BridgeInspectionManual (QLD)

Bridge Inspection
Manual

Prepared by
Bridge Asset Management
Structures Division
Road Systems & Engineering

DC1 June 2004
Bridge
Inspection
Manual

Second Edition, June 2004

Registration Number 80.640

Issued by the
Queensland Department of Main Roads
Road System and Engineering

For document content enquiries:- Principal Engineer
Bridge Asset Management
Phone: (07) 3834 2556
Facsimile: (07) 3834 2065

For document distribution enquiries:- Road System & Engineering
Technical Reference Centre
Phone: (07) 3834 5488
Facsimile: (07) 3834 2612

DC1 June 2004
Bridge Inspection Manual

First Published 2000
Second Published 2004

COPYRIGHT

State of Queensland (Department of Main Roads) 2004

Copyright protects this publication. Except for the purposes permitted by and subject to
the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act, reproduction by any means (including
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microcopying or otherwise) is prohibited without the
prior written permission of the Queensland Department of Main Roads. Enquiries
regarding such permission should be directed to the Road Network Management Division,
Queensland Department of Main Roads.

DISCLAIMER

This publication has been created for use in the design, construction, maintenance and
operation of road transport infrastructure in Queensland by or on behalf of the State of
Queensland.

The State of Queensland and the Department of Main Roads give no warranties as to the
completeness, accuracy or adequacy of the publication or any parts of it and accepts no
responsibility or liability upon any basis whatever for anything contained in or omitted from
the publication or for the consequences of the use or misuse of the publication or any parts
of it.

If the publication or any part of it forms part of a written contract between the State of
Queensland and a contractor, this disclaimer applies subject to the express terms of that
contract.
CONDI TI ONS OF USE

This manual is intended for use by Main Roads under the following conditions :-

1. Staff using the manual have appropriate training, experience and, where necessary,
supervision by a competent engineer

2. Decisions effecting the overall safety of the bridge or critical elements are made or
immediately reviewed by a senior structural engineer from Structures Division.

This manual may be used by Local Government for a similar purpose. They must ensure
their staff are also appropriately trained and experienced, and seek advice from competent
bridge engineers when decisions regarding public safety have to be made.

BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL

The economy of Queensland is based on the free movement of heavy loads. Bridges are a
key element in the road network, and it is essential that their condition is monitored and
essential repairs planned and completed to an appropriate timescale. This manual sets out the
process for ensuring that bridges have adequate strength for the safe movement of heavy
loads across our 2500 bridges and many thousands of major culverts.

This document establishes a statewide policy, systematic inspection and reporting procedures
and data management requirements for bridge inspections. It also identifies those
accountable for implementing the policy and the inspector's accreditation requirements for
the various levels of inspection.

It is intended that this manual will be improved over time with use and, to that end, it is
requested that users refer suggested improvements to Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset
Management) of Structures Division using the BAMANDSRS Advice Notes system.

J M Fenwick
Executive Director (Structures Division)

Project Sponsor

J ohn Fenwick, Executive Director (Structures Division)

Project Manager

Peter Graham, Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Management)
(Tel: (07) 3834 2556, Fax: (07) 3834 2065)
(E-mail: peter.x.graham@mainroads.qld.gov.au)

Project Team

J ohn Best, Principal Engineer (Bridge Services)
Alan Carse, Principal Engineer (Concrete Technology)
David Cole, Computer Systems Officer (Design Systems)
J ulie Keene, Typist

Acknowledgments

This manual is based on the "VicRoads - Bridge Inspection Manual" which has been modified
to reflect the bridge stock and operational requirements of the Department of Main Roads,
Queensland. Acknowledgment is hereby made of the use of that document and the generous
assistance provided by VicRoads in general and Mr Ken McGregor in particular.

Reproductions

Reproduction of extracts from this publication may be made subject to due acknowledgment of
the source.

Revision History

Version Date Prepared by Comments
1 May 1998 Bridge Asset Management
(Transport Technology Division)
Draft
(for trial use)
1 J anuary 2000 Bridge Asset Management
(Transport Technology Division)
Release
1 September 2000 Bridge Asset Management
(Structures Division)
Amendment No. 1
2 J une 2004 Bridge Asset Management
(Structures Division)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part One: Policy Page Nos

1.0 Bridge Management System........................................................................1.2

1.1 Background and Objectives.........................................................................1.2

1.2 Scope...............................................................................................................1.3

1.3 Accountabilities.............................................................................................1.4

1.4 Bridge I nformation.......................................................................................1.5

1.5 I nspection Requirements..............................................................................1.5

1.5.1 - Level 1 - Routine Maintenance I nspection......................................1.6
1.5.2 - Level 2 - Bridge Condition I nspection.............................................1.8
1.5.3 - Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering I nspection..................1.11

Part Two: Deterioration Mechanisms

1.0 Material Defects............................................................................................2.5

1.1 General...........................................................................................................2.5

1.2 Concrete.........................................................................................................2.5

1.2.1 Corrosion of reinforcement..............................................................2.5
1.2.2 Carbonation.......................................................................................2.6
1.2.3 Alkali - Silica Reaction (ASR).........................................................2.6
1.2.4 Cracking.............................................................................................2.6
1.2.5 Spalling...............................................................................................2.8
1.2.6 Surface Defects..................................................................................2.9
1.2.7 Delamination...................................................................................2.10

1.3 Steel ...........................................................................................................2.11

1.3.1 Corrosion.........................................................................................2.11
1.3.2 Permanent Deformations...............................................................2.11
1.3.3 Cracking...........................................................................................2.12
1.3.4 Loose Connections..........................................................................2.13

1.4 Timber..........................................................................................................2.14

1.4.1 Fungi.................................................................................................2.14
1.4.2 Termites...........................................................................................2.15
1.4.3 Marine Organisms..........................................................................2.16
1.4.4 Corrosion of Fasteners...................................................................2.17
1.4.5 Shrinkage and Splitting..................................................................2.17
1.4.6 Fire...................................................................................................2.18
1.4.7 Weathering......................................................................................2.19

1.5 Masonry.......................................................................................................2.20

1.5.1 Cracking...........................................................................................2.20
1.5.2 Splitting, Spalling and Disintegration...........................................2.20
1.5.3 Loss of Mortar and Stones.............................................................2.20

1.6 Protective Coatings.....................................................................................2.21

2.0 Common Causes of Older Bridge Deterioration......................................2.22

2.1 Concrete Bridges.........................................................................................2.22

2.1.1 Monolithic and simply supported T-beams..................................2.22
2.1.2 Precast I beams...............................................................................2.23
2.1.3 Precast prestressed inverted "T" beams......................................2.23
2.1.4 Box Girder Bridges.........................................................................2.23
2.1.5 Prestressed Voided Flat Slab Bridges...........................................2.24
2.1.6 Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs.....................................................2.24
2.1.7 Precast Prestressed Deck Units......................................................2.24
2.1.8 Precast Prestressed Voided "T" Slabs..........................................2.25
2.1.9 Decks and Overlays.........................................................................2.25
2.1.10 Diaphragms.....................................................................................2.26
2.1.11 Kerbs, Footways, Posts and Railing..............................................2.26
2.1.12 Abutments........................................................................................2.27
2.1.13 Piers..................................................................................................2.28

2.2 Steel Bridges................................................................................................2.29

2.3 Timber Bridges............................................................................................2.30

2.3.1 Timber Girders...............................................................................2.30
2.3.2 Corbels.............................................................................................2.31
2.3.3 Decking (timber and steel trough).................................................2.31
2.3.4 Kerbs, Posts and Railing................................................................2.33
2.3.5 Piles...................................................................................................2.33
2.3.6 Walings and Crossbraces...............................................................2.34
2.3.7 Headstocks.......................................................................................2.35
2.3.8 Abutments........................................................................................2.35

2.4 Deck J oints...................................................................................................2.37

2.5 Bearings.......................................................................................................2.39

2.6 Other Structure Types................................................................................2.40

2.6.1 Box Culverts....................................................................................2.40
2.6.2 Pipe Culverts...................................................................................2.40

2.7 Causes of deterioration not related to bridge materials..........................2.41

2.7.1 Damage due to Accidents...............................................................2.41
2.7.2 Drainage...........................................................................................2.41
2.7.3 Debris...............................................................................................2.42
2.7.4 Vegetation........................................................................................2.42
2.7.5 Scouring of Foundations.................................................................2.42
2.7.6 Movement of the Structure............................................................2.42
2.7.7 Condition of Approaches................................................................2.43

3.0 References....................................................................................................2.45

Part Three: Procedures

1.0 General..........................................................................................................3.3
1.1 Levels of I nspection..........................................................................3.3
1.2 Safety.................................................................................................3.3
1.3 Bridge Component Designation......................................................3.4
1.4 Advice Notes.....................................................................................3.5

2.0 Level 1 - Routine Maintenance I nspections...............................................3.6
2.1 Purpose..............................................................................................3.6
2.2 Scope..................................................................................................3.6
2.3 Frequency of I nspections.................................................................3.5
2.4 Extent of I nspections........................................................................3.6
2.5 I nspector Accreditation...................................................................3.7
2.6 I nspection Procedure.......................................................................3.7
2.6.1 Preparation for I nspection..................................................3.7
2.6.2 I nspection..............................................................................3.7
2.7 Data Recording...............................................................................3.10

3.0 Level 2 - Bridge Condition I nspections....................................................3.12
3.1 Purpose............................................................................................3.12
3.2 Scope of the I nspection..................................................................3.12
3.3 I nspector Accreditation.................................................................3.13
3.4 Extent of I nspection.......................................................................3.13
3.5 I nspection Procedure.....................................................................3.14
3.5.1 Preparation for I nspection................................................3.14
3.5.2 I nspection............................................................................3.15
3.6 Data Recording...............................................................................3.16
3.7 Data Transfer .................................................................................3.16
3.8 Condition Rating............................................................................3.17
3.8.1 General................................................................................3.17
3.8.2 Compilation of the Component I nventory.......................3.17
3.8.3 Condition State Criteria....................................................3.19
3.8.4 Component Condition Assessment...................................3.19
3.8.5 Measurement......................................................................3.20
3.8.6 Structure Condition Assessment ......................................3.22
3.8.7 Exposure Classifications....................................................3.22
3.9 I nventory Data...............................................................................3.23
3.10 Timber Drilling Survey.................................................................3.24
3.11 Measurement of Scour...................................................................3.25

