YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASCE
    • Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Load Rating of a Fully Instrumented Bridge: Comparison of LRFR Approaches

    Source: Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities:;2016:;Volume ( 030 ):;issue: 002
    Author:
    Masoud Sanayei
    ,
    Alexandra J. Reiff
    ,
    Brian R. Brenner
    ,
    Gregory R. Imbaro
    DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000752
    Publisher: American Society of Civil Engineers
    Abstract: This paper presents a comparison of three methods used to load rate the Powder Mill Bridge based on the load and resistance factor rating (LRFR) approach. This is a typical three-span continuous bridge with steel girders in composite action with the RC bridge deck. The three methods are as follows: (1) employing the conventional design office load rating technique using a simplified line girder analysis, (2) using strain measurements from a diagnostic load test to adjust the design office rating to account for in-situ bridge behavior, and (3) using a finite-element (FE) model of the bridge, which accounts for three-dimensional (3D) structural system behavior. Advantages and disadvantages of each method are related to speed, ease of use, reviewability, cost, accuracy, and type of use intended. Similarities and differences in utilizing these three methods are discussed. The advanced load rating methods are shown to produce higher ratings in comparison with the conventional approach.
    • Download: (4.989Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Load Rating of a Fully Instrumented Bridge: Comparison of LRFR Approaches

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/82828
    Collections
    • Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities

    Show full item record

    contributor authorMasoud Sanayei
    contributor authorAlexandra J. Reiff
    contributor authorBrian R. Brenner
    contributor authorGregory R. Imbaro
    date accessioned2017-05-08T22:34:16Z
    date available2017-05-08T22:34:16Z
    date copyrightApril 2016
    date issued2016
    identifier other49939835.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl/handle/yetl/82828
    description abstractThis paper presents a comparison of three methods used to load rate the Powder Mill Bridge based on the load and resistance factor rating (LRFR) approach. This is a typical three-span continuous bridge with steel girders in composite action with the RC bridge deck. The three methods are as follows: (1) employing the conventional design office load rating technique using a simplified line girder analysis, (2) using strain measurements from a diagnostic load test to adjust the design office rating to account for in-situ bridge behavior, and (3) using a finite-element (FE) model of the bridge, which accounts for three-dimensional (3D) structural system behavior. Advantages and disadvantages of each method are related to speed, ease of use, reviewability, cost, accuracy, and type of use intended. Similarities and differences in utilizing these three methods are discussed. The advanced load rating methods are shown to produce higher ratings in comparison with the conventional approach.
    publisherAmerican Society of Civil Engineers
    titleLoad Rating of a Fully Instrumented Bridge: Comparison of LRFR Approaches
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume30
    journal issue2
    journal titleJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities
    identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000752
    treeJournal of Performance of Constructed Facilities:;2016:;Volume ( 030 ):;issue: 002
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian