provides leadership and guidance to bridge inspection teams Administers the bridge load rating program Ensures load rating policies and procedures are followed Coordinates with federal, state and local agencies Ensures that UDOT complies with bridge related federal directives Retains the services of consultants and contractors to supplement UDOT staff as needed Assures that QC/QA procedures are maintained and followed Directs or performs QA reviews and audits the program Evaluates and develops bridge replacement, rehabilitation, preservation and maintenance needs based on bridge inspection reports; see Chapter 2 Provides prompt responses to emergencies (e.g., earthquakes, major bridge damage, bridge hits); see Chapter 5 Coordinates with maintenance personnel on bridge maintenance; see Chapter 6

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.4

Bridge Inspection Engineer

3.2.4.1 • •

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Bridge Inspector III (Supervisor)

3.2.5.1

• • • • • • • •

Qualifications

Meets Team Leader qualifications; see Section 3.2.2

3.2.5.2 •

Responsibilities

Supports the Bridge Management Engineer in fulfilling the requirements of the bridge inspection program Provides day to day management of the bridge inspection teams Ensures certification for bridge inspection training Ensures that bridge inspection team members maintain training requirements Develops, monitors and maintains training programs for state and consultant inspectors Maintains database of bridge inspection personnel qualifications Plans, schedules and prepares information for the field inspection of bridges Manages consultant work load for bridge inspections Performs QC/QA reviews of bridge inspection reports Reviews and approves bridge inspection reports Signs and processes bridge inspection reports Maintains the bridge inspection schedule and maintains schedule changes Assists with special inspections

3.2.5

•

Qualifications

Registered professional engineer Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

3.2.4.2 •

February 2014

Responsibilities

Supports the Bridge Inspection Engineer in fulfilling the requirements of the bridge inspection program Provides direction to the bridge inspection teams Plans, schedules and prepares information for the field inspection of bridges Coordinates with railroad companies for bridge inspections over/under railroads Performs bridge inspections Performs QC reviews of bridge inspection reports Signs and processes bridge inspection reports Ensures the general safety of the bridge site Verifies that all safety procedures and the proper use of access equipment are followed

Bridge Inspection Program

3-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.6

Bridge Inspector II

3.2.6.1 •

• • • • • • •

Responsibilities

Supports the Bridge Inspector III in fulfilling the requirements of the bridge inspection program Provides direction for the bridge inspection Plans, schedules and prepares information for the field inspection of bridges Performs bridge inspections Performs QC reviews of bridge inspection reports Signs and processes bridge inspection reports Ensures the general safety of the bridge site Verifies that all safety procedures and the proper use of access equipment are followed

3.2.7

Bridge Inspector I

3.2.7.1 •

Qualifications

Meets Team Leader qualifications; see Section 3.2.2

3.2.6.2 •

February 2014

Qualifications

Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course

OR •

Registered professional engineer, engineer in training or individual with bridge experience

3.2.7.2 • • • • • • •

3-10

Responsibilities

Supports the Bridge Inspector II in fulfilling the requirements of the bridge inspection program Prepares information for the field inspection of bridges Performs bridge inspections Performs QC reviews of bridge inspection reports (field reviews only) Processes bridge inspection reports Follows the requirements for the general safety of the bridge site Follows all safety procedures and procedures for the proper use of access equipment

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.8

Bridge Database Coordinator

3.2.8.1 • •

• • • • • • • •

Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

3.2.9.1

Qualifications

Meets Team Leader qualifications; see Section 3.2.2 Understands bridge maintenance

3.2.9.2 • • • • • • • • • •

Responsibilities

Manages the bridge file Performs QA reviews of the bridge file Supports the Bridge Inspection Engineer and the Bridge Inspection Manager in fulfilling the requirements of the bridge inspection program Supports bridge inspectors Performs bridge inspections as necessary Completes the required FHWA structures submittals (annually and quarterly) Completes Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) reports (annually) Coordinates with the Structures Design Division and Hydraulics Engineer on changes to the bridge file Prepares bridge file management reports as necessary Coordinates with Department infrastructure database managers Assigns structure numbers (state and local government structures)

3.2.9

• •

Qualifications

Meets Team Leader qualifications; see Section 3.2.2 Understands basic bridge database management systems

3.2.8.2 • • •

February 2014

Responsibilities

Performs special inspections Performs damage inspections (responds to bridge hits, flooding, earthquakes, etc.)

Maintains the structures damage recovery report data Performs bridge inspections as necessary Supports Regions on bridge maintenance issues; see Chapter 6 Provides bridge maintenance training Performs bridge emergency response Maintains the structures emergency response plan; see Chapter 5 Provides training on structures emergency response Coordinates equipment orders and maintenance

Bridge Inspection Program

3-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.10

Crane Operator

3.2.10.1 •

Qualifications

Trained in UBIC operation (ASPEN)

3.2.10.2 •

Responsibilities

Maneuvers the UBIC for under bridge inspections

3.2.11

Crane Driver

3.2.11.1 •

Qualifications

Holds a current CDL

3.2.11.2 •

February 2014

Responsibilities

Drives the UBIC

3.2.12

Consultants

Consultants supplement UDOT staff for bridge inspections. Individuals act as a Team Leader or Bridge Inspector I, II or III. Consultant bridge inspection teams must meet NBIS requirements.

The consultant team will consist of a Team Leader and a Bridge Inspector I, II or III as previously defined.

3.2.12.1

Underwater Bridge Inspection Engineer

Consultants perform underwater bridge inspections.

3.2.12.1.1 • • • • •

3-12

Qualifications

Registered professional engineer Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course Completed a minimum of five years of underwater bridge inspection experience Possesses a current commercial diver certification card from ADCI Meets the diving qualifications required by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, Commercial Diving Operations – CFR 29, §1910 Subpart T

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.2.12.1.2 •

Underwater Bridge Inspection Diver

3.2.12.2.1

•

Responsibilities

Meets Bridge Inspector III responsibilities

3.2.12.2

• • • •

February 2014

Qualifications

Completed the FHWA approved comprehensive bridge inspection training course Completed the FHWA approved underwater diver bridge inspection training course Completed a minimum of five years of underwater bridge inspection experience Possesses a current commercial diver certification card from Association of Diving Contractors International (ADCI) Meets the diving qualifications required by OSHA regulations, Commercial Diving Operations – CFR 29, §1910 Subpart T

3.2.12.2.2

Responsibilities

• •

Meets Bridge Inspector II responsibilities Performs underwater bridge inspections

3.3

INSPECTION TYPE AND FREQUENCY

Figure 3.2 summarizes information for the bridge inspection types and frequencies.

3.3.1

Initial Inspection

The Bridge Management Division performs the initial inspection of a new structure or modification of an existing structure, before project final acceptance. The Resident Engineer at the construction site notifies the Bridge Inspection Engineer that the project is ready for the initial inspection. A bridge inspection team completes a comprehensive bridge inspection that establishes the baseline condition of the bridge. Once the bridge is accepted by the Department, the Bridge Database Coordinator records the bridge plans, bridge shop drawings, quantities of the AASHTO elements, design calculations, load rating calculations, geotechnical report, hydraulic report and photographs in the bridge file. Also, upon acceptance by the Department, the Bridge Inspector:

Bridge Inspection Program

3-13

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Inspection Inspection Type Interval

Inspection Level Determine physical and functional conditions

Routine

24 months

Identify changes from previous recorded conditions

February 2014

Criteria Highway bridges

Comment Standard operating bridge inspection

Nonhighway traffic bridges and structures over state routes

Verify structure satisfies service requirements Complete in-depth inspection of element of concern (visual or nondestructive testing) Special

12 months

Monitor element of concern Document changes on element of concern

Special

6 months

Highway bridges with two condition ratings of 4 or less for the deck, superstructure, or substructure and culverts with a condition rating of 4 or less Scour critical bridges as defined in the established POA identified in the bridge file

Complete in-depth inspection of element of concern (visual or nondestructive testing)

Highway bridges with a condition rating of 4 or less for a superstructure with fracture critical members

Monitor element of concern

Highway bridges with a condition rating of 3 or less for a deck, superstructure, substructure or culvert component

Document changes Develop plan for corrective measures

Special bridge inspection due to advanced element deterioration or known or suspected deficiency that is a safety concern

Special bridge inspection due to advanced element deterioration or known or suspected deficiency that is a safety concern

Any bridge with temporary supports, falsework or cribbing Determine physical and functional conditions Routine

Extended

Case by case basis dependent upon FHWA approval

Extended inspection intervals have not been requested by the Department

Bridges continuously under more than 4 ft of water

Routine inspection with underwater inspection requirements

Identify changes from previous recorded conditions Verify structure satisfies service requirements Inspect underwater portion of a bridge and surrounding channel

Underwater

60 months Inspection elements are identified in the bridge record

Figure 3.2 — INSPECTION TYPES AND FREQUENCIES 3-14

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Inspection Inspection Type Interval Underwater

Fracture critical members

In-depth

Extended

Inspection Level

Criteria Case by case basis dependent upon FHWA approval

Extended inspection intervals have not been requested by the Department

Complete in-depth inspection (visual or nondestructive testing)

Steel tension member or component whose failure could cause a portion or the entire bridge to collapse

Standard hands on, detailed inspection

Complete (close up) hands on inspection of the bridge or of one or more members to identify deficiencies not readily detectable using routine inspection

Highway bridges

Standard hands on, detailed inspection of bridge or elements of concern; this can include previously arrested/ repaired cracks or cracks in secondary members (cross frames)

Complete inspection to assess damage due to environmental or human actions

Highway bridges

Nonhighway traffic bridges and structures over state routes

All initial bridge inspections

Damage

As required based on notification of damage

Comment

Inspect underwater portion of a bridge and surrounding channel

24 months

As required due to findings from routine inspections (within 30 days)

February 2014

Inspection elements and procedures are identified in the bridge record

Standard operating bridge inspection

Nonhighway traffic bridges and structures over state routes

Document damage Develop plan for corrective measures if necessary Complete in-depth inspection (visual or nondestructive testing)

Complex

Movable, suspension, segmental, cable stayed, arch or truss

24 months

Standard hands on, detailed inspection Inspection elements and procedures are identified in the bridge record

Figure 3.2 — INSPECTION TYPES AND FREQUENCIES (Continued)

Bridge Inspection Program

3-15

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • •

February 2014

Enters the inspection data into the bridge file Creates a SI&A data sheet Documents any deficiencies of elements, fracture critical members (FCMs), fracture critical details and corrective action measures Identifies any special inspection equipment and access equipment needed to perform future inspections Corrects any discrepancies found between the planned and actual bridge configuration using the initial bridge inspection checklist

The Bridge Database Coordinator enters the initial inspection data into the bridge file within 90 days of final acceptance for state owned bridges and within 180 days from the date of owner acceptance by local governments. The Bridge Database Coordinator adjusts the long term bridge inspection date as necessary to coordinate with the initial inspection schedule.

3.3.2

Inspection Schedule

The Bridge Inspection Engineer: • • •

Establishes the inspection schedule based on the last inspection date and the inspection interval Schedules the inspection to ensure that it is completed before the last inspection date plus the inspection interval Tracks and documents inspections in the bridge inspection tracking log

In the event of an emergency, inclement weather, safety concerns or unforeseen circumstances and with the approval of the Bridge Management Engineer, the Bridge Inspection Engineer can reschedule an inspection, which must be completed no later than 30 days following the date of the original scheduled completion date. Any schedule change and the reason for the change must be documented in the bridge inspection tracking log.

3.4 3.4.1

INSPECTION PROCEDURES General

The Bridge Inspection Engineer: • • • •

• 3-16

Evaluates the bridge inventory on a monthly basis and defines the type of inspection required for each bridge the following month Maintains a bridge inspection tracking log for the bridge inventory Assigns bridge inspection teams to each bridge Identifies the need for and schedules specialty equipment and traffic control measures up front (a lift or under bridge inspection vehicle could be needed to gain access to elements of the bridge) Ensures that the inspector follows the proper inspection procedures and that the inspection type scheduled is appropriate Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Bridge inspectors use both the NBI and AASHTO element level condition assessment procedures. Inspectors must thoroughly document the activities, procedures and findings of bridge inspections with the appropriate photographs, a location plan of deficiencies, test results and measurements in the bridge inspection report.

3.4.2

Bridge Inspection Report

Complete all bridge inspection reports using the standardized format to provide consistency and ensure completeness. The bridge inspection report layout is: • •

• • • •

Cover sheet (bridge data and signatures) Inspection photographs ○ Roadway approach ○ Elevation ○ Bridge underside ○ Wearing surface ○ Load limit signs if applicable (one direction with a note stating that the other sign is present) ○ Minimum vertical clearance signs if applicable (one direction with a note stating that the other sign is present) ○ Upstream and downstream if applicable ○ Noted defects SI&A sheet Inspection notes Channel cross sections if applicable Clearances if applicable

The cover sheet documents basic bridge geographical information, inspection type and the Inspector of Record. The cover sheet also documents QC procedures.

The bridge inspection report includes the SI&A sheet for easy access to bridge specific data.

Inspection notes contain basic inspection data and list the areas of deficiencies. Separate any recommendations into one of four categories: • • • •

Routine/responsive maintenance Signing Safety features Preservation

Include the inspection photographs to document the condition of the bridge, and note the areas of concern for elements supporting a recommendation.

For nonstate owned bridge inspections, the Bridge Inspection Engineer contacts the owner before the inspection and invites the owner to participate. Upon completion of the bridge inspection, the Bridge Management Engineer transmits a summary of the inspection findings and recommendations to the local government owner. The transmittal identifies any critical Bridge Inspection Program

3-17

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

findings with a follow up phone call to the owner. See Section 3.4.12 for additional information on critical findings. The Bridge Management Engineer signs the notification letter, which is stored in the bridge file under the bridge record.

3.4.3

Bridge File

3.4.3.1

General

The bridge file is a directory of bridge records for all structures classified as bridges in Utah.

The bridge file is maintained on an independent server with the records contained within the file sorted according to structure type and structure number.

The Bridge Database Coordinator updates the bridge file for new bridges or modified bridges within 90 days of owner acceptance for state owned bridges and within 180 days of owner acceptance for local government owned bridges.

All state departments of transportation (DOTs) must submit the NBI data to the FHWA Washington, DC office by April 1 of each year. Coordinate the submission with the FHWA Division Office.

3.4.3.2

Bridge Record

The Bridge Management Division prepares and maintains bridge records for every bridge owned by either the state or a local government according to the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation. Bridge records contain bridge information, inspection reports and notations of any actions taken to address findings. Bridge records maintain relevant maintenance and inspection data to allow the assessment of current bridge conditions. The general directory for a bridge record is as follows: • • •

• • • • •

Correspondence Calculations and documents ○ Load rating reports Inspection reports ○ Clearance reports ○ Cross section reports Plans ○ Shop drawings S&E reports Emergency response Inspection photos Scour POA

For new or replaced bridges, the Bridge Database Coordinator creates a bridge record within the bridge file and places the following documents received from the Structures Design Manager in the record:

3-18

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • • •

February 2014

Bridge calculations Bridge plans Load rating report and model; see Chapter 4 Hydraulic report Geotechnical report Final seismic strategy report Special provisions

For preservation, rehabilitation or widening of existing bridges, the Bridge Database Coordinator places the applicable documents into a new subdirectory within the existing bridge record.

The Bridge Database Coordinator coordinates with the Bridge Inspection Engineer to verify the basic structural information to include in the bridge record (e.g., basic geometric features).

3.4.3.3 3.4.3.3.1

Inspection Records General

The bridge file includes records of inspections for all state and locally owned structures that meet the bridge definition as defined by 23 CFR §650.305 of the NBIS. The bridge file also includes inspection records for bridges owned by federal and private owners, which are maintained on a case by case basis (e.g., a bridge over a state highway or a bridge owned by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)).

3.4.3.3.2

Filing System

The Structures Division maintains both hard copy and electronic inspection records to comply with the minimum NBIS requirements. The hard copy inspection records are maintained in a bridge folder and the electronic inspection records are maintained in the bridge file. The Structures Division collects additional bridge information, such as thickness of overlay or additional fill depths, and maintains hard copy records for every bridge. Each bridge receives a unique structure number during the design phase; see Section 3.4.4. The Structures Division organizes bridge records according to ownership, county, route, milepost and structure number.

3.4.3.3.3

Bridge Folder

For hard copy files, the Structures Division maintains state and locally owned bridges in separate filing cabinets. The Division further organizes state owned bridges by region, route, milepost and structure number; and locally owned bridges first by county number, then structure number, because local government roads typically do not have route or milepost numbers.

Bridge Inspection Program

3-19

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4.3.3.4

February 2014

Color Coding of Bridge Folders

The Bridge Management Division uses a color coding system for bridge folders. See Figure 3.3.

Color Code

Definition

Manila folder

State bridge

Red folder

State bridge that carries a local road or railroad over a state highway; state bridge with an overhead restriction of some sort

Green folder

State bridge box culvert or pipe

Orange folder

Local government bridge

Blue dot

Structure crosses water and requires cross section

Black tab

Structure is fracture critical

Red dot

Crane required to inspect

Green tab

Bridge is scour critical

Orange tab

Pin and hanger bridge Figure 3.3 — COLOR CODING SYSTEM

3.4.4 3.4.4.1

Structure Number General

Each structure receives a unique identification number during the design phase, which is located on the right approach parapet, typically cast into the concrete.

3.4.4.2

State Owned Structures

For a state owned structure, the structure number consists of a letter (identifying the structure type) followed by a unique number; for example, C 123. A number is added in front of the structure number to represent a direction of travel (0 = carries both directions of travel, 1 = Northbound, 2 = Eastbound, 3 = Southbound, 4 = Westbound); for example, 0C 123.

Figure 3.4 presents the structure type designations used in the structure number.

3-20

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Designation

February 2014

Structure Type

A

Timber bridge superstructure

C

Structural steel girder superstructure

D

CIP concrete superstructure Concrete rigid frame structures

E

Concrete box culvert Concrete arch drainage structure

F

Prestressed concrete girder superstructure

G

Overhead sign structure

H

Concrete headwall

P

Post-tensioned concrete superstructure

R

Retaining wall (CIP concrete, MSE, soil nail, masonry block, etc.)

V

Miscellaneous structure Miscellaneous drainage structure Multiplate steel arch structure Tunnel Figure 3.4 — STRUCTURE TYPE DESIGNATIONS

3.4.4.3

Structures Owned By Local Governments

For city or county owned bridges, the structure number consists of a three digit county number, followed by the number of the bridge within the county, and the structure type designation letter; for example, 013100F. Figure 3.5 presents the three digit county numbers.

3.4.5

Routine Inspections

The bridge inspector generally conducts routine inspections from the deck, ground or water level or from permanent work platforms and walkways, if present. Closely inspect the primary load carrying members (e.g., steel and concrete girders, decks, slabs, bents, bearings, abutments).

Bridge Inspection Program

3-21

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Number

County

Number

County

Number

County

001 003 005 007 009 011 013 015 017 019

Beaver Box Elder Cache Carbon Daggett Davis Duchesne Emery Garfield Grand

021 023 025 027 029 031 033 035 037 039

Iron Juab Kane Millard Morgan Piute Rich Salt Lake San Juan Sanpete

041 043 045 047 049 051 053 055 057

Sevier Summit Tooele Uintah Utah Wasatch Washington Wayne Weber

Figure 3.5 — COUNTY NUMBER IDENTIFICATION Inspect underwater portions of the substructure during a routine inspection, if the water level is 4 ft or less and the stream can be entered safely based on stream velocity. Document in the inspection notes. Limit observations to probing for signs of undermining and evaluating changes in the channel that affect the substructure.

During a routine inspection, the bridge inspector documents any structural changes or deterioration and evaluates traffic and pedestrian safety features.

General procedures are: • • • • • • • • •

3.4.6

Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the bridge using visual or tactile means for all structural elements Perform scour evaluation using mechanical (probing rods, etc.) and/or electronic methods if water level is less than 4 ft for routine inspection Document condition Verify inspection type and frequency coding correctness Recommend follow up actions if necessary Compile the bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report

Underwater Inspections

The bridge inspector cannot readily observe significant underwater structural conditions from above water. An underwater inspection is required if the water conditions at the structure prohibit access to all portions of an element by visual or tactile means to ensure a level of condition certainty. Only waterways with substructure components continuously submerged in water greater than 4 ft require an underwater bridge inspection.

The Bridge Management Division procures consultants to perform underwater bridge inspections. The bridge record identifies the locations and descriptions of the underwater elements for each bridge requiring an underwater bridge inspection. The underwater inspector must conduct underwater diving operations in compliance with: 3-22

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

February 2014

OSHA 29 CFR §1910 Subpart T – Commercial Diving Operations (including OSHA Directive CPL-02-00-143) ADCI – Consensus Standards for Commercial Diving Operations

All diving team personnel must be commercial divers, and at least one team member must be trained as a Team Leader. See Section 3.2.12.1.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer coordinates with the consultant performing the underwater bridge inspection. The inspection procedure is: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Perform a desk review of the bridge before visiting the site by the Bridge Inspection Engineer and Team Leader Review the bridge history Identify the location and description of underwater elements to inspect as described in each bridge record Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform a safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the bridge using visual or tactile means for all structural elements Perform scour evaluation using mechanical (probing rods, etc.) and/or electronic methods Document condition; obtain section loss of members or depth of scour section if applicable Verify inspection type and frequency coding correctness Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete the bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report

The bridge record contains a specific bridge inspection procedure that reflects the site conditions, structure complexity, method of access, safety, etc.

3.4.7

Fracture Critical Member Inspections

The bridge inspector conducts a FCM inspection in conjunction with the routine inspection or a special inspection of the bridge. FCMs are steel tension members or portions of steel members in tension whose failure would likely result in a total or partial bridge collapse. Examples of bridges with FCMs include a two steel girder system bridge, pin and hanger assemblies, truss structures and integral frame details. Track FCM inspections using the bridge inspection tracking log.

The inspection procedure is: • • •

Perform a desk review of the bridge before visiting the site by the Bridge Inspection Engineer and Team Leader Review the bridge history Identify the FCMs or components to inspect as described in each bridge record

Bridge Inspection Program

3-23

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • • • • • •

February 2014

Determine if a nondestructive testing examination is required as defined in the bridge record Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform a safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the bridge using a hands on approach for all FCMs Document condition; obtain section loss of members if applicable Document testing results if applicable Verify inspection type and frequency coding correctness Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete the bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report

Each bridge record contains a specific bridge inspection procedure that reflects the site conditions, structure complexity, method of access, safety, etc.

Communication and documentation of fatigue/weld crack findings is vitally important.

Mandatory policy is that any cracking found in primary load carrying steel members is a critical finding and must be reported immediately to the Bridge Management Engineer. See Section 3.4.12.

3.4.8

In-Depth Inspections

At times, a routine inspection identifies conditions that warrant structural concern based on inspection judgment, such as excessive longitudinal cracking in concrete girders or deck separation from girders that prompt an in-depth inspection. Schedule the in-depth inspection for completion within 30 days following the routine inspection when applicable.

The inspection procedure is: • • • • • • • • • • • •

3-24

Perform a desk review of the bridge before visiting the site by the Bridge Inspection Engineer and Team Leader Review the bridge history Identify the member or component to inspect Determine if a nondestructive testing examination is necessary based on the bridge information Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform a safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the bridge using a hands on approach for all structural elements or for the element under investigation for special inspection Document condition, quantities, locations, etc., as necessary Verify inspection type and frequency coding correctness Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete the bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4.9

February 2014

Special Inspections

The Bridge Inspection Engineer schedules special inspections to monitor a particular known or suspected deficiency (e.g., foundation settlement, scour, member conditions, public use of a load posted bridge). Special inspections follow in-depth inspection procedures and are recorded as special in the scheduling section of the bridge management software. The Bridge Management Division classifies and performs special inspections as hands on inspections at a frequency of less than 24 months. Document any changes to the special inspection status in the inspection notes. See Figure 3.2 for additional information on special inspections.

3.4.10

Damage Inspections

The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator completes or coordinates a damage inspection to assess structural damage resulting from environmental factors or human actions within 24 hours of notification. The inspection procedure is as follows: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Evaluate the notification of structural damage Identify the member or component damaged Determine if a nondestructive testing examination is necessary Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform a safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the damaged structural elements using visual or tactile means Document condition and evaluate damage Report a critical finding immediately to the Bridge Management Engineer and document on the critical findings log if applicable Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete a damage assessment and include in the bridge inspection report Update the structures damage recovery report Perform a QC review of the report

See Chapter 5 for more discussion on the Structures Division response to damaged structures.

3.4.11

Complex Bridge Inspections

A complex bridge is a movable, suspension, segmental, cable stayed, arch, truss or other bridge with unusual characteristics. The bridge inspection tracking log identifies complex bridges. The bridge record documents bridge specific inspection procedures. Inspections follow in-depth bridge inspection procedures.

3.4.12

Critical Findings

A critical finding is a structural or safety related deficiency that requires immediate follow up inspection or action. If during the inspection, the bridge inspector identifies a critical finding, use the following procedure: Bridge Inspection Program

3-25

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • •

February 2014

The bridge inspector reports the critical finding to the Bridge Management Engineer within 24 hours.

The bridge inspector has the authority to close the bridge or limit traffic. Contact the Bridge Management Engineer when this action is taken.

The Bridge Management Engineer: ○ Documents the finding on the critical findings log ○ Verifies the findings within 72 hours of notification if warranted ○ Documents the bridge data and determines a plan of corrective measure ○ If the bridge is owned by a local government, notifies the owner of the concern and provides a corrective measure recommendation ○ If the bridge is owned by the state, implements the plan of corrective measure

The Bridge Management Division coordinates with FHWA quarterly on bridge inspection critical findings.

3.4.13

Clearances

The bridge inspection team checks the vertical clearances for all structures over a roadway during the inspection if a change in the bridge condition (feature intersected or facility carried) has occurred or, at a minimum, during every other bridge inspection cycle. If a bridge has a minimum vertical clearance of 16 ft or less, the bridge is posted 3 in. less than the measured vertical clearance. For example, if a bridge has a measured minimum vertical clearance of 15′-9″, the minimum vertical clearance sign reads 15′-6″.

Lateral underclearances are checked at the initial inspection and after a change in the roadway under the structure.

Document all vertical clearances on the bridge clearance form in the bridge folder and the bridge record. Photograph and document existing vertical clearance signs during every bridge inspection.

3.4.14

Railroad Right of Way

The Bridge Management Division performs bridge inspections within railroad right of way.

Inspectors must follow all railroad requirements, and they must carry the railroad safety training card. The Team Leader for the bridge inspection ensures that proper on site coordination and all safety procedures are followed. Typical procedures for inspections within railroad right of way include: • • • • • 3-26

Coordinate with railroad company for maintenance of traffic and additional safety personnel (e.g., railroad flaggers) Identify location of elements to inspect within railroad right of way Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform safety briefing at the bridge site and document occurrence in bridge inspection report Follow all railroad requirements for inspection Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • •

February 2014

Inspect the bridge using visual or tactile means for all structural elements Document condition Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete the bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report

The following presents specific guidelines for coordination with the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR): • • • •

The Bridge Inspection Engineer coordinates the bridge inspection with the Track Manager for each UPRR District.

The Team Leader contacts UPRR before any bridge inspection occurs on UPRR right of way.

The Track Manager determines whether traffic control is needed on a case by case basis.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer submits any inspection reports on railroad bridges to the UPRR Manager of Industry and Public Projects.

Appendix 3B lists contact information for UPRR Track Managers and the UPRR Manager of Industry and Public Projects. Appendix 3B also includes a map of the UPRR districts.

3.4.15

Load Rating

Refer to Chapter 4 for a detailed discussion on policies and procedures for load rating bridges.

3.4.16

Posted or Restricted Bridges

Refer to Chapter 4 for a detailed discussion on policies and procedures to post and restrict a bridge.

3.4.17

Channel Cross Section

Obtain channel cross sections for every inspection cycle and document the data (both current and historical) on the cross section form in the bridge folder and the bridge record. An exception is for a bridge that is a four sided box culvert or a bridge that has a fully functioning integral concrete or metal floor that prevents scour action from exposing and undermining foundation elements or a channel that exceeds 50 ft in depth. Treat bridges with integral flooring as box culverts when evaluating for scour.

Channel cross sections include a roadway and bank elevation on each side of the bridge plus the bottom of the girder on the right side of the cross section. The bridge inspector obtains cross sections on the upstream side of the bridge and completes the cross sections left to right looking upstream as follows:

Bridge Inspection Program

3-27

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • •

3.4.18

February 2014

For bridges with a bridge length equal to or less than 50 ft, take cross sections in 5-ft station increments For bridges with a bridge length between 50 ft and 100 ft, take cross sections in 10-ft station increments For bridges with a bridge length equal to or over 100 ft, take cross sections in 20-ft station increments

Scour Assessment/Scour Critical Bridges

The Bridge Management Division inspects all bridges that cross rivers and other waterways as part of the routine inspection. If scour related distress is found during the routine inspection, the following procedure applies: • • • •

The bridge inspector documents a bridge scour concern and recommends further evaluation to the Bridge Inspection Engineer.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer coordinates with the Hydraulics Engineer.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer schedules a follow up, in-depth inspection if necessary.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer perform the in-depth inspection, if necessary, and: ○ Determine recommendations for an NBI Item 113 revision or future corrective measures ○ Provide recommendations to the Bridge Management Engineer; NBI Item 113 can only be changed with the approval of the Bridge Management Engineer ○ Document the changes in the condition rating and corrective measures in the bridge inspection report and the bridge management software ○ Place the bridge on the critical findings log if the distress found classifies as a critical finding ○ Approve the final report and verify coding accuracy

The bridge folders are color coded to indicate that the bridge has scour potential; see Figure 3.3. The bridge inspection tracking log identifies bridges listed as scour critical for inspections.