4.0 Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering I nspection............................3.26
4.1 Purpose............................................................................................3.26
4.2 Scope................................................................................................3.26
4.4 Frequency.......................................................................................3.27
4.7 Data Recording in the Field..........................................................3.28
4.8 Reporting........................................................................................3.28
4.9 Load Capacity................................................................................3.29

Appendix A: I nspection Report Forms - Proforms and Samples

Appendix B: Standard Component Schedule

Appendix C: Standard Component I dentification Guidelines

Appendix D: Standard Component Condition State Guidelines

Appendix E: I nspector Accreditation Appraisal Procedure

Appendix F: Guidelines for the Management of Sub-Standard and
Defective Bridges

Appendix G: Breakdown of Complex and Non-Standard Structures

Appendix H: Advice Notes

LI ST OF FI GURES

Part One: Policy

Figure 1.1 - Bridge Asset Management System Framework

Figure 1.2 - Bridge Asset Management Mechanisms

Figure 1.3 - Bridge I nformation System Overview

Table 1.5 - Summary of Structure I nspection Frequencies


Figure 1.2.1 (a) - Corrosion of Headstock Reinforcement due to Chloride I on
Penetration in a Marine Environment

Figure 1.2.1 (b) - Corrosion of Reinforcement in the Soffit of a Cast I nsitu
Culvert due to Carbonation

Figure 1.2.1 (c) - Calcium Chloride I nduced Corrosion of Suspended Slab
Soffit in an RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (d) - Spalling due to Calcium Chloride Distress in an RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (e) - Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Cantilever Soffit
Due To Poor Cover And Chloride Penetration

Figure 1.2.1 (f) - Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Deck Slab
Surface Due To Poor Cover And Chloride Attack

Figure 1.2.2 (a) - Carbonation Testing of a Freshly Broken Concrete Core

Figure 1.2.2 (b) - Carbonation I nduced Corrosion

Figure 1.2.3 (a) - General View of Longitudinal Cracking due to ASR
in Prestressed Deck Units

Figure 1.2.3 (b) - View of Deck Unit Soffit Cracking due to ASR

Figure 1.2.3 (c) - View of Vertical Crack due to ASR in a Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.3 (d) - View of ASR Gel Exudations

Figure 1.2.4 (a) - Cracking of Structures

Figure 1.2.4 (b) - Severity of Cracking

Figure 1.2.4 (c) - Plastic Settlement/Shrinkage Cracking in a Bridge Deck

Figure 1.2.4 (d) - Plastic Cracking Passing Completely Through a Bridge Deck

Figure 1.2.4 (e) - Shear Crack I n R.C. Headstock

Figure 1.2.4 (f) - Bursting Cracks I n Anchorage Zone Of Post-Tensioned Girder

Figure 1.2.4 (g) - Accurate Measurement of Crack Widths

Figure 1.2.8 (a) - General View of Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.8 (b) - Water Wash I ncluding Aggregate Particles Causing
Abrasion of Pile Surface

Figure 1.3.3 - Common Crack Locations of Steel 1
Common Crack Locations of Steel 2

Figure 1.4.1 (a) - Fungal Fruiting Body and Decay of Girder

Figure 1.4.1 (b) - Rot Pocket in Girder

Figure 1.4.2 (a) - Termite damage in Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.2 (b) - Section of Pile Showing Termite Nest in I nternal Pipe

Figure 1.4.2 (c) - Termite Galleries On Pile And Headstock

Figure 1.4.5 (a) - Splitting in Timber Girder

Figure 1.4.5 (b) - Splitting in Timber Pile

Figure 1.4.7 (a) - Weathered and Rotted Timber Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.7 (b) - Rotted Ends of Deck Planks

Figure 2.3.3 (a) - Corrosion of J oints Between Trough Sections

Figure 2.3.3 (b) - Cracking and Perforating of Steel Troughing

Figure 2.3.5 - Rotting of Abutment Pile Below Ground Level

Figure 2.4.1 (a) - Scour of Stream Bed and Significant Loss of Material Around
Pier Pilecaps and Piles

Figure 2.4.1 (b) - Localised Scour of Stream Bed and Debris Build-Up Around
Pier Piles

Figure 2.6.2 (a) - General View of Masonry Pipe Culvert, Showing Efflorescence
and Spalling of Base Brickwork

Figure 2.6.2 (b) - View of Efflorescence and Staining due to Chemical Leaching
of Mortar


Figure 1.0 - Standard Component Matrix

Figure 1.3 - Bridge Component Designation

Figure 1.4 - Culvert Component Designation

Figure 1.5 - General Terminology for Bridges

Figure 1.6 - General Terminology for Timber Bridges

Figure 1.7 - General Terminology for Masonry Bridges

Figure 1.8 - Terminology for Precast Crown Culverts

Figure 1.9 - Terminology for Slab Deck Culverts

Figure 1.10 - Terminology for Modular Culverts

PART ONE
Policy

Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL 1.1
Structures Division PART ONE POLI CY J une 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part One: Policy

Page Nos

1.0 Bridge Management System........................................................................1.2

1.1 Background and Objectives.........................................................................1.2

1.2 Scope...............................................................................................................1.3

1.3 Accountabilities.............................................................................................1.4

1.4 Bridge I nformation.......................................................................................1.5

1.5 I nspection Requirements..............................................................................1.6

1.5.1 - Level 1 - Routine Maintenance I nspection......................................1.6

1.5.2 - Level 2 - Bridge Condition I nspection.............................................1.8

1.5.3 - Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering I nspection..................1.11

LI ST OF FI GURES

Figure 1.1 - Bridge Asset Management System Framework

Figure 1.2 - Bridge Asset Management Mechanisms

Figure 1.3 - Bridge I nformation System Overview

Table 1.5 - Summary of Structure I nspection Frequencies


PART ONE - BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON POLI CY

1.0 Bridge Asset Management System (BAMS)

The BAMS has been developed to ensure that the bridge assets of the DMR are
managed effectively and efficiently. Bridge inspection and condition rating is an
integral component of the BAMS and its relationship with other principal components
of the system is shown in the system framework diagram (Figure 1.1) and in the
mechanisms used to deliver desired outcomes (Figure 1.2).

The primary objective of the BAMS is to establish an integrated and accessible
information system for bridge inventory, condition, load capacity and inspection and
works history. The Bridge Information System (BIS) has been developed for this
purpose, as detailed in the BIS overview (Figure 1.3).

1.1 Background and Objectives

Inspection regimes had traditionally been established and managed independently by
the various District offices within the constraints of other demands on limited
resources. As a consequence there had been a large variation in the extent and
frequency of bridge inspections and the format and consistency of the inspection
results and records.

In order that the network may be managed effectively a systematic statewide
inspection and condition rating and monitoring system is required to enable managers
to identify maintenance needs, assess the effectiveness of treatments, model patterns
of deterioration and forecast future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement
budget needs. This document establishes statewide procedures for inspection and
condition rating and includes requirements for inspection scope and frequency,
documentation, data management and accreditation levels. It also identifies those
responsible for implementing the policy.

The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the condition of all structures is
systematically monitored to ensure that conditions which may lead to severe
structural damage or collapse are identified as soon as possible in order that the
appropriate intervention or remedial action may be undertaken.

In addition, the data collected from the inspections may be used to:

Develop inspection and maintenance programmes.
Carry out load capacity assessments.
Provide feedback to the design process.
Monitor the health of the bridge assets and effectiveness of maintenance
treatments on a local or statewide basis.


1.2 Scope

This policy applies to the following structures:

All bridges.
All culverts that have an opening span, height or diameter greater than 1.8
metres and a waterway area in excess of 3.0 square metres.

These structures have an opening large enough to:

walk through and are therefore capable of being inspected relatively easily.
close the road and create a significant safety hazard in the event of structural
failure.

All structures complying with these criteria will be allocated a unique number in the
Bridge Information System (BIS) and in addition will be physically numbered to
permit ready identification in the field. However an additional, optional module has
been included in the BIS which will permit Districts to record data on "other"
structures if desired. In this event the Districts can adopt a local numbering system to
locally manage these assets. It is anticipated that these smaller structures shall be
managed through the RMPC system.

The policy also identifies accountabilities for bridge management and establishes the
requirements for data management and a systematic inspection and condition rating
programme. The latter is achieved through a three level hierarchy of inspections
comprising:

Level 1 - Routine Maintenance Inspections
Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspections and
Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering Inspections


1.3 Accountabilities

District Directors are accountable for the management of all bridges on the State
controlled road network. These management responsibilities include:

Development of uniform, consistent and cost effective inspection
programmes; including quality assurance systems, accreditation of inspectors
and the co-ordination of joint services among districts.

Monitoring the delivery of the bridge inspection programme.

Ensuring that Routine Maintenance Inspections are carried out at least once
every twelve months, inspection data is monitored and recorded and
recommendations are actioned.

Ensuring that Bridge Condition Inspections are carried out at the required
frequencies, inspection data is monitored and recorded and recommendations
are actioned.

Ensuring that the required "Maintenance Activities" are recorded, entered in
the BIS and managed effectively.

Commissioning Detailed Engineering Inspections, investigations and analysis
when required, and ensuring that recommendations are actioned.

Ensuring that all inspection data is transferred to the Bridge Information
System within 30 days of its collection. However, in the event that a defective
structure is detected, all inspection data shall be entered into the BIS as soon
as is practicably possible.

Development of "Structure Management Plans" in accordance with the
guidelines in Appendix F. Plans are to be developed in conjunction with
Structures Division, for all defective structures.

Executive Director (Structures) through Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset
Management) is accountable for:

Promulgating and monitoring the implementation of this policy.

Developing, implementing and maintaining the Bridge Information System
and providing the necessary access and reporting mechanisms for all DMR
personnel involved in bridge management.

Ensuring the technical adequacy of the specified inspection processes.

Developing and supporting the technical procedures; including the preparation
of the supporting manuals and the training and accreditation programmes
necessary to implement this policy.


Monitoring the delivery of the bridge inspection programme through a data
and physical auditing programme.

Supplying the specialist resources to enable PE (BAM) to develop, implement
and support the Bridge Inspection Manual and attendant procedures and
processes. This includes Bridge Asset Management Section arranging or
carrying out detailed structural engineering inspections for the Districts.

