P. 1
IRC-SP-51- Load Testing of Bridges

IRC-SP-51- Load Testing of Bridges

|Views: 4,250|Likes:
Published by Ramesh

More info:

Published by: Ramesh on Nov 10, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/18/2013

pdf

text

original

Indian Roads Congress Special Publication 51

GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES

Published by

The Indian Roads Congress

Copies can be had from

The Secretary, Indian Roads Congress Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road

NEW DELHI 1999

Price Rs. 80/ .. (plus packing and postage)

IRe: SP: 51-1999

First Published Reprinted

: June, 1999

: September, 2003

GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES

(Rights of Publication and of Translation are Reserved)

CONTENTS
Page
Composition of Bridge
Specifications & Standards Committee (i) to (ii)
Background 1
1. Introduction 2
2. Type of Tests 3
3. Scope 4
4. Test Procedures 4
5. Acceptance Criteria 13 Printed at Dee Kay Printers, New Delhi - 110 015 (500 copies)

"_

IRC:SP:51 - 1999

MlEMBERS OJF THE BR:n:DGlE SlP'ECKJFKCA nONS AND STANDARDS COMMK'fTlElE

(As OH1l 27.9.Jl997)

1. A.D. Narain
(Convenor)
2. The Chief Engineer (B) S&R
(Member-Secretary)
3. S.S. Chakraborty
4. Prof. D.N. Trikha
5. Ninan Koshi
6. A.G. Borkar
7. N.K. Sinha
8. A. Chakrabarti
9. M.V.B. Rao
roo C.R. Alimchandani
II. Dr. S.K. Thakkar
t2. M.K. Bhagwagar
13. P.D. Wani
14. S.A. Reddi
15. Vijay Kumar
16. C.V. Kand
17. M.K. Mukherjee
18. Mahesh Tandon
1-9. Dr. T.N. Subba Rao
20. The Director
21. A.K. Harit
22. Shri Prafulla Kumar DG(RD) & Add!. Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi

Managing Director, Consulting Engg. Services (I) Pvt. Ltd., 57, Nehru Place, New DelhI-II 00 19

Director, Structural Engg. Res. Centre, Sector-l 9, Central Govt. Enclave, Kamla Nehru Nagar,

PB No. 10, Ghaziabad-201002

DG(RD) & Add!. Secy., MOST (Retd.),

56, Nalanda Apartments, Vikaspuri, New Delhi

A-J, Susnehi Plot No. 22, Arun Kumar Vaidya Nagar, Bandra Reclamation, Mumbai-400050

Chief Engineer (PIC),

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing), Transport Bhavan, New Delhi-l 1000 I

Chief Engineer,

Central Public Works Department, Nirman Bhavan, Room No.424, New Delhi-llOOll

Head, Bridge Division,

Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi-I 10020 Chairman & Managing Director, STUP Consultants Ltd., 1004-5 & 7, Raheja Chambers, 213,

Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021

Professor, Deptt. of Earthquake Engg., University of Roorkee, Roorkee-247667

Consulting Engineer, Engg. Consultants (P) Ltd., F-14/15, Connaught Place, New Delhi-I 10001 Secretary (R) to the Govt. of Maharashtra, P.W.D., Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032

Dy. Managing Director, Gammon India Ltd., Gammon House, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025 General Manager, UP State Bridge Corpn. Ltd., 486, Hawa Singh Block, Khel Gaon, New Delhi-I 10049 Consultant, E-2/136, Mahavir Nagar, Bhopal-4620 16 40/182, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi-II 0019 Managing Director, Tandon Consultant (P) Ltd.,

17, Link Road, Jangpura Extn., New Delhi-I 10014 Construma Consultancy (P) Ltd., 2nd Floor,

Pinky Plaza, 5th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai-400052 Highway Research Station, Guindy, Madras-600025 Executive Director (B&S), Research Designs & Standards Organisation, Lucknow-226011

Member, National Highway Authority ofIndia, I, Eastern Avenue, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-l 10065

(i)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------~

IRC:SP:51 - 1999

23. Shri S.V.R. Parangllsam

24. Shri P.O. Agarwal

25. Shri B.C. Rao

26. r-c. Bhasin

27. Shri p.K. Sarmah

28. The Chief Engineer (NH),

29. The Secretary to the Govt. of Gujarat

30. The Chief Engineer (R&B),

31. The Engineer-in-Chief

32. The Chief Engineer (R) S&R

33. The Director & Head

(Civil Engg.),

34. The Chief Engineer(NH)

35. The Chief Engineer (NH)

36. President,

Indian Roads Congress

37. Hon. Treasurer

Indian Roads Congress

38. Secretary,

. Indian Roads Congress

l. N.V. Merani 2. Dr. o.r. Saha

3. Shitala Sharan

4. Dr. M.G. Tamhankar

Chief Engineer (B) South, .