The procedure for scour critical inspections is as follows: • • • • • • • • • • • 3-28

Perform a desk review of the bridge before visiting the site; include the Hydraulics Engineer if available Review the bridge history Identify critical areas of scour concern (refer to inspection guidelines) Obtain access to specialized equipment if necessary Perform a safety briefing at the bridge site Inspect the bridge following routine inspection procedures and evaluate scour potential concerns as documented in the established POA Document the condition Verify inspection coding correctness Recommend follow up actions if necessary Complete bridge inspection report Perform a QC review of the report Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Scour critical bridges are structures with abutment or bent foundations with an NBI Item 113 scour rating of 3 or less. Bridges rated as scour critical have a POA document that identifies bridge specific deficiencies, provides recommended countermeasures and describes instructions for monitoring the structure during and after a flood event. The Hydraulics Engineer updates scour POAs when significant site condition changes are observed based on the bridge inspection. Scour POAs are located electronically in the bridge record and referenced in hard copy in the bridge folder.

Bridge inspectors provide a scour rating recommendation (NBI Item 113) based upon scour observations in the field. Figure 3.6 summarizes the process. Refer to the FHWA Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual for additional coding guidance.

Refer to the codes in Figure 3.10 that characterize the scour vulnerability of a bridge. The figure is from the FHWA Recording and Coding Guide. Hydraulic, geotechnical and structural engineers assign the codes based on methodologies in FHWA Technical Advisory T 5140.23, Hydraulic Engineering Circular (HEC) 18, HEC 23 and supporting FHWA memoranda and advisories.

Single or multiple culverts, which are classified as bridges and have a functioning integral concrete or metal floor fully containing flows, technically cannot be scour critical based on channel material. Degradation can develop at culvert ends. Figure 3.11 presents FHWA coding clarifications for culverts and for bridges that have had floors installed and function like a culvert.

3.4.19 3.4.19.1

Quality Control/Quality Assurance General

The primary focus of QC/QA is to ensure a high degree of accuracy, consistency and completeness in the bridge inspection program. Quality begins with qualified, well trained bridge inspectors. Bridge inspectors attend required bridge inspection training and follow documented procedures to ensure correctness, uniformity and compliance with federal requirements.

Bridge Inspection Program

3-29

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Item

General

February 2014

Description Select the scour rating code (NBI Item 113) that best represents the scour risk posed by the bridge and channel conditions. The scour risk is a function of bridge and channel condition. An accurate assessment of scour risk requires consideration of poor channel conditions (NBI Item 61) in relation to the scour rating code. See Figures 3.7, 3.8 and 3.9.

Review the reasonableness of the current scour coding considering changed conditions.

Develop a narrative supported by notes and photographs for changing the item code.

Review previous channel cross sections, inspection reports, POAs and photographs to identify known or developing scour challenges. Evaluate:

• • • Desk review (scour • critical bridges only) • •

Are channel cross sections lacking?

Is the stream reach upstream and contiguous to the bridge reasonably stable?

Has the bridge had scour issues in the past?

Verify the bridge is scour critical?

Is the foundation known?

Have scour countermeasures been implemented?

Develop a list of any concerns and document stream stability and scour issues in the field.

If the scour rating code is 2 or less, verify that the substructure code (NBI Item 60) is the same code.

• • Channel cross sections

• • • • •

Location, depth and • extent of localized scour • •

Location and condition of countermeasures

• • •

Channel protection conditions

• •

Obtain a new streambed cross section at the upstream face of the bridge to capture current conditions at every inspection Plot the new cross section data on a single, common graph, which includes all previous cross section data, and evaluate the changes on site Compare the new channel cross section with the previous cross sections for any indication of developing scour Document the depth, location and extent of scour holes with notes and photographs Evaluate and identify trends; use best judgment and record assessment on whether the channel is degrading, aggrading or relatively stable Wade and probe around the perimeters of substructure elements for signs of scour and undermining Probe for scour holes and areas that have been loosely filled with silts and similar softer soil deposits Document the location and extent of any such localized scour holes detected by probing or other means with appropriate notes and photographs Take additional cross sections if needed to document scour holes Use best judgment and record assessment on whether the areas identified as scouring in the past are increasing in depth and/or extent, remain the same or have been repaired Create appropriate base line notes, photographs and/or cross sections to monitor for degradation of scour countermeasures (riprap, check dams, diversion structures, grouted riprap, articulated concrete block, A-jacks, etc.)

Take detailed photographs of countermeasures to document and track changes over time Note any development of point bars or meander bends that are restricting the original, well centered flow through the bridge waterway in the scour rating narrative Look upstream from the bridge and evaluate the evolving channel misalignment Document evolving poor channel approach conditions upstream of the bridge using notes and photographs

Figure 3.6 — NBI SCOUR RATING PROCESS

3-30

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 3.7 — SCOUR DEPTH (NBI Item 113)

Report estimated bankfull, high flow angles.

Figure 3.8 — HIGH FLOW ANGLES

Bridge Inspection Program

3-31

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Report estimated low flow approach angles only when the low flow channel is causing scour at an abutment.

Figure 3.9 — LOW FLOW ANGLES

3-32

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Code

Description (See FHWA Recording and Coding Guide5)

February 2014

UDOT Commentary

N

Bridge not over waterway.

U

Bridge with “unknown” foundation that has not been evaluated for scour. Until risk can be determined, a plan of action should be developed and implemented to reduce the risk to users from a bridge failure during and immediately after a flood event3.

9

Bridge foundations on dry land well above flood water elevations.

8

Bridge foundations determined to be stable for the assessed or calculated scour conditions.

Scour is determined to be above top of footing (Example A) by assessment (i.e., bridge foundations are on rock formations that have been determined to resist scour within the service life of the bridge4), by calculation or by installation of properly designed countermeasures3.

Upgrading to a scour rating code of 8 requires the installation of permanent structural countermeasures meeting the requirements of HEC 23.

Countermeasures have been installed to mitigate a previously existing problem with scour and to reduce the risk of bridge failure during a flood event. Instructions contained in a plan of action have been implemented to reduce the risk to users from a bridge failure during or immediately after a flood event.

Upgrading to a scour rating code of 7 requires the installation of temporary structural countermeasures3 (generally loose riprap) to mitigate scour during a limited number of flood events and inspection for degradation at the normal interval.

7

6

5

Use this code only after consultation with and the concurrence of the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

According to HEC 23, permanent countermeasure designs must reflect general scour, contraction, bent and/or abutment scour3.

Less commonly, the full implementation of the instructions in a POA (including monitoring for damage at the normal interval and during and after significant flooding events) constitutes an effective and appropriate countermeasure for scour risk for certain scour critical bridges, especially for older structures.

Scour calculation/evaluation has not been made.

(Use only to describe case where plans exist and bridge has not yet been evaluated for scour potential.)

Use this code only when approved by the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour condition. Scour is determined to be within the limits of footing or piles (Example B) by assessment (i.e., bridge foundations are on rock formations that have been determined to resist scour within the service life of the bridge), by calculations or by installation of properly designed countermeasures3.

Although observed scour is within the physical limits of the footing or pile elements, the substructure is judged stable based on an assessment or calculation or by the installation of properly designed3 temporary or permanent structural scour countermeasures.

Figure 3.10 — FHWA CODES FOR SCOUR VULNERABILITY AT BRIDGES

Bridge Inspection Program

3-33

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Description (See FHWA Recording and Coding Guide5)

Code

4

3

February 2014

UDOT Commentary

Bridge foundations determined to be stable for assessed or calculated scour conditions; field review indicates action is required to protect exposed foundations from effects of additional erosion and corrosion3.

Some scour degradation has occurred, yet bridge remains stable; monitor bridge closely at the normal interval for further scour degradation and recommend timely installation of properly designed3 structural scour countermeasures.

Bridge is scour critical; bridge foundations determined to be unstable for assessed or calculated scour conditions. Scour is within limits of footing or piles (Example B) or scour is below spread footing base or pile tips (Example C).

Scour risk is judged to be significant.

Prepare a POA and indicate the accelerated installation of properly structural scour counterdesigned3 measures.

Use this code only when approved by the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

2

1

0

Bridge is scour critical; field review indicates that extensive scour has occurred at bridge foundations, which are determined to be unstable by a comparison of calculated scour and observed scour during the bridge inspection, or an engineering evaluation of the observed scour condition reported by the bridge inspector in Item 60. Immediate action is required to provide scour countermeasures.

Significant scour degradation has occurred, which indicates the immediate installation of structural scour properly designed3 countermeasures to restore full stability and prevent gross damage from a subsequent flood event.

Bridge is scour critical; field review indicates that failure of bents/abutments is imminent. Bridge is closed to traffic. Failure is imminent based on a comparison of calculated and observed scour during the bridge inspection, or an engineering evaluation of the observed scour condition reported by the bridge inspector in Item 60.

Gross scour has occurred and substructure units have been fully compromised and are unstable.

Use this code only when approved by the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

Close bridge to traffic.

Bridge is scour critical. Bridge has failed and is closed to traffic.

References:

1

FHWA Technical Advisory T 5140.23, “Evaluating Scour at Bridges,” October 28, 1991

2

HEC 18, Evaluating Scour at Bridges, Fourth Edition

3

HEC 23, Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures, Second Edition

4

FHWA Memorandum, “Scourability of Rock Formations,” July 19, 1991

5

FHWA-PD-96-001, Recording & Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory & Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges, 1995

6

FHWA Memorandum, “Revision of Coding Guide, Item 113 – Scour Critical Bridges,” April 27, 2001

Figure 3.10 — FHWA CODES FOR SCOUR VULNERABILITY AT BRIDGES (Continued) 3-34

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Code

Description (See FHWA Publications 1&2 )

4

Large spalls, heavy scaling, wide cracks, considerable efflorescence, or opened construction joint permitting loss of backfill. Considerable settlement or misalignment. Considerable scouring or erosion at curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have significant distortion and deflection throughout, extensive corrosion or deep pitting.

Despite settlement/distortion, misalignment and/or extensive corrosion and scouring at culvert inlet/outlet culvert flows are fully contained inside the culvert barrel.

Any condition described in code 4 but which is excessive in scope. Severe movement or differential settlement of the segments or loss of fill. Holes may exist in walls or slabs.

Culvert flows are no longer fully contained inside the culvert barrel.

3

Integral wingwalls nearly severed from culvert. Severe scour or erosion at curtain walls, wingwalls or pipes. Metal culverts have extreme distortion and deflection in one section, extensive corrosion or deep pitting with scattered perforations.

UDOT Commentary

Soils surrounding the culvert barrel are not yet exposed to active piping or direct scour action.

Settlements have opened culvert joints, and/or the culvert barrel now exhibits significant penetration.

The openings are initiating active piping and loss of soil envelope materials; and/or scour at the culvert inlet/outlet is no longer contained or limited by the cutoff walls; and/or wingwalls have been displaced by undermining facilitating active piping and undermining of the culvert floor or barrel.

Initiate or update a POA and recommend appropriate repair/replace/stabilize response. Use this code only when approved by the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

2

Integral wingwalls collapsed.

Severe settlement of roadway due to loss of fill.

Section of culvert may have failed and can no longer support embankment.

Complete undermining at curtain walls and pipes. Corrective action required to maintain traffic. Metal culverts have extreme distortion and deflection throughout with extensive perforations due to corrosion.

Loss of original design geometry has caused wall buckling and localized failure of the culvert barrel and barrel joints; and/or undermining around the culvert inlet/outlet has caused wingwall rotation and failure accelerating the cumulative loss of soil envelope materials; and/or undermining of culvert foundations has caused unacceptable roadway settlements affecting the free flow of traffic.

Immediate repairs are required to stabilize the situation.

Initiate or update a POA and recommend appropriate repair/replace/stabilize response. Use this code only when approved by the Bridge Management Engineer and the Hydraulics Engineer.

Figure 3.11 — FHWA CODES (For Culverts and Culvert Like Bridges)

Bridge Inspection Program

3-35

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Code

Description (See FHWA Publications 1&2 )

UDOT Commentary

1

Bridge closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

Initiate or update a POA and recommend appropriate repair/replace/stabilize response.

References:

1

FHWA-PD-96-001, Recording & Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory & Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges, 1995

2

FHWA Report No. IP-86-2, “Culvert Inspection Manual – Supplement to the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual,” July 1986

Figure 3.11 — FHWA CODES (For Culverts and Culvert Like Bridges) (Continued)

3.4.19.2

Forms and Lists

UDOT uses the following forms to ensure quality and consistency in the program: • • • • • • • • • • •

Bridge inspection personnel qualifications Bridge inspection report cover sheet Bridge inspection tracking log Bridge inspector checklist Initial bridge inspection checklist Bridge clearance form Cross section form Predesk audit form Collaborative peer review template Critical findings log Structures damage recovery report

The following monitor and track the bridge inventory condition: • • •

Rehabilitation/replacement list Bridge preservation list Scour critical bridge list

The bridge inspector checklist is a tool for use by bridge inspection teams to help validate bridge inspection notes. The checklist is not a required document for the QC/QA procedures.

The Bridge Management Division maintains the rehabilitation/replacement list to monitor structurally deficient bridges, and initiates major bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects based on the list. The bridge preservation list describes bridges in need of preservation activities, and lists the bridge deficiencies as part of a plan for every structure. The scour critical bridge list identifies bridges with scour potential and monitors the bridges as high, medium or low risk. See Chapter 2 for more discussion.

3-36

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4.19.3

February 2014

Field Inspection Quality Control

Use the following procedure to document QC in the field: • • • •

The two bridge inspectors who inspect the bridge on site independently evaluate the bridge.

One team member (originator) inputs the inspection notes into the bridge inspection software.

The other team member (checker) validates/checks the inspection notes for correctness and completeness.

Once both team members agree on the bridge condition, the checker completes the QC checkbox in the bridge inspection software.

3.4.19.4

Bridge Inspection Report Quality Control (Office Review)

Use the following procedure to check the bridge inspection report: • • •

•

•

The Inspector of Record (originator) creates the bridge inspection report.

The Inspector of Record signs the bridge inspection report cover sheet.

A Team Leader completes a quality check of the bridge inspection report. The Team Leader could or could not be a member of the bridge inspection team for the bridge.

The quality check evaluates the following: ○ Inspector qualifications ○ Consistency and correctness of condition ratings for bridge components and/or elements ○ Deterioration documented if applicable ○ Critical findings identified if applicable ○ Scour evaluation included if applicable ○ Load posting revisions if applicable ○ Clearance and waterway profile updated as necessary ○ Maintenance recommendations consistent with inspection findings ○ Inventory items correctly entered into bridge file ○ Supporting notes and comments ○ Photographic documentation Once the bridge inspection report is checked, the Team Leader signs as the reviewer on the bridge inspection report cover sheet. If the Team Leader is a registered Utah professional engineer (PE), the Team Leader stamps and signs the bridge inspection report cover sheet following standard signature procedures.

The Team Leader finalizes the report and places the report in the bridge record and in the bridge folder.

Document QC on the report by following the established UDOT QC/QA procedures or by comments/revisions documented electronically on the bridge inspection report.

Bridge Inspection Program

3-37

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4.19.5

February 2014

Quality Control Independent Review (Field Evaluation)

The QC independent review consists of evaluating the findings and documentation from the bridge inspection report and the quality and consistency of the data produced in the inspection.

The review evaluates the consistency and accuracy of component ratings, inventory items, adequacy of photographic documentation and notes, recommended maintenance actions, critical findings, etc. The QC independent review occurs at the bridge location with the bridge inspection report in hand. The review team (an independent bridge inspection team) validates the entries in the bridge inspection report for compliance. The Bridge Management Division conducts QC independent reviews for 3% of the bridge inspections within two months of the original field inspection. The Bridge Inspection Engineer determines the bridges for which to complete a QC independent review and tracks the schedule on the bridge inspection tracking log by highlighting the bridge in yellow. The Bridge Inspection Engineer distributes the bridges chosen from among the bridge inspection teams.

The QC independent review of inspection data includes the following components: • • • • • • • •

Independent verification of condition ratings Proper identification of AASHTO elements Adequacy of photographs, notes and sketches Critical problems identified Appropriate recommended actions included Load and clearance posting if applicable Vertical clearance measurements included if applicable Waterway measurements judged reasonable if applicable

The QC team highlights the bridge inspection report data in yellow for correctness in the field.

Notes are added in blue pen or pencil. The report is then scanned and placed electronically in the bridge record.

3.4.19.6

Quality Assurance Review (Office or Field Review)

The Bridge Management Engineer performs or directs QA reviews. The QA review monitors and adjusts as necessary the program requirements and procedures to ensure that overall quality is maintained, but not to correct the deficiencies within a specific bridge inspection report.

The Bridge Management Engineer: • • • •

3-38

Performs or directs QA reviews on one bridge inspection a month Performs an audit to verify that the established QC procedures are being followed, which is tracked on the bridge inspection tracking log by highlighting the bridge in green Takes corrective actions for bridge inspections that are noncompliant with the QC plan Reviews the QC independent review reports to determine whether discrepancies in the reports are caused by inadequate procedures or training, and recommends changes to procedures or training, if required Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

3.4.19.7

February 2014

Quality Control/Quality Assurance Training

The Bridge Management Division uses the collaborative peer review (CPR) model to complete QC/QA training. CPR training occurs on one bridge inspection per year. The CPR process uses a team of peers assembled with the Team Leader for the subject inspection team to participate in a team oriented re-inspection. The team: •

• • •

Collaborates to develop appropriate component ratings and to identify elements and condition states from a blank inspection data sheet (discussion of appropriate ratings is ongoing during the inspection) Reviews the original report and discusses the report in detail among the team members Generates a report documenting the results of the review, which is stored in the bridge file Tracks the process on the bridge inspection tracking log by highlighting the bridge in blue

The team quantifies the consistency of inspection results by comparing the results of the collaboratively developed bridge inspection report with the original inspection results. The comparison provides a means for identifying areas where improvements are needed for specific inspection teams, and summarizes the results from multiple reviews to identify programmatic improvements.

3.4.19.8

Monthly Inspection Quality, Planning and Review Meetings

The Bridge Management Division conducts monthly inspection quality and planning meetings.

The meetings plan upcoming inspections and review unresolved issues from the previous month. The entire bridge inspection staff and the Bridge Management Engineer attend the meetings. The meetings discuss the following: • • • • • • • •

Review of schedules, workloads, etc.

Planning of labor, equipment and other resources Safety concerns Upcoming bridges and issues of concern Previous month inspections Critical findings Bridges with condition ratings changing above or below NBI 4 Open peer discussion of case studies and questions

Bridge Inspection Program

3-39

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 3A FHWA SUPPLEMENTAL GUIDELINES FHWA developed the following guidelines as a training guide for the condition rating of a variety of structural elements. The guidelines are a supplement to the FHWA Recording and Coding Guide to assist in assigning the most appropriate condition rating.

3.A.1 Timber Deck Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. condition of the deck.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. No crushing, rotting or splitting. Tightly secured to floor system.

7

GOOD CONDITION. Minor checking or splitting with a few loose planks.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Some planks checked or split but sound. Some loose planks. Fire damage limited to surface scorching with no measureable section loss.

Some wet areas noted.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Numerous (30% to 40%) planks checked, split, rotted or crushed.

Many planks are loose. Fire damage limited to surface charring with minor, measurable section loss. Some planks (< 10%) are in need of replacement.

4

POOR CONDITION. Majority (over 40%) of the planks are rotted, crushed or split. Fire damage with significant section loss that may reduce the load carrying capacity of the member. Over 10% of the planks are in need of replacement.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Severe signs of structural distress are visible. Extensive plank damage evident with reduced deck load carrying capacity.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Advanced deterioration with partial deck failure. It may be necessary to close bridge until corrective action is taken.

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Bridge is closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge closed. Deck replacement necessary.

3-40

No noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies that affect the

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.2 Concrete Deck Condition Rating Condition Indicators (% deck area) Chloride Content (lbs/cy)

Rating

Spalls

Delaminations

Electrical Potential

9

None

None

0

0

8

None

None

None > 0.35

None > 1.0

7

None

< 2%

0-5% > 0.35

None > 2.0

6

< 2% spalls or sum of all deteriorated and/or contaminated deck concrete < 20%

5

< 5% spalls or sum of all deteriorated and/or contaminated deck concrete 20% to 40%

4

> 5% spalls or sum of all deteriorated and/or contaminated deck concrete 40% to 60%

3

> 5% spalls or sum of all deteriorated and/or contaminated deck concrete > 60%

2

Deck structural capacity grossly inadequate

1

Deck has failed completely; repairable by replacement only

0

Holes in deck; danger of other sections of deck failing

Bridge Inspection Program

3-41

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.3 Timber Superstructure Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. New condition.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. No noteworthy deficiencies that affect the condition of the superstructure.

7

GOOD CONDITION. noncritical locations.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Some decay, cracking or splitting of beams or stringers.

Fire damage limited to surface charring with minor, measureable section loss.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Moderate decay, cracking, splitting or minor crushing of beams or stringers. Fire damage limited to surface charring with minor, measurable section loss.

4

POOR CONDITION. Extensive decay, cracking, splitting or crushing of beams or stringers, or significant fire damage. Diminished load carrying capacity of members is evident.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Severe decay, cracking, splitting or crushing of beams or stringers, or major fire damage. Load carrying capacity is substantially reduced. Local failure may be evident.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Beam defects noted in Code 3 have resulted in significant local failures. Unless closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Bridge is closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge closed. Replacement necessary.

3-42

Minor decay, cracking or splitting of beams or stringers at

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.4 Reinforced Concrete Superstructure Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. New condition.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. capacity of members.

7

GOOD CONDITION. Some minor problems. Nonstructural hairline cracks without disintegration may be evident. Load carrying capacity of structural members unaffected.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Structural members show some minor deterioration or collision damage. Hairline structural cracks or spalls may be present with evidence of efflorescence. Minor water saturation marks. Generally, reinforcing steel unaffected.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Structural members are generally sound (structural capacity unaffected) but may have evidence of deterioration or disintegration. Numerous hairline structural cracks or spalls may be present with minor section loss of reinforcing steel possible.

4

POOR CONDITION. Extensive disintegration. Measurable structural cracks or large spall areas. Corroded reinforcing steel evident with measurable section loss. Structural capacity of some structural members may be diminished.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Serious deterioration and/or disintegration of primary concrete members. Large structural cracks may be evident. Reinforcing steel exposed with advanced stages of corrosion. Local failures or loss of bond possible.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements.

Concrete disintegration around reinforcing steel with loss of bond. Some reinforcing steel may be ineffective due to corrosion or loss of bond. Numerous large structural cracks may be present. Localized failures of bearing areas may exist. Unless closely monitored, it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken.

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Bridge is closed to traffic. Major deterioration or section loss present on primary structural elements, obvious vertical or horizontal movement is affecting the structure’s stability. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge is closed; out of service. replacement necessary.

Bridge Inspection Program

No noteworthy deficiencies that affect the structural

Beyond corrective action;

3-43

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.5 Prestressed Concrete Superstructure Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. New condition.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. No problems noted.

7

GOOD CONDITION. Nonstructural cracks less than 0.015 in. in width may be evident.

No rust stains apparent.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Minor concrete damage or deterioration. Nonstructural cracks over 0.015 in. Isolated and minor exposure of mild steel reinforcement may be present.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Isolated and minor exposure of prestressing stands may be present.

Structural cracks with little or no rust staining. Primary members sound, but may be cracked or spalled.

4

POOR CONDITION. Moderate damage or deterioration to concrete portions of the member exposing reinforcing bars or prestressing strands. Possible bond loss.

Structural cracks with medium to heavy rust staining may be present. May be loss of camber.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Severe damage to concrete and reinforcing elements of the member. Severed prestressing strand(s) or strand(s) are visibly deformed. Major or total loss of concrete section in bottom flange. Major loss of concrete section in the web, but not occurring at the same location as concrete section loss in the bottom flange.

Horizontal misalignment to member or negative camber. Unless closely monitored, it may be necessary to restrict or close the bridge until corrective action is taken.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Critical damage to concrete and reinforcing elements of member. This damage may consist of one or more of the following:

3-44

•

Cracks extend across the bottom flange or in the web directly above the bottom flange damage that are not closed below the surface damage. (This indicates that the prestressing strands have exceeded yield strength.)

•

An abrupt lateral offset as measured along the bottom flange or lateral distortion of exposed prestressing strands. (This also indicates that the prestressing strands have exceeded yield strength.)

•

Loss of prestress force to the extent that calculations show that repair cannot be made.

•

Excessive vertical misalignment.

•

Longitudinal cracks at the interface of the web and the top flange that are not substantially closed below the surface damage. (This indicates permanent deformation of stirrups.)

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Critical damage requiring the replacement of a member. Bridge is closed to traffic and installation of temporary falsework to safeguard the public and the bridge should be taken at the time of the inspection.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge closed and out of service.

Bridge Inspection Program

3-45

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.6 Steel Superstructure Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. New condition.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. No noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies that affect the condition of the superstructure.

7

GOOD CONDITION. Some rust may be evident without any section loss.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Rusting evident, but with minor section loss (minor pitting, scaling or flaking) in critical areas.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Minor section loss in critical areas. Fatigue or out of plane distortion cracks may be present in noncritical areas. Hinges may be showing minor corrosion problems. A few cracks in compression zones of fracture critical members.

4

POOR CONDITION. Significant (measurable) section loss in critical areas. Fatigue or out of plane distortion cracks may be present in critical areas. Hinges may be frozen from corrosion. Load carrying capacity of structural members affected. Several locations of cracking in tension zones or nonfracture critical members or in compression zones of fracture critical members.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Severe section loss or cracking in a critical area. Minor failures may have occurred. Significant weakening of primary members evident. Fatigue cracks in tension zones of fracture critical members.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Severe section loss in many areas with holes rusted through at numerous locations in critical areas. Severe fatigue cracking in fracture critical members.

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Bridge closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge closed. Replacement necessary.

3-46

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.A.7 Substructure Condition Rating Code Description 9

EXCELLENT CONDITION. No noticeable or noteworthy deficiencies that affect the condition of the superstructure. Insignificant scrape marks caused by drift or collision.

8

VERY GOOD CONDITION. Shrinkage cracks, light scaling or insignificant spalling that does not expose reinforcing steel. Insignificant damage caused by drift or collision with no misalignment and not requiring corrective action.

7

GOOD CONDITION. Minor cracking with possible leaching or spalls on concrete or masonry unit with no detrimental effect on bearing area. Leakage of expansion devices have initiated minor cracking. Some rusting of steel without measurable section loss.

Insignificant decay, cracking or splitting of timber. Minor scouring may have occurred.

6

SATISFACTORY CONDITION. Minor deterioration or disintegration, spalls, cracking and leaching on concrete or masonry units with little or no loss of bearing area.

Corrosion of steel section, but no measurable section loss. Some initial decay, cracking or splitting of timber. Fire damage limited to surface scorching of timber with no measurable section loss. Shallow, local scouring may have occurred near foundation.

5

FAIR CONDITION. Concrete or masonry units may exhibit some section loss with exposed reinforcing steel possible. Measurable but minor section loss in steel members.

Moderate decay, cracking or splitting of timber; a few secondary members may need replacement. Fire damage limited to surface charring of timber with minor, measurable section loss. Some exposure of timber piles as a result of erosion, reducing the penetration. Scour may be progressive and/or is becoming more prominent with a possibility of exposing top of footing, but no misalignment or settlement noted.

4

POOR CONDITION. Structural cracks and advanced deterioration in concrete and masonry units. Extensive section loss in steel members. Substantial decay, cracking, splitting or crushing of primary timber members, requiring some replacement. Fire damage with significant section loss of timber that may reduce the load carrying capacity of the member. Extensive exposure of timber piles as a result of erosion, reducing the penetration and affecting the stability of the unit. Additional cross bracing or backfilling is required. Extensive scouring or undermining of footing affecting the stability of the unit and requiring corrective action.

3

SERIOUS CONDITION. Severe disintegration of concrete. Generally, reinforcing steel exposed with advanced stages of corrosion. Severe section loss in critical stress areas.

Major fire damage to timber that will substantially reduce the load carrying capacity of the member. Bearing areas seriously deteriorated with considerable loss of bearing.

Severe scouring or undermining of footings affecting the stability of the unit. Settlement of the substructure may have occurred. Shoring considered necessary (not just precautionary) to maintain the safety and alignment of the structure.