Executive Director (Road Network Management) through Director (Roads
I nformation) is accountable for:

Providing resources to maintain and audit data that is held in the BIS.

Providing resources to develop and maintain the BIS IT system through the
ARMIS service request (ASR) system.

Providing resources to train and support BIS and mobile-BIS users.

Ensuring that current bridge inspection forms are available on the BIS.

Maintaining an accredited bridge inspectors register.

Supporting the BIS Functional Manager Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset
Management).

1.4 Bridge I nformation

Comprehensive bridge inventory and condition data will be recorded in the Bridge
Information System (BIS), which is maintained by the Executive Director (Road
Network Management). This system provides accessible and timely information to
all DMR personnel involved in bridge management and is integrated with ARMIS.
This connects all related bridge and road data through a common location reference
system. Refer to Figure 1.3 for an overview of the system.

The District Director will act as an agent for Executive Director (Road Network
Management) and is responsible for entering and managing the inventory, inspection,
condition and maintenance data at the local level in accordance with the documented
guidelines for the BIS and this manual.

Details of the data recording requirements for the various inspection levels are
defined in the inspection requirements section.

In the past it has not been possible to compare past bridge maintenance expenditure
and condition trends. The adoption of the unique numbering system for structural
assets will permit the tracking of all expenditure on the asset through the Financial
Information Management System (FIMS).

The development of standard bridge maintenance activity costing procedures within
the RMPC and special maintenance and rehabilitation/strengthening programmes
would greatly assist this objective.


1.5 I nspection Requirements

The safety and condition of bridges on the state road network is monitored through a
three level hierarchical bridge inspection regime that was introduced in March 1998.
The overall requirements are summarised in the Table 1.5 and the detailed
requirements for each category of inspection are listed independently. The frequency
of inspections is related to the structure type, age and condition depending on the
assessed risk of deterioration or damage.

Where annual inspections are specified, they shall be undertaken not less than
10 months nor greater than 14 months after the previous inspection.

In the case of biennial inspections, the range is 20-28 months after the
previous inspection.

If the inspection frequency is three years or greater then the tolerance is plus
or minus six months.

1.5.1 Level 1 - Routine Maintenance I nspections

Purpose

A visual inspection to check the general serviceability of the structure, particularly for
the safety of road users, and identify any emerging problems.

Level 1 inspections may be carried out in conjunction with routine maintenance of the
structure and the adjacent pavement as part of the Road Maintenance Performance
Contract. (RMPC)

Scope

The scope of a Routine Maintenance Inspection will include:

Inspection of approaches, waterway, deck/footway, substructure,
superstructure and attached services to assess and report any significant
visible signs of distress or unusual behaviour, including active scours or deck
joint movements.

Check of miscellaneous inventory items, including the type, extent and
thickness of the bridge surfacing as well as details of existing services.

Recommendation of a Bridge Condition Inspection if warranted by observed
distress or unusual behaviour of the structure.

Identify maintenance work requirements, and record on the Structure
Maintenance Schedule form (M1).


Verification of the Structural Inventory data held in the BIS as part of the
initial inspection and as required thereafter (standard forms can be produced
from the BIS for this purpose)

Procedures and I nspector Accreditation

Routine Inspections shall be carried out in accordance with the Bridge Inspection
Procedures - Level 1 (Refer to part 3 of the Bridge Inspection Manual) by an
accredited Bridge Inspector.

Frequency

Minimum frequency is generally one inspection per year for all structures, however
frequencies may be increased for defective structures as tabulated below or as
stipulated in a specific "Structure Management Plan" as per the guidelines in
Appendix F. In addition, Routine Maintenance Inspections will also be carried out
immediately after flooding, fire or accident damage events. Level 1 inspections are
generally not required in the same year as a Level 2 or 3 inspection.

Structure Type Condition State of Structure I nspection Frequency
(years)
Timber structures
and steel culverts in
wet environments
1-2
3-4
1*
1**
Other structures
1-2
3
4
1*
1*
1**
* Generally not required in same year as Level 2 or 3 inspection
** Level 1 and Level 2 inspection cycles to be staggered by six months to ensure that
the structure is inspected every six months

Data Recording

The inspection is conducted using the "Routine Maintenance Inspection Report" form
included in Appendix A.

The inspector shall forward a completed Routine Maintenance Inspection Report and,
if applicable, a completed Structure Maintenance Schedule form, to the District
Office and the District data control officer shall record inspection data and any
relevant actions, including the need for a condition or detailed engineering inspection
or maintenance requirements, in the Bridge Information System within 30 days of the
inspection.

In addition the inspector shall forward a completed Structural Inventory Verification
Form in order that the current BIS data may be positively verified or amended within
30 working days of the first Level 1 inspection


1.5.2 Level 2 - Bridge Condition I nspections

Purpose

An inspection to assess and rate the condition of a structure (as a basis for assessing
the effectiveness of past maintenance treatments, identifying current maintenance
needs, modelling and forecasting future changes in condition and estimating future
budget requirements).

Scope

The scope of the Bridge Condition Inspection will include:

Compiling, verifying and updating inspection inventory element items as
appropriate.

Visual inspection of the principal bridge components (including measurement
of crack widths, etc.) and an assessment of condition using a standard
condition rating system as defined in the inspection procedures.

The inspection of timber bridges will be supplemented by a drilling
investigation, and will also include the identification and reporting of
undersized timber members.

Soundings to determine the presence of active scour.

Reporting the condition of the principal bridge components and determining
an aggregate rating of the structure as a whole.

Identifying and programming preventative maintenance requirements and
recording on the Structure Maintenance Schedule form (M1). If access
equipment is required to conduct the inspection, then routine / preventative
maintenance may also be completed in conjunction with the inspection.

Requesting a detailed bridge inspection by a bridge engineer if warranted by
apparent rapid changes in structural condition and/or apparent deterioration to
condition state 4.

Development of "Structure Management Plans" in conjunction with Structures
Division for all defective structures. Refer to Appendix F for plan guidelines.

Underwater inspections of those elements in permanent standing water at the
specified frequency.

Recommending requirements for the next inspection and nominating
components for closer monitoring as appropriate.

Recommending supplementary testing as appropriate.


Completion of the Design Inventory data held in the BIS as part of the
initial inspection and as required thereafter (standard forms can be produced
from the BIS for this purpose)

As these inspections may be carried out with the use of an Under Bridge Inspection
Unit (UBIU), it is recommended that on such occasions District personnel take
advantage of the availability of the UBIU and conduct routine maintenance on those
components not normally accessible, such as bearings.

Condition Rating

The condition rating system shall reflect the performance, integrity and durability of
the structure and its principal components. The assessment of the nature and extent of
defects shall be detailed in the procedures as appropriate to each component type.
The overall structure condition rating is based on the condition of its principal load
bearing components as described in Section 3.8.6 of Part Three. The condition ratings
have been developed to represent the easily discernible stages of deterioration as
tabulated below.
Condition
State
Subjective
Rating
Description
1 Good Free of defects
2 Fair Free of defects affecting structural
performance, integrity and durability
3 Poor Defects affecting the durability which require
monitoring, detailed structural engineering
inspection or maintenance.
4 Very Poor Defects affecting the performance and
structural integrity of the structure which
require urgent action as determined by a
detailed structural engineering inspection.
5
(whole structure
rating only)
Unsafe Bridge must be closed.

Procedures and Accreditation

Bridge Condition Inspections shall be carried out in accordance with Bridge
Inspection Procedures - Level 2 (Refer to Part Three of the Bridge Inspection
Manual) by an experienced Bridge Inspector or Bridge Engineer who has attended a
Level 2 training course and who has fulfilled the accreditation requirements stipulated
in Appendix E.


Frequency

All new structures shall be given a Level 2 inspection prior to the end of the Defects
Liability period for the construction contract, and thereafter generally in accordance
with the frequencies tabulated below. The frequency of inspecting defective structures
may be increased as stipulated in a specific "Structures Management Plan"

Structure Type Condition State of
Structure
Inspection Frequency
(years)
Timber or steel
culverts in
wet environments
1-2
3
2
1**
Other
1-2
3
5
3
Components Under
Water
1-2
3
8
1
All 4
1** with "Structures
Management Plan"
** Level 1 and Level 2 inspection cycles to be staggered by six months to ensure that
the structure is inspected every six months

These standard frequencies may be modified as a result of recommendations in a
Detailed Engineering Inspection Report, and as agreed in the "Structure Management
Plan" (refer Appendix F). Additional Level 2 inspections will be required when:

Recommended in a Level 1 - Routine Maintenance Inspection Report;

Major maintenance, rehabilitations or other modifications have been carried
out; and

Detailed Engineering Inspections are carried out.

Data Recording

The inspector shall provide a report of the condition of the principal components of
the structure, by defect and extent, in accordance with the standard components and
report proforma defined in Part 3 - Procedures - Level 2. The completed report shall
be downloaded from the data capture tool or entered manually in the Bridge
Information System within 30 working days of the inspections. However, in the event
that a defective structure is detected, all inspection data should be entered as soon as
is practicably possible.

The District data control officer shall ensure that the inventory and condition data are
in the correct format and compatible with existing entries. This data and any
recommended actions including inspection inventory amendments and the need for a
Detailed Engineering Inspection or maintenance requirements shall be entered in the
BIS.

In addition, the inspector shall forward a completed Design Inventory Verification
Form in order that the current BIS data may be positively verified or amended within
30 working days of the first Level 2 bridge inspection.


1.5.3 Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering I nspections

Purpose

An extensive inspection which may include physical testing and structural analysis to
assess the structural condition and behaviour of a structure, to identify and quantify
the current and projected deterioration of the structure, and to assess appropriate
management options.

Scope

The scope of a detailed Engineering Inspection and analysis will include:

Auditing the performance of the Districts Inspection Regime with respect to
the structure.

Detailed inspection of all relevant bridge components, including testing and
analyses as necessary to supplement visual inspection.

Reporting the condition, structural adequacy, evidence of distress, mode of
deterioration and projected deterioration. A Level 2 - Bridge Condition
Inspection Report shall generally be completed, by the Engineer as part of this
inspection.

Development of "Structure Management Plans" in conjunction with the
Districts as required. Refer to Appendix F for plan guidelines.

Recommendations of management actions and/or maintenance/rehabilitation
treatment options.