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wmg),

New Delhi-lIOOO!

Chief Engineer (NH),

U.P. p.W.D., Lucknow-226001 .'

Chief Engineer, Dy. Director General (Bridges). West Block-IV, Wing I, R.K. Puram,

New Delhi-l 10066 .

324, Mandakini Enclave, Greater Kmlash-II,

New Delhi-I 10019

Chief Engineer, . P.W.D. (Roads) Assam, P.O. Chandman,

Guwahati-78I 003

P.W.D., B&R Branch, Patiala

i~&~ ~~~~;~ent, Block No. 14, Sachivalaya Complex, Gandhinagar-3820 I 0

(D. Sree Rama Murthy) .

National Highways, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad-580482

Haryana P.W.D., B&R, Sector-19 B,

Chandigarh-1600 19 .

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wmg),

New Delhi-l 1000 I

(Vinod Kumar)

Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan,

New Delhi-II 0002 . .

Public Works Depmtment, Writers' B1Uldlllg,

Block 'C" Calcutta-700001

M I' P W b 'D' Wing, 1st Floor, Bhopal-462004.

. . . . ., - Ex-OfficIO

H.P. Jamdar .

Secretary to the Govt. of GUlara!,

R&B Department, Block No. 14, Sachivalaya Complex, Gandhinagar-3820 I 0 A.D. Narain

DG(RD) & Addl, Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Surface

Transport (Roads Wing),

New Delhi

S.C. Sharma

Chief Engineer, Ministry of . Surface Transport (Roads Wing),

New Delhi

Corresponding Members

A-47/1344, Adarsh Nagar, Wodi, Mumbai-400025 Flat No.4, Kavita, 15th Road, Khar (W),

Mumbai-400052 S . (I)

Adviser Consultant, Consulting Engg. ervlc~s

Pvt. Ltd., 57, Nehru Place, New DeIhl-II 001

Emeritus Scientist, P k t E Structural Engg. Research Centre, 399, oc e ,

Mayur Vihar Phase II, Delhi-II 0091

(ii)

-

BACKGROUND

1.1. Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-I0) set up in 1991 had identified and formed a sub-group to prepare the draft oil 'Guidelines for Load Testing of Bridges'. The newly constituted (B-l() Committee (1994-96) reviewed the work done by sub-group in its first meeting held on the 26th April, 1994.

The guidelines drafted by a sub-group comprising of Sarvashri M.V.B.

Rao (Convenor), A.D. Narain, C.V. Kand and M.R. Kachhwaha were approved by the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-IO) in its meeting held on the 29th November 1996 at Mumbai. The personnel of the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation" Committee (B-lO) are given below:

A.G. Borkar D.K Kanhere

Convenor Member-Secretary

MEMBERS

- Ex-Officio

P.C. Bhasin

S.S. Chakraborty M.K Chatterjee S.G. Joglekar C.Y. Kand

P. Y. Manjure N.V. Merani O.D. Mohindra M.V.B. Rao

Dr. T.N. Subba Rao S.A. Reddi

Dr. N.S. Rengaswamy KB. Sarkar

Surjeet Singh

Dr. M.G. Tamhankar Mahesh Tandon Director, HRS, Madras

Director B&S, RDSO, Lucknow

EX-OFFICIO

Sh. M.S. Guram, Chief Engineer, Punjab PWD B&R, Patiala

Sh. A.D. Narain, Director General (Road Development) &

Add!. Secy., MOST)

Sh. S.C. Sharma, Chief Engineer, MOST

- Ex-Officio

President, IRC

Hon. Treasurer, IRC

Secretary, IRC

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

CORRESPONDING MEMBERS

Dr. v.x. Raina M.K. Saxena

S.R. Tambe N.G. Thatte

M.R. Vinayak

Further the Guidelines were considered and approved by Bridge Specifications & Standards Committee in its meeting held at New Delhi on 27.9.97, the Executive Committee on 29.11.97 and the Council on 5.1.98.