2

CRITICAL CONDITION. Concrete cap is soft and spalling with reinforcing steel exposed with no bond to the concrete. Top of concrete cap is split or concrete column has

Bridge Inspection Program

3-47

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

undergone shear failure. Structural steel members have critical section loss with holes in the web and/or knife edge flanges typical. Primary timber members crushed or split and ineffective. Scour is sufficient that substructure is near state of collapse. Pier has settled.

1

“IMMINENT” FAILURE CONDITION. Bridge closed. Corrective action may put back in light service.

0

FAILED CONDITION. Bridge closed. Replacement necessary.

3-48

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 3B MANAGER OF TRACK MAINTENANCE

1 2 3 4

Primary Contact Bill Ince

Michael Stanton

Title Manager, Industry & Public Projects Engineering PROJ COOR1 Engineering â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Western Region

Location

Telephone

Salt Lake City, UT

801-212-3939

Salt Lake City, UT

801-212-2744

Craig Merrill

Regional Manager

Salt Lake City, UT

801-212-5223

Gary Jensen

Regional Manager

Delta, UT

801-360-4485

Jeffery Gale

Regional Manager

Ogden, UT

801-212-4005

K.C. Bone

Regional Manager

Elko, NV

775-778-6242

Michael McMerrick

Regional Manager

Evanston, WY

970-501-4806

Paul Crespin

Regional Manager

Grand Junction West, CO

402-248-4254

Robert Maxwell

Regional Manager

Caliente, NV

402-501-3574

Travis Weston

Regional Manager

Helper, UT

801-212-5280

5 6

Bridge Inspection Program

3-49

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

1

3-50

Bridge Inspection Program

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.1

INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL OVERVIEW .......................................................... 4-1 4.1.1 4.1.2

4.2

Introduction .................................................................................................... 4-1 General Overview .......................................................................................... 4-1

POLICY .......................................................................................................................4-1 4.2.1 4.2.2

Load Rating Policy......................................................................................... 4-1 Roles and Responsibilities/Qualifications ...................................................... 4-2 4.2.2.1 4.2.2.2 4.2.2.3 4.2.2.4 4.2.2.5

4.2.3

Load Rating Requirements ............................................................................ 4-4 4.2.3.1 4.2.3.2 4.2.3.3

4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 4.3

Bridge Management Engineer; Load Rating Program Manager; Load Rating Engineer .................................................. 4-2 Load Rating Manager (Consultant) .............................................. 4-2 Load Rating Engineer (Consultant).............................................. 4-3 Load Rating Engineer .................................................................. 4-3 Design Consultant ....................................................................... 4-4

Resistance (Condition Factors and System Factors)................... 4-6 Dead Loads ................................................................................. 4-6 Live Loads ................................................................................... 4-6

Load Posting Requirements .......................................................................... 4-11 Permitting Requirements ............................................................................... 4-11 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Requirements ......................................... 4-11

LOAD RATING PROCEDURES .................................................................................. 4-12 4.3.1

General Analysis Approach ........................................................................... 4-12 4.3.1.1 4.3.1.2 4.3.1.3 4.3.1.4 4.3.1.5 4.3.1.6 4.3.1.7

4.3.2

General ........................................................................................ 4-12 Resistance ................................................................................... 4-13 Dead Loads ................................................................................. 4-13 Live Loads ................................................................................... 4-14 Software ....................................................................................... 4-15 Elements to Load Rate ................................................................ 4-18 Evaluation and Refinement of Load Rating Results .................... 4-19

Structure Specific Procedures ....................................................................... 4-19 4.3.2.1 4.3.2.2 4.3.2.3 4.3.2.4 4.3.2.5 4.3.2.6 4.3.2.7

Deterioration ................................................................................ 4-19 Splayed Girders ........................................................................... 4-19 Concrete Superstructure Bridges................................................. 4-20 Steel Superstructure Bridges ....................................................... 4-29 Culverts ........................................................................................ 4-32 Substructures ............................................................................... 4-34 Rating Bridges without Plans ....................................................... 4-34

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.3

Rating Procedures for Bridges ...................................................................... 4-34 4.3.3.1 4.3.3.2 4.3.3.3 4.3.3.4 4.3.3.5

4.3.4

4.4

Permitting Procedures ................................................................................... 4-40 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Procedures ............................................. 4-41 Local Government Coordination .................................................................... 4-41

Load Rating Report Procedure ...................................................................... 4-42 4.4.1.1 4.4.1.2

4.4.2

4.4.3 4.4.4

New/Replacement and Rehabilitated/Widened Bridges .............. 4-42 Existing Bridges ........................................................................... 4-44

Reporting ....................................................................................................... 4-44 4.4.2.1 4.4.2.2

Reports ........................................................................................ 4-44 Electronic Files ............................................................................ 4-47

Training.......................................................................................................... 4-47 Data Conflicts and Software Issues............................................................... 4-47

REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS ................................................................................... 4-47

Appendix 4A Appendix 4B Appendix 4C

4-ii

State Owned Bridges ................................................................... 4-38 Locally Owned Bridges ................................................................ 4-39 Signing ......................................................................................... 4-40 Rescinding Posting ...................................................................... 4-40

DOCUMENT CONTROL .............................................................................................. 4-42 4.4.1

4.5

New/Replacement Bridges .......................................................... 4-34 Rehabilitated/Widened Bridges.................................................... 4-35 Existing Bridges (Load Rating Program)...................................... 4-35 Critical Findings from Inspection .................................................. 4-37 Critical Findings from Load Rating ............................................... 4-38

Load Posting Procedures .............................................................................. 4-38 4.3.4.1 4.3.4.2 4.3.4.3 4.3.4.4

4.3.5 4.3.6 4.3.7

February 2014

TEMPLATES ............................................................................................... 4-49 UTAH COMMON PERMIT CONFIGURATIONS .......................................... 4-50 LOAD RATING SUMMARY SHEET EXAMPLE ........................................... 4-51

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5 Figure 4.6 Figure 4.7 Figure 4.8 Figure 4.9 Figure 4.10 Figure 4.11 Figure 4.12 Figure 4.13 Figure 4.14 Figure 4.15

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — —

Figure 4.16 Figure 4.17 Figure 4.18 Figure 4.19 Figure 4.20

— — — — —

LFR ANALYSIS SETTINGS ............................................................................. 4-7 LRFR ANALYSIS SETTINGS ........................................................................... 4-8 LRFR ADVANCED ANALYSIS SETTINGS ...................................................... 4-9 METRIC INPUT REQUIREMENTS ................................................................ 4-12 SURFACE ROUGHNESS RATING ................................................................ 4-15 SMOOTH SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 1; IM: 10%) .... 4-16 AVERAGE SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 2; IM: 20%) .. 4-16 POOR SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 3; IM: 33%) ......... 4-17 BRIDGE TYPE AND REQUIRED LOAD RATING SOFTWARE .................... 4-17 REINFORCED CONCRETE SLABS (Control Options) .................................. 4-21 REINFORCED CONCRETE GIRDERS (Control Options) ............................. 4-23 PRECAST, PRESTRESSED CONCRETE I-GIRDER BRIDGES .................. 4-25 EFFECTIVE WEB WIDTH .............................................................................. 4-27 PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDERS (Control Options) .......................... 4-28 RATING FOR CORROSION (Precast, Prestressed Concrete Deck Girder Bridges) ............................................................................................... 4-30 STEEL GIRDERS (Control Options)............................................................... 4-31 BOX CULVERT (Control Options) .................................................................. 4-33 POSTING SIGNS ........................................................................................... 4-38 ELECTRONIC FILE NAMING CONVENTION................................................ 4-43 FORMAT OF LOAD RATING REPORT ......................................................... 4-45

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-iii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4-iv

February 2014

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 4 LOAD RATING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 4.1 4.1.1

INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL OVERVIEW Introduction

Bridge load rating is the determination of the live load carrying capacity of a newly designed or existing bridge. Engineers typically determine load ratings by analytical methods based on information from bridge plans supplemented by information gathered from field inspections or field testing.

4.1.2

General Overview

Knowledge of the capacity of each bridge to carry loads is critical for several reasons, including to: • • • •

Determine which structures have substandard load capacities that could require load posting or other remedial action Effectively use available resources for rehabilitation or replacement Assist in the overload permit review process Satisfy FHWA requirements for submitting load ratings

NBIS (Title 23, CFR §650.313(c)) requires that load ratings meet the current AASHTO Manual.

FHWA updated the NBIS regulations in December 2009 to define the AASHTO Manual in 23 CFR §650.317 as the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation (MBE), effective February 25, 2010. The NBIS includes the MBE by reference.

4.2 4.2.1

POLICY Load Rating Policy

The Structures Division load rating policies and procedures supplement and supersede the MBE provisions.

Load rate all structures defined as bridges in the CFR as follows: • • •

Load rate all new bridges in the design phase Load rate all rehabilitated bridges in the design phase Update load ratings when required due to changes in condition noted in inspections

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

February 2014

Load rate bridges in accordance with the MBE including all interims and this chapter Develop a load rating model and report for all load ratings

The MBE is the national standard for bridge load rating. These policies and procedures serve as a supplement to the MBE and focus primarily on specific load rating requirements, interpretations and policy decisions. The policy and procedures also provide technical guidance to engineers performing and submitting load rating calculations using load factor rating (LFR) and load and resistance factor rating (LRFR) methodologies. The procedures provide requirements for consistent and reproducible load rating inputs and deliverables.

4.2.2

Roles and Responsibilities/Qualifications

The Bridge Management Division is responsible for the Utah bridge inspection program in compliance with 23 CFR §650 Subpart C – NBIS, which includes bridge live load ratings. See Chapter 3. The load rating program uses information from the inspection program and updates load ratings based on inspection data when required.

4.2.2.1

Bridge Management Engineer; Load Rating Program Manager; Load Rating Engineer

The Bridge Management Engineer implements the load rating program and serves as the Load Rating Program Manager and the Load Rating Engineer for implementation of the NBIS.

4.2.2.1.1 • •

Registered PE Completed the FHWA approved National Highway Institute (NHI) load rating course (preferred but not required)

4.2.2.1.2 • • • •

Qualifications

Responsibilities (Applicable to Load Ratings)

Administers the bridge inspection, reporting and inventory program Administers the bridge load rating program Ensures compliance with load rating policies and procedures Ensures compliance with federal load rating directives

4.2.2.2

Load Rating Manager (Consultant)

The Load Rating Manager performs load rating tasks as directed by the Load Rating Program Manager. The Load Rating Manager also manages technical aspects of the load rating program.

4-2

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.2.2.2.1 • •

Qualifications

Registered PE Completed the FHWA approved NHI load rating course (preferred but not required)

4.2.2.2.2 • • • • • •

February 2014

Responsibilities

Assists with Request for Qualifications (RFQ) preparations to hire load rating consultants Develops load rating standards Maintains load rating standards Conducts project team meetings Coordinates and conducts training Performs quality assurance audits on load rating reports

4.2.2.3

Load Rating Engineer (Consultant)

The Load Rating Engineer (Consultant) performs ratings as directed by the Load Rating Manager.

4.2.2.3.1 • •

Registered PE Completed the FHWA approved NHI load rating course (preferred but not required)

4.2.2.3.2 • • •

Qualifications

Responsibilities

Performs load ratings Prepares load rating reports Provides input into the load rating policies and procedures

4.2.2.4

Load Rating Engineer

The Load Rating Engineer can be either a UDOT employee or consultant that completes load rating reports.

4.2.2.4.1 • •

Qualifications

Registered PE or engineer in training (EIT) Completed the FHWA approved NHI load rating course (preferred but not required)

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.2.2.4.2

February 2014

Responsibilities (Depending on Experience)

Professional Engineer: • • • •

Oversees the efforts of EITs Performs load ratings Reviews, signs and seals load rating reports Coordinates with the Bridge Database Coordinator on BMS

Engineer in Training: • •

Performs load ratings Compiles load rating reports

4.2.2.5

Design Consultant

The Structures Division hires design consultants to complete new bridge designs, widenings or rehabilitations. The UDOT Project Delivery Network includes a load rating model and report as deliverables. Design consultants must complete the load rating model and report using the format and procedures defined in this chapter.

4.2.2.5.1 • •

Registered PE Completed the FHWA approved NHI load rating course (preferred but not required)

4.2.2.5.2 • •

4.2.3

Qualifications

Responsibilities (Applicable to Load Ratings)

Coordinates with the Load Rating Program Manager when required Performs load ratings and prepares load rating reports on new, widened or rehabilitated bridges

Load Rating Requirements

Rate bridges designed by the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges with the LFR method and the LRFR method. Use the LRFR method to rate bridges designed by the AASHTO LRFD Specifications. Use the allowable stress design (ASD) method to rate timber bridges regardless of the original design.

Perform load ratings according to the Structures Division and MBE requirements.

4-4

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Calculate load ratings for the Inventory and Operating levels of safety. The definitions of Inventory and Operating levels depend on the rating methodology. The MBE definitions are: 1.

Inventory Rating. Load ratings based on the Inventory level allow comparisons with the capacity for new structures and, therefore, results in a live load that can safely utilize an existing structure for an indefinite period of time.

2.

Inventory Level Rating. Generally corresponds to the rating at the design level of reliability for new bridges in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, but reflects the existing bridge and material conditions with regard to deterioration and loss of section.

3.

Operating Rating. Load ratings based on the operating level generally describe the maximum permissible live load to which the structure may be subjected. Allowing unlimited numbers of vehicles to use the bridge at operating level may shorten the life of the bridge.

4.

Operating Level Rating. Maximum load level to which a structure may be subjected.

Generally corresponds to the rating at the operating level of reliability in past load rating practice.

5.

Legal Level Rating. This second level rating provides a single safe load capacity (for a given truck configuration) applicable to AASHTO and state legal loads. Live load factors are selected based on the truck traffic conditions at the site. Strength is the primary limit state for load rating; service limit states are selectively applied. Use the results of the load rating for legal loads as a basis for decision making related to load posting or bridge strengthening.

6.

Permit Level Rating. Permit load rating checks the safety and serviceability of bridges in the review of permit applications for the passage of vehicles above the legally established weight limitations. Only apply this third level rating to bridges having sufficient capacity for AASHTO legal loads. Calibrated load factors by permit type and traffic conditions at the site are specified for checking the load effects induced by the passage of the overweight truck.

Load ratings either employ design assumptions or are consistent with the operation of the structure. UDOT performs four types of load ratings: • • • •

Design load ratings are completed by the structural engineer before construction.

Operating (in service) load ratings are routine load ratings completed after design and incorporate any changes in condition noted in the inspection reports.

Permit load ratings are special request load ratings of existing bridges for a permit load and incorporate any changes in condition noted in the inspection reports.

Construction load ratings are special request load ratings for local construction loads and incorporate any changes in condition noted in the inspection reports.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Design Load Ratings are completed before construction and use the same assumptions and approaches as shown on the bridge design plans. Design Load Ratings: • • • •

Reflect the bridge according to the design plans (include future wearing surface) Do not account for future deterioration Do not consider deterioration and evaluate only design loads Place vehicles without regard to striped lanes following the LRFD Specifications requirements

Operating (In Service) Load Ratings, Special Permit Load Ratings and Construction Load Ratings are load ratings performed after the time of design. The load ratings use parameters consistent with the operation of the structure. Load ratings after design: • • • •

Are generated from as built or available design plans or field measurements Are updated with the biennial inspection when deterioration has occurred Do account for deterioration Can place vehicular live load within the striped lanes on the bridge

4.2.3.1

Resistance (Condition Factors and System Factors)

Set the condition factor equal to the values provided in the MBE. Use the system factors provided in the MBE when load rating for flexural and axial effects. Use the appropriate factors for segmental concrete members. Use the 0.90 system factor for flexure of riveted floor beams and use the 0.85 system factor for three girder systems with spacing less than or equal to 6 ft.

4.2.3.2

Dead Loads

Use the loads and nomenclature described in Section 4.3.1.3.

4.2.3.3

Live Loads

Refer to the MBE for load factors and limit states for load rating. Rate each bridge for the following live load models. See Appendix 4C, which contains a copy of the Load Rating Summary Sheet. Figures 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 present the LFR and LRFR analysis settings for the live load models when using AASHTO Bridge Rating (BrR).

4-6

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.1 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; LFR ANALYSIS SETTINGS

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.2 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; LRFR ANALYSIS SETTINGS

4-8

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.3 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; LRFR ADVANCED ANALYSIS SETTINGS

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.2.3.3.1 • • • • •

• • • • •

• • •

Operating (In Service) Load Rating

Perform the load rating using the HL-93 loading at the Inventory and Operating levels using the LRFR method Perform the legal load rating for routine commercial traffic using the legal loads — Type 3, Type 3-S2, Type 3-3; see the MBE for load definitions Perform the legal load rating for AASHTO SHVs — SU4, SU5, SU6, SU7; see the MBE for load definitions Perform permit load ratings for the five common Utah operating configurations (UT-P6, UT-P7, UT-P8, UT-P9a, UT-P9b); see Appendix 4B Check all limit states listed in the MBE except Service III for legal and permit load ratings For bridges not designed for HL-93, repeat all items listed above using the LFR method with operating level ratings in place of the LRFR legal or permit levels

4.2.3.3.3 •

Design Load Rating

Perform the load rating using the HL-93 loading at the Inventory and Operating levels using the LRFR method Perform legal load ratings for routine commercial traffic using the legal loads — Type 3, Type 3-S2, Type 3-3; see the MBE for load definitions Perform legal load rating for AASHTO specialized hauling vehicles (SHV) — SU4, SU5, SU6, SU7; see the MBE for load definitions Perform permit load ratings for the five common Utah configurations (UT-P6, UT-P7, UTP8, UT-P9a, UT-P9b); see Appendix 4B Check all limit states listed in the MBE including the service limit states

4.2.3.3.2 •

February 2014

Permit Load Rating

Perform a load rating using the permit load configuration using the LRFR permit level rating Use existing condition information and applicable adjustments For bridges not designed for HL-93, repeat the load rating using the LFR operating method and the permit load configuration Check all limit states listed in the MBE including the service limit states

4.2.3.3.4

Construction Load Rating

Construction Load Ratings are performed by the contractor’s engineer. Construction Load Ratings are for construction activities using existing bridges, and do not apply to shipping of precast elements from a precast plant to the site or loads requiring a permit.

4-10

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • • •

4.2.4

February 2014

Perform a load rating using the construction load configuration operating level using the LRFR method Use existing condition information and applicable adjustments Check all strength limit states listed in the MBE Check all service limit states if the bridge remains in service after completion of the construction project Use the special or limited crossing permit load factors, defined in the MBE, for defined construction loads Use a load factor of 1.3 and no impact factor for self propelled modular transporters (SPMT) carrying preconstructed bridge elements Use special or limited crossing permit load factors, defined in the MBE, for SPMTs carrying defined construction loads (a defined construction load is a load verified by scales or an equipment load verified by the manufacturer to be within ±5% of the actual load)

Load Posting Requirements

If a bridge is not capable of carrying legal loads, post for a lesser load limit. UDOT follows the bridge posting procedure recommendations in the MBE for LRFR and LFR. UDOT closes bridges to the traveling public if the Operating Load Rating is less than 3 tons.

Refer to Section 4.3.4 for load posting procedures.

4.2.5

Permitting Requirements

The Utah Trucking Guide, published by the Motor Carrier Division, provides the provisions for routine and special permits. The Motor Carrier Division issues permits on a semi-annual or annual basis for a gross vehicle weight of less than 125,000 pounds for nondivisible loads and 129,000 for divisible loads. The Motor Carrier Division grants permits for larger vehicles on a single trip basis. The Utah Trucking Guide presents approved routes for permits.

Refer to Section 4.3.5 for permitting procedures.

4.2.6

Quality Control/Quality Assurance Requirements

Follow the current version of the UDOT QC/QA procedures. Provide routine and consistent checks for data integrity, correctness and completeness. Identify and address errors and omissions.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3

February 2014

LOAD RATING PROCEDURES

4.3.1 4.3.1.1

General Analysis Approach General

Rate both interior girders and exterior girders. Do not rate exterior girders if justified by existing conditions and approved by UDOT. When plans are in SI units, use metric input in rating software. Use the requirements in Figure 4.4.

Property or Dimension

Conversion Method

Plans Show

Use for Rating

Axle width and offsets for distribution factors

Use US customary units

1800 mm 600 mm

6 ft 2 ft

Reinforcing strength

Use metric value shown in the plans

420 MPa

420 MPa (60.92 ksi)

Steel strength

Use metric value shown in the plans

345 MPa

345 MPa (50.04 ksi)

Concrete strength

Use metric value shown in the plans

27.5 MPa

27.5 MPa

Concrete dimensions

Use metric value shown in the plans

208 mm

208 mm

Reinforcing size

Use bar size shown in the plans

#16

#16 (SI)

Steel plate width and depth

Use dimensions shown in the plans

400 mm

400 mm

Steel plate thickness

Use dimensions shown in the plans

38 mm

38 mm

Rolled shapes

Use metric equivalents of standard shape

W10 × 19

W250 × 28.4

Bridge geometry

Use dimensions shown in the plans

14.400 m

14.400 m

AASHTO precast concrete girders

Use US customary dimensions converted to metric

75 mm

76.2 mm (¾ in.)

Precast concrete girders created during the metric era (WXXXXMG)

Use metric value shown in the plans

75 mm

75 mm

Figure 4.4 — METRIC INPUT REQUIREMENTS 4-12

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.1.2

February 2014

Resistance

Calculate resistance using the references and requirements of the MBE matching the load rating method.

4.3.1.3

Dead Loads

Calculate dead loads based on plan dimensions. Use the material unit weights specified in the current edition of the AASHTO LRFD Specifications unless indicated otherwise in the plans or in Chapter 4.

Distribute superstructure composite dead loads equally to all supporting members.

Calculate wearing surfaces and utility loads with the best information available.

Use a 1.5 load factor for overlays unless the inspection reports specifically state that the thickness is field verified. Wearing surface thicknesses are highly variable and can vary significantly from plan dimensions.

Use the field verified deck overlay thickness in calculations if available. Use a 1.25 load factor for the LRFR load factor for dead weight (DW) at the strength limit state where the wearing surface thickness has been field measured within the last two years. The bridge inspector field verifies the thickness of overlay using multiple measurements at parapets to determine an average wearing surface thickness. Unless indicated otherwise by field measurement or plans, use a ⅜-in. thickness for thin bonded polymer overlays.

Use the following densities for wearing surfaces unless noted otherwise in the plans: • • • • • • • •

Monolithic concrete: Latex concrete: Low slump concrete: Polyester concrete Polymer overlay: Bituminous: Wood: Gravel:

0.15 kcf 0.16 kcf 0.16 kcf 0.14 kcf 0.16 kcf 0.16 kcf 0.06 kcf 0.12 kcf

Include the future wearing surface in the load rating calculations when performing a Design Load Rating. Do not include the future wearing surface in the load rating calculations when performing an Operating (In Service) Load Rating, Permit Load Rating or Construction Load Rating. Do not include overlays (i.e., concrete, asphalt, polymer) in the composite section properties.

Consider the top ½ in. of the cast-in-place concrete deck slab thickness as sacrificial. Include for dead load but do not include in section property computations. For precast decks, consider the top ½ in. as sacrificial if no initial overlay was included.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-13

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Utility loads can be either composite or noncomposite depending on the construction sequence.

The default policy is to apply the utility load as a composite load to the two adjacent girders or exterior girder only when attached outside the exterior girder. Apply the utility loads to the noncomposite section when appropriate. Use a utility load of 250 pounds per foot when no information other than the presence of the utility is available or only a pipe size(s) greater than or equal to a 6-in. diameter is known. Use a utility load of 125 pounds per foot when only a pipe size(s) less than a 6-in. diameter is known. Where photographs or other information is sufficient, estimate the utility weight and document the weight in the load rating report.

In calculations and program input, differentiate dead loads using the following standard names: • • • • • • • •

DC1 DC1 DC2 DW DC2 DC2 DC2 DW

— — — — — — — —

Haunch (Camber Strip) Stay In Place Forms Parapet Utilities Light Sign Sound Wall For overlays, use names listed in FHWA Recording and Coding Guide

Include a dead load of 0.018 ksf for stay in place forms unless records indicate that the forms have been removed or a different weight is indicated on the plans. If the forms have been removed, use 0.013 ksf to account for the concrete deformations. Verify stay in place form removal with inspection or construction records.

4.3.1.4

Live Loads

Use the live loads and permit loads identified in Section 4.2.3.3. Do not rate girders that support an area of deck protected by a barrier. Ignore curbs when computing live load distribution. For two way traffic structures, use 55% of traffic to estimate the one way average daily truck traffic (ADTT). Do not include pedestrian loads in rating calculations.

4.3.1.4.1

Live Load Distribution Factor

Rate bridges using the LRFD Specifications load distribution factors. Where the LRFD Specifications distribution methods are not applicable, use refined methods of analysis. Refined analysis methods can improve low ratings and prevent load posting. Do not use refined analysis without the prior approval of the Load Rating Program Manager.

Use the LRFD Specifications formulas where applicable without modification for striped lanes.

When estimating load distribution by approximate methods other than the LRFD Specifications formulas, use live load positioned in the striped lanes. Do not use metric axle spacing or curb offsets when calculating the distribution factor.

4-14

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.1.4.2

February 2014

Surface Roughness Rating

A LRFD dynamic load allowance of 33% reflects conservative conditions that could prevail under certain distressed bridge approach and bridge deck conditions. For LRFR load rating of legal loads and permits for bridges with less severe approach and deck surface conditions, decrease the IM based on field observations in accordance with the MBE. For LRFR ratings, use a dynamic load allowance (IM) of 33% unless rating factors for legal loads require a posting analysis. In this case, use the following guidance for determining a reduced IM. Use the corresponding values for IM given in the MBE for the surface roughness ratings. Figure 4.5 defines surface roughness for load rating applications: Surface Roughness Rating

Description

1 = Smooth

Smooth riding surface at the approaches, bridge deck and expansion joints

2 = Average

Minor surface deviations or settlement at the approach slab or just before the approach slab

3 = Poor

Significant deviations in the riding surface at the approaches or significant deviations in the bridge deck surface (patchwork) and expansion joints Figure 4.5 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; SURFACE ROUGHNESS RATING

Figures 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8 provide examples that represent the surface roughness rating.

4.3.1.5 4.3.1.5.1

Software General

Standard analysis tools can maximize efficiency, provide consistency and facilitate future revisions of load ratings. Use the software indicated in Figure 4.9 based on the bridge type.

Obtain approval from the Load Rating Program Manager before using other types of bridge load rating software.

4.3.1.5.2

AASHTOWare Bridge Rating Modeling Approach

The structure name description in the AASHTOWare BrR (formerly known as Virtis) model must match the bridge key in the BMS exactly.

Place the bridge reference line at the centerline of the bridge.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-15

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.6 — SMOOTH SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 1; IM: 10%)

Figure 4.7 — AVERAGE SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 2; IM: 20%) 4-16

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.8 — POOR SURFACE ROUGHNESS (Riding Surface Rating: 3; IM: 33%)

Required Load Rating Software

Bridge Type Multistringer/multigirder (steel or concrete)

BrR

Reinforced concrete girders

BrR

Reinforced concrete slabs

BrR

Prestressed precast concrete (I-girders or box girders)

BrR

CIP box girders (including post-tensioned)

BrR (CSIBRIDGE if necessary)

Girder/floor beam/stringer systems

BrR (CSIBRIDGE If necessary)

Curved girders

BrR (CSIBRIDGE if necessary)

Transverse steel box girders (integral bent cap)

CSIBRIDGE

Culverts and concrete rigid frames

BrR, BRASS CULVERT or in house software

Trusses and arches

BrR (CSIBRIDGE if necessary)

Timber

BrR (CSIBRIDGE if necessary) Figure 4.9 — BRIDGE TYPE AND REQUIRED LOAD RATING SOFTWARE

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-17

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Use the default tolerances in BrR. Modify the tolerances only with the approval of the Load Rating Program Manager.

Model every unique girder element of the structure. Model the bridge as a connected system with each unique span in multispan bridges and each span with deterioration. Rate at tenth points of all spans, at 0.45 times the span length for simple span bridges, and at 0.25 and 0.75 times the span length for continuous bridges.

Select an interior girder located near the center of the bridge to exemplify the interior girders during the rating rather than a girder next to the exterior girder.

Rate the girder with the longest overhang when rating bridges with variable overhangs. For bridges with a curved edge of deck and chorded girders, set one overhang to the maximum of the overhang at the ⅓ span point or ⅔ span point. Set the other overhang so that the remaining deck adds up to the out to out deck width.

Noncomposite bridges with full-depth cast-in-place concrete decks have wearing surface and parapet loads distributed equally to all girders. Use engineering judgment in unusual cases (e.g., widenings, decks poured in segments).

For multispan bridges, check the Lane Type Legal Load with Legal Pair in the LRFR Analysis Settings under the Advanced tab. For single span bridges over 200 ft, add the Lane Type Legal Load without the Legal Pair. For all bridges, change Single Trip to Unlimited Crossing for permit loads only.

For slab on girder bridges, rate the entire bridge superstructure as a BrR girder system that includes the rating of all girders. Use the Link with: option to define identical girders within a girder system. For members that have deterioration, copy and paste to create unique member alternatives.

Model concrete slab bridges as a girder line with a 1-ft width.