Procedures and I nspector Accreditation

Detailed Structural Engineering Inspections shall be carried out in accordance with
Bridge Inspection Procedures - Level 3, (Refer to Part 3 of the Bridge Inspection
Manual) by an experienced bridge engineer. Inspections must be arranged through
the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Management) of Structures Division. Structures
Division is the preferred supplier of inspection services.

Frequency

A detailed Engineering Inspection will be carried out in one of the following
circumstances:

As the result of recommendations in a Level 2 Bridge Condition Inspection
Report which has rated the structure condition as poor or a principal
component in Condition State 3 or 4.

In order to assess the condition of a structure prior to carrying out
programmed works such as rehabilitation, strengthening or widening.


To provide a Load Rating for the structure.

Data Recording

The inspecting engineer shall provide a written report to the District Director with a
copy to the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Management) Structures Division,
within 60 days of the inspection. This detailed engineering report shall include:

Assessments of load capacity and condition (including a Level 2 report, where
applicable)

Recommendations for further investigation and testing, remedial action and
future inspection and monitoring regime as required.

A "Structure Management Plan" if required (refer Appendix F).

The District Director shall consider the recommendations of the report and initiate the
necessary actions. If the District Director does not agree with the recommendations a
response to that effect shall be made in writing to the inspecting engineer and copied
to the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Management) within 30 days of receipt of the
inspection report.

A copy of the final report shall be forwarded to the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset
Management) who shall be responsible for entering the Level 3 inspection into the
Bridge Information System (BIS) within 30 days of completion of the report.

F
I
G
U
R
E

1
.
1

-

B
R
I
D
G
E

A
S
S
E
T

M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T

S
Y
S
T
E
M

F
R
A
M
E
W
O
R
K

`
`

I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M

B
r
i
d
g
e

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

M
a
n
u
a
l

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
i
e
s

P
o
l
i
c
y

a
n
d

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
o
r

a
c
c
r
e
d
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

&

a
u
d
i
t
i
n
g

N
.
D
.
T
.

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s

L
e
v
e
l

3

i
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

C
o
m
p
e
t
e
n
c
y

t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
o
r

H
a
n
d
b
o
o
k

F
I
N
A
N
C
I
A
L

M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T

S
Y
S
T
E
M

V
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n

(
B
r
i
d
g
e
s

a
n
d

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s
)

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

C
o
s
t
s

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

E
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e

C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

C
o
s
t
s

P
r
e
-
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

C
o
s
t
s

R
o
a
d

U
s
e
r

C
o
s
t
s

B
R
I
D
G
E

I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

(
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

G
e
o
m
e
t
r
y
,

e
t
c
.
)

D
e
s
i
g
n

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

(
D
e
s
i
g
n

D
a
t
a
,

E
q
u
i
v
a
e
n
c
e

R
a
t
i
n
g
s
,

e
t
c
.
)

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

(
E
l
e
m
e
n
t

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
,

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
,

e
t
c
.
)

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s

W
h
i
c
h
b
r
i
d
g
e

I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

R
e
p
o
r
t
s

M
o
b
i
l
e

B
.
I
.
S
.

I
n
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

W
h
i
c
h
b
r
i
d
g
e

B
r
i
d
g
e

S
u
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E

S
Y
S
T
E
M

W
h
i
c
h
b
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

t
o
o
l

T
i
m
b
e
r

B
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

M
R
S

1
1
.
8
7

T
i
m
b
e
r

B
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s

S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

R
e
p
a
i
r

t
e
c
h
n
i
q
u
e
s

B
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

o
f

D
e
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

a
n
d

S
u
b
-
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

B
r
i
d
g
e
s

W
h
o
l
e

o
f

L
i
f
e

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s

S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E

C
A
P
A
C
I
T
I
E
S

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
c
e

R
a
t
i
n
g

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

b
r
i
d
g
e

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s

f
o
r

E
x
c
e
s
s

M
a
s
s

V
e
h
i
c
l
e

p
e
r
m
i
t
s

A
s
s
e
s
s
e
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

C
l
a
s
s
e
s

4
8
t

C
r
a
n
e

A
c
c
e
s
s

M
a
p
s

V
u
l
n
e
r
a
b
l
e

A
s
s
e
t

M
a
p
s

T
i
m
b
e
r

b
r
i
d
g
e

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

r
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

Q
u
i
c
k
b
r
i
d
g
e

R
a
p
i
d

A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s

T
o
o
l

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

i
n
p
u
t

f
o
r

V
e
h
i
c
l
e

L
i
m
i
t
s

M
a
n
u
a
l

D
i
s
t
r
i
c
t

g
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s

f
o
r

a
s
s
e
s
s
i
n
g

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

f
o
r

p
e
r
m
i
t
s

8
0
t

C
r
a
n
e

A
c
c
e
s
s

M
a
p
s

H
L
P

A
c
c
e
s
s

M
a
p
s

P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
c
e

R
a
t
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

D
e
s
i
g
n

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

A
D
V
I
C
E

N
O
T
E
S

D
A
T
A
B
A
S
E

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

S
u
p
p
o
r
t

K
E
Y

C
u
r
r
e
n
t
l
y

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

T
o

b
e

i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
e
d

B
r
i
d
g
e

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

S
y
s
t
e
m
1
.

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
W
H
I
C
H
B
R
I
D
G
E
M
a
i
n

R
o
a
d
s

-

K
e
y

f
e
a
t
u
r
e

d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
o
r
s

s
u
c
h

a
s

I
D

n
u
m
b
e
r
,

-

A
n

'
M
S
-
A
c
c
e
s
s
'

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

t
h
a
t

i
s

d
r
i
v
e
n

b
y

-

D
e
t
a
i
l
e
d

a
s
s
e
t

i
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

c
o
m
p
i
l
e
d

i
n

a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e

w
i
t
h

-

B
r
i
d
g
e

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

M
a
n
u
a
l

(
B
I
M
)

l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
,

c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l

t
y
p
e

d
a
t
a

e
x
t
r
a
c
t
e
d

d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

B
I
S
.

I
t

c
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
s

B
I
S

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

-

C
o
s
t

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

t
a
r
g
e
t
e
d

m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
*

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

a
n
d

-

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
o
r

a
c
c
r
e
d
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

/

a
u
d
i
t
i
n
g

-

H
y
d
r
a
u
l
i
c

d
a
t
a

r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

r
i
s
k

s
c
o
r
e
s

b
y

m
e
a
n
s

o
f

a

m
u
l
t
i
-
c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a

-

K
n
o
w
n

c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

o
f

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

d
e
l
i
v
e
r
e
d

b
y

a
c
c
r
e
d
i
t
e
d

-

E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

o
f

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l

a
s
s
e
t
s

e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t

-

L
e
v
e
l

3

i
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
s

-

D
e
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

i
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

o
f

v
a
r
i
o
u
s

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l
,

s
o
c
i
a
l
,

i
n
s
p
e
c
t
o
r
s

u
s
i
n
g

t
h
e

r
o
b
u
s
t

B
I
M

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y

-

P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

o
f

a
s
s
e
t
s

t
o

s
u
p
p
o
r
t

i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y

e
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

a
n
d

t
r
a
f
f
i
c

c
r
i
t
e
r
i
a
.

-

D
e
f
e
c
t
s

a
n
d

m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s

i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d

f
o
r

-

D
e
f
e
n
s
i
b
l
e

m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e
s

a
n
d

c
o
m
p
e
d
i
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
2
.

D
e
s
i
g
n

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

e
a
c
h

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

a
c
c
e
s
s

l
e
v
e
l
s

a
n
d

g
r
o
w
t
h

-

D
e
s
i
g
n

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

d
a
t
a
D
A
T
A
B
R
O
W
S
E
R

-

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

a
c
t
i
o
n
s

c
a
n

b
e

p
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
s
e
d

u
s
i
n
g

B
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

S
y
s
t
e
m

-

V
e
h
i
c
l
e
-
s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

E
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
c
e

R
a
t
i
n
g
s

D
a
t
a

q
u
e
r
y
i
n
g

t
o
o
l

t
h
a
t

i
s

u
s
e
d

t
o

d
e
v
e
l
o
p

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

'
W
h
i
c
h
b
r
i
d
g
e
'

a
n
d

p
o
l
i
c
y

f
o
r

t
h
e

'
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

o
f

(
a
c
c
e
s
s
i
b
l
e

o
n
l
y

b
y

B
A
M
)

r
e
p
o
r
t
s

o
n

d
e
m
a
n
d
.

T
h
e
y

a
r
e

u
s
e
d

t
o
;

D
e
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

a
n
d

S
u
b
-
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s
'
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
y

-

T
i
m
b
e
r

B
r
i
d
g
e

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

M
a
n
u
a
l

(
d
r
a
f
t
)

-

P
r
e
p
a
r
e

'
S
t
a
t
e

o
f

N
e
t
w
o
r
k
'

r
e
p
o
r
t
s

f
o
r

-

D
e
f
e
n
s
i
b
l
e

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e

d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

f
r
o
m

n
o
n
-
f
e
a
s
a
n
c
e
*

S
a
f
e
r

r
o
a
d
s

t
o

-

T
i
m
b
e
r

m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

(
M
R
S

1
1
.
8
7
)
3
.

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

S
e
n
i
o
r

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

a
n
d

r
i
s
k

p
e
r
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e
s

-

C
o
s
t

s
a
v
i
n
g
s

t
o

t
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t

i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y

t
h
r
o
u
g
h

s
u
p
p
o
r
t

s
a
f
e
r

-

M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

o
f

D
e
f
e
c
t
i
v
e

a
n
d

-

O
v
e
r
a
l
l

s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

-

A
d
d
r
e
s
s

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c

d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t

n
e
e
d
s

-

C
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t

a
n
d

p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l

q
u
a
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

b
r
i
d
g
e

i
m
p
r
o
v
e
d

e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

S
u
b
-
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
s

-

I
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l

e
l
e
m
e
n
t

c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

-

D
e
r
i
v
e

b
r
i
d
g
e

d
e
t
a
i
l
s
,

s
u
c
h

a
s

d
e
s
i
g
n

c
l
a
s
s

a
n
d

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

i
n

t
e
r
m
s

o
f

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

v
e
h
i
c
l
e

t
y
p
e
s
.