1.2. This guideline will only give procedure for a full-fledged load testing of bridge superstructure including recommendation for acceptance criteria. Inspite of the limitation associated with load testing of bridges, the method complements structural analysis and also facilitates assessment of latent (reserve) strength. Such load testing should not be considered as a routine requirement and should be resorted to only on case specific basis. The testing is done mainly to assess the flexural capacity, wherein deformations in superstructures can be measured directly with reasonable accuracy. Bridges are rarely tested for shear strength evaluation due to absence of a reliable method of monitoring extremely small strains and widening of shear cracks.

1. INTRODUCTION

IRC's Bridge Maintenance & Rehabilitation Committee (B-lO) has already issued Guidelines for Evaluation of Load Carrying Capacity of Bridges as IRC: SP: 37. These guidelines deal with rating of bridges for standard IRC live loads as specified in IRe: 6. In these guidelines, analytical method, load testing method and correlation method are recommended, but load testing method is recommended only when no construction drawings and specifications originally followed are available. The testing loads to be utilised for rating of bridges are not the IRe's standard bridge loadings, but will be from amongst those commercially available. Normally, the test vehicle will be chosen as the next heavier vehicle than the predominantly heavy vehicle presently plying over the bridge. The application of load is over a very small duration of time during which the relevant deformations

2

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

are measured. This method of ratins f b . .

a number of bridges in a road netwo~ko are ~~gbe: r~t;;rk~~n~~nient Wh~n

~~::~~lc~ed bridge is to be eccepred, may be becaus~ its desi:~ ~ noeta~

specified,y~::ra ~~I~~~e~~~~~e~~i~;~:r~:~i~~!S :~pected to be not as

as an assurance test bar . g as to be resorted to loads Such load t ti y hPP ication of loads atleast equivalent to the design

. es mg as also to be em 1 d h

so specify. At times testi . p oye w en contract conditions

load or more is resort~d ~~t~~e~fthbndges bhy t~e application of design live

. e researc ObjectIve so dem d N

old bridges are not to be tested in this manner The b . diff an s. ormally

th~ 10~d testing as envisaged in IRe: SP: 37 and asic 1 ere~ce fetween gllldeimes isthat the behaviour of the brid e. b the load testing 1~ th~se

. of design live load or load slight! exceedin IS o. ser~ed by the appltcatlOn

period of say 24 h d h y. ng design hve load over a longer

ours an t e elastic perfo f .

removal of the test load can be observed. rmance 0 the bridge deck on

2. TYPE OF TESTS

The load tests on b . d ld .

n ges cou be claSSIfied under five heads:

(a) Behaviour Tests

(b) Proof Load Tests

(c) Stress History Tests

(d) Ultimate Load Tests

(e) Diagnostic Tests

The Behaviour Tests are carried .

method of analysis or design. The test loa~u:o~~d v;nfY thle results of any

the design load. e equa to or lower than

The Proof Load Tests are more co I

rating of bridges The tests are d mmon y adopted for operational

. one on new structures whi h h d d .

or construction problem or for the ti f .. c a esign

ra mg 0 an eXlstlllg bridge.

The Stress History Test is carried out .

of stress ranges in fatigue prone f' orid to establish the distribution

areas 0 in ges The data obtai d f

passage of regular traffic is us d t . . arne rom

e 0 assess the fatIgue life.

The Ultimate Load Te t

s s are performed to understand the global

3

I~

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRe: SP: 51 - 1999

behaviour when sufficient theoretical knowledge is not available to predict the structural performance. The tests provide valuable information regarding the sequence and mode of failure.

static loads on wheel/track imprints of the specific class of vehicle for which the bridge is to be rated;

static loads on a configuration which produces the calculated force in the member(s) under test.

The Diagnostic Tests are meant to monitor the behavi~ur of a component of a bridge either to establish the cause of .da~age or Its share in transfer of loads when sufficient theoretical analysis IS not developed.

The type, magnitude, application and duration of different tests is decided on the basis of objective and evaluation procedure. Each methodology depends on exigencies and site conditio~s. T!1US, until and unless specified, the term "load test" used without qualification commonly

denotes Proof L021d Test only.