Refer to Section 4.3.2 for direction on the selection of control options for various types of bridges and other specific requirements.

4.3.1.6

Elements to Load Rate

Analyze the following items: • • • • • 4-18

All superstructure elements defined as primary members FCMs or components with fatigue prone details (Category C or lower) for infinite fatigue life Gusset plates and connection elements for nonredundant steel truss bridges Other connections of nonredundant systems (e.g., nonredundant floor beam connections, pin and hanger assemblies) Nonredundant steel bent caps

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

February 2014

Steel or timber bents, as needed, based on deterioration (NBI condition state ≤ 4) Substructure elements on an as needed basis

4.3.1.7

Evaluation and Refinement of Load Rating Results

Bridges with legal load ratings higher than 1.0 do not require refinements. Evaluate and refine the analysis assumptions for bridges with load ratings below the legal load limits.

Use the 3D finite element method (FEM) analysis option if posting evaluation is required when using a line girder analysis and the lowest legal load rating is between 0.7 and 1.0. Report the analysis results of whichever analysis gives the highest critical legal load rating factor. Use 3D FEM if any of the support skew angles are greater than 60° when modeling girders as splayed or when stiffnesses between girder lines varies greatly. If 3D FEM analysis does not run or yields results that are unrealistic, consider using and reporting line girder analysis.

4.3.2

Structure Specific Procedures

The following provides load rating procedures specific to bridge types.

4.3.2.1

Deterioration

Bridge inspections determine the physical and functional condition of the bridge, which forms the basis for the evaluation and load rating of the bridge. During each inspection, measure and document items that can affect the load capacity such as dead loads, section deterioration and damage. Consider only sound material in determining the nominal resistance of the deteriorated section.

The bridge inspector measures and documents the remaining section during each field inspection and records the location of section loss within the cross section and along the length of the span.

The measurements can have a significant influence on the section property calculations and the member resistance used for load rating. A deteriorated structure can behave differently than the structure as originally designed. Evaluate deterioration and damage observed in the field and determine the impact on bridge load ratings.

4.3.2.2

Splayed Girders

When rating splayed girders, use engineering judgment to know when to model with a nonsplayed girder system. If a nonsplayed girder system is used, set the spacing to the spacing at the ⅔ point of the splayed system. Items to consider are:

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-19

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • • •

February 2014

Girder location (exterior or interior) Skew Span configuration (simple or continuous) Span length Varying dead loads Varying live loads Varying girder widths or other details

When a splayed girder bridge would otherwise require a posting evaluation, the bridge must be modeled as splayed to get the most accurate results.

4.3.2.3 4.3.2.3.1

Concrete Superstructure Bridges General Guidance

For concrete bridges designed as rigid frames, include integral substructure elements in the bridge model. A rotational stiffness increase at the joint will increase flexural moment at the joint and decrease midspan flexural moments. Model the actual substructure element, if possible. Use equivalent spring stiffness if the software does not support modeling the member.

Model typical integral abutments as pinned supports.

For girders made continuous for live load at bents, take negative moment ratings at the face of the bent diaphragms.

Use the critical section for shear ratings at a distance from the face of support in accordance with the LRFD Specifications.

Do not perform the Service III check for legal loads.

When modeling shear stirrups in BrR in concrete and prestressed concrete members, start at zero spacing. Never use the wizard.

For bridge plans where only the allowable concrete stress is provided, estimate concrete compressive strength as 3.0 times the allowable concrete stress for bridges designed according to the 1953 design code or older, and 2.5 times the allowable concrete stress for bridges designed according to codes later than 1953.

4.3.2.3.2

Concrete Slab Bridges

Some slab bridge plans show that the slab depth at abutments is deeper than in the positive moment regions of the span. For these cases, code into the bridge model the entire slab section depth as the positive moment region depth. Slab designs from the 1940s and early 1950s did not include steel in the top of slabs in the positive moment regions. For these cases, code into the load rating model minimal top reinforcing (e.g., #4 bars at 18 in.). The coding 4-20

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

gives a capacity to the rating equation so that the negative moment rating in the positive moment region does not control the bridge rating.

Slab bridges built in the 1930s and 1940s could have used square reinforcing steel. The plans identify square reinforcing by the size of bar and an associated square symbol. In BrR, use a #9 reinforcing bar with the number and spacing to produce an equivalent area of the square bars.

For modeling reinforced concrete slabs in BrR, select the following load factor design (LFD) control options for LFR (see Figure 4.10): •

• •

Points of Interest (POI) ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Ignore shear Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI

Figure 4.10 — REINFORCED CONCRETE SLABS (Control Options)

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-21

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

For modeling reinforced concrete slabs in BrR, select the following control options for LRFR (see Figure 4.10): •

• • • •

Points of Interest ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Shear Computation Method ○ Ignore Ignore design and legal load shear Ignore permit load shear Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI

4.3.2.3.3

Reinforced Concrete Girder Bridges

For modeling reinforced concrete girders in BrR, select the following LFD control options for LFR (see Figure 4.11): •

•

Points of Interest ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI

For modeling reinforced concrete girders in BrR, select the following control options for LRFR (see Figure 4.11): •

• •

4-22

Points of Interest ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Shear Computation Method ○ General procedure Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.11 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; REINFORCED CONCRETE GIRDERS (Control Options)

4.3.2.3.4

Precast, Prestressed Concrete I-Girder Bridges

Use the simplified approach for determining prestress losses. Use the LRFD Specifications map for estimating average annual ambient mean relative humidity.

In BrR, model only the prestressed center of gravity and the jacking force, unless the strand pattern is known, deterioration is present or the bridge has a legal load rating factor less than 1.0 with shear controlling. Modeling the strand pattern increases the computed shear capacity.

Templates are available to calculate the jacking force; see Appendix 4A. Assume 35 ksi losses unless better information indicates otherwise. Do not adjust the jacking force to attempt to obtain an exact number of strands. In the BrR model, use the approximate method to estimate losses.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-23

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

When estimating the number of strands and strand pattern for plan sets prepared before 2000, which only list the final required PT force, assume 35 ksi in losses and 0 ksi tension in the bottom flange for service loads.

Unless plans, shop drawings or calculations indicate otherwise, use stress relieved strand for bridges constructed during or before 1998. For bridges constructed after 1998, use low relaxation strand.

Ignore the minimum area of prestressing steel statements in the plans.

Use strand diameters in modeling no larger than the maximum strand diameter specified in the plans. Include evidence of prestressing corrosion in the load rating model. Disregard exposed strands for the resistance at the exposed location. See Figure 4.12 for further clarification on disregarding strands.

If the plans do not indicate the girder concrete strength at transfer, use 0.8 times the specified concrete strength.

If the girder design occurred in approximately 1979 and the BrR model produces a rating less than 1.0 for shear, run a 1979 code check. Include the 1979 code check results in the evaluation of rating and recommendations sections of the load rating report. Omit the 1979 code check in the BrR model submitted with the load rating report.

For LFR ratings, include the chamfers in the effective web width for calculating the tributary deck width as seen in Figure 4.13. Use the BrR defaults for LFR effective flange width unless a posting evaluation would be required, in which case, use web and haunch width to get effective web widths of AASHTO Type I, II, III and IV girders.

Model prestressed girders based upon as built conditions (e.g., model as continuous if there is a continuous deck with increased longitudinal deck reinforcement over the bents, full-depth diaphragms at the bents and tendons that tie into the diaphragm). For continuous spans, use all longitudinal reinforcing contained within the tributary width of slab for each girder in the model.

Use longitudinal temperature, distribution and negative moment reinforcing in the model. If questions arise, notify the Load Rating Program Manager.

If positive moment is an issue in continuous prestressed girders, ensure an equivalent amount of mild reinforcing is modeled at the bent (to model the amount of strands that are extended).

The amount of mild steel is as follows: Areamild_steel = Areaextended_strand*(Fy_strand/Fy_mild_steel).

Always populate the stress limits and Stress Limit Range in the Beam Details tab of the BrR model for concrete girder bridges.

4-24

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.12 — PRECAST, PRESTRESSED CONCRETE I-GIRDER BRIDGES Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-25

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.12 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; PRECAST, PRESTRESSED CONCRETE I-GIRDER BRIDGES (Continued) 4-26

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.13 — EFFECTIVE WEB WIDTH

Code the haunch as zero (0) in. into the model for section properties. Enter a dead load for the haunch based on the larger of the plan values or as calculated by assuming a 1-in. minimum haunch at the controlling location and estimating the midspan and support haunch based on the structure geometry. Account for the roadway profile and superelevation. Refer to DD-11B for a sample haunch calculation. Use an average depth calculated as ⅔ of the end haunch depth plus ⅓ of the midspan haunch depth applied uniformly over the span.

For modeling prestressed concrete girders in BrR, select the following LFD control options for LFR (see Figure 4.14): •

• •

Points of Interest (POI) ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Shear Computation Method ○ Use current AASHTO (see note on figure) Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-27

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.14 — PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDERS (Control Options)

For modeling prestressed concrete girders in BrR, select the following control options for LRFR (see Figure 4.14): •

• • • • • •

4-28

Points of Interest (POI) ○ Generate at tenth points ○ Generate at section change points ○ Generate at user defined points Shear Computation Method ○ General Procedure Loss and Stress Calculations ○ Use gross section properties Multispan analysis ○ Continuous and Simple (see note on figure) Ignore tensile rating in top of girder Consider permit load tensile steel stress Distribution Factor Application Method ○

By POI Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.2.3.5

February 2014

Precast, Prestressed Concrete Deck Girder Bridges

Corrosion issues are more critical in precast, prestressed concrete deck girder bridges (where the top surface of the girders form the deck surface) than in other prestressed concrete bridges.

Figure 4.15 provides guidance on the number of strands to disregard in the load rating analysis when an inspection reveals cracks or unsound concrete around exposed strands. The figure illustrates a box girder, but the same procedure applies to prestressed voided slabs.

Use the BrR control options identified in Section 4.3.2.3.4.

4.3.2.4

Steel Superstructure Bridges

Refer to the MBE for guidance on the effects of deterioration. To account for miscellaneous details not shown in the plans, add an additional 3% to the total steel weight and distribute evenly to the girders. The total steel weight includes all cross frames, stiffeners, splice plates and any other items defined in the plans. Include the weight of field splices for girders greater than 5-ft deep as a point load in the analysis.

4.3.2.4.1

Straight Steel Girder Load Rating

For continuous spans, use the deck reinforcement in the negative moment region only if the bridge requires a posting evaluation without it.

Include stiffeners in the load rating analysis to determine the shear capacity.

Include the haunch as shown in the plans for both resistance and dead load. Use the same haunch depth for all girders unless shown otherwise.

For modeling steel girders in BrR, select the following LFD control options for LFR (see Figure 4.16): •

• • • •

Points of Interest o Generate at tenth points o Generate at section change points o Generate at user defined points Allow moment redistribution Allow plastic analysis Ignore longitudinal reinforcement in negative moment capacity (see note on figure) Distribution Factor Application Method o

By POI

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-29

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.15 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; RATING FOR CORROSION (Precast, Prestressed Concrete Deck Girder Bridges)

4-30

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 4.16 — STEEL GIRDERS (Control Options)

For modeling steel girders in BrR, select the following control options for LRFR (see Figure 4.16): •

• • • • •

Points of interest o Generate at tenth points o Generate at section change points o Generate at user defined points Allow moment redistribution Use Appendix A6 for flexural resistance Allow plastic analysis Ignore longitudinal reinforcement in negative moment capacity (see note on figure) Distribution Factor Application Method o

By POI

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-31

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.2.4.2

February 2014

Curved and Highly Skewed Steel Girder Load Rating

The LRFR provisions of the MBE apply to components of straight or horizontally curved I-girder bridges and straight or horizontally curved single or multiple closed box or tub girder bridges.

Perform the analysis of bridges curved in plan using refined methods of analysis. A 2D grid analysis is an acceptable approach in most cases for curved girder load ratings. Consider a 3D FEM analysis for curved girders with tight radii, severe skews (greater than 60°) or irregular framing. Do not use refined analysis without the prior approval of the Load Rating Program Manager.

4.3.2.4.3

Gusset Plate Rating for Nonredundant Bridges

Rate gusset plates for primary structural members. Follow the guidance for rating gusset plates in FHWA Publication No. FHWA-IF-09-014.

4.3.2.4.4

Steel Through Girders

Assume that compression flanges of through girders are braced at knee brace locations. Floor girders are typically attached to vertical stiffeners on the girders with knee bracing. This provides moment resistance and, thereby, lateral bracing. Connections without knee bracing provide only shear resistance and, therefore, do not provide lateral bracing.

4.3.2.5

Culverts

Culverts experience loadings that are not applicable to most bridge superstructures, including vertical and horizontal soil loads and live load surcharge. Additionally, maximum and minimum load factors for earth pressure and dead loads are required for load rating.

Do not rate culverts with fill depths greater than 8 ft. Do not rate multicell culverts with fill depths greater than the distance between end walls (see MBE Section 6A.5.15.10.3.1).

When modeling culverts in BrR, no changes to the control options are necessary. Use the following assumptions unless good engineering judgment or additional information indicates otherwise: • • • • • • •

4-32

The first 12 in. of fill is asphalt.

The culvert was constructed under embankment conditions.

The subgrade modulus is 100 pci.

The water height can be ignored.

Live load surcharge is the same for LRFR and LFR. Use standard soil 1.

Use the fill height at the center of the traveled way.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Rate headwalls when indicated by the headwall rating flowchart. There are templates provided to compute loads and section properties; see Appendix 4A. Refer to the MBE for specific culvert load rating criteria.

For modeling box culverts in BrR, select the following LFD control options for LFR (see Figure 4.17): •

Points of Interest (POI) o Generate at tenth points o Generate at user defined points

For modeling box culverts in BrR, select the following control options for LRFR (see Figure 4.17): •

•

Points of Interest (POI) o Generate at tenth points o Generate at user defined points Shear Computation Method o Simplified Procedure

Figure 4.17 —BOX CULVERT (Control Options) Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-33

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.2.6

February 2014

Substructures

Only load rate substructures if directed by the Load Rating Program Manager. Refer to the MBE for a discussion on component specific evaluation of substructures.

4.3.2.7

Rating Bridges without Plans

The Structures Division does not require that concrete bridges with unknown reinforcing be posted for restricted loading when the bridge has carried normal traffic for an appreciable length of time and does not show signs of distress. In these cases, assign a load rating equal to the legal load limit.

Make detailed measurements of steel bridges without plans. Load rate steel bridges without plans using the detailed field measurements. Ignore composite action between the steel girders and the deck when load rating steel bridges with concrete decks without plans.

On a case by case basis, the load rating of an individual structure without plans can be determined through load testing in accordance with provisions in the MBE.

4.3.3

Rating Procedures for Bridges

Load rate by the LRFR method for: • •

All new and replacement bridges Rehabilitation and repair designs involving a substantial structural alteration

Use the templates and forms provided by the Structures Division. See Appendix 4A for a list of available supplemental templates. Perform LRFR load rating calculations as part of the design process within the Project Delivery Network. The following sections identify the requirements for performing load ratings.

4.3.3.1 • • • • •

4-34

New/Replacement Bridges

The structural engineer generates LRFR based on design.

The structural engineer submits final load rating report and load rating model as described in the Project Delivery Network; see Section 4.4.

The Structures Design Manager notifies the Bridge Database Coordinator that the load rating is complete and that the load rating model and report are available.

The Bridge Database Coordinator uploads the load rating model to the database and places a copy of the load rating model and the load rating report in the bridge record.

The Bridge Database Coordinator places a copy of the bridge load rating summary in the hard copy bridge folder and updates the load rating in the bridge management software (Items 41, 63, 64, 65 and 66).

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

During the initial (inventory) bridge inspection, if significant discrepancies exist between the plans and the as built condition, the Bridge Inspection Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer. The Bridge Management Engineer initiates an update of the bridge load rating, which is completed within 90 days for state owned bridges and 180 days for locally owned bridges.

4.3.3.2 • • • • •

Rehabilitated/Widened Bridges

The structural engineer generates LRFR ratings (and LFR where applicable) based on the design and existing condition of remaining elements.

The structural engineer submits final load rating report and load rating model as described in the Project Delivery Network; see Section 4.4.

The Structures Design Manager notifies the Bridge Database Coordinator that the load rating is complete and that the load rating model and report are available.

The Bridge Database Coordinator uploads the load rating model to the database and places a copy of the load rating model and the load rating report in the bridge record.

The Bridge Database Coordinator places a copy of the bridge load rating summary in the hard copy bridge folder and updates the load rating in the bridge management software (Items 41, 63, 64, 65 and 66).

During the initial (inventory) bridge inspection, if significant discrepancies exist between the plans and the as built condition, the Bridge Inspection Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer. The Bridge Management Engineer initiates an update of the bridge load rating, which is completed within 90 days for state owned bridges and 180 days for locally owned bridges.

4.3.3.3

Existing Bridges (Load Rating Program)

The load rating program consists of two primary tasks: • •

Perform load ratings on unrated existing bridges Maintain the load rating database by updating the ratings of existing bridges as the bridge conditions change

4.3.3.3.1

Unrated Existing Bridges

Load Rating Engineers perform bridge load ratings, submit reports, address comments on the reports and load the resulting files to the project site. The load rating process is: • • • •

The Bridge Database Coordinator identifies unrated bridges.

The Bridge Database Coordinator notifies the Load Rating Manager of the unrated bridges.

The Load Rating Manager assigns the load rating to a Load Rating Engineer.

The Load Rating Engineer performs the load rating and submits the report. The tasks include:

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-35

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

○ ○ ○ ○

• • • • •

Determine type of evaluation Evaluate and review the bridge data Perform load rating analysis Prepare load rating report and make recommendations to either improve or maintain the condition of the structure; include posting recommendations if necessary; recommend conceptual repairs without details as necessary ○ Perform QC activities on load rating report ○ Post the load rating report, QC documentation, load rating model and supplemental calculations (excel and Mathcad files) onto the project site ○ Notify the Load Rating Manager that the report is ready for QA audit The Load Rating Manager audits the report and notifies Load Rating Engineer of comments.

The Load Rating Engineer coordinates with the Load Rating Manager to address any comments.

After final verification, the Load Rating Manager notifies the Load Rating Engineer that the bridge load rating report is approved.

The Load Rating Manager transfers the load rating report and supporting files to the bridge record.

The Bridge Database Coordinator imports the BrR model to the BrR database and updates the BMS.

4.3.3.3.2

Existing Bridges with a Change in Condition

Existing bridges require load ratings by the LFR and LRFR method. However, if the bridge design is based on the LRFD Specifications, then only the LRFR method of analysis is required.

The process for performing load ratings on existing bridges is as follows: • • • • • •

• •

The Bridge Inspection Team Leader notifies the Bridge Inspection Engineer when a condition could require an update to the load rating.

The Bridge Inspection Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer.

The Bridge Management Engineer evaluates and determines if a load rating update is necessary.

If necessary, the Bridge Management Engineer informs the Load Rating Manager that the load rating requires updating.

The Load Rating Manager assigns a Load Rating Engineer.

The Load Rating Engineer updates the load ratings based on the changed conditions and submits the report and updated load rating model. Section 4.3.3.3.1 defines the specific load rating tasks.

The Load Rating Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Database Coordinator to update the bridge record and bridge management software based on the new analysis.

The Bridge Management Engineer verifies that the process is complete.

The process for updating the load rating is completed within 90 days for state owned bridges and 180 days for locally owned bridges.

4-36

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The following are conditions that could require an update to the load rating: •

•

• • • • • • • •

The primary member general condition rating has changed: ○ The NBI superstructure condition rating deteriorates to 4 or less. ○ The NBI superstructure condition rating deteriorates by 2 or more.

Dead load has changed due to resurfacing, structural or other nonstructural alterations such as utility additions: ○ An increase in dead load if the existing rating factor is at or below 1.1, unless dead load increase is less than 10 pounds per foot per girder. ○ The wearing surface thickness has increased by 1 in. or more from the value considered in the prior load rating. For bridges where the design records show design for a 3-in. wearing surface, rerate if the wearing surface has increased by 1 in. or more over the original 3 in.

Section properties of members have changed due to rehabilitation, redecking or other alterations.

Steel bridges have measured section losses of 1/16 in. or greater since the last inspection.

Prestressed bridges have more exposed, broken or severed strands since the last inspection.

Concrete bridges have more reinforcing corrosion, shear cracks or other signs of distress since the last inspection.

Gusset plates have visually bent or bowed connecting compression members in trusses.

Compression members in trusses have buckled.

A 15% or more increase in truck traffic volume occurs based on the NBI records used for selecting the live load factor for bridges evaluated using LRFR. Bridge requires a damage inspection (evaluated on a case by case basis).

4.3.3.4

Critical Findings from Inspection

A critical finding during the bridge inspection can prompt an immediate load rating at the direction of the Bridge Management Engineer. Use the following process to update the load rating due to a critical finding: • • • • • • •

The Bridge Inspection Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer.

The Bridge Management Engineer evaluates and determines if a load rating is necessary.

If necessary, the Bridge Management Engineer assigns a Load Rating Engineer.

The Load Rating Engineer updates the load ratings based on the new conditions.

The Load Rating Engineer informs the Bridge Management Engineer of results.

The Bridge Management Engineer evaluates the next steps for the bridge and implements a plan.

The Load Rating Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Database Coordinator to update the bridge record and bridge management software based on the new analysis.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-37

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The process for updating the load rating is completed within 30 days for state owned bridges and 60 days for locally owned bridges.

4.3.3.5

Critical Findings from Load Rating

If the updated load rating from the critical finding has a rating factor less than 0.6 for any legal loads (Operating for LFR), notify the Bridge Management Engineer. The Bridge Management Engineer takes action (within 72 hours) if the bridge needs either posting or restriction.

4.3.4

Load Posting Procedures

4.3.4.1 •

•

•

State Owned Bridges

If bridges receive a rating factor less than 1.0 for legal loads (Operating for LFR), the Load Rating Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer that a load posting evaluation is required. For the Service III limit state, notify the Bridge Management Engineer only when the legal rating factor is less than 0.6.

The Bridge Management Engineer determines the need for load posting and coordinates with the Chief Structural Engineer and Region Director on installing a load posting sign.

If the decision to post is affirmative, then the bridge is load posted for the defined limit; see Figure 4.18.

The Bridge Management Engineer ensures that the load posting sign is installed no later than 90 days after notice of load posting requirement.

Single Tonnage

Modified Silhouette

SHV Silhouette

Figure 4.18 — POSTING SIGNS

4-38

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.3.4.2 •

•

•

• • •

February 2014

Locally Owned Bridges

If bridges receive a rating factor less than 1.0 for legal loads (Operating for LFR), the Load Rating Engineer notifies the Bridge Management Engineer that a load posting evaluation is required. For the Service III limit state, notify the Bridge Management Engineer only when the legal rating factor is less than 0.6.

The Bridge Management Engineer determines the need for posting and coordinates with the Chief Structural Engineer and local owner on installing a load posting sign. The bridge is load posted for the defined limit; see Figure 4.18.

The Bridge Management Engineer sends a formal letter to the local owner requesting that the bridge be load posted. The Bridge Management Engineer enters a copy of the letter into the bridge record.

Local owner installs the load posting signs at the bridge site within 180 days of the notification requirement.

The local owner photographs the signs and documents that the signs are in place in both directions and sends the photos to the Bridge Management Engineer.

The Bridge Management Engineer enters the photos into the bridge record.

Use the following procedures to identify, track and resolve bridge posting deficiencies: 1.

Inspectors note all posting deficiencies at the time of inspection and notify the Bridge Inspection Program Manager.

2.

Bridge Inspection Program Manager sends initial letter to bridge owner noting deficiencies and requests response within 180 days: •

• •

3.

UDOT runs report of all B bridges in November: • •

4.

Bridge owner responds within 180 days and has posted bridge: ○ UDOT files response and documentation of posting (photos) in bridge file; update Item 41 Bridge owner responds within 180 days and refuses to post bridge; ○ UDOT notifies FHWA Bridge Engineer Bridge owner does not respond within 180 days: ○ UDOT notifies FHWA Bridge Engineer ○ UDOT sends followup email to bridge owner

UDOT contacts all bridge owners on the list, notifying owners of deficiencies UDOT submits copy of report to FHWA

UDOT tracks status of all B bridges, with the following information: • • • •

Structure number Bridge owner Bridge owner contact Date deficiency identified

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-39

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • 5.

February 2014

Date owner notified by letter Date owner notified by followup email (if required) Date of resolution Nature of resolution (posted, closed, no longer in inventory, etc.)

UDOT submits status report to FHWA quarterly

4.3.4.3

Signing

Load post bridges based on the legal load rating vehicles defined in Section 4.2.3.3.2. Use the standard MUTCD single tonnage sign, the modified silhouette sign or the SHV sign in Figure 4.18.

Use single tonnage posting limit signs except on truck routes where the modified silhouette or the SHV silhouette is used. When posting is only required for SHV, use the SHV Silhouette.

Post signs assuming state owned bridges are on truck routes and locally owned bridges are not on truck routes, unless requested otherwise by the local owner or if noted otherwise by the Bridge Management Engineer.

If a bridge closure is required, bridge owners install barricades and signs.

4.3.4.4

Rescinding Posting

When a state owned bridge is strengthened or rehabilitated, the structural engineer prepares an updated load rating during design. The Bridge Management Engineer rescinds or revises the load posting based on the updated load rating.

When a locally owned bridge has been strengthened or rehabilitated by the local owner, the local owner sends a letter to the Bridge Management Engineer with the updated bridge plans, calculations, load rating report and load rating model requesting a rescinded or revised load posting. The Bridge Management Engineer evaluates the request based on the information received and either approves or recommends revisions to the request. If load posting is still required, the local owner sends updated photographs of the load posting signs to the Bridge Management Engineer for filing in the bridge record.

4.3.5

Permitting Procedures

The following process applies to overload permits: • •

4-40

The Motor Carrier Division receives permit applications.

The Motor Carrier Division evaluates the requested permit loading using the Modified Formula B procedure as described in the Utah Trucking Guide.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

•

• • •

4.3.6

February 2014

The Motor Carrier Division sends permits that do not pass the Modified Formula B procedure and any special case loading needing additional evaluation to the Bridge Management Engineer.

The Bridge Management Engineer initiates a Permit Load Rating and assigns a Load Rating Engineer.

The Load Rating Engineer performs a load rating for the permit and/or special case and reports results to the Bridge Management Engineer.

The Bridge Management Engineer coordinates results with the Motor Carrier Division.

Quality Control/Quality Assurance Procedures

Follow the current version of the UDOT QC/QA procedures. Apply checking procedures as follows: •

•

•

•

Use the detailed checking of design calculation procedures. Do not include the calculation cover sheet unless requested ○ Use provided templates and report formats to maintain consistency ○ List all assumptions considered for the load rating ○ Include results of each live load and applicable limit state Follow the detailed checking of computer program input procedures. Do not include the computer program input cover sheet unless requested ○ Check completeness and accuracy ○ Provide additional calculations as necessary to support computer program input Follow the detailed checking of project document procedures for the bridge load rating report; use the project document cover sheet to document all aspects of the load rating including calculation checks, computer input validation, load rating model confirmation and report check. The results summary for each member rated only needs a yellow line drawn diagonally through the page to indicate that it has been reviewed.

Document load rating report QC in a file separate from the load rating report; include in the following order: ○ Cover sheet with check print stamp ○ Check list ○ Screen shot of input tree ○ Load rating report

The project auditor completes the project QA audit form upon review and acceptance of the load rating report and model.

4.3.7

Local Government Coordination

UDOT assumes responsibility for all bridge inspections within the state, which includes meeting the load rating requirements defined in the CFR. In return, UDOT encourages open and frequent communication with local government agencies.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-41

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The UDOT Local Government Engineer oversees all local government projects that use federal funds. If a local government uses federal funds to replace a bridge, the project design team follows the SDDM requirements and the Project Delivery Network process. The Bridge Management Division receives the load rating model and associated documentation as part of the project.

When local governments replace bridges using nonfederal funds, UDOT encourages the local government to follow UDOT load rating policies and procedures. UDOT requests that local governments submit plans, calculations, the load rating model and associated documentation to the Bridge Management Division for future structure NBI reporting and FHWA compliance.

Existing local bridges that have been modified from the original design (widened or rehabilitated) and discovered through UDOT’s routine bridge inspections receive an updated load rating. The process is as follows: • • •

•

4.4

The Bridge Management Engineer sends a formal letter notifying the local government owner of the need to update the bridge load rating.

The local government provides an updated bridge load rating with supporting models and documentation to the Bridge Management Engineer.

If the local government fails to respond, UDOT uses local government project funding to update the load rating. Once completed, the Bridge Management Engineer sends a formal letter to the local government bridge owner explaining the results and providing recommendations as needed.

The Bridge Management Engineer coordinates with the Bridge Database Coordinator to update the bridge load rating in the bridge record and bridge management software.