A
l
l
o
w
s

-

P
r
o
v
i
d
e
s

t
h
e

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

t
o

c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t

m
a
j
o
r

-

D
e
f
e
c
t

p
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
s

a
n
d

s
k
e
t
c
h
e
s

c
u
r
r
e
n
t

c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
,

f
o
r

e
x
c
e
s
s

m
a
s
s

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

r
a
p
i
d

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t

o
f

p
e
r
m
i
t

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

i
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l

c
o
m
p
l
e
x
e
s

b
y

d
e
l
i
v
e
r
i
n
g

h
e
a
v
y

-

A
c
c
e
s
s

t
h
e

'
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
i
s
e
d

v
i
e
w
s
'

t
a
b
l
e
s

a
p
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e

a
s
s
e
t

p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

m
e
a
s
u
r
e
s
.

p
l
a
n
t

i
t
e
m
s

t
o

m
i
n
e
s
,

p
o
w
e
r

s
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
,

e
t
c
4
.

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

-

D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t

o
f

e
x
c
e
s
s

m
a
s
s

v
e
h
i
c
l
e

'
a
c
c
e
s
s
'

m
a
p
s

-

E
q
u
i
t
y

o
f

a
c
c
e
s
s

f
o
r

h
e
a
v
y

l
o
a
d
s
*

F
a
i
r

a
c
c
e
s
s

a
n
d
S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l

C
a
p
a
c
i
t
i
e
s

-

M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

b
a
c
k
l
o
g
M
A
P
P
I
N
G

T
O
O
L
S

t
o

a
l
l
o
w

r
o
u
t
e

p
l
a
n
i
n
g

b
y

i
n
d
u
s
t
r
y

a
n
d

p
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

-

N
o

u
n
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y

r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s

a
m
e
n
i
t
y

t
o

s
u
p
p
o
r
t

-

C
o
s
t

e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e

o
f

p
r
o
g
r
a
m
m
e
d

w
o
r
k
s

-

U
s
e
d

t
o

p
r
e
s
e
n
t

d
a
t
a

g
e
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
a
l
l
y
.

o
f

a
s
s
e
t
s

l
i
v
e
a
b
l
e

c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s

-

E
x
c
e
s
s

M
a
s
s

P
e
r
m
i
t

S
y
s
t
e
m

-

W
o
r
k
s

a
n
d

c
o
s
t

h
i
s
t
o
r
y

-

R
e
s
e
a
r
c
h

p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s

t
o

r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
s
e

g
a
p

b
e
t
w
e
e
n

-

V
e
h
i
c
l
e

L
i
m
i
t
s

M
a
n
u
a
l
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

B
I
S

O
U
T
P
U
T
S

t
h
e
o
r
e
t
i
c
a
l

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

a
n
d

o
b
s
e
r
v
e
d

p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
,

a
n
d
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y

-

S
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
a
l

e
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
c
e

r
a
t
i
n
g

m
e
t
h
o
d
o
l
o
g
y
5
.

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
i
s
a
t
i
o
n

(
m
o
d
u
l
e
)

-

S
e
r
i
e
s

o
f

s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

r
e
p
o
r
t
s

-

r
e
f
e
r

F
i
g
u
r
e

1
.
3

q
u
a
n
t
i
f
y

e
f
f
e
c
t
s

o
f

d
e
t
e
r
i
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

i
n

t
e
r
m
s

o
f

c
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

-

4
8
t

c
r
a
n
e

m
a
p
s

-

D
a
t
a

e
x
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n

f
a
c
i
l
i
t
y

f
o
r

u
s
e

w
i
t
h

-

G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s

a
n
d

t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g

f
o
r

b
r
i
d
g
e

m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t

-

N
o

u
n
n
e
c
e
s
s
a
r
y

r
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
s

t
o

a
c
c
e
s
s

-

V
u
l
n
e
r
a
b
l
e

A
s
s
e
t

m
a
p
s

'
W
h
i
c
h
b
r
i
d
g
e
'
Q
U
I
C
K
B
R
I
D
G
E

p
e
r
s
o
n
n
e
l

o
r

d
e
v
e
o
p
m
e
n
t

-

S
p
e
c
i
a
l

E
x
c
e
s
s

M
a
s
s

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s

-

A
n

'
M
S
-
A
c
c
e
s
s
'

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

w
h
i
c
h

m
o
d
e
l
s

b
y

B
A
M

b
r
i
d
g
e
s

a
n
d

a
n
a
l
y
s
e
s

t
h
e
m

u
n
d
e
r

v
e
h
i
c
u
l
a
r

l
o
a
d
s

u
s
i
n
g

a

'
S
p
a
c
e
g
a
s
s
'

g
r
i
l
l
a
g
e

W
h
o
l
e

o
f

G
o
v
e
r
n
m
e
n
t

d
e
s
i
r
e
d

o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
F
I
G
U
R
E

1
.
2

-

B
R
I
D
G
E

A
S
S
E
T

M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T

M
E
C
H
A
N
I
S
M
S
O
u
t
p
u
t
s
O
U
T
C
O
M
E
S
D
a
t
a

a
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
B
R
I
D
G
E

I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N

S
Y
S
T
E
M

(
B
I
S
)

d
a
t
a
b
a
s
e

-

s
e
e

F
i
g
u
r
e

1
.
3
C
u
r
r
e
n
t

P
o
l
i
c
y
,

P
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e

a
n
d

D
a
t
a

C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
U
p
d
a
t
e
d

i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

f
e
d

b
a
c
k

i
n
t
o

B
I
S

a
n
d

r
e
-
a
n
a
l
y
s
e
d

o
n

a

c
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s

b
a
s
i
s
Design inventory
Inspection inventory
This area of BIS records the
structures construction details, its
superstructure, substructure, design
details, component details and
services. An advanced feature of this
module is its ability to store and
retrieve an image of the plans.
BAMS requires that all structures
undergo periodic inspection. Details
of the inspections are managed by the
inspection inventory module. It caters
for:
!
!
!
In addition to the diary functions
and standard reports that are
available to aid the inspection
scheduling process, the system
maintains a full history of inspections
and their results. These may include
photographs and/or sketches.
recording and reporting of three
levels of inspection,
printing of pre-printed or blank
inspection forms,
recording of special inspection
requirements.
The accredited inspector register is
held and managed in the BIS.
Maintenance activities
Mobile BIS
This module
The core system is based on the
ARMIS (A Road Management
Information System) architecture and
servers and requires connection to
the departments data network.
Another version has been developed
which complements the core system.
Known as mobile BIS, it allows data
to be replicated onto a laptop PC for
update in the field. The main database
provides a mechanism
for creating a backlog of maintenance
activities to address defects identified
in the inspections and to compile a
detailed estimate for the works. The
"maintain jobs" feature allows
stewards to approve activities and
create maintenance jobs at a bridge or
group of bridges level. Actual costs
can be recorded to generate a works
history for the structure and
estimate/costs comparisons. Several
reports are available to assist network
managers maintain the bridge stock.
Bridge Information System
What is a structure?
!
!
!
In Queensland, this currently comprises some
2,700 bridges and over 10,000 major culverts
that have a current replacement value in excess
of two billion dollars.
All Main Roads owned bridges or culverts
with a diameter of more than 1.8m and a
waterway area in excess of 3m.
Minor structures including pipes and culverts
of smaller size.
Obstructions, i.e. any other feature over a
State-owned road, e.g. overhead signs,
gantries etc.
BAMS
Introducing BIS
Structure inventory
The system developed to manage
structures within Main Roads is the
Bridge Asset Management System
(BAMS). It comprises a number of
integrated processes covering:
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
The Bridge Information System or
BIS is the computer system where
records that support BAMS are
stored, maintained and analysed. Its
main modules are:
!
Structure Inventory
!
Design Inventory
!
Inspection Inventory
!
Maintenance Activities
!
Load Capacity Inventory.
Further development of the system
will provide for heavy vehicle
routing and network performance
analysis.
The inventory is the heart of BIS. It
records the key features of the
structure, including its unique ID, its
construction type, material, location
and hydraulic data.
Policy
Inspection methodology
Inspection manual
Bridge Information System
Heavy vehicle assessment/
management
Asset management reporting
Maintenance prioritisation.
T

A
I
S
H
.
.
.
W
FIGURE 1.3 - BRIDGE INFORMATION SYSTEM OVERVIEW
BIS
Business defined Integrated with BAMS Inspections Maintenance Sketchesand photographs Standardreports Decision support Investment priorities MobileBIS
can be synchronised with the updates
when staff return to the office.
The number of standard reports
available from the system is indicated
by the following list:
BIS reports
!
Structure Listing
!
Structure Details (overview,
location, geometry, environment,
hydraulics, deficiencies,
photographs)
!
Design Detail
!
Modified Structure
!
Inspection Summary
!
Condition Rating
!
Next Inspection
!
No Inspection Data
!
Components in Poor Condition
!
Completed Inspections
!
Maintenance Activities Detail
Listing (bridge or job)
The
Mobile BIS allows inspectors to
capture bridge inspection data,
identify defects and compile the
maintenance backlog and estimate in
the field.
Standard outputs
Inspection reports
!
Structure Condition Inspection
Report
!
Defective Components Report
!
Standard Procedure Exceptions
Report
!
Photographic and Sketches
Record
!
Timber Drilling Survey Reports.
A number of additional reports are
prepared by the Bridge Asset
Management section of the Road
Systems and Engineering Division of
Queensland Main Roads, based on
data extracted from the BIS using the
data browser query tool or the
prioritisation extract file.
!
Progress Report
!
Trends in Inspection
!
Outstanding Inspections
!
Progress of the Bridge and
Culvert Inspection Programme
!
Trends in Bridge condition
!
Bridge and Culvert Inspection
Status
!
Defective bridges by severity and
trend thereof
!
Mapping of the bridge data.
Asset management reports
Heavy vehicle management
Prioritisiation
!
Vulnerable Asset maps
!
48t Mobile Crane bridge crossing
restrictions maps.
!
The "Whichbridge" software
uses a data file extracted from
BIS to calculate bridge and bridge
group risk scores.
!
Road Reference/Road Inventory
(RR/RI) for location information
as well as other information such
as date of last reseal.
!
Road Maintenance Performance
Contracts (RMPC) for
maintenance activity details
!
BIS data sources
Summary
BIS is an integrated suite of
modules and provides a complete
view of the structures maintained
by Main Roads. The system
architecture gives a solid
foundation for current and
anticipated needs
CONTACT
Bridge Asset Management Branch
Floor 8 Spring Hill Office Complex
477 Boundary Street, Spring Hill Q 4000
Peter Graham
Functional Manager
Phone: (07) 3834 2556
Fax: (07) 3834 2065
Email: peter.x.graham@mainroads.qld.gov.au
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
It supports enhanced decision making by providing
timely and up to date information on the status of
structure assets
Planning tools assist the districts in planning
structure maintenance
The system gives detailed insights into the capacity
of the State-controlled road network (SCRN)
BIS includes a comprehensive reporting facility that
assists operational and head office staff manage the
bridge assets
Data extracted from the BIS allows detailed
assessment and strategic analysis of the State-
controlled structures and assists the Department in
the further development of the Road Network
Strategy, the Roads Implementation Plan and Asset
Valuation.
Heavy vehicle management makes significant use of
information in BIS. Development of effective
management systems to ensure the safety of road
users, and to maximise the performance of the
bridge asset, are dependent on the quality and
accuracy of the data in BIS.
The information is also used for a variety of external
reporting requirements.