4.2.2. Test Vehicles: The usage of commercial vehicles has been recommended in para 6 of IRC: SP: 37. The vehicles and/or their trailers are uniformly loaded with preweighed units like concrete cubes or sand soil containers and the axle loads determined on weigh bridges. However, the commercial vehicles do not produce the expected load effects of standard loadings. Use of special test vehicles would be ideal. The advantage of special test vehicles is that they can be moved on and off the structure

quickly. '

3. SCOPE

4.2.3. Static Loads

These guidelines deal with Proof Load Test. Th~y cover testing. of superstructures, excluding arches for evaluation ~f thetf. flexur~l capacity. Testing for shear capacity is not considered. ThIS test 1S not intended to assess ultimate load carrying capacity of bridge superstructure.

4. TEST PlROCEJl)URlES

4.2.3.1. Simulation of the specific IRe vehicle: The load effect on a span can be produced by building up preweighed units on loading imprints spaced as per codal provisions. The imprints are built either with brick masonry or concrete and rolled steel sections placed across pairs of imprints, so that platforms could be built on a group of four imprints for placement of preweighed units. The area of each platform depends on the magnitude of the load and unit weight of individual unit. A preweighed unit normally comprises sand or soil filled gunny bags, concrete cubes, bricks etc., which can be carried manually. Otherwise, large concrete blocks, containers of water or (stone) ballast or steel ingots could be used if mechanical handling facilities are available to load and unload them from test vehicles. Fig. 1 shows a scheme for building up 2 lanes of IRC Class A loading on the carriageway of a bridge. The loads are placed eccentrically on the carriageway of a bridge in such a way that maximum. bending moment is produced in any longitudinal.

4.1. Selection I(}~' Span

In case of new multispan bridges, minimum one out of 15 spans could be chosen for load testing, the maximum chosen being two when the total number of spans exceeds 15

4.2. Method of Loading

4.2.1. The method of loading should be such as to either simulate the specific class of vehicle or induce in the member(s) the calculated forces, viz., the bending moments at critical sections.

The test loads may be in the form of:

4.2.3.2. Other types of static loads: Any configuration which produces the design forces (load effects) in the member(s) could be adopted, for instance uniformly distributed load. Any of the appropriate methods of load distribution between the girders can be adopted in arriving at the test load and its configuration on the span. But the method of distribution

- mobile test vehicles;

4

5

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

LOADING

OFGEAAING

condition of a bridge and the load carrying capacity theoretically assessed. It is advisable to monitor the appearance and widening of flexural cracks at every stage of loading, so as to decide about placement of next incremental load. It is expected that the load-deflection characteristics at every increment are linear and any abnormal behaviour is reflected in the load vis deflection data. If the deflection observed exceeds the limit prescribed in the code the further loading shall be stopped. Subsequent actions shall be taken in consultation with appropriate authorities. Occasionally, crackling sounds at the locations of expansion joints are heard when the rotation capacity is exceeded, particularly, in balanced cantilever bridges. Spalling of delaminated concrete is also possible during load tests.

Fig. 1. Placement of 2-lanes of lORC Class-A loading and footpath loading on carriageway

4.4. Preparatory Work

of loads should be the same as adopted in the approved design. However, where the approved designs are not available the owner of the bridge should specify the appropriate method of load distribution. In the case of multiple girders, it is possible that the design moments are simultaneously induced in more than one girder. It may well happen that the magnitude of the test load on the span is greater than that of the design IRe vehicle, but the forces induced in any member should be always equal to the specified design force of the load test.

- All visual defects should be measured, mapped and plotted.

- It should be ensured that bearings are functional.

- Expansion gaps, joints should be cleared of all debris.

- It will be useful to give the surface of the superstructure a coat

of white wash, so that appearance of cracks becomes immediately perceptible.

4.5. Precautions

4.3. Loading and Unloading Sequence

4.3.1. The test load shall be applied in stages so that timely action, such as stopping the test, can be taken if any untoward distress is observed at any stage. In most cases, the design live load effect would be equal to or less than that due to dead load. The dead load is already acting and the test load is some specified multiple of live load more than one. The suggested stages of test load placement are 30 per cent, 50 per cent, 70 per cent, 80 per cent, 90 per cent and 100 per cent. Unloading should also be in the same stages. The next incremental loading should be added only after the deflections under the previous load have stabilised and all the stipulated observations are completed.

- Staging should be stable and safe

- Staging for instruments and that for observers should be quite

independent.

- Staging for instruments should be rigid.

- Due to temperature change, the superstructure may tend to hog

or sag; therefore, it should be ensured that when this occurs, contact with the spindle of the dial gauge is not lost. Spindle extensions should be fixed to take care of this.