DOCUMENT CONTROL

4.4.1

Load Rating Report Procedure

4.4.1.1 •

4-42

New/Replacement and Rehabilitated/Widened Bridges

The Structures Design Manager notifies the Bridge Database Coordinator that the load rating model, report and supporting files are available. The Project Delivery Network requires a load rating package as a deliverable. The load rating package includes five electronic files at a minimum: ○ Summary sheet ○ Bridge load rating report ○ QC version of the bridge load rating report ○ Bridge model in either BrR or CSIBRIDGE ○ Supplemental calculations Some bridges may require additional electronic files in the load rating package. Refer to Figure 4.19 for the type, description and naming convention required for electronic files in the load rating package.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • •

•

February 2014

The Bridge Database Coordinator places the load rating report, the BrR model, the load rating summary and all calculation files in the bridge record.

For BrR bridges, the Bridge Database Coordinator imports the bridge model to the BrR database.

The Bridge Database Coordinator updates the bridge management software using the BrR utility for BrR bridges and manually for bridges rated using other software. Enter only the governing rating values for each vehicle for nonBrR bridges from the bridge load rating summary.

The Bridge Database Coordinator places the bridge load rating summary in the bridge folder.

Type

Description

County Example

State Example

Bridge load rating report

Bridge number followed

by LR Report and date with .pdf extension

035001_LR_Report_MM DD- 0C_750_LR_Report_MMYYYY.pdf DD-YYYY.pdf

Bridge load rating report QC

Bridge number followed

by LR Report QC and date with .pdf extension

035001_LR_Report_QC_ MM-DD-YYYY.pdf

0C_750_LR_Report_QC_ MM-DD-YYYY.pdf

BrR

Bridge number with .xml extension

035001E.xml

0C_750.xml

CSIBRIDGE

Bridge number followed

by LR Analysis with .bdb extension

035001E_LR_Analysis.bdb

0C_750_LR_Analysis.bdb

Supplemental calculations

Bridge number followed

by LR Supplemental Calculations with the appropriate extension

035001E_LR_Supplemental_ 0C_750_LR_Supplemental_ Calculations.xmcd Calculations.xmcd

Summary sheet

Bridge number followed

by LR Summary with .xlsx extension

035001E_LR_Summary.xlsx

0C_750_LR_Summary.xlsx

Other supplemental calculations

Bridge number followed

by LR “Description” Supplemental Calculations with the appropriate extension

035001E_LR_PS_Strand_ Supplemental_Calculations .xlsx

0C_750_LR_PS_Strand_ Supplemental_Calculations .xlsx

Additional span calculations

Add Span x before the extension

035001E_LR_Supplemental_ 0C_750_LR_Supplemental_ Calculations_Span_1.xmcd Calculations_Span_1.xmcd

Additional girder calculations

Add Girder x before the extension

035001E_LR_Supplemental_ 0C_750_LR_Supplemental_ Calculations_Girder_1.xmcd Calculations_Girder_1.xmcd

Additional span and additional girder calculations

Add Span x Girder x before the extension

035001E_LR_Supplemental_ 0C_750_LR_Supplemental_ Calculations_Span_1_ Calculations_Span_1_ Girder_1.xmcd Girder_1.xmcd

Figure 4.19 — ELECTRONIC FILE NAMING CONVENTION

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-43

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.4.1.2 • • • •

•

February 2014

Existing Bridges

The Load Rating Manager notifies the Bridge Database Coordinator by email that the load rating model, report and supporting files are available.

The Bridge Database Coordinator places the load rating report, the BrR model, the load rating summary and all calculation files in the bridge record.

For BrR bridges, the Bridge Database Coordinator imports the bridge model to the BrR database.

The Bridge Database Coordinator updates the bridge management software using the BrR utility for BrR bridges and manually for bridges rated using other software. Enter only the governing rating values for each vehicle for nonBrR bridges from the bridge load rating summary.

The Bridge Database Coordinator places the bridge load rating summary in the bridge folder.

4.4.2

Reporting

The Bridge Management Division reports load rating data to FHWA according to the FHWA Recording and Coding Guide.

4.4.2.1 4.4.2.1.1

Reports General

Incorporate load rating calculations and documentation into a comprehensive report to facilitate updating the information and calculations in the future. Document all details, in writing, including all background information such as all supporting computations and a clear statement of all assumptions used in calculating the load rating. Do not include plans or inspection reports. Provide sketches documenting section losses incorporated into the analysis. BrR models generate LRFD Specifications distribution factors based on the system input, or the Load Rating Engineer enters the distribution factors for line models. When other software or load testing is used, include live load distribution factors for all load rated members in the report to facilitate future load ratings.

When rating twin bridges with the same properties, first rate the bridge with the highest overlay using the higher ADTT of the two bridges. If a posting is not required, the report for the second bridge need only be composed of a summary form and the QC/QA sheets. On the summary form, indicate to view the twin bridge that was analyzed. A separate BrR model with updated title is required for each bridge.

4-44

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.4.2.1.2

February 2014

Format

Figure 4.20 presents the sections in the load rating report. Load rating reports are electronic and stored in the bridge record. Place only the bridge load rating summary in the hard copy of the bridge folder.

Load rating reports are electronic and stored in the bridge record. Place only the bridge load rating summary in the hard copy of the bridge folder.

Section

Title • • • •

1 Bridge Load Rating Summary

• • 2 Computations

•

3 Computer Output 4 QC/QA Documentation

Refer to Appendix 4A for the required template, LR Summary.xls Provide signature and seal of Load Rating Engineer List controlling load rating values Provide recommendations to either improve or maintain the condition of the structure Include posting recommendations if necessary Describe all methods, assumptions, allowable stresses, strengths, dead loads, live load distribution factors (if nonBrR program is used for load rating) used to determine the bridge load rating Include all supplementary computations required for rating program input (use applicable UDOT standard supplementary calculation templates)

•

Provide rating results summary report for every member rated

•

Include the following forms from the UDOT QC/QA procedures: ○ Form_G-Project_QA_Audit_Form ○ Form_D-Project_Document_Cover_Sheet Figure 4.20 — FORMAT OF LOAD RATING REPORT

4.4.2.1.3

Load Rating Summary Form

Complete the bridge load rating summary form as the first sheet of the load rating report; see Appendix 4C. Use the current load rating summary form provided by the Structures Division.

Report the bridge length as the back of backwall to back of backwall dimension from the plans.

Complete all fields on the form or mark as NA. Under the member column, list all members to which the rating is applicable as G1 & G5 or G2-G4. The Engineer of Record (EOR) (the Designer, Load Rating Engineer, Consultant or manager of EIT Load Rating Engineer) signs and seals the lower right corner of the form with a Utah PE seal.

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-45

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.4.2.1.4

February 2014

Report Naming Convention

Save reports as Adobe Acrobat portable document format files (.pdf). Name report files with the structure number followed by LR Report and the load rating date. Refer to Section 3.4.4 for structure numbering information. General information is as follows: For state owned bridges, the structure number is defined as: DS_nnnn, where: D = Direction of travel 0 = two way traffic 1 = northbound 2 = eastbound 3 = southbound 4 = westbound S = Superstructure type, where: A = Timber C = Steel D = Cast in place concrete and T-girder E = Box culvert F = Prestressed concrete P = Segmental box girder and post-tensioned The last four places are numeric. Provide a space between the superstructure type and the numeric number only when there are three or less numbers.

For example, a state owned steel girder bridge report file name could be 0C_602_LR Report_02-01-2012.pdf or 0C1007_LR_Report_02-01-2012.pdf for four digit numbers.

For local government owned bridges, the structure number is defined as: NNNnnnS, where: NNN = County code (001 through 057; odd numbers only) nnn = Numeric number S = Superstructure type A bridge owned by Salt Lake County (County 035) could be 035001E_LR_Report_02-012012.pdf.

Save the electronic file in the load rating folder within the bridge record.

4-46

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4.4.2.2

February 2014

Electronic Files

Figure 4.19 presents the naming convention for electronic files. The supplemental calculations include dead load computations where BrR or CSIBRIDGE does not compute the dead load based on bridge parameters and other calculations as required.

4.4.3

Training

NHI training is available through NHI course 130092 (4 day course) and NHI course 130092A (2 day course). The Structures Division periodically hosts NHI training courses.

4.4.4

Data Conflicts and Software Issues

Where different sources provide conflicting data necessary for the load rating, notify the Load Rating Manager. Provide a preliminary recommendation to resolve the data conflict and an evaluation of significance to the load rating. The Load Rating Manager determines if field verification is necessary and notifies the Load Rating Engineer of the final resolution. The Load Rating Engineer provides a markup of the conflicting data sources using Adobe and uploads the amended documents to a location specified by the Load Rating Manager.

For software issues (i.e., bugs), the Load Rating Engineer uses the following procedure: •

• •

Check the software developer log of frequently asked questions and known bugs.

Access the BrR Support Center and Critical Bugs website via https://aashto.mbakercorp.com/Pages/default.aspx. Use your assigned username and password to gain access.

If the issue is resolved using the software developer resources, document in the load rating report.

If the issue is not resolved using the software developer resources, notify the Load Rating Manager. The Load Rating Manager coordinates a resolution either with the software developer or via a work around, which is distributed to all Load Rating Engineers as the standard resolution approach for the issue.

4.5

REFERENCE PUBLICATIONS

(1)

AASHTO, Manual for Bridge Evaluation, Second Edition, 2011, including all subsequent interim revisions

(2)

FHWA Memorandum, “Bridge Load Ratings for the National Bridge Inventory,” October 2006

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-47

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

(3)

FHWA, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual (BIRM), NHI 103-001, Vols. 1 and 2; October 2002; revised 2006 Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC

(4)

AASHTO, LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 6th Edition (2011), including all subsequent interim revisions

(5)

AASHTO, Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges, 17th Edition

(6)

NCHRP Report 575, Legal Truck Loads and AASHTO Legal Loads for Posting, 2006

(7)

NCHRP Report 454, Calibration of Load Factors for LRFR Evaluation, 2001

(8)

FHWA, Load Rating Guidance and Examples for Bolted and Riveted Gusset Plates in Truss Bridges, Publication No. FHWA-IF-09-014, February 2009, Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC

(9)

FHWA, Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges, Report No. FHWA-PD-96-001, December 1995 with Errata, March 2004

(10)

FHWA, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition

(11)

NCHRP Synthesis 354, Inspection and Management of Bridges with Fracture-Critical Details, 2005

(12)

UDOT Motor Carrier Division, Utah Trucking Guide, 2010 with 2011 update

4-48

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

July 2012

Appendix 4A TEMPLATES The following is a list of load rating templates, which are available on the UDOT website: • •

•

•

•

General ○ LR Summary.xls Prestressed concrete ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (PS I Girder).xmcd ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (PS T Girder).xmcd ○ LR Strand Pattern Supplemental Calculations.xls ○ LR Check List (PS I Girder).pdf Reinforced concrete ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (CIP T Girder).xmcd ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (RC Girder).xmcd ○ LR Check List (RC Girder).pdf Steel ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (Steel Girder).xmcd ○ LR Check List (Steel Girder).pdf Box culvert ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (Box Culvert).xmcd ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (Headwall – Procedure A).xmcd ○ LR Supplemental Calculations (Headwall – Procedure B).xmcd ○ LR Check List (Box Culvert).pdf

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

4-49

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 4B UTAH COMMON PERMIT CONFIGURATIONS

4-50

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 4C LOAD RATING SUMMARY SHEET EXAMPLE UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRIDGE LOAD RATING SUMMARY EXISTING BRIDGE DATA Bridge ID Bridge Location (NBI) Superstructure Type (NBI) Length of Bridge (ft.)

Number of Spans

rev. 5/1/2013

Year Built Plans Available Design Loading Inspection Date FCM

RESISTANCE DATA Condition Factor System Factor

1 1

BRIDGE DEAD LOAD DATA Overlay Type Overlay Depth (in) Overlay Depth Measured

Bituminous 3 No

1993 Yes HL-93 8/15/2011 No

CRITERIA AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation, Second Edition, 201 with 2012 Interim Revisions UDOT Policies and Procedures, Version 2.8, Dated June 20, 2012 Rating Program Used: BrR, version 6.4.1

LIVE LOAD DATA Dynamic Load Allowance (Legal/Permit) 33.00% 100 ADTT (one-way) LRFR RESULTS Leve Vehicle l

Rating Tons Factor

Limit State

LFR RESULTS Mode

Member Span

Mode

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

NA NA

Member Span

Permit * ~

Legal ~

Design

HL-93 (INV) 36 HL-93 (OPR) 36 NA NA NA NA HS-20 (INV) 36 NA NA NA NA NA HS-20 (OPR) 36 NA Type 3 25 Type 3S2 36 Type 3-3 40 NA NA NA NA Span 40 NA NA NA NA NA Neg Mom 40 NA SU4 27 SU5 31 SU6 35 SU7 39 UT-P6 48 UT-P7 54 UT-P8 52.5 UT-P9a 53 UT-P9b 66 Legend: Remarks: Remark 1.

G = Girder or Stringer Remark 2.

Span = Lane load combination for spans > 200 ft Remark 3.

Assumptions: None.

Neg Mom = Lane load combination for negative Recommendations: None. moments and reactions at interior supports NA = Not Applicable * = Rated for unlimited crossings for LRFR ~ = Rated at operating level for LFR FCM = Fracture Critical Member Load Rating Performed By/ Firm: Cody Parker, P.E. / HNTB Initials/Date: 5/1/2013 CKP Load Ratings Checked By / Firm: Mitch Balle, S.E. / HNTB

Rating Factor

Quality Assurance By / Firm:

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

Engineer Seal

/HNTB

4-51

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

4-52

February 2014

Load Rating Policies and Procedures

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 5-1

5.2

OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 5-2

5.3

SAFETY PLAN AND EQUIPMENT LIST .................................................................... 5-3 5.3.1 5.3.2

Job Safety Analysis ....................................................................................... 5-3 Emergency Bridge Inspection Equipment ..................................................... 5-4 5.3.2.1 5.3.2.2

5.4

COMMUNICATION, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................ 5-5 5.4.1 5.4.2

General .......................................................................................................... 5-5 Communication.............................................................................................. 5-6 5.4.2.1 5.4.2.2 5.4.2.3 5.4.2.4 5.4.2.5

5.4.3

5.4.4

Overview ...................................................................................... 5-6 Minor Event Response................................................................. 5-6 Major Event Response — Communication with Outside Agencies ...................................................................................... 5-9 Major Event Response — Communication within the Structures Division ....................................................................... 5-9 Communication Modes Available................................................. 5-11

The Basic Response Phases ........................................................................ 5-12 5.4.3.1 5.4.3.2 5.4.3.3 5.4.3.4 5.4.3.5

General ........................................................................................ 5-12 Emergency Preparation ............................................................... 5-12 Mobilization .................................................................................. 5-12 Data Gathering ............................................................................ 5-13 Action ........................................................................................... 5-13

Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................................ 5-14 5.4.4.1 5.4.4.2

5.5

Essential Supplies and Equipment .............................................. 5-4 Suggested Additional Supplies and Equipment ........................... 5-5

Chief Structural Engineer ............................................................. 5-14 Structures Division Emergency Response Management Group.. 5-14

TRAINING .................................................................................................................... 5-20 5.5.1 5.5.2 5.5.3 5.5.4 5.5.5

General .......................................................................................................... 5-20 Structures Division Emergency Response Management Group ................... 5-20 Structures Division Staff and Consultant Bridge Inspectors .......................... 5-21 District Engineers and Maintenance Station Staff ......................................... 5-21 Local Governments ....................................................................................... 5-21

Emergency Response Plan

5-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.6

ROUTE INSPECTION PRIORITIZATION AND SHAKECAST.................................... 5-21 5.6.1

Route Inspection Prioritization ....................................................................... 5-21 5.6.1.1 5.6.1.2 5.6.1.3

5.6.2

General .......................................................................................................... 5-26 Inspection Procedures ................................................................................... 5-26 Bridge Site Procedures.................................................................................. 5-26 First Responders (initial response — first 8 hours after event) ..................... 5-27 Initial Structure Review .................................................................................. 5-27 5.7.5.1 5.7.5.2

5.7.6 5.7.7 5.7.8 5.7.9

Level I Inspection (first 2 to 24 hours following an event) ............ 5-27 Level II Inspection (within 24 to 72 hours following an event)...... 5-28

Complete Structural Review (Level III Inspection — within 3 weeks following an event) ........................................................................................ 5-29 Tagging Procedures ...................................................................................... 5-29 Geotechnical Emergency Response ............................................................. 5-30 Flood Emergency Response ......................................................................... 5-31

EMERGENCY FIELD INSPECTION REPORT ............................................................ 5-32 5.8.1

Basic Inspection Procedures ......................................................................... 5-32 5.8.1.1 5.8.1.2 5.8.1.3 5.8.1.4

5.8.2 Appendix 5A Appendix 5B Appendix 5C Appendix 5D Appendix 5E Appendix 5F

5-ii

General ........................................................................................ 5-23 Background .................................................................................. 5-24 Application ................................................................................... 5-24

INSPECTION PROCEDURES ..................................................................................... 5-26 5.7.1 5.7.2 5.7.3 5.7.4 5.7.5

5.8

Priority 1 ....................................................................................... 5-21 Priority 2 ....................................................................................... 5-22 Priority 3 ....................................................................................... 5-23

ShakeCast and ShakeMap ............................................................................ 5-23 5.6.2.1 5.6.2.2 5.6.2.3

5.7

February 2014

Top Side Inspection ..................................................................... 5-32 Bridge Side Inspection ................................................................. 5-32 Utilities ......................................................................................... 5-33 Under Bridge Inspection .............................................................. 5-33

Emergency Field Inspection Report .............................................................. 5-34 ROUTE PRIORITIZATION MAPS................................................................. 5-35 STRUCTURES TAGGING STICKER ........................................................... 5-42 EMERGENCY FIELD INSPECTION REPORT ............................................. 5-43 STRUCTURAL DAMAGE EXAMPLE PHOTOS .......................................... 5-45 QUICK REFERENCE SHEET ....................................................................... 5-51 COMMUNICATION LISTS ............................................................................ 5-54

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 5.1 — COMMUNICATION FLOWCHART FOR A MINOR EVENT ............................. 5-7 Figure 5.2 — COMMUNICATION FLOWCHART FOR A MAJOR EVENT ............................ 5-10

Emergency Response Plan

5-iii

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5-iv

February 2014

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 5 EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN 5.1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Structures Division emergency response plan provides a rapid, efficient and uniform method of inspecting bridges and other minor structures following an event that potentially compromises a structure’s integrity. The Structures Division staff uses this plan for all emergency situations — from minor events that typically affect an isolated structure (e.g., a bridge impact) to a major event affecting multiple structures (e.g., an earthquake). Although a minor event response plan is included, the chapter focuses on rapid bridge assessment following a major event, specifically an earthquake response, but use the plan for any event (e.g., flooding, landslides).

The primary users of the plan are UDOT maintenance and construction personnel, who initially reach the bridge sites as Level I responders, and Structures Division staff, who are responsible for the structural review of damaged bridges and repair designs. The first line personnel possess a variety of backgrounds and, therefore, a systematic method of evaluating the damage is necessary.

The plan includes: • • • • • • •

Safety and equipment checklists; see Section 5.3 A communication plan; see Section 5.4.2 Personnel roles and responsibilities; see Section 5.4.4 Training; see Section 5.5 A route prioritization plan for bridge inspections; see Section 5.6 Basic inspection procedures; see Section 5.7 An emergency field inspection report; see Section 5.8

The inspection teams complete the inspection report forms, and submit the forms to the Structures Division as quickly as possible. The Structures Division prepares appropriate posting actions and recommendations from the inspection notes on the evaluation forms. Based on the information on these forms, the Structures Division prioritizes the follow up inspections by trained structural engineers and then plans repair efforts. This chapter’s appendices contain maps and bridge lists for each maintenance station, which are used for planning and training exercises. The appendices also provide guidance on actions if there are limited communication options available.

The Structures Division and Hydraulics Engineer annually review the plan to better understand specific roles. All District Engineers and maintenance station personnel annually participate in training for the Level I responder’s role.

Emergency Response Plan

5-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.2

February 2014

OVERVIEW

This chapter provides a plan of action with a list of personnel expectations when any event, minor or major in scope, compromises the structural integrity of a bridge. The event could be isolated to only one structure (e.g., a bridge impact), or the event could be widespread over a much larger geographical area. Major events include: • • • • • •

Earthquakes of magnitude 5.0 or greater Forest or transient fires Landslides and mudflows Winter storms and blizzards Severe thunderstorms Floods and flash floods

The major event procedures focus on an earthquake response plan of action, but can be easily modified to accommodate any major event.

Response personnel must be familiar with these emergency procedures to ensure that the appropriate response actions are executed during an emergency event. Understanding each individual’s responsibilities is the first step in emergency preparation; see Section 5.4.4. With proper preparation and training, all personnel can conduct the assignments as required in the emergency plan following an event.

The rapid assessment of a structure’s safety and functionality is an essential component to restoring vital lifeline routes. The Structures Division uses a color coded system for the appropriate posting categories (e.g., bridge open, travel with caution, reduced speed limit, emergency vehicle use only, bridge closed) to ensure the safety of the traveling public. For example: • • • •

Green represents a low damage state of the bridge structure.

Yellow represents a guarded damage state.

Orange represents a high damage state.

Red represents a severe damage state requiring immediate closure.

All inspectors must consistently apply the designations. The primary objective is to assess the damage and provide the necessary information for emergency planning and reconstruction assistance.

Following a major event, the Structures Division determines the level of response based on initial reports and preliminary data gathered. This assists in determining the size of the affected area and the number of responders required. Depending on the magnitude of the event, the number of responders vary, but the damage assessment follows the following procedure: 1.

5-2

Initial Reports. Gather the initial reports from the public, most likely in the form of emergency calls. Route this information through the UDOT Traffic Operations Center (TOC) and then to the Structures Division to activate the response plan.

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

2.

Level I Inspection. UDOT maintenance and construction personnel perform the initial inspection of all bridges within the geographical area. The inspections provide a rapid assessment of the bridge conditions and identify the viability of alternative routes to continue safe passage of travelers. If a bridge is considered an immediate safety concern, the responders take the appropriate actions necessary to close the roadway until further inspections are completed. The responders transmit the data gathered during the Level I inspection to the Structures Division to help scope the level of follow up inspections required.

3.

Level II Inspection. The Structures Division personnel conduct a Level II inspection, which is a follow up, rapid assessment of the structure to confirm or modify the findings of the Level I inspections. The Level II inspection is not a thorough inspection of the bridge.

4.

Level III Inspection. After all affected structures have been inspected at a Level II assessment, a structural engineer performs a more in-depth Level III inspection on the structures that were damaged during the event.

Section 5.7 discusses inspection procedures in detail.

5.3

SAFETY PLAN AND EQUIPMENT LIST

UDOT is committed to a safe and healthy workplace through prevention, equipment maintenance, education, training and compliance with all state and federal regulations. All employees that conduct a field assignment adhere to the safety policies and training provided by the Department. This section presents the emergency respondersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; basic job safety analysis and essential supplies and equipment lists.

5.3.1

Job Safety Analysis

Safety in the field is a fundamental responsibility of each employee. Follow safe practices and methods regardless of the nature of the emergency event.

Segregate every job assignment into a series of relatively simple steps. The discussion identifies the hazards associated with each step and provides solutions to help control each hazard. The bridge type, location and site conditions vary drastically throughout the state.

Therefore, assess the hazards at each location and modify the hazard analysis on a case by case basis to accommodate the local conditions encountered. A generic example is as follows: 1.

Work as a team. Always perform the job assignment with a coworker.

2.

Prepare for traffic control. Match the traffic control plan with site conditions and work.

Walk against traffic, have a traffic spotter accompany the inspector, always have an escape route, provide warning signs or vehicular strobe lights or provide a lane closure.

Emergency Response Plan

5-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.

Obtain appropriate equipment. Match equipment needs to the work performed. Follow the UDOT Personal Protective Equipment and Safety Clothing policy (Policy 06E-02).

4.

Plan and implement access. Devise a plan to mitigate all known hazards and ensure that all team members fully understand the plan.

5.

Avoid working in a confined space. Do not enter a confined space during Level I and Level II inspections. Only confined space certified personnel with proper equipment and assistance can enter such locations after completing the required safety plan for the specific site.

6.

Perform proper inspection protocol. Never drive or walk over/under a bridge following an emergency event until the safety of the bridge has been assessed. If an inspector walks under a bridge, the team partner remains in the open and is ready to assist if the structure becomes unstable and shifts during the inspection.

5.3.2

Emergency Bridge Inspection Equipment

Proper equipment is necessary to ensure the safety of each employee assigned to field duties.

This section presents a suggested list of personal protective equipment and supplies for responders.

5.3.2.1 5.3.2.1.1 • • •

5-4

Clothing and Personal Supplies

Hard hat Safety vest Work boots

5.3.2.1.2 • • • • • • • •

Essential Supplies and Equipment

• • •

Ear plugs Work gloves Safety glasses

• • •

First aid kit w/eye wash Fresh water Watch

Machete Flashlight and batteries Red paint marker Green paint marker Portable strobe (yellow) Digital camera Flagman’s signal Hammer

• • • • • • •

Radio/walkie talkies Fire extinguisher Shovel Pocket knife Speed limit signs Posting signs Road closed signs

Inspection Equipment

Clipboard Notepad Pens & pencils Flagging tape Wire cutters 25-ft measuring tape Cellular phone w/charger Compass

• • • • • • • •

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.3.2.2 5.3.2.2.1 • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

Suggested Additional Supplies and Equipment Clothing and Personal Supplies • • • •

Soft cap Stocking cap Rubber gloves Rain gear

5.3.2.2.2

5.4.1

Extra socks Rubber boots Extra sweatshirt Coveralls

• • • •

Food Drinking cup Life vest Handheld GPS

• • • • • • • •

Toilet paper Hand level Inspection mirror Hip boots Scraping tool Wisk broom Screwdrivers Rock hammer

Inspection Equipment

Micrometer 100-ft measuring tape Safety harness Binoculars Portable ladder Duct tape Pliers Wire brush Lanyards

5.4

February 2014

• • • • • • • • •

Keel/crayon/marker 50 ft of ½-in. rope Sounding weight Crescent wrench Metal file Portable strobe (yellow) Safety rope Plumb bob Crack gauges

COMMUNICATION, ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES General

The size of the event determines the magnitude of the response. However, the responders comply with the emergency response plan for any type of emergency. Section 5.4.2 identifies the communication protocols to ensure that pertinent information is efficiently transmitted to the right people.

UDOT employees’ basic priorities and responsibilities are: • • • • •

Immediate safety/human life Family safety Understanding job responsibilities within the applicable classification Understanding the emergency response plan, including the roles and responsibilities for all involved individuals Expectations: ○ Contact the supervisor as soon as possible and maintain regular communication ○ If communication systems are unavailable, proceed to designated meeting location ○ Prepare for extended field work or office duties

Emergency Response Plan

5-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.2

February 2014

Communication

5.4.2.1

Overview

The communication plan describes the communication required within the Structures Division to conduct the rapid assessment of bridge conditions following an event. The communication and response plan for a minor event is a streamlined process. The plan for a major event accommodates the response necessary dependent on the nature of the event. For a major event, divide communication protocols into two coordination categories — communication with agencies outside of the Structures Division (other UDOT divisions, other state agencies, federal agencies, etc.) and communication within the Structures Division.

Appendix 5F presents a complete list of the Structures Division emergency call down personnel.

The following contacts are provided for quick reference: • • • • • • • •

Structures Division main number – (801) 965-4188 Structures Division fax – (801) 965-4187 Traffic Operations Center – (801) 887-3700 State Emergency Command Center – (801) 538-9795 UDOT Region One – (801) 620-1600 UDOT Region Two – (801) 975-4900 UDOT Region Three – (801) 227-8000 UDOT Region Four (backup command center in Richfield) – (435) 893-4799

5.4.2.2

Minor Event Response

The Structures Division uses the following communication protocol following a minor event for an isolated structural concern such as a bridge impact. Also use this process to address events related to other minor structures including sign foundations and structures, headwalls, retaining walls, sound barriers, culverts, etc. Figure 5.1 presents the communication flowchart on which the following elaborates: 1.

Initial Reports. Immediately following a bridge collision, the public, via 911 calls or the UHP typically provides initial reports, which the TOC then distributes.

2.

Page Message. The TOC receives the initial reports and notifies the Structures Division Emergency Response Management Group (ERMG) with a page message. The following presents the page format and description of the level of service number rating: • •

5-6

The page message uses this format: “Bridge hit at (address), (states unknown extent of damage or includes information provided by the initial report).”

The level of service number rating system is based on: #1 Minimal structural damage; minimal restrictions #2 Structure damaged; closed to most traffic; repairable #3 Structure severely damaged, but not collapsed; structure unrepairable #4 Catastrophic; structure failure likely with potential loss of life Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 5.1 — COMMUNICATION FLOWCHART FOR A MINOR EVENT Emergency Response Plan

5-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

3.

Emergency Response Management Group Response. A member of the ERMG, typically the Bridge Emergency/ Maintenance Coordinator, responds to the TOC page indicating that a bridge inspector is in route to the bridge location.

4.

Bridge Inspector Response. The bridge inspector responding to the bridge collision assesses the level of service of the bridge and sends a revised page to the TOC, which then forwards it to the ERMG as follows: • •

The page message uses the following format: “Bridge hit, Level (#1, #2, #3 or #4), (address), (applicable damage assessment).”