Table 1.5: Summary of Structure Inspection Frequencies

Inspection Irequency in months Inspection Category Structure Type
CS1 CS2 CS3 CS4
Timber or Steel
Culverts
#

12* 12* 12** 12** Level 1: Routine
Maintenance
Other 12* 12* 12* 12**
Timber or Steel
Culverts
#

24 24 12** 12** SMP
Other 60 60 36 12** SMP
Level 2: Condition
Ratings
Underwater
Components
##

96 96 12 12** SMP
Level 3: Engineering All As required

* Routine Level 1 inspections are not generally required in the same year as a Level 2 or Level 3
inspection.
** Level 1 and Level 2 annual inspection cycles are to be staggered by six months to ensure that the
structure is inspected every six months.
#
Only those steel culverts that are in permanent standing water.
##
Only those components (other than steel culverts) that are in permanent standing water.

SMP: Structure Management Plan. A management plan shall be developed by districts in conjunction with
Structures Division Ior all structures that have been rated in Condition State 4. This shall deIine the
required inspection regime, repair or replacement strategy and operational issues such as load, width and
vehicle mass limit restrictions. ReIer to Appendix F Ior guidelines on the development oI management
plans.

Notes:
1. A Level 1 inspection is required Iollowing major Ilooding events, Iire or accident damage and as
recommended in a "DeIective Structure Management Plan" or recommended by a Bridge
Engineer.
2. Where annual inspections are called Ior, they should be undertaken not less than 10 months nor
greater than 14 months aIter the previous inspection, Ior biennial inspections the range is 20 to 28
months, Ior Irequencies oI 36 months or greater the range is plus or minus 6 months.

PART TWO
Deterioration
Mechanisms

Structures Division PART TWO J une 2004
DETERI ORATI ON MECHANI SMS
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Nos

1.0 Material Defects............................................................................................2.5

1.1 General...........................................................................................................2.5

1.2 Concrete.........................................................................................................2.5

1.2.1 Corrosion of reinforcement..............................................................2.5
1.2.2 Carbonation.......................................................................................2.6
1.2.3 Alkali - Silica Reaction (ASR).........................................................2.6
1.2.4 Cracking.............................................................................................2.6
1.2.5 Spalling...............................................................................................2.8
1.2.6 Surface Defects..................................................................................2.9
1.2.7 Delamination...................................................................................2.10

1.3 Steel ...........................................................................................................2.11

1.3.1 Corrosion.........................................................................................2.11
1.3.2 Permanent Deformations...............................................................2.11
1.3.3 Cracking...........................................................................................2.12
1.3.4 Loose Connections..........................................................................2.13

1.4 Timber..........................................................................................................2.14
1.4.1 Fungi.................................................................................................2.14
1.4.2 Termites...........................................................................................2.15
1.4.3 Marine Organisms..........................................................................2.16
1.4.4 Corrosion of Fasteners...................................................................2.17
1.4.5 Shrinkage and Splitting..................................................................2.17
1.4.6 Fire...................................................................................................2.18
1.4.7 Weathering......................................................................................2.19

1.5 Masonry.......................................................................................................2.20

1.5.1 Cracking...........................................................................................2.20
1.5.2 Splitting, Spalling and Disintegration...........................................2.20
1.5.3 Loss of Mortar and Stones.............................................................2.20

1.6 Protective Coatings.....................................................................................2.21

2.0 Common Causes of Older Bridge Deterioration......................................2.22

2.1 Concrete Bridges.........................................................................................2.22
2.1.1 Monolithic and simply supported T-beams..................................2.22
2.1.2 Precast I beams...............................................................................2.23

2.1.3 Precast prestressed inverted "T" beams......................................2.23
2.1.4 Box Girder Bridges.........................................................................2.23
2.1.5 Prestressed Voided Flat Slab Bridges...........................................2.24
2.1.6 Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs.....................................................2.24
2.1.7 Precast Prestressed Deck Units......................................................2.24
2.1.8 Precast Prestressed Voided "T" Slabs..........................................2.25
2.1.9 Decks and Overlays.........................................................................2.25
2.1.10 Diaphragms.....................................................................................2.26
2.1.11 Kerbs, Footways, Posts and Railing..............................................2.26
2.1.12 Abutments........................................................................................2.27
2.1.13 Piers..................................................................................................2.28

2.2 Steel Bridges................................................................................................2.29

2.3 Timber Bridges............................................................................................2.30

2.3.1 Timber Girders...............................................................................2.30
2.3.2 Corbels.............................................................................................2.31
2.3.3 Decking (timber and steel trough).................................................2.31
2.3.4 Kerbs, Posts and Railing................................................................2.33
2.3.5 Piles...................................................................................................2.33
2.3.6 Walings and Crossbraces...............................................................2.34
2.3.7 Headstocks.......................................................................................2.35
2.3.8 Abutments........................................................................................2.35

2.4 Deck J oints...................................................................................................2.37

2.5 Bearings.......................................................................................................2.39

2.6 Other Structure Types................................................................................2.40

2.6.1 Box Culverts....................................................................................2.40
2.6.2 Pipe Culverts...................................................................................2.40

2.7 Causes of deterioration not related to bridge materials..........................2.41

2.7.1 Damage due to Accidents...............................................................2.41
2.7.2 Drainage...........................................................................................2.41
2.7.3 Debris...............................................................................................2.42
2.7.4 Vegetation........................................................................................2.42
2.7.5 Scouring of Foundations.................................................................2.42
2.7.6 Movement of the Structure............................................................2.42
2.7.7 Condition of Approaches................................................................2.43

3.0 References....................................................................................................2.45
LI ST OF FI GURES

Figure 1.2.1 (a) - Corrosion of Headstock Reinforcement due to Chloride I on
Penetration in a Marine Environment

Figure 1.2.1 (b) - Corrosion of Reinforcement in the Soffit of a Cast I nsitu Culvert
due to Carbonation

Figure 1.2.1 (c) - Calcium Chloride I nduced Corrosion of Suspended Slab
Soffit in an RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (d) - Spalling due to Calcium Chloride Distress in an RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (e) - Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Cantilever Soffit Due
To Poor Cover And Chloride Penetration

Figure 1.2.1 (f) - Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Deck Slab Surface Due
To Poor Cover And Chloride Attack

Figure 1.2.2 (a) - Carbonation Testing of a Freshly Broken Concrete Core

Figure 1.2.2 (b) - Carbonation I nduced Corrosion

Figure 1.2.3 (a) - General View of Longitudinal Cracking due to ASR
in Prestressed Deck Units

Figure 1.2.3 (b) - View of Deck Unit Soffit Cracking due to ASR

Figure 1.2.3 (c) - View of Vertical Crack due to ASR in a Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.3 (d) - View of ASR Gel Exudations

Figure 1.2.4 (a) - Cracking of Structures

Figure 1.2.4 (b) - Severity of Cracking

Figure 1.2.4 (c) - Plastic Settlement/Shrinkage Cracking in a Bridge Deck

Figure 1.2.4 (d) - Plastic Cracking Passing Completely Through a Bridge Deck

Figure 1.2.4 (e) - Shear Crack I n R.C. Headstock

Figure 1.2.4 (f) - Bursting Cracks I n Anchorage Zone Of Post-Tensioned Girder

Figure 1.2.4 (g) - Accurate Measurement of Crack Widths

Figure 1.2.8 (a) - General View of Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.8 (b) - Water Wash I ncluding Aggregate Particles Causing
Figure 1.3.3 - Common Crack Locations of Steel 1 and Common Crack Locations of
Steel 2

Figure 1.4.1 (a) - Fungal Fruiting Body and Decay of Girder

Figure 1.4.1 (b) - Rot Pocket in Girder

Figure 1.4.2 (a) - Termite damage in Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.2 (b) - Section of Pile Showing Termite Nest in I nternal Pipe

Figure 1.4.2 (c) - Termite Galleries On Pile And Headstock

Figure 1.4.5 (a) - Splitting in Timber Girder

Figure 1.4.5 (b) - Splitting in Timber Pile

Figure 1.4.7 (a) - Weathered and Rotted Timber Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.7 (b) - Rotted Ends of Deck Planks

Figure 2.3.3 (a) - Corrosion of J oints Between Trough Sections

Figure 2.3.3 (b) - Cracking and Perforating of Steel Troughing

Figure 2.3.5 - Rotting of Abutment Pile Below Ground Level

Figure 2.4.1 (a) - Scour of Stream Bed and Significant Loss of Material Around Pier
Pilecaps and Piles

Figure 2.4.1 (b) - Localised Scour of Stream Bed and Debris Build-Up Around Pier Piles

Figure 2.6.2 (a) - General View of Masonry Pipe Culvert, Showing Efflorescence and
Spalling of Base Brickwork

Figure 2.6.2 (b) - View of Efflorescence and Staining due to Chemical Leaching of
Mortar

1.0 MATERI AL DEFECTS

1.1 General

This section describes the defects that are normally found in concrete, steel, timber,
masonry and coatings. Each defect is briefly described and the causes producing it
are identified.

1.2 Concrete

Based on concrete defects described in Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Ontario
Structure Inspection Manual (Ref. 1) and adjusted for Queensland conditions.