4.3.2. The selection of first stage of loading depends on the general

During the 24 hour retention period of built up load, care shall be taken to cover the preweighed units with tarpaulin, so that rain or strong winds do not affect the stacking on the platforms.

6

7

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

4.6. Observations

- deflections at critical sections (for instance for simply supported spans at mid-span and at quarter-span. In box girders, it will be useful to record deflections under each of the external ribs).

The following should be observed, measured and recorded at regular intervals of one hour over a period of 24 hours:

- appearance of cracks and their development, length, width, location, orientation correlated with load.

USING DIAL GAUGE

USING SCALE AND CURSOR

- deformation of bearings. _

- ambient temperature and related temperature in the body of the structure.

Fig. 2. Suspension wire method for deflection measurement using dial gauge or scale and cursor

4.7. Measurement of Deflections

(a) Dial gauges

(b) Ruler and cursor (c) Deflectometers (d) Precision level (e) Water level

of least count 0.01 mm are clamped to them. The spindles of the dial gauges are connected by a pair of adapters in plumb line with a GI or lnvar wire. The wire is made taut by attaching a weight at the end. The method could be partly modified by using a (steel) scale and cursor instead of dial gauge, when the order of anticipated deflection exceeds 100 mm. Fig. 2 also shows the scale and cursor method for measurement of large deflections.

Delfections could be measured with the following devices:

4.8. Procedure for Temperature Correction-

The methods (a) to (c) could be used wherever dry bed is available under the span. Otherwise, methods (d) and (e) can be used by using a reference station at the nearby abutment. When girder bridges are subjected to load tests, it is essential to clear debris in the expansion gaps and lubricate steel bearings to permit free translation and rotational movements of the spans.

The deflection measurement can be done by suspension wire method at the required locations using dial gauges (Fig. 2). In this method trestles or posts 1.5 m tall would be embedded in firm ground and dial gauges

A set of thermocouples are to be fixed at different locations of deflection measurement for monitoring temperature of the bridge deck. In absence of thermocouples, hand held instruments could be used wherein a probe could be inserted in a preformed hole in concrete surface, for recording temperature. As a last resort, thermometers could also be suspended from trestles used for deflection measurement to measure the shade temperature. The number of thermocouples/thermometers/probes used could be about half the total number of locations for deflection measurement.

8

9

IRC: SP: 51-1999

The superstructure tends to hog or sag due to variation in ambient temperature and it is necessary to apply correction to the deflection data during static load test. This is so since the duration of loading or unloading operation in static load test could be for 4-5 hours.

For this purpose, the platforms on masonry imprints meant for building up static loads should be placed in respective positions for observing thermal response of the bridge deck prior to load test. The deflection values and ambient temperature data are generally collected from dawn to dusk for two or three consecutive days at 1 hour intervals. The temperature vs. deflection data are collected on these days and a curve drawn for each station (dial gauge location), which is taken as basic curve for temperature correction. Usually the temperature-deflection characteristic would be a best fit obtained from a cluster of readings. The deflection reading at any location and temperature during load test, is super-imposed on the basic curve. The difference between the two values give the true deflection for the location under reference, corresponding to the same temperature. Fig. 3 shows typical characteristic of thermal response, super imposed on load vs. deflection data during a proof test.

80
90
5?
~ 100
z
0
;::: 110
0
w
...J
U.
W
a
120
130
140
150
ISO
170
lBO
Fig. 3. Precaution

The bridge deck temperature gets affected due to vanation in humidity and strong winds on the day. Also, the data gathered on sunny and cloudy days would be different, although the ambient temperature is same.

Therefore, to avoid inconsistencies in the data, it is preferable to choose two identical spans, one for load test and the other for temperaturedeflection data and should be monitored simultaneously. This approach reduces the total period of load testing by at least two days.

4.9. Correction for Rotation of Pier

The deflection data of cantilever span bridges and those with tall piers (of effective length to radius of gyration ratio 50 and above) need further correction due to rotation of the piers. The rotation could be measured with a clinometer mounted on the hammer head portion for

10

15

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE 'C

21 23 25 27

IRC: SP: 51-1999

29

31

33

17

19

50

NOTES:-

1. THE Loo,DING OPERATION IS CO~PlETED BEFORE 2PM AND UNLOADING OPERATION COMMENCES . 24 HOUR AFTER COMPlETION OF LOADING.

