2001•Journal of Korean Society of Steel ConstructionRequires access

A Study on the Comparisom of Load-carrying Capacity by the rating Methods of Bridges

Sang Chul Han, Seung Ie Yang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

About half of bridges in United States are considered to be deficient and therefore are in need of repair or replacement. Half of these are functionally obsolete, and others do not have required strength For these bridges repairs and replacements are needed To avoid the high cost of rehabilitation the bridge rating must corectly report the present load-carrying capacity Rating engineers use Allowable Stress Design(ASD) Load Factor Design(LFD), and Load Resistance Factor Design(LRFD) to evaluate the bridge load carrying capacity In this paper the load rating methods are introduced and bridge load test data are collected. The reasons that make the difference between test results and analytical results are explained for each bridge load test And load rating methods are applied to real bridge. The rating factors from each method are compared.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

About half of bridges in United States are considered to be deficient and therefore are in need of repair or replacement. Half of these are functionally obsolete, and others do not have required strength For these bridges repairs and replacements are needed To avoid the high cost of rehabilitation the bridge rating must corectly report the present load-carrying capacity Rating engineers use Allowable Stress Design(ASD) Load Factor Design(LFD), and Load Resistance Factor Design(LRFD) to evaluate the bridge load carrying capacity In this paper the load rating methods are introduced and bridge load test data are collected. The reasons that make the difference between test results and analytical results are explained for each bridge load test And load rating methods are applied to real bridge. The rating factors from each method are compared.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

About half of bridges in United States are considered to be deficient and therefore are in need of repair or replacement. Half of these are functionally obsolete, and others do not have required strength For these bridges repairs and replacements are needed To avoid the high cost of rehabilitation the bridge rating must corectly report the present load-carrying capacity Rating engineers use Allowable Stress Design(ASD) Load Factor Design(LFD), and Load Resistance Factor Design(LRFD) to evaluate the bridge load carrying capacity In this paper the load rating methods are introduced and bridge load test data are collected. The reasons that make the difference between test results and analytical results are explained for each bridge load test And load rating methods are applied to real bridge. The rating factors from each method are compared.

Key concepts: Bridge (graph theory), Engineering, Structural engineering, Load testing, Load factor, Design load, Reliability engineering, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
A Study on the Comparisom of Load-carrying Capacity by the rating Methods of Bridges — Research Paper | ScholarLens