Concrete is used in structures as plain concrete, such as tremie and mass concrete; or,
it is combined with conventional steel reinforcement as reinforced concrete, or with
prestressing steel reinforcement as prestressed concrete.

Defects in concrete can often be related to the lack of durability of the concrete,
resulting from the composition of the concrete, poor placement practices, poor quality
control or the aggressive environment in which it is placed.

The following defects which have occurred in the Queensland road infrastructure are
described. They have been listed in order of occurrence from most common to least
as found in our concrete road bridges to date:

(i) Corrosion of Reinforcement (v) Spalling
(ii) Carbonation (vi) Surface Defects
(iii) Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) (vii) Delamination
(iv) Cracking

1.2.1 Corrosion of Reinforcement

Corrosion is effected by the deterioration of reinforcement by electrolysis. The alkali
content in concrete protects the reinforcement from corrosion but when moisture,
oxygen and/or chloride ions above a certain concentration are dissolved in water and
penetrate through the concrete to reinforcement, this protection breaks down and
corrosion starts. In the initial stages, corrosion may appear as rust staining on the
concrete surface. In the advanced stages, the surface concrete above the
reinforcement cracks, delaminates and spalls off exposing heavily rusted
reinforcement. This process is illustrated in Figure 1.2.1 (a), (b), (e) and (f).

In Queensland, the most common example of reinforcement corrosion is found in the
square section reinforced concrete piles which were used extensively until the
introduction of prestressed octagonal piles.

Cracking typically follows the line of the corner reinforcement where the density of
the concrete is compromised by limited access for compaction. The severity of the
cracking increases until the cover concrete delaminates and ultimately spalls off
exposing the corroded reinforcement. In addition horizontal cracking caused by
driving stresses is often found in this type of pile.

1.2.2 Carbonation

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can dissolve in moisture within the concrete pores
and react with calcium hydroxide in the cement paste to form a neutral calcium
carbonate. Over a long period of time this gradually lowers the alkalinity of the
concrete cover to the steel reinforcement, thus reducing the passive oxide layer
around the steel and placing it in a more acidic environment whereby it is susceptible
to corrosion.

The depth of carbonation from the exterior surface can be estimated by using a pH
indicator, eg phenolphthalein dissolved in water. The carbonated zone remains clear
while the uncarbonated area turns pink when the solution is applied to a freshly
broken surface (see Figure 1.2.2 (a)). Carbonation induced corrosion is shown in
Figure 1.2.2 (b).

1.2.3 Alkali - Silica Reaction (ASR)

Some aggregates react adversely with the alkalies in cement to produce a highly
expansive alkali-silica gel. The expansion of the gel under moist conditions leads to
cracking and deterioration of the concrete. The cracking occurs through the entire
mass of the concrete. Alkali-Silica reactions are generally slow by nature, and the
results may not be apparent for 5-10 years. The appearance of prestressed concrete
affected by alkali-silica reaction is shown in Figures 1.2.3 (a), (b), (c) and (d).

1.2.4 Cracking

A crack is a linear fracture in concrete which extends partly or completely through the
member. Cracks in concrete occur as a result of tensile stresses introduced in the
concrete. Tensile stresses are initially carried by the concrete and reinforcement until
the level of the tensile stresses exceeds the tensile capacity of the concrete. After this
point the concrete cracks and the tensile force is transferred completely to the steel
reinforcement. The crack widths and distribution are controlled by the reinforcement
in reinforced and prestressed concrete, whereas in plain concrete there is no such
control.

The buildup of tensile stresses and, therefore, cracks in the concrete may be due to
externally applied loads, external restraint forces, internal restraint forces, differential
settlements, differential temperature or shrinkage or corrosion of the reinforcement.
Externally applied loads generate a system of internal compressive and tensile
stresses, in the members and components of the structure, as required to maintain
static equilibrium. For example, prestressing generates bursting effects at anchorage
zones which will cause tensile cracks if the member is inadequately reinforced as in
Figure 1.2.4(f). Cracks resulting from externally applied loads initially appear as
hairline cracks and are harmless. However as the reinforcement is further stressed the
initial cracks open up and progressively spread into wider cracks. Of particular
concern is the development of shear cracks in structural members adjacent to supports
which may be indicative of incipient brittle failure as in Figure 1.2.4(e).

External restraint forces are generated if the free movement of the concrete in
response to the effects of temperature, creep and shrinkage is prevented from
occurring due to restraint at the member supports. The restraint may consist of
friction at the bearings, bonding to already hardened concrete, or by attachment to
other components of the structure. Cracks resulting from the actions of external
restraint forces develop in a similar manner as those due to externally applied loads.

Internal restraint forces are caused by the differential expansion or contraction of the
exterior surface of concrete relative to the interior mass of the concrete, as in plastic
shrinkage. The resulting surface cracks are normally shallow and appear as pattern
cracks. However, if a slab is significantly affected by plastic shrinkage cracking the
cracks may continue through the depth of the slab as in Figure 1.2.4 (d).

Differential movements or settlements result in the redistribution of external reactions
and internal forces in the structure. This may in turn result in the introduction of
additional tensile stresses and, therefore, cracking in the concrete components of the
structure. Movement cracks may be of any orientation and width, ranging from fine
cracks above the reinforcement due to formwork settlement, to wide cracks due to
foundation or support settlement.

The types and location of cracking that are the most likely to be observed are shown
in Figure 1.2.4 (a)

The severity of cracking is shown in Figure 1.2.4 (b) and is defined as:

Hairline up to 0.1mm
Minor 0.1 to 0.3mm
Moderate 0.3 to 0.6mm
Severe Greater than 0.6mm

Over time, the concrete surface deteriorates and spalling of the crack edges will
occur. When measuring crack widths, it is important to ensure that is it the actual
width of the crack that is measured, and not the width of the spalled area. The
difference between crack width and spalled width is illustrated in Figure 1.2.4 (g)

Figures 1.2.4 (c) and (d) show an example of severe plastic settlement/shrinkage
cracking in a reinforced concrete bridge deck. ASR cracking most commonly occurs
in prestressed deck units in Queensland (see Figures 1.2.3 (a) to (d)). In those
elements ASR is characterised by longitudinal cracking on the soffits and exposed
side faces. Vertical cracking has also been detected in some prestressed octagonal
piles which is the result of Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR). The risk of this type of
cracking has been minimised in new piles by the use of an approved mass of fly ash
in the approved mix designs. In addition, the alkali-silica gel formed by the reaction
may often be seen in, or exuding from the cracks. This gel is a clear or translucent
viscous substance. Usually the gel absorbs calcium as it exudes through the paste and
deposits on the soffit of deck units as a white substance. It should be noted that
calcium carbonate is often found in and around cracks and usually forms white
stalactites on the soffit of deck units.

1.2.5 Spalling

A spall is a fragment, which has been detached from a larger concrete mass. Spalling
may be a continuation of the corrosion process whereby the actions of external loads
or pressure exerted by the corrosion of reinforcement and attendant expansion results
in the breaking off of the delaminated concrete. The spalled area left behind is
characterised by sharp edges.

Vehicular or other impact forces on exposed concrete edges, deck joints or
construction joints, may also result in the spalling or breaking off of pieces of
concrete locally.

Spalling may also be caused by overloading of the concrete in compression. This
results in the breaking off of the concrete cover to the depth of the outer layer of
reinforcement. Spalling may also occur in areas of localised high compressive load
concentrations, such as at structure supports, or at anchorage zones in prestressed
concrete.

The imposition of external loads may also cause spalling. Restraint forces generated
by seized bearings often cause spalling of the bearing support area on the front face of
the bearing shelf.

Spalling of concrete is shown in Figure 1.2.1 (b).

1.2.6 Surface Defects

The following surface defects in concrete are described herein:

- Segregation
- Cold J oints
- Deposits - efflorescence, exudation, encrustation, stalactite
- Honeycombing
- Abrasion
- Slippery Surface

Surface defects are not necessarily serious in themselves; however, they are
indicative of a potential weakness in concrete.

Segregation is the differential concentration of the components of mixed concrete
resulting in non-uniform proportions in the mass. Segregation is caused by concrete
falling from a height, with coarse aggregates settling to the bottom and the fines on
top. Another form of segregation occurs where reinforcing bars prevent the uniform
flow of concrete between them. Segregation is more likely to occur in higher slump
concrete.

Cold J oints are produced if there is a delay between the placement of successive
pours of concrete, and if an incomplete bond develops at the joint due to the partial
setting of concrete in the first pour.

Deposits are often left behind where water percolates through the concrete and
dissolves or leaches chemicals from it and deposits them on the surface.

Deposits may appear as the following:

efflorescence: A deposit of salts, usually white and powdery.

exudation: A liquid or gel-like discharge through pores or cracks in
the surface.

encrustation: A hard crust or coating formed on the concrete surface.

stalactite: A downward pointing formation hanging from the
concrete surface, usually shaped like an icicle.

Honeycombing is produced due to the improper or incomplete vibration of the
concrete which results in voids being left in the concrete where the mortar failed to
completely fill the spaces between the coarse aggregate particles.

Abrasion is the deterioration of concrete brought about by vehicles scraping against
concrete surfaces, such as decks, kerbs, barrier walls or piers or the result of dynamic
and/or frictional forces generated by vehicular traffic, coupled with abrasive influx of
sand, dirt and debris. It can also result from friction of waterborne particles against
partly or completely submerged members (see Figures 1.2.8 (a) and (b)). The surface
of the concrete appears polished.

A slippery surface may result from the polishing of the concrete deck surface by the
action of repetitive vehicular traffic where inadequate materials and processes have
been used.

1.2.7 Delamination

Delamination is defined as a discontinuity in the surface concrete which is
substantially separated but not completely detached from concrete below or above it.
Visibly, it may appear as a solid surface but can be identified as a hollow sound by
tapping. Delamination begins with the corrosion of reinforcement and subsequent
cracking of the concrete. However, in the case of closely spaced bars, the cracking
extends in the plane of the reinforcement parallel to the exterior surface of the
concrete.

1.3 Steel

Based on Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Ontario Structure Inspection Manual
(Ref. 1)

The use of steel has progressed from cast iron, wrought iron, rivet steel and plain
carbon steel to notch tough low temperature steel.