2. THE READING ON TEMPERATURE CORRECTION CUlM: CORRESPOND TO DIFFERENT HOURS OF DAYTlME. THEREFORE, THE OIFUECTION OATA IS

TO BE CORRECTED AS PER TIME AND TEMPERATIURE OF RECORDING FOR LOAOING/UNUOADING CYCLES.

3. LOADING .t UNLOADING IS DONE IN THE ~E INCREMENTS/DECREMENTS BUT THE VAlUE OF TEMPERATURE CORRECTION WOULO BE OIFFERENT.

4. THE CORRECTED DEFUECTION VAlUES INDICATED IN PMENTHESIS CORRESPOND TO UNLOADING CYCLE.

-i

12AM

70

lPM 2PM 14PM'r-.3PM

I I I

I !

I 75:1:

ft UO

75'l 120-70-(50)

OO-(TO).(CO)

11

I I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 '1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I

6

90~ 76.5

LEGEND:-

00 -06SERVED DEFLECTION

TO -TEMPERATURE DEFLECTION CD -CORRECTED DEFLECTION o -LOADING STAGE

• -UNLOADING STAGE

• -CREEP DEFLECTION

BASIC TEMP. CURVE

/_

gAM

SO

100:1: 89.65

• 90~

70.15

j 100"

80.75

120X

97.5

120:1:

, 09.25 CREEP DEFLECTION AfTER 24 HOURS·

Typical basic temperature correction curve with load-deflection data in a load test

IRC: SP: 51 -1999

IRC: SP: 51 -1999

cantilever bridges directly over the piers. The clinometer is initially set to 'no load' condition and rotations at incremental loads can be measured directly.

4.10. Percentage Recovery of Deflection

The percentage recovery could be calculated for values of deflection.

The percentage recovery is calculated at 24 hours after removal of load.

The rotation of the piers could also be measured with a column of dial gauges placed across the depth of pier at fixed distances. More than one column of dial gauges would be required to measure rotation of circular piers in the longitudinal and transverse direction. The method needs erection of a mounting system to fix the dial gauges and also an independent scaffolding or ladder for personnel to record the dial gauge data.

The calculation is done as follows after effecting temperature and! or rotation correction to deflection data:

An indirect method to determine rotation of pier can be adopted when the pier and superstructure are monolithic, as in cantilever bridges. In this case, the load free arm could be instrumented for deflection measurement (at different cross sections) along the span length and the ratio of difference in deflection values and distance between cross sections yields rotation of load free arm. The rotation of pier would be equal to the rotation of load free arm, due to monolithic action.

Initial value (on dial gauge) R 1

Final value after placement of test load R2

[Thereafter, measurements are to be

taken at regular intervals of one hour,

as per Clause 4.S].

Value at 24 hours after placement of test load.. R3

Value immediately after removal of test load R4 [Thereafter, measurement are to be taken at

regular intervals of one hour,

as per Clause 4.S].

Value at 24 hours after removal of test load RS

Fig. 4 shows the schematic arrangement adopted to determine rotation of piers by the indirect method.

Total deflection

Total recovery 24 hI'S after removal of test load

Percentage of recovery of deflection 24 hI'S after removal of test load.

R3-R1 R3-RS

R3-RS x 100 R3-R1

. 5. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

O.865L

S.1. The criterion of acceptance is based on recovery of deflection after removal of test load. It is necessary to specify the quantum of applied load, the duration of the load on the span and the percentage recovery of deflection on removal of load.

DG- DIAL GAUGE LOCATION SC- SCALE-CURSOR LOCATION

O.765L

O.573L

OF PIER

O.95JL

Fig. 4. Scheme for determination of rotation of deflection in a cantilever bridge

12

13

IRC: SP: 51 -- 1999

5.2. For bridges designed for IRe Standard loadings, criteria for load testing of steel, PSC and RCC superstructures are given in Table below.

TABLE. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

Live Load Duration of Minimum percentage
Intensity for Retention of recovery of Deflection
Testing Test Load at 24 hrs after
(Hrs.) removal of Test Load
* 24 75
:1: 24 85
* 24 85
" 24 75 Type of Bridges

I. Reinforced
concrete
2. Prestressed
concrete
3. Steel
4. Composite (* I.OL plus corresponding impact as per IRC Codes)

A general acceptance criterion for the behaviour of a structure under test load is that it shall not show "visible evidence of failure" which include appearance of cracks of width more than 0.3 mm, spalling or deflections which are excessive and incompatible with safety requirements.

14

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->