Once the bridge status page(s) is sent, the inspector sends a final page to the TOC to clear the original bridge impact page.

Note: Steps 5 and 6 only apply if the minor event necessitates the need for structure repairs.

5.

Project Development. The following project development process occurs: •

•

•

6.

Cost Estimate. Construction cost estimates determine the contractual requirement: •

•

5-8

Bridge Management Engineer: ○ Evaluates the bridge damage assessment to determine the plan of action response ○ Initiates a project, in accordance with the current version of the UDOT Emergency Contracting Procedures Structures Design Manager: ○ Prepares recommendations ○ Develops advertising package + Prepares calculations + Develops plans and specifications + Prepares cost estimate ○ Completes task within allotted time; bridge repair response times are dependent on the criticality of the bridge and the severity of the damage Bridge Program Manager: ○ Sets up PIN ○ Programs funds

If estimated construction costs are less than or equal to $500,000, the Bridge Management Engineer advertises through the bridge collision and emergency repair pool contract.

If estimated construction costs are in excess of $500,000, UDOT advertises through the standard project advertising process. The Structures Design Manager coordinates with the Region Project Manager during this process.

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.2.3

February 2014

Major Event Response — Communication with Outside Agencies

The Chief Structural Engineer or appointed staff member communicates with the Roadway/Bridge Branch representative who relays information to the Operations Section Chief and other agencies including UDOT management, state agencies, federal agencies, etc. The restriction ensures that a consistent message is being conveyed to other agencies and reduces the likelihood of miscommunication.

5.4.2.4

Major Event Response — Communication within the Structures Division

The Structures Division and Levels I and II inspectors use the following communications protocol following a major event such as an earthquake.

Figure 5.2 presents the communication flowchart on which the following elaborates: 1.

Initial Reports. Immediately following an event, the public, via 911 calls or the Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) typically provides initial reports, which the TOC then distributes.

2.

Page Message. The TOC receives the initial reports and notifies the Structures Division ERMG with a page message. The following presents the page format and description of the level of service number rating: • •

The page message uses this format: “Bridges damaged on (route), (states unknown extent of damage or includes information provided by the initial report).”

The level of service number rating system is based on: #1 Minimal structural damage; minimal restrictions #2 Structure damaged; closed to most traffic; repairable #3 Structure severely damaged, but not collapsed; structure unrepairable #4 Catastrophic; structure failure likely with potential loss of life

If communication is down, rely on the Chapter 5 appendices.

3.

Structure Damage. Within ten minutes of an earthquake, ShakeCast automatically transmits a customized email report of the initial ground motion maps and the resulting predicted structure damage. If communication is down, rely on the Chapter 5 appendices.

4.

Notification. The Bridge Management Engineer provides email notification and phone calls to the District Engineers and Maintenance Station Supervisors located within the immediate vicinity of the affected areas; see Appendix 5F.

5.

Level I Inspectors. District Engineers and Maintenance Station Supervisors contact maintenance personnel designated for Level I inspections.

6.

Level II Inspectors. The Bridge Management Engineer provides email notification and phone calls to the bridge inspectors and structural engineers to mobilize the Level II inspections.

Emergency Response Plan

5-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 5.2 — COMMUNICATION FLOWCHART FOR A MAJOR EVENT 5-10

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

7.

Reports. Level I and Level II inspectors submit the inspection reports to the ERMG.

8.

Status Updates. The ERMG informs the Chief Structural Engineer on the status of inspections, condition of bridges and availability of alternative routes.

9.

Route Closures. The Chief Structural Engineer remains in contact with the TOC and the Roadway/Bridge Branch representative regarding route closures.

10.

Level III Inspectors. The Bridge Management Engineer notifies the Level III Inspectors, if necessary.

5.4.2.5

Communication Modes Available

Varying levels of communication types can be available to the ERMG and the field inspection teams depending on the magnitude of the event, the resulting damage and the probable surge in cell phone usage by the public. The Structures Division uses the communication methods described below. The UDOT emergency operations plan (EOP) has additional information regarding communication methods.

The field inspection teams provide damage assessments to the ERMG as soon as possible using the following prioritized forms of communication. The preferred communication method is the use of cell phones. However, some methods of communication could be unavailable; for example, cell phones could not function if cell towers are damaged or overloaded by the high volume of calls immediately following an event. The following presents communication modes, in order of preference, until successful in delivering the inspection reports to the Structures Division: • •

• • • •

Cell phones: ○ See the Call Down List in Appendix 5F Email: ○ Send all reports to the following address: + StructuresER@utah.gov ○ Use as a two way conduit of information: + ShakeCast information supplied to field inspection teams regarding likely bridge damage + Completed field inspection reports sent by field inspection teams to Structures Division UDOT radio frequency: ○ Follow UDOT guidelines for radio use during an emergency following an event Landline phones: ○ Call Structures Division: (801) 965-4188 Fax: ○ Send inspection reports to Structures Division: (801) 965-4187 Use of other responding agencies (use only in the event of a bridge closure due to damage): ○ Coordinate with other agency personnel following an event (e.g., UHP, local law enforcement, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)), who might have other communication channels available

Emergency Response Plan

5-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

•

February 2014

Hand delivery: ○ Following initial field inspections, gather field inspection reports at a central location such as the maintenance station or Region and deliver to the Structures Division

5.4.3

The Basic Response Phases

5.4.3.1

General

The basic response phases for any structures emergency are: • • • •

Emergency preparation (before an event) Mobilization (immediately following an event) Data gathering (determining the magnitude of damage from the event) Action (restoring services): ○ Detailed inspections ○ Design ○ Construction

During each of the response phases, the Chief Structural Engineer maintains overall control for the response methods implemented and staffing decisions made to implement the plan. The Chief Structural Engineer’s primary role is to communicate between other agencies and the primary role of the ERMG is to provide information regarding the operational status of bridges.

A Structures Division manager is designated as the Emergency Manager for each phase of the response. The other members of the ERMG assist in the response as directed by the Emergency Manager or the Chief Structural Engineer. If a member of the ERMG is unable to perform the designated duties, the plan designates a primary and secondary backup staff for each member.

5.4.3.2

Emergency Preparation

Preparation includes the development of and updating for the emergency response plan, training of response personnel and participation in mock drills. The actions improve the efficiency in the performance of staff responsibilities in an organized, safe manner following an event.

• • •

Emergency Manager – Bridge Management Engineer Primary backup – Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator Secondary backup – Structures Design Manager

5.4.3.3

Mobilization

Regardless of how the initial disaster information is received, initiate calls to the call down list personnel to mobilize available staff and resources to respond to the event. Appendix 5F 5-12

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

includes the list for the Structures Division, other applicable resources and current contractors selected to perform bridge collision and emergency repair through the current UDOT Bridge Collision and Emergency Repairs pool selection.

• • •

Emergency Manager – Bridge Management Engineer Primary backup – Structures Design Manager Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer

5.4.3.4

Data Gathering

Field personnel conduct rapid assessment investigations (Level I inspections) and convey this information via inspection reports to the Structures Division. The Division processes and disseminates pertinent information to other state and federal agencies.

• • •

Emergency Manager – Bridge Management Engineer Primary backup – Structures Design Manager Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer

5.4.3.5

Action

Once the Level I inspection has determined the magnitude of the damage caused by the event, take the following steps to restore services: •

•

•

Conduct rapid assessment investigations (Level II inspections), detailed investigations (Level III inspections) and prepare summary reports: ○ Emergency Manager – Bridge Management Engineer ○ Primary backup – Structures Design Manager ○ Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer Develop strategies for emergency repairs, prepare advertisement plans and construction cost estimates (completed by structural engineers): ○ Emergency Manager – Structures Design Manager ○ Primary backup – Bridge Management Engineer ○ Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer Manage construction aspects of the field repairs providing contractor oversight and coordinating design changes with the structural engineers: ○ Emergency Manager – Structures Construction Engineer ○ Primary backup – Structures Design Manager ○ Secondary backup – Bridge Management Engineer

Emergency Response Plan

5-13

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.4

Roles and Responsibilities

5.4.4.1 5.4.4.1.1 •

• • •

•

Emergency Preparation Duties

Role During an Emergency Event

Contacts members of the Structures Division ERMG Activates the Structures Division emergency response plan Manages available resources toward emergency response needs Coordinates with the Roadway/Bridge Branch representative regarding structure conditions: ○ Bridge condition — open/close ○ Bridge capacity (traffic loading restrictions) Administers emergency construction contracts for: ○ Temporary shoring and repair ○ Temporary bridge construction

5.4.4.1.3 • •

Chief Structural Engineer

Ensures that the Structures Division emergency response plan complements the UDOT EOP for communication protocols with UDOT management, state agencies and federal agencies Ensures that Structures Division staff fully understand roles and responsibilities Participates in emergency preparation meetings both on a statewide level and for the Structures Division staff Maintains a three ring binder, quickly accessible following an event, containing the following: ○ A complete copy of the emergency response plan ○ A jump drive containing: + UDOT ShakeCast program + Structure tracking log database + Bridge inventory spreadsheet ○ User guides for ShakeCast and the database

5.4.4.1.2 • • • •

February 2014

Backup in Case of Absence

Primary backup – Structures Design Manager Secondary backup – Bridge Management Engineer

5.4.4.2 5.4.4.2.1

Structures Division Emergency Response Management Group Members

The ERMG consists of the following staff: 5-14

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • •

February 2014

Bridge Management Engineer Structures Design Manager Structures Construction Engineer Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator Geotechnical Design Manager Lead Hydraulics Engineer

Each member has a different role in the response plan based on specific areas of expertise.

However, many of the roles and responsibilities are common among the staff, as discussed in the following.

5.4.4.2.2 • • • •

Emergency Preparation Duties

Ensures that staff reporting directly to the ERMG understands staff roles and responsibilities Maintains ShakeCast training and is prepared to operate the software following an event Participates in emergency preparation meetings for the Structures Division staff Maintains a three ring binder, quickly accessible following an event, containing the following: ○ A complete copy of the emergency response plan ○ A jump drive containing: + UDOT ShakeCast program + Structure tracking log database + Bridge inventory spreadsheet ○ User guides for ShakeCast and the database

5.4.4.2.3

Role During an Emergency Event

Each member of the ERMG reports to the Structures Division office located in the Calvin L. Rampton state office complex. If the building is damaged and uninhabitable, the primary backup is the Region Two headquarters. If a member of the ERMG cannot travel to the office due to closed roads, report to the nearest maintenance station.

The Emergency Manager for each phase of the event response directs the other ERMG members to assist with the following tasks as needed: • • • • • • •

Mobilizes staff Monitors open/closed routes and reports the status changes Processes inspection reports as the reports become available Maintains a status report of each structure Prioritizes emergency repairs Develops preliminary strategies for emergency repairs Addresses requests for information from the Chief Structural Engineer

Emergency Response Plan

5-15

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

The following are specific roles and duties of each member of the Structures Division ERMG and a designated backup if unable to perform the assigned duties during an event response.

5.4.4.2.4 1.

Emergency Preparation Duties: • • • • •

2.

•

5.4.4.2.5

•

Participates in emergency preparation meetings on a statewide level

Assumes the duties of the Chief Structural Engineer in case of absence Assists state and private construction groups to develop temporary shoring details based on site conditions and available construction materials Following structure inspections, directs the design staff to develop emergency bridge repair plans following the priority list

Backup in Case of Absence: • •

5-16

Structures Design Manager

During an Emergency Event: • •

3.

Primary backup – Structures Design Manager Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

Contacts the other members of the Structures Division ERMG Calls maintenance stations to initiate Level I inspections; see Appendix 5F Organizes bridge inspectors and structures design staff into teams and assigns inspection routes Procures prequalified bridge inspectors to assist with bridge inspections

Backup in Case of Absence: • •

1.

Ensures that the Structures Division emergency response plan is maintained Schedules and conducts ShakeCast training Ensures that the ShakeCast database is maintained with latest bridge information Participates in emergency preparation meetings on a statewide level Maintains an on call pool contract for consultant bridge inspectors for use as additional response personnel

Role During an Emergency Event: • • •

3.

Bridge Management Engineer

Primary backup – Structures Construction Engineer Secondary backup – Bridge Management Engineer Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.4.2.6 1.

•

5.4.4.2.7

Primary backup – Structures Design Manager Secondary backup – Bridge Management Engineer

Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

•

• • • • • 2.

Assists state and private construction groups to develop temporary shoring details based on site conditions and available construction materials Oversees implementation of emergency repairs

Backup in Case of Absence: • •

1.

Participates in emergency preparation meetings on a statewide level

Role During an Emergency Event: •

3.

Structures Construction Engineer

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

February 2014

Maintains the Structures Division emergency response plan: ○ Updates contact information when personnel changes are made within the Structures Division ○ Updates Chapter 5 appendices as needed Administers UDOT’s ShakeCast database: ○ Develops email notification format ○ Provides training on ShakeCast to Structures Division managers ○ Updates the ShakeCast database information annually in June with latest bridge information: + Inspection reports + Bridge replacements + Bridge rehabilitations and preservation activities Maintains specialized field investigation equipment Prepares training materials and conducts training classes as needed for both Level I and Level II inspectors Organizes emergency response drills Contacts all District Engineers and Maintenance Station Supervisors to provide training and communication protocols Conducts emergency equipment checks every six months

Role During an Emergency Event: • • •

Assists the Bridge Management Engineer with initial response tasks as directed Ensures that all specialized inspection equipment is in working condition and deployed with the Level II inspectors Maintains contact with Level I and Level II inspectors

Emergency Response Plan

5-17

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

3.

5.4.4.2.8

• •

5.4.4.2.9

• •

Lead Hydraulics Engineer

No specific additional duties

Assists state and private construction groups in developing temporary solutions based on site conditions and available construction materials Assists with Level II inspections involving potential scour concerns as directed by the Bridge Management Engineer Following Level II inspections, directs the hydraulic design staff to develop emergency bridge/stream channel repair plans following the priority list

Backup in Case of Absence: •

5-18

Primary backup – Lead Geotechnical Design Engineer

Role During an Emergency Event: •

3.

Assists state and private construction groups in developing temporary solutions based on site conditions and available construction materials Assists with Level II inspections involving geotechnical concerns as directed by the Bridge Management Engineer Following Level II inspections, directs the geotechnical design staff to develop emergency bridge/embankment repair plans following the priority list

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

No specific additional duties

Backup in Case of Absence: •

1.

Geotechnical Design Manager

Role During an Emergency Event: •

3.

Primary backup – Bridge Inspection Engineer Secondary backup – Structures Construction Engineer

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

Coordinates Level II inspections as directed by the Bridge Management Engineer Acts as a courier between inspection teams and Structures Division managers if there are communication service outages

Backup in Case of Absence: • •

1.

February 2014

Primary backup – Hydraulics Engineer Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.4.2.10 1.

•

• • • •

5.4.4.2.11

Reports directly to the respective maintenance station and follows route priorities for inspection Records all initial damage observations on the emergency bridge inspection report forms Affixes completed inspection stickers to each structure following inspection; see Section 5.7.7 Communicates all inspection reports to the Structures Division Takes direction for requested aftershock investigations

Level II Inspectors

Emergency Preparation Duties: • •

2.

Reviews the Structures Division emergency response plan and fully understands the assigned roles and responsibilities Prepares for emergencies including: ○ Maintains personal field equipment and vehicle ○ Attends the emergency response plan training conducted annually by the Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

Role During an Emergency Event: •

1.

Level I Inspectors

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

February 2014

Reviews the Structures Division emergency response plan and fully understands the assigned roles and responsibilities Prepares for emergencies including: ○ Maintains personal field equipment and vehicle (prepares for two week assignment) ○ Attends the emergency response plan training conducted annually by the Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

Role During an Emergency Event: • •

• • • •

Coordinates with the Bridge Management Engineer to discuss availability Reports to the Structures Division offices located in the Calvin L. Rampton state office complex to receive assignments; if the building is damaged and uninhabitable, the primary backup is the Region Two headquarters; if a Level II inspector cannot travel to the office due to closed roads, report to the nearest maintenance station Records all damage observations on the emergency bridge inspection report forms; see Appendix 5C Updates the bridge inspection stickers with current information; see Section 5.7.7 Communicates all inspection reports to the Structures Division Takes direction for requested aftershock investigations

Emergency Response Plan

5-19

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.4.4.2.12 1.

•

•

5.5.1

Reviews the Structures Division emergency response plan and fully understands the assigned roles and responsibilities Works in conjunction with the Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator to update employee phone lists, software support tools, structure inspection stickers and emergency bridge inspection forms Prepares for emergencies including: ○ Attends the emergency response plan training conducted annually by the Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator

Role During an Emergency Event: • • • • •

5.5

Office Support Staff

Emergency Preparation Duties: •

2.

February 2014

Communicates directly with the Chief Structural Engineer Coordinates with the Bridge Management Engineer Provides support to the ERMG Monitors phones and directs field questions Inputs inspection reports into database

TRAINING General

The Bridge Management Engineer is responsible for scheduling and conducting annual training for all Structures Division staff, District Engineers, maintenance station staff (those who will perform Level I inspections) and local government entities. The sessions provide a tailored training plan for each group.

The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator assists the Bridge Management Engineer in preparing for and conducting the training exercises. The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator updates the Structures Division emergency response plan (including the Chapter 5 Appendices) every February prior to the first training event of the year.

5.5.2

Structures Division Emergency Response Management Group

The ERMG, including the Chief Structural Engineer, attends annual training on the emergency response plan, including the use of software related to the ShakeCast models and the tracking log database. The training is scheduled for early March of each year, ahead of all other training sessions.

Individual members of the ERMG could be unavailable during an actual emergency event; therefore, all ERMG personnel are fully trained on the roles and responsibilities of each member

5-20

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

so that each ERMG member can assume the duties of the other members if required. In addition, each member assists in the training of assigned staff members.

5.5.3

Structures Division Staff and Consultant Bridge Inspectors

All Structures Division staff and consultant bridge inspectors attend the Structures Division emergency response plan training conducted on a two year cycle. Consultant bridge inspectors include those who routinely perform bridge inspections for UDOT and those who are prequalified as part of the structures emergency response bridge inspection on call contract.

5.5.4

District Engineers and Maintenance Station Staff

All District Engineers and maintenance station staff receive annual training on the emergency response plan as part of the snow school workshops held each fall.

5.5.5

Local Governments

Local government representatives have the opportunity to receive training during the Utah League of Cities and Towns Road School Conference held each April. The Bridge Management Engineer coordinates additional training opportunities as requested.

5.6

ROUTE INSPECTION PRIORITIZATION AND SHAKECAST

5.6.1

Route Inspection Prioritization

The Structures Division has developed the following route prioritization for the inspection of roadways to match the NHS. All Level I and Level II inspections follow this prioritization. If a significant earthquake aftershock occurs, re-inspect all bridges beginning at the Priority 1 routes.

5.6.1.1

Priority 1

Priority 1 includes interstates, the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) and Congressional High Priority Corridors: •

Interstates ○ I-15 ○ I-80 ○ I-215 ○ I-84 ○ I-70

Emergency Response Plan

5-21

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

•

•

February 2014

STRAHNET ○ From the Tooele Army Depot to I-80 + Starting at the Tooele Army Depot and heading northwest on SR-112 to the junction of SR-138 For Army vehicles heading west towards Nevada – SR-138 west to the junction with I-80 For Army vehicles heading east towards Salt Lake City – SR-138 east to the junction with SR-36, then east on SR-36 to the junction with I-80 ○ From Hill Air Force Base (Hill Air Force Base (AFB)) to I-15 + SR-193 from I-15 to milepost 2.2 Congressional High Priority Corridors ○ I-15 ○ US-6 from I-70 to I-15

5.6.1.2

Priority 2

Priority 2 includes other principal arterials: • •

•

•

5-22

Logan ○ US-89 Ogden/Layton ○ US-89 (I-15 junction in Farmington north to SR-134 in Ogden) ○ SR-203 (Harrison Blvd, Ogden) ○ SR-26 (Riverdale Rd, Ogden) ○ SR-134 (2700 North, Ogden from I-15 to US-89) ○ SR-104 (20th/21st St, Ogden from I-15 to SR-203) Salt Lake City ○ East-West + SR-201 + SR-186 (400 South/500 South from I-15 to Foothill Drive to I-80 at the mouth of Parley’s Canyon) + SR-269 (600 South from I-15 to SR-71) + SR-171 (3300/3500 South) + SR-266 (4500/4700 South) + SR-209 (9000/9400 South) ○ North-South + SR-172 (5600 West) + SR-154 (Bangerter Highway from airport to I-15) + SR-71 (700 East from SR-186 to SR-209) + SR-152 (Van Winkle Expressway/Highland Drive from SR-71 to SR-209) + SR-210 (6200 South/Wasatch Blvd from I-215 to SR-209) Provo-Orem ○ US-89 ○ SR-52 (800 North from I-15 to US-189)

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

•

February 2014

○ SR-265 (University Pkwy) ○ US-189 Statewide; see Utah statewide map in Appendix 5A for limits along each route ○ US-189 ○ US-40 ○ US-6 ○ US-50 ○ SR-28 ○ US-191 ○ SR-491 ○ SR-12 ○ SR-161 ○ US-89 ○ SR-9

5.6.1.3

Priority 3

Priority 3 includes all other roadways beginning with those that can handle increased emergency services due to hospitals, fire stations, river/stream crossings, etc.

5.6.2

ShakeCast and ShakeMap

5.6.2.1

General

The Structures Division uses the United States Geological Survey (USGS) earthquake hazards program ShakeCast, in conjunction with the USGS ShakeMap program, to identify structures that have the highest probability of damage as the result of an earthquake. USGS administers the ShakeMap program, and each individual organization using the system administers the ShakeCast program. The Structures Division uses ShakeCast to plan inspection routes.

Planning and preparation steps taken before an earthquake include: •

•

ShakeMap (USGS) ○ Develops ground motion models ○ Processes test earthquakes and creates scenario ShakeMaps ShakeCast (UDOT) ○ Imports bridge data into ShakeCast ○ Creates email notification list ○ Evaluates scenario ShakeMaps to test ShakeCast and identifies probable associated bridge damage

The following sequence of events occurs after an actual earthquake: • •

ShakeMap program analyzes ground motion information.

ShakeMap program generates a ShakeMap (ground motion map) and sends to ShakeCast users.

Emergency Response Plan

5-23

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • •

February 2014

ShakeCast automatically imports the ShakeMap data and analyzes the information using the user defined criteria for structure fragility limits.

ShakeCast generates a prioritized list of potentially damaged structures based on the probable level of damage.

ShakeCast sends the information automatically to all user defined email recipients.

Upon additional review by the USGS and following aftershocks, the ShakeMap program creates updated maps that automatically generate additional ShakeCast email notifications.

5.6.2.2

Background

ShakeMap is a product of the USGS earthquake hazards program in conjunction with regional seismic network operators. ShakeMap sites provide near real time maps of ground motion and shaking intensity following significant earthquakes. Federal, state and local organizations, both public and private, use the maps for post earthquake response and recovery and public and scientific information and for preparedness exercises and disaster planning.

A ShakeMap is a representation of ground shaking produced by an earthquake. The information differs from the earthquake magnitude and epicenter that are released after an earthquake, because ShakeMap focuses on the ground shaking produced by the earthquake rather than the parameters describing the earthquake source. Although an earthquake has one magnitude and one epicenter, it produces a range of ground shaking levels at sites throughout the region depending on the distance from the earthquake, the rock and soil conditions at sites and variations in the propagation of seismic waves from the earthquake due to complexities in the structure of the earth’s crust.

ShakeCast is a post earthquake situational awareness application that automatically (with an internet connection) retrieves earthquake shaking data from ShakeMap, compares intensity measures against users’ facilities and generates potential damage assessment notifications, facility damage maps and other web based products for emergency managers and responders.

5.6.2.3

Application

The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator imports all major structures for the state of Utah into the ShakeCast database plus design parameters for ground motions and accelerations that could damage the structure. The design parameters used (and any updates) to determine the level of potential damage are based on the California Department of Transportation criteria. The current (November 2011) criteria uses the corresponding NBI field inspection reports: • • • • •

5-24

Year built (NBI field 27) Angle of skew (NBI field 34) Bridge type (kind of material, type of design and/or construction) (NBI field 43) Number of spans (NBI field 45) Maximum span length (NBI field 48)

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

February 2014

Total bridge length (NBI field 49) Bridge width (NBI field 52)

When an earthquake occurs, USGS produces a ShakeMap, and the information is entered into the ShakeCast program. The output from ShakeCast is an email within ten minutes of the event that includes a map showing the areas of strong ground motions and accelerations that could cause damage to structures and a corresponding list of structures within the area that could have been damaged. The list is not all inclusive but, rather, an initial damage assessment of the conditions pending field reviews and verification.

The initial ShakeCast email is refined as seismologists analyze additional recordings.

ShakeCast generates updated emails as the information is refined. Level I and Level II inspectors use the information to help target potentially damaged structures during route inspections. The inspectors color code the list of potentially damaged structures in the following method: • • • •

Red – complete damage possible Orange – extensive damage possible Yellow – moderate damage possible Green – damage unlikely or slightly damaged

The color coding within ShakeCast corresponds with the inspection procedures described in Section 5.7. The list of potentially damaged structures is not intended to be comprehensive or complete because the earthquake data could be incorrect for each location and the bridge could be unresponsive to the ground motion as assumed by the design parameters.

In addition, the University of Utah Seismology Department developed several ShakeMap scenarios that are probable to occur within Utah urbanized areas. Each of these scenarios assumes the maximum magnitude earthquake anticipated for the fault. A list of each scenario location and associated magnitude of earthquake is: • • • • • • •

Brigham City – 7.0 Weber – 7.0 Salt Lake City – 7.0 Taylorsville – 6.0 Provo – 7.2 Nephi – 6.9 Ashcreek – 6.9

For training, the Structures Division has run each of these ShakeMap scenario earthquakes through the ShakeCast program to review the possible impacts to structures.

If email communication is unavailable following an earthquake, UDOT emergency staff use the ShakeCast scenario maps and lists of probable structural damage until communication is restored and the distribution of updated ShakeCast information is achieved.

Emergency Response Plan

5-25

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.7 5.7.1

February 2014

INSPECTION PROCEDURES General

Highway bridges include various structural components categorized into superstructure and substructure elements. No two bridges are alike, and some do not contain all of the following components: • •

• •

5.7.2 • • • • • • • • • •

5.7.3 • • • • • • 5-26

The substructure portion of a bridge consists of the embankments, retaining walls, abutments, bents or columns and the foundation system.

The foundation system could be more vulnerable to damage during an event depending on the soil types present, foundation type and the potential of scour at channel crossings.

The supporting elements of the substructure (i.e., the bents or columns) could be a single bent or have multiple columns.

The superstructure portion consists of the main spans (girders), deck and bearings. The main span of a bridge structure varies depending on the material components. It could be composed of concrete, steel or timber elements. The main spans include the girder elements and members (including cross bracing and/or diagonals).

Inspection Procedures Meet at assigned location Obtain assignments and inspection responsibilities from the appropriate individuals Review the type and location of the bridges Collect the essential supplies and equipment required for bridge inspection; see Section 5.3.2.1 Plan inspection routes as defined in Section 5.6 Review current ShakeCast results if available following an earthquake Start inspections on assigned routes and bridges Complete the emergency field inspection report; see Appendix 5C Follow structure tagging procedures after inspection; see Section 5.7.7 Report findings to the Structures Division; see Section 5.4.2.5

Bridge Site Procedures Assist in rescue efforts, if necessary Document inspectors’ names and bridge identification information Make a visual inspection of the entire bridge Never walk or drive immediately under or over the bridge until the safety of the environment has been assessed Use caution when proceeding under or across a bridge structure, because aftershocks could further shift or cause collapse of a structure Complete the emergency field inspection report; see Appendix 5C Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

•

February 2014

Post bridge inspection sticker with color coded rating (red, orange, yellow or green) matching the worst rated element marked on the field inspection report; if structure is collapsed or completely nonfunctional, post the bridge with a red colored tag and take immediate action to barricade the bridge approaches to prevent traffic from crossing the structure (no further inspection is required)

5.7.4

First Responders (initial response — first 8 hours after event)

Because the source of the initial information is most likely from nontransportation personnel (e.g., 911 calls from the general public, news media, police agencies, fire departments, rescue personnel), the Structures Division records and maintains the initial report in the bridge database tracking log as a first look status report. The inspection is an initial assessment of the usability of a bridge by an untrained observer. The basic information from the initial reports is whether or not the bridge (and approaches) has collapsed. Recording a first look status provides the ability to log and track initial reports and by whom. The reports are likely the best initial damage assessment available.

5.7.5

Initial Structure Review

5.7.5.1

Level I Inspection (first 2 to 24 hours following an event)

Upon notification that a major event has or is occurring, the Bridge Management Engineer verifies that all bridges within the affected area(s) are being assessed for damage by trained personnel. Maintenance station personnel perform the Level I inspections of the bridges located within the maintenance station limits.

