Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge Network Costs (2003)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N R E S E A R C H B O A R D WASHINGTON, D.C. 2003 www.TRB.org NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 495 Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration SUBJECT AREAS Bridges, Other Structures, Hydraulics and Hydrology Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge Network Costs GONGKANG FU JIHANG FENG WASEEM DEKELBAB Center for Advanced Bridge Engineering Wayne State University Detroit, MI FRED MOSES University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA HARRY COHEN Ellicott, MD DENNIS MERTZ University of Delaware Newark, DE PAUL THOMPSON Castle Rock, CO

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Note: The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 495 Project C12-51 FY’98 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 0-309-08759-7 Library of Congress Control Number 2003107411 © 2003 Transportation Research Board Price $35.00 NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and techni- cal matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad- emy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board’s mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting, the Board facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research results broadly and encourages their implementation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage more than 4,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 495 ROBERT J. REILLY, Director, Cooperative Research Programs CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Manager, NCHRP DAVID B. BEAL, Senior Program Officer EILEEN P. DELANEY, Managing Editor NCHRP PROJECT C12-51 PANEL Field of Design—Area of Bridges ANTHONY M. GUGINO, California DOT (Chair) PAUL M. KIVISTO, Minnesota DOT MATTHEW FARRAR, Idaho Transportation Department YAVUZ I. GONULSEN, Illinois DOT KEVIN MCGHEE, Virginia DOT DOUGLAS F. ROSE, New York State DOT JAMES G. SAKLAS, FHWA TED SCOTT, Roadway Express, Inc., Alexandria, VA JOHN O’FALLON, FHWA Liaison Representative STEPHEN F. MAHER, TRB Liaison Representative AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Mr. Anthony Gugino, Senior Bridge Engineer with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and chairman of the proj- ect panel, and his colleagues at Caltrans spent significant effort in gathering the data from California used in this project. Mr. Edward Flanagan with Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department provided the unique historical data of vehicle traffic used in Chap- ter 3 of this report. Mr. Matthew Farrar, State Bridge Engineer of Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) and also a member of the project panel, and many of his staff members and colleagues with ITD provided detailed data for the Idaho example in Appendix B. Mr. Mark Van Port Fleet, State Bridge Design Engineer of the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), and many MDOT personnel assisted in gathering data for the Michigan example included here. Messrs. David Jones, Perry Kent, and James March, currently or previously with FHWA, provided WIM data and valuable information on relevant FHWA studies. Dr. James Saklas with FHWA, also a member of the project panel, pro- vided the cost ratio data in Appendix A and other important back- ground information on previous relevant FHWA studies. Professor Michael Petrou with University of South Carolina provided detailed data resulting from the research on RC bridge deck fatigue carried out at Case Western Reserve University. Messrs. Bala Sivakumar and Charles Minervino and their colleagues with A.G.Lichtenstein & Associates developed the cost estimates for steel fatigue repair and reviewed other cost data. Many members of the project panel and state transportation agencies promptly responded to the survey and our calls for various data and infor- mation. Mr. David Beal, NCHRP program senior officer, super- vised this study. Without these efforts, this project could not have been successfully completed. Messrs. Bala Sivakumar and Charles Minervino with A.G.Licht- enstein & Associates provided assistance in handling some admin- istrative details for this project. Their generosity is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are also due to graduate research assistants Husni Al- Dakkak, Brian Li, and Adil Moosa with Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Wayne State University for their able assistance in various tasks of this project.

This report contains the findings of a study to develop a methodology for estimat- ing the impact of changes in truck weight limits on bridge network costs. The report describes the research effort and the recommended methodology and illustrates appli- cation of the methodology. A software module for automation of the recommended methodology also is included. The material in this report will be of immediate interest to bridge engineers and planners. TRB Special Reports 225 and 227, Truck Weight Limits: Issues and Options and New Trucks for Greater Productivity and Less Road Wear: An Evaluation of the Turner Proposal, respectively, noted that trucks produce significant damage to highway bridges. A truck’s gross weight, axle weights, and axle configuration directly affect the useful life of highway bridge superstructures. Damage typically occurs in the bridge deck and in the superstructure elements including floor beams and girders, diaphragms, joints, and bearings. Bridge costs associated with increased truck weights are the result of the accelerated maintenance, rehabilitation, or replacement work that is required to keep structures at an acceptable level of service. Owners need a network-level method- ology for estimating these costs. Truck-weight frequency distributions by vehicle type (truck-weight histograms) are needed to estimate reliably the effects on remaining life and the costs caused by changes in legal and permit truck weights. Changing truck weight limits affect the truck-weight histograms. Because carrying heavier payloads may reduce the operating costs of truck operators, the possibility of a growing share of freight transportation shifting from rail to truck needs to be considered in estimating these histograms. The objective of this project was to develop a methodology for estimating the bridge network costs associated with changes in legal and permit gross weight, axle weights, or axle configurations. This objective has been achieved with a recommended methodology for estimating changes in truck-weight histograms and for calculating the cost of fatigue and overstress in bridge components. To automate the recommended methodology, a software module that can be integrated with AASHTOWare Bridge- Ware was also developed. This research was performed at Wayne State University, with the assistance of Fred Moses, Harry Cohen, Dennis Mertz, and Paul D. Thompson. The report fully doc- uments the research leading to the recommended methodology. Step-by-step instruc- tions for applying the methodology are included in an appendix along with detailed examples of the application of the methodology. The accompanying CD-ROM con- tains the software module implementing the recommended methodology, a user’s man- ual, and the application examples described in Appendix B. FOREWORD By David B. Beal Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

1 CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 Problem Statement and Research Objective, 1 1.2 Scope of Study, 1 1.3 Organization of Report, 2 4 CHAPTER 2 Findings 2.1 Relevant Cost-Impact Studies and Approaches, 4 2.2 Highway Agency Practice Relevant to Cost-Impact Study, 8 2.3 Fatigue and Deficiencies of Bridge Components Caused by Heavy Trucks, 10 2.4 Predicting Truck Weight Spectra Changes, 22 2.5 Summary, 24 25 CHAPTER 3 Concept of Recommended Methodology for Estimating Bridge Network Costs Due to Truck Weight Limit Changes 3.1 Data Requirements for Applying the Recommended Methodology, 25 3.2 Predicting Changes in Truck Weight Histograms and Wheel Weight Histograms, 26 3.3 Steel Member Fatigue Assessment and Fatigue Truck Models, 40 3.4 Reinforced Concrete Deck Fatigue, 45 3.5 Deficiency Due to Overstress for Existing Bridges, 56 3.6 Deficiency Due to Overstress for New Bridges, 57 3.7 Total Cost Impact Calculation, 59 60 CHAPTER 4 Conclusions 61 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY A-1 APPENDIX A Recommended Methodology for Estimating Bridge Network Costs Due to Truck Weight Limit Changes B-1 APPENDIX B Two Application Examples of the Recommended Methodology for Estimating Bridge Network Costs Due to Truck Weight Limit Changes Software Module and User’s Manual Accompanying CD-ROM CONTENTS