The inspection teams use the following to prioritize the inspection order: •

• •

Lifeline routes – Priority 1 and Priority 2 routes as defined in Section 5.6.1 (maps provided in Appendix 5A); a lifeline route is a route used to provide essential services during the first 72 hours following an event Lifeline alternative routes – as determined by local resources Other secondary highways

All bridges within the affected area(s) receive a Level I inspection within the first 24 hours. The inspections identify all damaged structures and record the nature and extent of the damage on each. For emergency response, this level revolves around questions regarding the bridge’s serviceability: • • • •

Is it damaged?

If yes, how badly?

Is it usable?

If yes, how many lanes and under what conditions or limitations?

The level of inspection assesses basic structural components and determines whether the structure remains open or closed. The basic guideline is whether the inspectors feel safe Emergency Response Plan

5-27

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

driving on the bridge. If the bridge is considered safe to cross, the inspector determines a color coded rating based on the extent of damage compared to the example bridge damage photos in Appendix 5D. The personnel performing the Level I inspection take whatever action deemed necessary to protect the general public. The inspector notifies the Bridge Management Engineer of the status of the bridge based on the appraisal, and marks the right hand approaching parapet ends near the structure number in accordance with the tagging procedures; see Section 5.7.7.

Use the emergency field inspection report form to facilitate the following; see Appendix 5C: • • •

Provide the inspector with guidelines that warrant closing a bridge Communicate bridge condition; help convey structural damage information by writing notes and using sketches Help document conditions and actions taken by date and time

Upon inspection completion, the inspectors take the following actions: • • • • •

Notify the Bridge Management Engineer on the status of the bridge Mark the bridge ends in accordance with the structure tagging procedure Complete an emergency field inspection report form on each structure inspected Forward a copy of the form to the Bridge Management Engineer Place required signs limiting traffic, limiting speed and/or warning traffic of obstructions

5.7.5.2

Level II Inspection (within 24 to 72 hours following an event)

Following a seismic event with a magnitude of 5.0 or greater, a Level II inspection is performed on all bridges in the impacted area within 72 hours of the event and extends to 15 miles further than the last damaged bridge. Following a seismic event with a magnitude of less than 5.0, a Level II inspection is performed on all bridges that have reported damage within 72 hours of the event. Level II inspection teams include a structures inspection staff member and a structural engineer. For large scale events, or landslide and flooding events, a geotechnical and hydraulics staff member supplement the structures staff member to form Level II inspection teams.

As a safety precaution, the Level II inspection teams partner with Region maintenance personnel. The teaming maximizes the expertise of personnel and familiarity with the affected area for potential detour routes, and exercises the delegated authority for closing a structure.

Preliminary data from the Level I reports initially define the scope of the event. The Level II inspection provides a more in-depth damage assessment by a certified inspection Team Leader or a licensed civil/structural engineer.

Upon inspection completion, the inspectors take the following actions: • • • 5-28

Notify the Bridge Management Engineer on the status of the bridge Mark the bridge ends in accordance with the structure tagging procedure Complete an emergency field inspection report form on each structure inspected Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

February 2014

Forward a copy of the form to the Bridge Management Engineer Update the signing, if necessary

Personnel performing Level II inspections also provide temporary recommendations and/or, if necessary, request a Level III inspection.

repair/shoring

Only a licensed professional structural engineer can make the decision on whether to keep a damaged bridge open to traffic that has an orange or red field inspection rating.

5.7.6

Complete Structural Review (Level III Inspection — within 3 weeks following an event)

After all bridges within the affected area(s) are initially inspected and actions taken to ensure public safety, bridge inspection teams assigned by the Bridge Management Engineer conduct a more in-depth inspection and investigation. The Level III inspection only occurs on selected structures that warrant a detailed inspection.

The Level III inspection is an on site analysis of the damaged portion of the bridge, which could include nondestructive testing (NDT) testing of the primary structural members. The structural engineer uses the analysis to evaluate the load carrying capacity of the existing structure to assist in the design of temporary shoring and to develop plans and specifications for permanent repairs or long term shoring.

Upon completion of the inspection, the inspectors: • • •

5.7.7

Notify the Bridge Management Engineer on the status of the bridge based on the appraisal Mark the bridge ends in accordance with the structure tagging procedure Forward an emergency field inspection report form to the Bridge Management Engineer

Tagging Procedures

Following Levels I, II and III inspections, the inspector posts a structure tagging sticker near the structure number. For bridges, the sticker is typically located on the approach slab parapet.

Appendix 5B includes a copy of the structure tagging sticker. The essential information on the sticker is: • • • •

Date and time of inspection Level of inspection (I, II or III) Inspector’s initials Color coded inspection rating (red, orange, yellow, green)

If no stickers are available, the inspector tags the same information on the structure with spray paint, marker or other means available to the inspection teams. Following each inspection, the inspector updates the sticker with the current assessment. The same team (or the next level of inspectors) can perform follow up inspections after earthquake aftershock/re-evaluations.

Emergency Response Plan

5-29

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.7.8

February 2014

Geotechnical Emergency Response

An emergency geotechnical response is primarily the result of earthquake, slope failure, rockfall events or flooding. The required geotechnical response follows the same basic steps as previously defined for structure evaluation with modifications to accommodate the site specific needs. Slope failure can include rockfall, landslides and retaining wall failures as the result of natural events such as earthquakes, flooding, heavy rains/snow and freeze/thaw cycles.

For geotechnical emergency events, the following process applies: 1.

Initial Evaluation. distress/failure site.

The District Engineer conducts an initial evaluation of the

2.

Geotechnical Involvement. Regardless of the perceived magnitude of the slope stability or the potential for future slope movement or rockfall, the District Engineer contacts the Geotechnical Design Manager for assistance and discusses the hazard situation.

3.

Site Visit. The Geotechnical Design Manager determines whether an immediate site review by the Geotechnical Division is warranted to assess the magnitude of the problem and to determine if further assistance is needed. During the site visit, the District Engineer and a geotechnical engineer determine if a more detailed evaluation of the site conditions is necessary.

4.

Geotechnical Evaluation Not Required. If it is determined that a detailed geotechnical evaluation is not required (e.g., conditions are not geologically complex, the failure is limited in extent, the risk of continued slope movement or instability is low, slope stabilization methods are not required), the Geotechnical Design Manager provides the District Engineer with recommendations to complete the cleanup and repair the facility.

5.

Geotechnical Evaluation Required. If it is determined that a detailed geotechnical is required (e.g., a threat of continued slope movement, instability or rockfall, geological complexities exist at the site), the Geotechnical Design Manager assigns a geospecialist (geologist or geotechnical engineer) to conduct further evaluation. The geospecialist provides the District Engineer (on site where possible) with a hazard assessment and the risks associated with that assessment. The assessment includes an evaluation of the probable cause(s) of the instability, the potential for future instability, whether or not the threat of future instability is immediate, the potential threat to public and worker safety and the need for stabilization measures.

6.

Action. Once the initial geohazard assessment is completed, the District Engineer and Region Director, in consultation with the Geotechnical Design Manager, determine the appropriate action for both the immediate needs and long term stabilization measures.

The long term corrective measures follow the standard Project Delivery Network to develop a design solution and obtain funding.

For flooding events, the Geotechnical Division responds as requested by the Chief Structural Engineer and Lead Hydraulics Engineer for foundation and geotechnical stability concerns.

5-30

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.7.9

February 2014

Flood Emergency Response

The Lead Hydraulics Engineer conducts emergency assessments when significant flooding transpires in a drainage basin. Significant flooding is usually indicated by an increase in bank water (bank full) and higher stage flow events in a particular stream or river channel. The Lead Hydraulics Engineer coordinates hydraulic assessments of harmful scour effects on bridge substructures and major culverts with the Level II inspection teams. In addition to bridge stability concerns, the Lead Hydraulics Engineer can assess the danger posed by channel erosion and scour as a result of significant flow events on vulnerable roadway embankments.

The Hydraulics Division conducts field reviews of potential scour issues as requested by District Engineers to provide a risk assessment of the conditions observed. When water levels return to normal levels following significant flooding, the Hydraulics Division inspects the damaged channels and embankments and provides remediation recommendations.

For hydraulic emergency events, follow the following process: 1.

Initial Evaluation. The District Engineer conducts an initial evaluation of the potentially scoured structures and/or embankments and channels.

2.

Hydraulics Involvement.

When the observed scour damage warrants structural countermeasure work, the District Engineer contacts the Hydraulics Division for assistance to discuss the hazard and response.

3.

Site Review. The Hydraulics Division determines whether an immediate site review by the Lead Hydraulics Engineer is warranted to assess the magnitude of the problem, and determines if further assistance is needed. After the site visit, the District Engineer and Lead Hydraulics Engineer determine if a detailed analysis and mitigation design is required.

4.

Hydraulic Evaluation Not Required. If it is determined that a detailed hydraulic evaluation is not required (e.g., flow conditions are not complex, the channel is not inherently unstable, the failure areas are limited in number and location, the repairs are limited to renewal and limited reconstruction), the District Engineer instructs maintenance personnel on the necessary cleanup and repair.

5.

Hydraulic Evaluation Required. If it is determined that a detailed hydraulic evaluation is required (e.g., flow conditions are complex, the channel is unstable, the failure areas are extensive in number and location, the repairs will be extensive), the Hydraulics Division assists the Region Hydraulics Engineer (when one exists) and/or aids the District Engineer in selecting an appropriate consultant hydraulics engineer to conduct the evaluation. The hydraulics engineer visits the site to make a more detailed assessment and provides the District Engineer (on site where possible) with the assessment and the associated risks. The assessment includes an evaluation of: • • • •

Factors contributing to the scour hazard Potential for future scour danger Whether or not the threat of future instability is immediate Potential threat to the traveling public

Emergency Response Plan

5-31

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • 6.

February 2014

Needed scour countermeasures Potential threat to construction personnel during repairs

Action. Once the initial scour assessment is completed, the District Engineer and Region Director, in consultation with the Hydraulics Division, determine the appropriate action for both the immediate and long term stabilization measures. The long term corrective measures follow the standard Project Delivery Network to develop a design solution and obtain funding.

For geotechnical events, the Hydraulics Division responds as requested by the Geotechnical Design Manager and the Chief Structural Engineer for hydraulic related support.

5.8

EMERGENCY FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

5.8.1

Basic Inspection Procedures

This section presents the basic parameters that the Level I and Level II inspectors observe in the initial assessment of each bridge following an event. Each inspection is a rapid assessment of the bridge condition, which is used to assess whether or not to keep the bridge in operation and to prioritize further in-depth inspections.

5.8.1.1 • • • • • • •

Overall appearance — does it sag or appear twisted?

Does either end appear to have settled?

Is there any cracking in the deck or parapets?

Are the parapets out of vertical or horizontal alignment?

Are the parapet tops crushed or spalling at supports?

Is there evidence of significant ground movement?

Has bridge moved vertically or horizontally with respect to the approaching roadways?

5.8.1.2 • • • • •

5-32

Top Side Inspection

Bridge Side Inspection

Choose a safe place to descend the slope to view the side of the bridge. Move slowly because footing can be a problem.

When the side of the bridge is at eye level, look along the edge to see if it appears normal.

Evaluate the wingwalls and the abutment. Do they appear to be in good/stable condition? Is there any abnormal settlement?

Evaluate the girders. Are there any major cracks through the girder? Is there rotation of the girder? Are there any cross frames disconnected or hanging down?

Evaluate the bents. Are the columns straight? Are the column tops or bottoms spalled?

Is the bent cap spalled or cracked? Do spalls appear to be recent?

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

Evaluate the bearings. How much of the girder is still on the support? Are all girders in contact with the bent?

Examine the ground under the bridge. Is there evidence of debris having fallen from the bridge? Is broken concrete present under the bridge?

5.8.1.3 •

•

• •

• • • • • • • •

• •

Utilities

Are there any damaged utilities within the general proximity of the bridge? ○ Damaged utilities could rupture and damage the bridge. ○ Large sewer and water lines could wash away structural backfill holding up the approach slabs. ○ Gas lines could catch fire and cause heat damage to girders.

5.8.1.4 •

February 2014

Under Bridge Inspection

DO NOT proceed under the bridge if there is apparent damage. Note the visible damage and return to the vehicle.

If everything appears normal, proceed under the structure to view the girders, bearings, diaphragms, face of the abutments and other substructure elements. Only one inspector proceeds under the structure at a time.

Is there any abnormal settlement? How do the girders line up? Are they parallel? Are all girders still sitting on the pedestals or bearings?

Do the diaphragms show any sign of distress? ○ Steel – Is there bending or crumpling? ○ Concrete – Are there diagonal (shear) cracks?

For a concrete girder bridge, look at the ends of the girder where it comes in contact with the support. Are there any diagonal (shear) cracks?

At midspan, are there any transverse (flexural) cracks? Do bents appear normal?

Is the bridge still in contact with the substructure elements?

Is there any cracked or loose concrete over a roadway?

Are the splices, pin and hanger assemblies and/or cables free of damage, intact and appear to be functional?

Are the footings exposed?

Is there excessive vibration under load?

If the bridge crosses a stream, only cross over the bridge if deemed safe to reach the other end for inspection. DO NOT cross the stream because flowing water can be dangerous.

Has the abutment or bent rotated?

Inspect the ground near foundation elements. Is there evidence of movement or possible damage underground?

Emergency Response Plan

5-33

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

5.8.2

February 2014

Emergency Field Inspection Report

Appendix 5C presents a copy of the emergency field inspection report. The top of the form includes basic bridge information. One important entry in the form is the date and time of inspection, especially for earthquake aftershocks, which can cause additional damage to the structure. The information allows the Structures Division to assess if the bridge was inspected before and following aftershocks and to schedule appropriate follow up inspections if needed.

Appendix 5D provides various levels of damage comparison photos to assist inspectors in properly checking which level of damage has occurred for each category in the Feature Description portion of the inspection report. The color coding of the damage severity matches the color coding provided by the ShakeCast maps and list of potentially damaged structures.

Use the following color coding: • • • •

Red – complete damage possible Orange – extensive damage possible Yellow – moderate damage possible Green – damage unlikely or slightly damaged

Mark the worst case condition of a structure element in the emergency field inspection report.

For example, if a bridge has multiple spans and bridge columns and one out of the twelve columns has severe damage and the others have minor damage, check the severe damage category. Provide brief notes as applicable. The back of the form provides additional room for notes and sketches.

If possible, take photos of the bridge and send them to the Structures Division with the emergency field inspection report. The photos can be beneficial to assisting the bridge design team in initiating repair plans.

5-34

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5A ROUTE PRIORITIZATION MAPS • •

Utah — Statewide Priority Map Urbanized Areas Maps: ○ Logan ○ Ogden to Layton ○ Salt Lake City ○ Provo to Orem ○ St. George

Emergency Response Plan

5-35

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5B STRUCTURES TAGGING STICKER

5-42

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5C EMERGENCY FIELD INSPECTION REPORT

5-43

Emergency Response Plan

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5D STRUCTURAL DAMAGE EXAMPLE PHOTOS • • • • •

Deck damage Abutment damage Bent or column damage Concrete span damage Steel span damage

Emergency Response Plan

5-45

Structural Damage Example Photos – Deck Damage

Yellow – Minor damage.

Bridge parapet / barrier damage likely caused by the bridge moving relative to the embankment.

Bridge remains open to traffic.

Orange – Moderate damage. Bridge embankment settlement under the approach slab.

Traffic is restricted to emergency vehicles.

Red – Severe damage.

Bridge is closed to all traffic.

Structural Damage Example Photos – Abutment Damage

Yellow – Minor damage.

Shear cracking at the abutment backwall and wingwall. Bridge remains open to traffic.

Orange – Moderate damage. Longitudinal displacement at the abutment seat. Good use of ID to show relative scale of shift. Traffic is restricted to emergency vehicles.

Red – Severe damage.

Foundation movement.

Longitudinal displacement and rotation of the abutment footing.

Notice the flexure and shear failure of the exposed piles.

Bridge is closed to all traffic.

Structural Damage Example Photos – Bent or Column Damage

Yellow – Minor damage. Shear cracking of the concrete cover at the column base. No significant damage to the reinforcement cage or core concrete. Bridge remains open to traffic.

Orange – Moderate damage. Shear failure of the column. The cracks have propagated into the core concrete and the vertical bars are beginning to buckle. Traffic is restricted to emergency vehicles.

Red – Severe damage. Reinforcement cage and core concrete confinement failure in the column. Bridge is closed to all traffic.

Structural Damage Example Photos – Concrete Span Damage

Yellow – Minor damage.

Shear cracks have begun to develop near the supports of the girders.

Bridge remains open to traffic.

Orange – Moderate damage. Flexural cracks near the midspan of a concrete girder bridge.

Traffic is restricted to emergency vehicles.

Red – Severe damage.

Bridge is closed to all traffic.

Structural Damage Example Photos – Steel Span Damage

Yellow – Minor damage.

Sheared rivets at the steel truss plate. Bridge remains open to traffic.

Orange – Moderate damage. Buckled flanges and webs of the steel girders and bearing failure.

Traffic is restricted to emergency vehicles.

Red – Severe damage.

Buckling of the steel girders. Bridge is closed to all traffic.

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5E QUICK REFERENCE SHEET The next two pages present the quick reference sheet for the Structures Division emergency response plan.

Emergency Response Plan

5-51

UDOT Structures Division Emergency Response Plan Quick Reference Sheet Objective: This plan provides a rapid and efficient method of inspecting bridge structures in a uniform manner following a major event. The rapid assessment of a bridge structure’s safety and functionality is an essential component to restoring vital lifeline routes. This quick reference sheet is a synopsis of the plan highlighting the most critical items to be considered, but is not intended to be all inclusive. The full plan can be found on the UDOT website at http://www.udot.utah.gov within the following folder: Home/Inside UDOT/Project Development/Structures Design and Bridge Management/Bridge Management Manual/Chapter 5 – Emergency Plan UDOT employee BASIC priorities and responsibilities are: • Ensure the immediate safety of yourself and your family • Understand your job responsibilities for this emergency response plan • Contact your supervisor as soon as possible and maintain regular communication • In the event that communication systems are unavailable, proceed to designated meeting location • Be prepared for extended field work or office duties Safety: • Do not work alone, always have a partner • Wear personal protective equipment (PPEs) • Be aware of your surroundings including potential hazards o Traffic o Uneven terrain, steep slopes, icy or wet surfaces o Never enter a confined space without proper training, equipment and assistance o Never drive over/under a bridge following an earthquake until it can be assessed for damage • Do not walk under a bridge that appears to have been damaged o Earthquake aftershocks may cause additional damage Response Teams: • First Responders (first 8 hours following an event) o Provided by public, UHP, local law enforcement, TV/radio contacts o Send information to the Traffic Operations Center via 911 calls, etc.

• Level I Inspection (first 2 to 24 hours following an event) o Conducted by UDOT station personnel o Prioritize inspection routes  Life line routes first (interstates, major arterials)  Life line alternate routes  Other secondary routes o Determine if bridges remain operational (initial assessment) – immediately close bridges with significant damage o Convey inspection reports and photos back to the Structures Division • Level II Inspections (within 24 to 72 hours following an event) o Conducted by UDOT Structures, Hydraulic and Geotechnical personnel o Verify Level I inspection assessment with rapid review (basic assessment) • Level III Inspection (within 3 weeks following an event) o Performed by trained bridge inspectors (full bridge inspection assessment) Communication: • Structures Division Managers will report to the State Emergency Command Center • All inspection teams will use any communication method available to convey inspection reports and bridge operational status to the Structures Division Managers o Email - StructuresER@utah.gov o Structures Division Main Number – (801) 965-4188 o Structures Division Fax – (801) 965-4187 o Traffic Operations Center – (801) 887-3700 o State Emergency Command Center – (801) 538-9795 o UDOT Region 1 – (801) 620-1600 o UDOT Region 2 – (801) 975-4900 o UDOT Region 3 – (801) 227-8000 o UDOT Region 4 (backup command center) – (435) 893-4799 Emergency Field Inspection Report: • A copy of the emergency field inspection report is provided in Appendix F of the Structures Division emergency response plan.

o o o o o •

•

The date and time of the inspection is important to note in case of earthquake aftershocks since they can cause additional damage to the structure.

Top side inspection – Can you observe sags in the parapets? Is there settlement at the approaches?

Side view inspection – Is the bridge sagging? Do the wingwalls and abutments appear normal?

Are there cracks or rebar exposed on columns? Are the girders still sitting on the bent cap?

Under bridge inspections – Do NOT inspect under the bridge if damage is apparent.

Utilities – Are there any major utilities broken that could further damage the bridge with fire or erosion?

The following color coding of the damage severity is utilized: o Green – little or no damage to the structure o Yellow – minor damage observed, structure appears capable to carry traffic o Orange – moderate damage observed, traffic restrictions (weight limits, reduced number of lanes, etc.) or traffic closure except for emergency vehicles may be warranted o Red – severe damage observed. If any element of the bridge is found to have severe damage, close the structure immediately to all traffic until a structural engineer can assess the damage.

If possible, send photos of the bridge to the Structures Division along with the inspection report.

Example Photos of Post Event Structural Damage:

Deck Damage

Abutment A Damage

Bent or Column Damage

Concrete Span Damage

Steel Span Damage

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 5F COMMUNICATION LISTS See the following links: •

UDOT Structures Division Emergency Call Down contact list; see the following link: http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=10753103646385779

•

UDOT Bridge Collision & Emergency Repairs contractors list (qualified/approved by pool contracts; July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2015); see the following link: http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0:::1:T,V:286,65751

•

UDOT District Engineers and Maintenance Station Supervisors contact list; see the following link: http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=10753314513398442

Emergency Response Plan

5-54

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1

MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS .................................................................................. 6-1 6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1.3

6.2

REGION MAINTENANCE STATION ........................................................................... 6-2 6.2.1 6.2.2

6.3

Maintenance Process and Procedures.......................................................... 6-1 Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum............................... 6-1 Operational Management System ................................................................. 6-2

Routine/Responsive Maintenance Activities.................................................. 6-2 Maintenance Coordination............................................................................. 6-3

TRAINING .................................................................................................................... 6-3 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4

Maintenance Academy .................................................................................. 6-3 Transportation Education Program................................................................ 6-4 Snow School.................................................................................................. 6-4 Road School .................................................................................................. 6-4

Appendix 6A

STRUCTURES DIVISION RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAINTENANCE STATIONS ......................................................................... 6-5

Appendix 6B

STANDARD LANGUAGE FOR RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 6-6

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 6.1 — STRUCTURES INSPECTION RECOMMENDATIONS MEMORANDUM ......... 6-5

Bridge Maintenance

6-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

6-ii

February 2014

Bridge Maintenance

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 6 BRIDGE MAINTENANCE 6.1

MAINTENANCE OPERATIONS

Bridge maintenance is an essential element for extending the service life of structures.

Maintenance and preservation activities assist in protecting the structural and operational performance of bridge structures and in minimizing future repair costs.

This chapter addresses all aspects of bridge maintenance from the identification of maintenance requirements during inspection to the coordination required to perform recommended maintenance.

6.1.1

Maintenance Process and Procedures

The Bridge Management Division inspects every bridge in the bridge file at least once every two years. Bridge inspectors enter the bridge inspection findings and recommendations into the BMS. The bridge maintenance recommendations are automatically transferred from the BMS to the Region maintenance stations through the Operating Management System (OMS) via work requests. The Region maintenance stations and District Engineer receive a Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum from the Bridge Management Engineer; see Appendix 6A. The Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum contains a list of the highest priority work requests.

The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator contacts the Maintenance Station Supervisor approximately one month after the bridge inspection has been completed to verify that the maintenance station received the Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum and understood the maintenance recommendations entered in OMS. The Region maintenance stations track the work requests in OMS. When the maintenance station schedules the work, the work request becomes a work order and the maintenance is performed.

The Bridge Emergency/Maintenance Coordinator schedules station visits to discuss the maintenance recommendations, provide training on repair techniques and assist with other structure related issues as necessary. During the station visits, the Maintenance Station Supervisor closes out the completed work orders in OMS.

6.1.2

Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum

Bridge inspectors recommend maintenance activities for each bridge. The activities are prioritized as high, medium or low and are classified as routine/responsive maintenance, signing, safety features or preservation activities, as described in the following: 1.

Routine/Responsive Maintenance.

Consists of prioritized routine/responsive maintenance activities to be completed by the maintenance station staff every spring

Bridge Maintenance

6-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

and fall. Because routine maintenance is performed semiannually, bridge inspectors only recommend routine maintenance items that presently need attention.

2.

Signing. Indicates inadequate or misplaced signage on the structure, such as object markers, load posting signs or vertical clearance signs, to be replaced by the maintenance station staff.

3.

Safety Features. Indicates issues regarding transition elements, approach guardrail, attenuation, parapets and any other safety items to be addressed by the maintenance station staff.

4.

Preservation.

Consists of bridge needs that are outside of the scope of routine/responsive maintenance. The needs are addressed through a project and not entered into OMS.

The Structures Inspection Recommendations Memorandum presents the high priority bridge routine/responsive maintenance, signing and safety feature needs within the specific maintenance station.

Appendix 6B contains the standard language to use for recommendations.

6.1.3

Operational Management System

OMS is used to plan, track and schedule the work orders to be performed by the maintenance stations and clears the work orders once the activity is completed. OMS is used to monitor the staff hours and associated costs to complete each activity to assist in future planning and programming of bridge maintenance funds.

6.2 6.2.1

REGION MAINTENANCE STATION Routine/Responsive Maintenance Activities

The Region maintenance stations complete routine maintenance and responsive maintenance activities. Routine maintenance is performed on a regular frequency, typically twice a year.

Responsive activities occur on an as needed basis. Maintenance activities use Code One funding, which is the state funding designation for all maintenance related activities on the state highway infrastructure.

Routine maintenance tasks completed every spring and fall include: • • • • • • • 6-2

Sweep deck Remove debris from drain/drain boxes Remove vegetation from deck and approach areas Remove vegetation from slope protection Remove debris from expansion joints Remove debris from around bearings Remove weeds and seal slope protection joints Bridge Maintenance

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • • • • • •

February 2014

Remove debris from culvert barrels and inlets/outlets Patch minor potholes on deck Seal relief/backwall joints Maintain general safety features Repair erosion around wingwalls Repair erosion in slope protection Clean and seal parapets Remove graffiti Power wash structural elements Update signing

Responsive maintenance tasks can include: • • • •

6.2.2

Patch minor potholes on deck Remove loose concrete from structures over traffic lanes Respond to bridge collisions Any routine/responsive maintenance item requiring immediate attention; see Appendix 6.B.1

Maintenance Coordination

The Region maintenance stations perform the following coordination: 1.

Perform Preservation and Address Recurring Issues. The maintenance stations provide input to the Structures Division on repairs and recurring issues (e.g., drainage, collisions, ride quality) that are considered preservation items. The Region and Structures Division personnel use the input from maintenance stations to help identify opportunities to address the items in future projects. Appendix 6.B.4 lists standard language for preservation recommendations.

2.

Designate Bridge Week. Bridge week is implemented at the Region’s discretion. During bridge week, the entire maintenance station spends one week focusing on structure maintenance, which is in addition to the spring and fall routine maintenance.

3.

Plan Work Around Road Closures. During construction projects, maintenance stations can complete maintenance activities within the road closure limits. Maintenance stations coordinate project schedules and expected road closures with contractors to complete the work.

6.3

TRAINING

6.3.1

Maintenance Academy

The Maintenance Division conducts a maintenance academy twice a year to train new employees. The Bridge Management Division provides training on basic bridge components, Bridge Maintenance

6-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

maintenance activities and inspection. awareness to maintenance staff.

6.3.2

February 2014

The training provides knowledge and structural

Transportation Education Program

The Maintenance Division created the Transportation Education Program (TEP) to better train maintenance transportation technicians who work in both construction and maintenance. The technicians are placed into three experience levels to assist in all types of construction inspection and maintenance activities. Individuals participating in the training have typically completed the maintenance academy training. The Bridge Management Division provides training through the TEP, which describes structural elements, bridge inspection, structure maintenance activities and bridge construction inspection in more detail than the maintenance academy.

6.3.3

Snow School

The Regions conduct an annual snow school training every fall to refresh maintenance personnel on winter maintenance activities. The Bridge Management Division provides training on bridge maintenance and emergency response.

6.3.4

Road School

Each April, the Utah League of Cities and Towns, in cooperation with the Utah Local Technical Assistance Program Center, presents a conference specifically for public works department personnel from throughout the state. Workshops present state of the art techniques, money saving alternatives, various compliance regulations, safety procedures and management skills.

The Bridge Management Division provides various training at the conference.

6-4

Bridge Maintenance

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 6A STRUCTURES DIVISION RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAINTENANCE STATIONS

Figure 6.1 — STRUCTURES INSPECTION RECOMMENDATIONS MEMORANDUM Bridge Maintenance

6-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Appendix 6B STANDARD LANGUAGE FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 6.B.1 List of Routine/Responsive Maintenance Recommendations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Sweep deck Clean joints Remove weeds and seal slope protection joints Overlay approach slab settlement Patch minor potholes on deck Remove debris from expansion joints Seal relief/backwall joints Remove debris from drain/drain boxes Remove debris from around bearings Remove large vegetation debris and vegetation growth from channel Remove debris from culvert barrels and inlets/outlets Remove loose concrete from structures over traffic lanes Remove graffiti Repair chain link fence damage Extend drain pipes below girders Repair erosion around wingwalls Repair erosion in slope protection Place riprap around abutments to repair or prevent scour Replace missing parapet delineators Remove debris from deck, shoulders and sidewalks Crack seal deck asphalt wearing surface Crack seal approach asphalt wearing surface Clean and seal parapets Remove vegetation from deck and approach areas Seal slope protection Remove vegetation from slope protection Maintain general safety features Power wash structural elements Update signing

6.B.2 List of Standard Safety Recommendations • • • •

6-6

Update approach barrier to meet current standards Repair approach barrier Update bridge parapet to meet current standards Repair bridge parapet

Bridge Maintenance

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

6.B.3 List of Standard Signing Recommendations • • • •

Install missing object markers to meet current standards Update (clearance/load limit ) signs to read (X) Install (clearance/load limit ) signs to read (X) Install (X) advance warning signs

6.B.4 List of Preservation Recommendations • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Apply deck overlay treatment Replace deck overlay treatment Replace deck Replace parapets Repair parapets Replace approach slab Replace expansion joints Remove and close expansion joints Install deck shoring Install polymer overlay Repair settlement/ride Repair spalls/delaminations/potholed areas Apply healer/sealer on the deck and parapets Install waterproof membrane and asphalt overlay Clean and seal parapets Repair chain link fence damage Extend drain pipes below girders Remove and patch all loose concrete from structures Repair girder ends Replace girders Repair bent cap Repair collision damage in girders Clean and repaint structural steel Install carbon fiber wrap on girders and girder ends Epoxy inject cracks in girders Repair, replace or reset bearing units Clean and paint bearing units Place riprap around abutments/bents to repair or prevent scour Wrap columns with carbon fiber Install scour countermeasures Repair and restore channel Fill/repair erosion holes in aprons

Bridge Maintenance

6-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

6-8

February 2014

Bridge Maintenance

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS 7.1

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.1.3

7.2

Local Governments ....................................................................................... 7-1 Inspection ...................................................................................................... 7-1 Funding.......................................................................................................... 7-1

DEFINITIONS .............................................................................................................. 7-2 7.2.1 7.2.2 7.2.3

Bridge Definition ............................................................................................ 7-2 Bridge Components ....................................................................................... 7-2 Bridge Elements ............................................................................................ 7-5 7.2.3.1 7.2.3.2 7.2.3.3 7.2.3.4 7.2.3.5

7.2.4 7.2.5 7.3

Routine Maintenance Activities ..................................................................... 7-18 Nonroutine Maintenance ............................................................................... 7-18 Emergency Maintenance ............................................................................... 7-18

STRUCTURE PROJECTS ........................................................................................... 7-19 7.4.1 7.4.2 7.4.3 7.4.4

7.5

Inspection Terms ........................................................................................... 7-15 Miscellaneous Terms..................................................................................... 7-17

MAINTENANCE ........................................................................................................... 7-18 7.3.1 7.3.2 7.3.3

7.4

Deck ............................................................................................. 7-12 Superstructure ............................................................................... 7-13 Substructure .................................................................................. 7-13 Culvert ........................................................................................... 7-14 Miscellaneous Structures .............................................................. 7-15

Structure Numbers ........................................................................................ 7-19 Post Project Submittal Requirements ............................................................ 7-19 Bridge Rehabilitation ..................................................................................... 7-19 Bridge Widening or Culvert Extension ........................................................... 7-20

UTAH RULE FOR MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES AT STRUCTURES ........... 7-21 R918-6-2. Purpose and Background. .......................................................................... 7-21 R918-6-5. Maintenance Responsibility at Overcrossings and at Interchanges where the State Route Crosses Over the Local Route ............................... 7-21 R918-6-6. Maintenance Responsibility at Undercrossings and at Interchanges where the State Route Crosses Under the Local Route ............................. 7-21

Local Government Coordination

7-i

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 7.1 — EXAMPLES OF NBIS BRIDGE LENGTHS ........................................................ 7-3 Figure 7.2 — PRESTRESSED GIRDER BRIDGE ................................................................... 7-6 Figure 7.3 — CAST-IN-PLACE BRIDGE ................................................................................. 7-6 Figure 7.4 — STEEL GIRDER BRIDGE .................................................................................. 7-7 Figure 7.5 — EXPANSION JOINTS ........................................................................................ 7-7 Figure 7.6 — ELASTOMERIC BEARING ................................................................................ 7-8 Figure 7.7 — BENTS AND STEEL GIRDERS ......................................................................... 7-8 Figure 7.8 — EXPANSION ABUTMENT ................................................................................. 7-9 Figure 7.9 — SLIDING BEARING ............................................................................................ 7-9 Figure 7.10 — SHEAR KEYS .................................................................................................. 7-10 Figure 7.11 — COFFERDAM AND PILES ............................................................................... 7-10 Figure 7.12 — PILES ............................................................................................................... 7-11 Figure 7.13 — CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ........................................................................... 7-11

7-ii

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Chapter 7 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COORDINATION 7.1

INTRODUCTION

Structures are major assets owned by a local government. As discussed in Chapter 3, 23 CFR §650 requires the periodic inspection of all structures classified as bridges to ensure public safety. The Structures Division provides inspection services, maintains records of inspections and makes maintenance recommendations for local government owned bridges.

This chapter documents UDOT’s roles and policies for local government coordination and defines the local government’s responsibilities throughout the life of the bridge. The chapter also presents definitions of structure components and inspection terms. The definitions assist bridge owners in understanding inspection reports and maintenance recommendations.

Contact the Bridge Management Division if a local government representative has questions on the information contained in Chapter 7.

7.1.1

Local Governments

Local governments, as defined in the BMM, include cities, counties, towns, transportation authorities, public utilities, service districts and any owner of a bridge over a public road.

7.1.2

Inspection

The Structures Division inspects all structures within the state defined as highway bridges that are not owned by the federal government or a private entity. Chapter 3 defines the bridge inspection program. Section 7.2.1 provides the definition of a bridge. For nonstate owned bridge inspections, the bridge inspector contacts the owner before the inspection and invites the owner to participate. Upon completion of the bridge inspection, the Bridge Management Engineer transmits a summary of the inspection findings and recommendations to the local government owner and follows up with a phone call. The inspection summary provides bridge recommendations in 5 categories — routine/responsive, prompt action, signing, safety and general preservation or rehabilitation.

7.1.3

Funding

Federal and state funding is available for replacement or preservation of bridges. Chapter 2 provides a thorough discussion on the planning and programming procedures for bridge projects statewide. Contact the UDOT Local Government Engineer for additional information on the funding available and requirements for eligibility.

Local Government Coordination

7-1

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.2

February 2014

DEFINITIONS

Chapter 1 contains a complete list of definitions. This section provides information and definitions for terms used in inspection reports and FHWA guidelines to assist local governments.

7.2.1

Bridge Definition

A bridge, as defined by the Code of Federal Regulations, 23 CFR ยง650, is: A structure including supports erected over a depression or an obstruction, such as water, highway or railway, and having a track or passageway for carrying traffic or other moving loads and having an opening measured along the center of the roadway of more than 20 ft between undercopings of abutments or spring lines of arches, or extreme ends of openings for multiple boxes; it may also include multiple pipes, where the clear distance between openings is less than half of the smaller contiguous opening.

Figure 7.1 provides examples of bridges based on the NBIS definition. In all examples, the dimension S must exceed 20 ft to meet the definition of a bridge.

7.2.2

Bridge Components

Inspection reports separate bridge structures into three primary components: 1.

Deck. The riding surface of the bridge. The deck can be covered by an overlay system (asphalt or polymer).

2.

Superstructure. The system of elements that spans the feature being crossed. The superstructure rests on the substructure. The superstructure includes the deck, parapets and girders or other support elements (e.g., trusses, arches, box girders). Note that, in inspection reports, the superstructure refers to all elements except the deck; deck ratings are listed independently.

3.

Substructure.

The system of elements that support the superstructure.

The substructure transfers the loads to the earth and retains material behind the supports.

Substructure elements include abutments, bents, footings, piles, wingwalls, backwalls, etc.

4.

Culvert. A structure that is designed to convey water and provide a path under an obstruction. Most culverts have a structural floor and are covered with embankment material. However, buried three sided structures, arches, pipes, boxes, etc., are also culverts if the structures are designed to convey water. If the structure is designed to convey water and has a structural floor, but is not covered with embankment material, the structure is still a culvert. The Structures Division assigns a structure number to all

7-2

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.1 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; EXAMPLES OF NBIS BRIDGE LENGTHS Local Government Coordination

7-3

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.1 â&#x20AC;&#x201D; EXAMPLES OF NBIS BRIDGE LENGTHS (Continued)

7-4

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

culverts requiring design plans, which typically applies to any box culvert with a span or rise greater than 12 ft.

5.

Miscellaneous Structures. Structures not meeting the definition of a bridge or culvert.

Examples of miscellaneous structures are culvert headwalls, overhead signs, retaining walls and roadway undercrossings.

Inspection reports provide aggregate ratings of the three main bridge components. Each bridge component consists of bridge elements; see Section 7.2.3.

7.2.3

Bridge Elements

This section describes specific bridge elements that are evaluated during bridge inspections.

Chapter 3 provides an in-depth discussion on the bridge inspection program. In addition, the SDDM provides in-depth discussions on practices for the structural design of each bridge element, including the Department’s use of the LRFD Specifications.

The following figures and graphics identify typical bridge elements: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Figure 7.2 — Prestressed Girder Bridge Figure 7.3 — Cast-in-Place Bridge Figure 7.4 — Steel Girder Bridge Figure 7.5 — Expansion Joints Figure 7.6 — Elastomeric Bearing Figure 7.7 — Bents and Steel Girders Figure 7.8 — Expansion Abutment Figure 7.9 — Sliding Bearing Figure 7.10 — Shear Keys Figure 7.11 — Cofferdam and Piles Figure 7.12 — Piles Figure 7.13 — Concrete Box Culvert

Following the figures are definitions in the order of appearance on the bridge (top down). The discussion also provides terms for culverts and miscellaneous structures.

Local Government Coordination

7-5

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.2 — PRESTRESSED GIRDER BRIDGE

Figure 7.3 — CAST-IN-PLACE BRIDGE

7-6

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.4 — STEEL GIRDER BRIDGE

Compression Joint

Modular Joint

Strip Seal Figure 7.5 — EXPANSION JOINTS

Local Government Coordination

7-7

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.6 — ELASTOMERIC BEARING

Figure 7.7 — BENTS AND STEEL GIRDERS 7-8

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.8 — EXPANSION ABUTMENT

Figure 7.9 — SLIDING BEARING

Local Government Coordination

7-9

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.10 — SHEAR KEYS

Figure 7.11 — COFFERDAM AND PILES

7-10

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Figure 7.12 — PILES

Figure 7.13 — CONCRETE BOX CULVERT Local Government Coordination

7-11

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.2.3.1

February 2014

Deck Name

Description

Parapet (or bridge rail)

A low wall or railing along the edge of a bridge to contain and redirect errant vehicles; see Figures 7.2 and 7.3

Overhang

The portion of the deck that extends past the exterior girder; see Figure 7.2

Approach slab

A concrete slab that transitions the roadway pavement to the bridge

Sleeper slab

A support element under the approach slab and between the approach slab and roadway pavement; helps control approach slab settlement and provides a location to place an expansion joint to reduce pavement damage due to bridge movement An additional ½ in. of deck thickness that is sacrificial and can be worn off without sacrificing structure capacity; also refers to any overlay placed on the bridge including:

Wearing surface

• • • •

Polymer overlays Asphalt overlays with membranes Concrete overlays Polymer concrete overlays

Connects adjacent parts of a structure and allows for expansion and contraction of the bridge; types of expansion joints are; see Figure 7.5: Expansion joint

• • • •

Compression seals — a joint that is pressed into the armored backing Strip seal — a joint that is attached into the armor backing Modular joint — a joint for long spans that has more than one strip seal gland allowing greater movement Foam expansion joint — typically consists of a compressed foam backer rod covered with an elastic material to accommodate movement

Allows for control of concrete shrinkage stresses and differential movement between bridge elements; there are several types of relief joints including: Relief joint

• • •

7-12

A V-groove in concrete to force a crack at that location Concrete expansion joint material; a layer of compressible material separating adjacent concrete pours Combination of V-grooves, expansion joint material and waterstops used between the bridge and approach slab to allow for settlement and rotation of the approach slab

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.2.3.2

February 2014

Superstructure Name

Description

Girder or beam

Primary load carrying member supporting a deck; see Figures 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.10

Diaphragms or crossframes

Secondary members between girders that brace the girder and transmit loads between girders; see Figures 7.4, 7.8 and 7.10 Elements between the girder and substructure that allow for rotation and/or movement between the superstructure and substructure; types of bearings include; see Figures 7.6 and 7.9: • • • •

Bearings

• •

Elastomeric bearings Elastomeric bearings with sliding surfaces Integral abutment bearings — only active during construction Isolation bearings — allow for significant movement during an earthquake and used to reduce the load transferred to the substructure Sliding plate bearings — typically a curved plate and a flat plate with the flat plate sliding on the stationary curved plate Rocker bearings — uses a curved plate to allow the girder to rotate

The drainage system controls runoff from the bridge and can include; see Figure 7.4: Drainage system

7.2.3.3

• • • •

Deck drains Approach slab drains Drainage pipes from the deck drains to the storm water system Catch basins

Substructure Name

Description Linear members that carry load from bents or abutments through weak soils into the ground; pile types include; see Figures 7.11 and 7.12:

Piles and drilled shafts

• • • •

Footing

The lower portion of a substructure that distributes the load to the earth or piles

Spread footing

Transfers load directly to the soil or rock beneath the bent or abutment

Abutment

A substructure element used for supporting the ends of a structure; see Figures 7.2, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8

Wingwall

A retaining wall extending from the abutments; see Figures 7.2 and 7.4

Backwall

The abutment wall above the bearing seat; see Figures 7.6 and 7.9

Local Government Coordination

Pipe piles Concrete filled pipe piles H-piles Precast concrete piles

7-13

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

Name

February 2014

Description

Bent (including straddle bent)

A substructure element between abutments on a multispan bridge; can consist of footings on soil, piles or drilled shafts; footings can support walls or columns; caps often used to span between the columns and support the girders; see Figures 7.2, 7.7 and 7.10

Pedestal

A raised concrete pad constructed on top of a bridge seat to provide a specific bearing seat elevation; see Figures 7.6 and 7.9

Shear key

Used to transfer lateral or longitudinal loads from the superstructure to the substructure; can be a concrete block adjacent to the girders or under diaphragms/crossframes; can also be steel bolsters attached to steel girders and engaging the bent cap or abutment; see Figures 7.8 and 7.10

Cofferdam

A temporary enclosure built within a body of water to allow the enclosed area to be pumped out and filled with concrete; see Figure 7.11

Slope protection

A concrete or rock surface placed on a slope in front of the abutment to stabilize steep fill slopes and provide weed control under structures; see Figures 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4

Riprap

Rock lining channels to reduce scour around abutments or bents; see Figure 7.3

7.2.3.4

Culvert Name

Description

Concrete box culvert

A box culvert is a structure that is usually buried below the roadway and consists of a top, bottom and sides. A cast-in-place or precast reinforced concrete culvert consisting of a single or multiple openings to allow passage of water under a roadway; see Figure 7.13

Wingwalls

Retaining walls attached to the corners of a structure to retain the roadway material and fill embankment

Aprons

Flat areas of concrete before either opening of a culvert to provide a smooth hydraulic transition to or from the culvert opening

Cutoff walls

Placed at the end of aprons to protect against scour due to cavitation at the transition between natural ground and concrete apron

Barrel

A single opening in the box culvert

Headwall

A wall extending from the box culvert to retain fill above the culvert at the end of the culvert

7-14

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.2.3.5

February 2014

Miscellaneous Structures Name

Multiple pipes

Description A pipe array placed to create a bridge as defined in Section 7.2.1 A buried element that provides a passage through a fill section or provides an access or maintenance point to underground utilities; buried structures include:

Buried culverts

Roadway undercrossing

• • • • • • • • •

Metal pipe Structural plate pipe Long span structural plate Deep corrugated plate Structural plate box Reinforced concrete pipe Precast concrete arches Elliptical structures Concrete utility vaults

A structure meeting the definition of a culvert except it is not designed to convey water. These are commonly used for pedestrian access under a roadway.

A structure designed and constructed to resist the lateral pressure of soil where there is a desired change in ground elevation that exceeds the stability of the free standing soil; retaining walls include:

Retaining walls

Overhead signs

• • • • • •

A sign that is placed such that a portion or the entirety of the sign or the support is directly above the roadway or shoulder such that vehicles travel below the sign; typical installations include signs placed on: • •

7.2.4

CIP concrete retaining walls Precast concrete retaining walls MSE wall systems Prefabricated modular gravity wall systems Tieback walls Soil nail walls

Cantilever arms that extend over the traveled way or shoulder Sign support structures that span the entire width of the roadway

Inspection Terms

Chapter 3 provides an in-depth discussion on the bridge inspection program. The following defines several bridge inspection terms to assist local government bridge owners: 1.

Condition Rating. An overall assessment of the physical condition of the deck, the superstructure and the substructure of a bridge or culvert. General condition ratings range from 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent condition).

2.

Channel Cross Section. A survey taken of the upstream side of a bridge. The bridge inspector takes readings at evenly spaced intervals, documents the results and compares to previous readings to determine stream migration, scour, stream degradation or aggradation and current water depths.

Local Government Coordination

7-15

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

Channel cross sections include a roadway and bank elevation on each side of the bridge plus the bottom of the girder on the right side of the cross section and a top of water elevation. The bridge inspector obtains cross sections on the inlet side of the bridge and completes the cross sections left to right looking upstream as follows: • • •

For bridges equal to or less than 50 ft in length, take cross sections in 5-ft station increments.

For bridges between 50 ft and 100 ft in length, take cross sections in 10-ft station increments.

For bridges equal to or over 100 ft in length, take cross sections in 20-ft station increments.

3.

Fracture Critical Member. A steel member in tension, or with a tension element, whose failure would likely result in a total or partial bridge collapse.

4.

Fracture Critical Bridge. A bridge that does not contain redundant supporting elements.

This means that, if a key support fails, the bridge or portion of a bridge could be in danger of collapse. This does not mean that the bridge is inherently unsafe, only that it lacks redundancy in the design.

5.

Functionally Obsolete. A bridge that was built to standards that do not meet the minimum federal functional requirements for a new bridge. The bridges are not necessarily rated as structurally deficient nor are the bridges inherently unsafe.

Functionally obsolete bridges include those that have substandard geometric features (e.g., narrow lanes, narrow shoulders, poor approach alignment, inadequate vertical clearance). For a more complete description, refer to Chapter 3.

6.

Load Rating. The determination of the live load carrying capacity of a bridge using bridge plans and supplemented by information gathered from a field inspection. Bridges are rated at two different stress levels referred to as Inventory Rating and Operating Rating; see Chapter 4.

7.

Scour. Erosion of streambed or bank material due to flowing water; often considered as being localized around bents and abutments of bridges.

8.

Scour Critical. A bridge with a foundation element that has been determined to be unstable for the observed or evaluated scour conditions; that threatens substructure elements; and that places one or more elements in danger of failure.

9.

Structurally Deficient. Bridges that have a general condition (or NBI) rating for the deck, superstructure, substructure or culvert as 4 or less or if the roadway approaches regularly overtop due to flooding. A general condition rating of 4 means that the component rating is described as poor. Examples of poor condition include:

7-16

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • •

February 2014

Corrosion that has caused significant section loss of steel support members Significant substructure settlement Advanced cracking and deterioration in concrete bridge decks Advanced cracking and deterioration in concrete girders

For bridge owners, the classification structurally deficient is a reminder that the bridge could need further analysis that could result in load posting, maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement or closure. A bridge that is structurally deficient does not imply that it is unsafe. A structurally deficient bridge typically needs maintenance and repair and eventual rehabilitation or replacement to address deficiencies. To remain open to traffic, the bridge owner often posts structurally deficient bridges with reduced weight limits that restrict the gross weight of vehicles using the bridges. If unsafe conditions are identified during a physical inspection, the structure is closed. For a more complete description, refer to Chapter 3.

10.

7.2.5

Sufficiency Rating. The method of evaluating highway bridge data by calculating four separate factors to obtain a numeric value that is indicative of bridge sufficiency to remain in service. The result of the method is a percentage in which 100% represents an entirely sufficient bridge and 0% represents an entirely insufficient or deficient bridge.

The formula includes factors for structural condition, bridge geometry and traffic considerations. The FHWA Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges presents the sufficiency rating formula.

Miscellaneous Terms

The definition of the following terms assists local government bridge owners: 1.

Clearance Sign. A sign either attached to the structure or on the roadway before the bridge warning larger vehicles of the restricted height. Any bridge with a clearance less than 16′-0″ requires posting.

2.

Load Limit Posting Sign. A sign indicating a weight limit that the structure is capable of carrying; see Chapter 4.

3.

Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall. Retaining walls consisting of horizontal soil reinforcing elements connected to a facing material to retain the soil. MSE walls are constructed from the bottom up; see Figure 7.4.

4.

Anchored Walls (Soil Nails or Rock Anchors). Retaining walls consisting of horizontal soil reinforcing elements drilled into an existing fill to stabilize the soil and connected to a facing material to retain the soil. Anchored walls are typically constructed from the top down.

Local Government Coordination

7-17

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.3 7.3.1

February 2014

MAINTENANCE Routine Maintenance Activities

Routine maintenance activities extend the service life of the structure. Local government maintenance forces perform routine maintenance on a defined schedule, which occurs without involvement from UDOT. In general, maintenance activities are simple procedures that can be completed in a short period of time. See Chapter 6 for more discussion on bridge maintenance.

7.3.2

Nonroutine Maintenance

Nonroutine maintenance is bridge repair work that addresses a specific deficiency at a bridge and is not typically performed during routine maintenance. Nonroutine maintenance can include the following: • • • • •

7.3.3

Updating load limit signage Updating vertical clearance signage Incorporating safety improvements Repairing scour damage Repairing damage due to vandalism

Emergency Maintenance

If a bridge emergency occurs, contact the Structures Division immediately. The Structures Division has trained and experienced personnel to address emergency issues and repairs. See Chapter 5 for a thorough discussion on the Structures Division’s emergency response plan.

Emergencies can relate to a wide range of conditions including: • • • •

Vehicular impacts Floods Earthquakes Fire or blast

In the event of a bridge emergency, maintenance activities may temporarily restore the functionality of the bridge until major repairs are completed. Typical maintenance activities include: • • • • • • 7-18

Removing debris Removing loose items hanging from the bridge Closing lanes or shoulders Cleaning the drainage system Placing detour signs or warning signs Removing damaged expansion joint material Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• •

Placing material to temporarily mitigate continuation of scour damage Placing material to stabilize fill slopes where damaged by scour

7.4

STRUCTURE PROJECTS

7.4.1

February 2014

Structure Numbers

The Structures Division assigns a unique number to every structure that is defined as a bridge.

Owners must request structure numbers for new bridges, bridge rehabilitations, bridge widenings and culvert extensions. The bridge owner submits project information to the Structures Division on a form accessible on the UDOT website, which is accessed from the Structures Division Request for Information page and then by selecting Assign a Local Government Agency Bridge Number. Section 3.4.4 describes how the structure number is assigned.

7.4.2

Post Project Submittal Requirements

The Structures Division requests that the bridge owners follow the Project Delivery Network. At a minimum, bridge owners must submit the following to the Bridge Management Division: • • • • • • • • •

Design plans Design calculations Load rating report Bridge load rating model Geotechnical report Hydraulic report (if applicable) As built plans Construction photographs Shop drawings (if applicable)

Refer to Chapter 4 for load rating requirements.

7.4.3

Bridge Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation projects require contract documents that specifically identify the type and location of work being performed on a bridge. The contract documents are typically referred to as a PS&E (plans, specifications and estimate). Private contractors typically perform bridge rehabilitation work under a contractual agreement. Several of the following items of work could be eligible for federal or state funding: • • •

Repairing potholes Jacking approach slabs Replacing or rehabilitating deck joints

Local Government Coordination

7-19

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

• • • • • •

February 2014

Adding or replacing overlays Repairing bents, abutments, pedestals, wingwalls, bent caps, parapets, diaphragms and girder ends Painting structural steel Replacing major elements including parapets, deck approach slabs, girders or substructure elements Repairing collision damage Realigning channels, scour mitigation or scour repair

Safety requirements for existing structures are measured against current standards.

Rehabilitation projects must consider safety improvements to increase the safety of the structure and to the traveling public. Typical safety improvements include: • • • • •

Replacing parapets Replacing or adding approach barrier Adding or repairing reflective object markers Updating signage (update load limit or clearance signs immediately when notified of required modifications) Adding or replacing crash cushions/attenuators

Owners must notify the Bridge Management Division at the completion of rehabilitation projects.

The Bridge Management Division schedules an initial inspection to update the records of the structure. Section 3.3.1 defines the requirements for initial inspections.

7.4.4

Bridge Widening or Culvert Extension

Bridge widening or culvert extension projects require contract documents that describe the work (e.g., structure design plans, quantity and cost estimates, specifications). Private contractors typically perform bridge widenings and culvert extensions, which requires a contractual agreement. Bridge widenings and culvert extensions can be eligible for funding.

Measure safety requirements for existing structures against current standards. Bridge widening or culvert extension projects must consider safety improvements to increase the safety of the structure and to the traveling public. Typical safety improvements include: • • • •

Replacing parapets Replacing or adding approach barrier Adding or repairing reflective object markers Updating signage (update load limit or clearance signs immediately when notified of required modifications)

Owners must notify the Bridge Management Division at the completion of bridge widening or culvert extension projects. The Bridge Management Division schedules an initial inspection to update the records of the structure. Section 3.3.1 defines the requirements for initial inspections.

7-20

Local Government Coordination

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

7.5

February 2014

UTAH RULE FOR MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES AT STRUCTURES

Title: Utah Administrative Code, Rule R918-6. Maintenance Responsibility at Intersections, Overcrossings, and Interchanges between Class A Roads and Class B or Class C Roads (As in effect on June 1, 2013) For the convenience of local government bridge owners, the following provides excerpts from the UDOT rule as related to structures. The link to the full version of the rule is found at: http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r918/r918-006.htm#T2

R918-6-2. Purpose and Background.

(1) The purpose of this rule is to assign maintenance responsibility between the department and the local government entity for roadway and roadside features at the intersection of state and local roads, including grade-separated interchanges, overcrossings, undercrossings, and at-grade intersections.

R918-6-5. Maintenance Responsibility at Overcrossings and at Interchanges where the State Route Crosses Over the Local Route (1) UDOT is responsible for: (a) maintenance, repairs, and replacement of all structure elements, including decks, parapets, bent caps, beams, columns, footings, abutments, approach slabs, and slope protection; (b) maintenance of drains on the structure; (c) maintenance of retaining walls; (d) fence maintenance on the structure and its approaches and ramps; and (e) vegetation control including mowing, along the state route, as demarcated by access control or Right-of-Way fencing.

(2) The local government jurisdiction is responsible for: (a) maintenance of drainage under the structure; (b) vegetation control, including mowing, along the local route, as demarcated by access control or Right-of-Way fencing; and (c) maintenance of decorative landscaping beyond the UDOT Aesthetics Guideline baseline, as described in R918-6-4(15).

(3) If the local government entity proposes a pavement treatment that would decrease vertical clearance under the structure to less than the current standard, such work shall be done in consultation with UDOT.

R918-6-6. Maintenance Responsibility at Undercrossings and at Interchanges where the State Route Crosses Under the Local Route (1) UDOT is responsible for: (a) major structure maintenance, including repair or replacement of parapets, bent caps, beams, columns, footings, abutments, approach slabs, and slope protection; Local Government Coordination

7-21

UDOT Bridge Management Manual

February 2014

(b) deck maintenance where necessary to preserve the structural integrity of the bridge such as where the rebar is exposed; (c) maintenance of retaining walls; (d) maintenance of drainage under the structure; (e) vegetation control, including mowing, along the state route, as demarcated by access control or Right-of-Way fencing; and (f) fence maintenance under the structure.

(2) The local government jurisdiction is responsible for: (a) minor deck and parapet maintenance which includes maintenance of the wearing surface down to the first mat of reinforcing steel, and of any bituminous surfacing above that.

This maintenance should include preventive sealing and repair of spalls and delaminations. If UDOT performs a deck rehabilitation project involving pothole patching, waterproofing membrane and asphalt overlay, the responsibility to maintain the asphalt wearing surface would also default to the local government owned upon completion of the initial installation. If the local entity proposes a deck treatment that would add static load to the structure, such work shall be done in consultation with UDOT; (b) maintenance of drains on the structure; (c) fence maintenance on the structure and its approaches; (d) vegetation control, including mowing, along the local route, as demarcated by access control or Right-of-Way fencing; and (e) maintenance of decorative landscaping beyond the UDOT Aesthetics Guideline baseline, as described in R918-6-4(15).

7-22

Local Government Coordination