The following defects commonly occurring in steel are described:

Corrosion
Permanent Deformations
Cracking
Loose Connections

1.3.1 Corrosion

Corrosion is the deterioration of steel by chemical or electro-chemical reaction
resulting from exposure to air, moisture, industrial fumes and other chemicals and
containments in the environment in which it is placed. The terms rust and corrosion
are used inter-changeably in this sense. Corrosion, or rusting, will only occur if the
steel is not protected or if the protective coating wears or breaks off.

Rust on carbon steel is initially fine grained, but as rusting progresses it becomes
flaky and delaminates exposing a pitted surface. The process thus continues with
progressive loss of section.

1.3.2 Permanent Deformations

Permanent deformation of steel members can take the form of bending, buckling,
twisting or elongation, or any combination of these. Permanent deformations may be
caused by overloading, vehicular collision, or inadequate or damaged intermediate
lateral supports or bracing.

Permanent bending deformation may occur in the direction of the applied loads and
are usually associated with flexural members; however, vehicular impact may
produce permanent deformations in bending in any other member.

Permanent buckling deformations normally occur in a direction perpendicular to the
applied load and are usually associated with compression members. Buckling may
also produce local permanent deformations of webs and flanges of beams, plate
girders and box girders.

Permanent twisting deformations appear as a rotation of the member about its
longitudinal axis and are usually the result of eccentric transverse loads on the
member.

Permanent axial deformations occur along the length of the member and are normally
associated with applied tension loads.

1.3.3 Cracking

Crack is a linear fracture of the steel. Cracks are mainly produced due to fatigue and
can, under certain conditions, lead to brittle fracture.

Brittle fracture is a crack completely through the component that usually occurs
without prior warning or plastic deformation. Brittle fracture may result at fatigue
prone details after initial fatigue cracking.

The primary factors leading to fatigue cracking are: the number of applied stress
cycles, which is a function of the volume of traffic; the magnitude of the stress range,
which depends on the applied live load; and the fatigue strength in the connection
detail. Cracks caused by fatigue usually occur at points of tensile stress
concentrations, at welded attachments or at termination points of welds. Cracks may
also be caused or aggravated by overloading, vehicular collision or loss of section
resistance due to corrosion. In addition, stress concentrations due to the poor quality
of the fabricated details and the fracture toughness of materials used are contributing
factors. Material fracture toughness will determine the size of the crack that can be
tolerated before fracture occurs.

Welded details are more prone to cracking than bolted or riveted details. Grinding off
the weld reinforcement to be smooth or flush with the joined metal surfaces improves
fatigue resistance. Once the cracking occurs in a welded connection, it can extend into
other components due to a continuous path provided at the welded connection, and
possibly lead to a brittle fracture.

Bolted or riveted connections may also develop fatigue cracking, but a crack in one
component will generally not pass through into the others. Bolted and riveted
connections are also susceptible to cracking or tearing resulting from prying action,
and by a build-up of corrosion forces between parts of the connection.

Common locations susceptible to cracking are illustrated in Figure 1.3.3. As cracks
may be concealed by rust, dirt or debris, the suspect surfaces should be cleaned prior
to inspection.

Cracks that are perpendicular to the direction of stress are very serious, with those
parallel to the direction of stress less so. In either case, cracks in steel should
generally be considered serious, as parallel crack may for a number of reasons turn
into a perpendicular crack. Any crack should be carefully noted and recorded as to its
specific location in the member, and member structure. The length, width (if
possible) and direction of crack should also be recorded.

1.3.4 Loose Connections

Loose connections can occur in bolted or riveted connections; and, may be caused by
corrosion of the connector plates or fasteners, excessive vibration, overstressing,
cracking or the failure of individual fasteners.

Loose connections may sometimes not be detectable by visual inspection. Cracking
or excessive corrosion of the connector plates or fasteners, or permanent deformation
of the connection or members framing into it, may be indications of a loose
connection. Tapping the connection with a hammer is one method of determining if
the connection is loose.

1.4 Timber

Based on Austroads 1991 "Bridge Management Practice" (ref. 2)

Timber was extensively used for bridges constructed up until the middle 1900's and
these constitute just under one quarter of the structures on the State Declared Road
network. The largest proportion of timber bridges occurs on roads of lesser
importance such as local roads, but many timber bridges are still in service on higher
class roads and are often required to carry heavy traffic loadings.

The major causes of deterioration in timber bridges are as follows:
(1) Fungal (rotting)
(2) Termites
(3) Marine organisms
(4) Corrosion of Fasteners
(5) Shrinkage and Splitting
(6) Fire damage
(7) Weathering

1.4.1 Fungi

References include Bootle (1983)

Severe internal decay of timbers used for bridges is caused mainly by "white rot" or
"brown rot" fungi. External surface decay, especially in ground contact areas, is
caused by "soft rot" fungi. Other fungi such as mould and sapstain fungi may
produce superficial discolourations on timbers but are not generally of structural
significance.

Fungal growths will not develop unless there is a source of infection from which the
plants can grow. Fungi procreate by producing vast numbers of microscopic spores
which may float through the air for long periods and can be blown for considerable
distances.

Although it is true to say that no timber components in service will be free from
decay because of an absence of infecting spores, these spores will not germinate and
develop unless there is:

an adequate supply of food (wood cells).
an adequate supply of air or oxygen. (prolonged immersion in water saturates
timber and inhibits fungal growth)
a suitable range of temperatures. (optimum temperatures are 20
o
- 25
o
c for
soft rots, while their rate of growth declines above or below the optimum with
a greater tolerance of lower temperatures apparent)
a continuing supply of moisture. (wood with a moisture content below 20% is
considered safe from decay, while many fungi require a moisture content
above 30%.)

Once established, the decay fungi continue to grow at an accelerating rate as long as
favourable conditions prevail. Depriving the fungi of any one of these required
conditions will effectively curtail the spread of decay. Wood that is kept dry or
saturated will not rot. Moisture change can affect decay indirectly because drying
often leads to surface checks, which may expose untreated parts of timber or create
water trapping pockets. Proper preservative treatment effectively provides a toxic
barrier to the fungi's food supply, thus preventing decay. Figures 1.4.1 (a) and (b)
show rotting of members. The most common rotting areas in timber bridges are
internally in log girders, corbels and piles (piping), and in sawn decking at the
exposed ends and interface with kerbs.

1.4.2 Termites


Australia has a large number of different species of termites (300) which are widely
distributed. Practically all termite damage to timber bridges occurs through
subterranean termites (especially Coptotermes acinaciformis and allied species)
which require contact with the soil or some other constant source of moisture. Some
dry wood termite species are found in coastal areas of Queensland, but minimal
damage is attributable to these types in bridges.

Termites live in colonies or nests which may be located below ground in the soil, or
above ground in a tree stump, hollowed out bridge member or an earth mound. Each
colony contains a queen, workers, soldiers and reproductives or alates. The workers,
who usually constitute the highest portion of the population, are white bodied, blind
insects some 3mm in length which have well developed jaws for eating timber.
However, in North Queensland, termites growing to 20mm or more in length
(Mastotermes darwiniensis) are found and these are capable of causing significant
damage in a short time compared to the most commonly distributed species. Attack
by subterranean termites originates from the nest, but may spread well above ground
level, either inside the wood or via mud walled tubes called galleries which are
constructed on the outside of bridge members. Reference should be made to Figure
1.4.2(c). These galleries are essential for termites as they require an absence of light,
a humid atmosphere and a source of moisture to survive. At least once a year the
alates develop eyes and wings and leave the nest under favourable weather conditions
to migrate up to 200m from the original nest. After migration, their wings fall off and
a few of these may pair to start new colonies.

Termite attack, once established, usually degrades timber much more quickly than
fungi, but termite attack in durable hardwoods normally used in bridge construction is
usually associated with some pre-existing fungal decay. This decay accelerates as the
termites extend their galleries through the structure, moving fungal spores and
moisture about with their bodies. Hence, although some of the material removed by
termites has already lost it structural strength because of decay, the control of termites
remains an extremely important consideration.

Basically, there are two main strategies in termite control:

eradication of the nest (by either direct chemical treatment or by separation of
the colony from its sustaining moisture)
installation of chemical and physical barriers to prevent termites from entering
a bridge or attacking timber in contact with the ground.

In practice it may be difficult to eradicate the nest because of the problem of locating
it. Refer to Figures 1.4.2 (a) and (b) showing termite attack in timber members.

1.4.3 Marine Organisms


Damage to underwater timber in the sea or tidal inlets is usually caused by marine
borers, and is more severe in tropical and sub tropical waters than in colder waters.
The two main groups of animal involved are:

molluscs (teredinindae) - this group includes various species of Teredo,
Nausitora and bankia. They are commonly known in Australia as teredo or
"shipworm". They start life as minute, free-swimming organisms and after
lodging on timber they quickly develop into a new form and commence
tunnelling. A pair of boring shells on the head grow rapidly in size as the
boring progresses, while the tail with its two water circulating syphons
remains at the original entrance. The teredine borers destroy timber at all
levels from the mudline to high water level, but the greatest intensity of the
attack seems to occur in the zone between 300mm above and 600mm below
tide level. A serious feature of their attack is that while the interior of the pile
may be eaten away, only a few small holes may be visible on the surface.

crustaceans - this group includes species of Sphaeroma (pill bugs), Limnoria
(gribbles ), and Chelura. They attack the wood on its surface, making many
narrower and shorter tunnels than those made by the teredines. The timber so
affected is steadily eroded from the outside by wave action and the piles
assume a wasted appearance or "hourglass effect". Attack by Sphaemora is
limited to the zone between tidal limits, with the greatest damage close to
halftide level. They cannot survive in water containing less than 1.0 - 1.5 per
cent salinity, but can grow at lower temperatures than the teredines.

Many strategies have been developed for the control of marine borers but, assuming
that the piles have sufficient remaining strength, the most effective work by reducing
the oxygen content of water around the borers.

1.4.4 Corrosion of Fasteners


Corrosion of steel fasteners can cause serious strength reductions for two related
reasons. Firstly, the steel fastener reduces in size and weakens, and secondly a
chemical reaction involving iron salts from the rusting process can significantly
reduce the strength of the surrounding wood (this is not fungal decay but may
enhance corrosion of the fastener because of water ingress in the softened timber).

Galvanised fasteners in contact with timber which has been freshly treated with CCA
preservative may exhibit enhanced corrosion. However, for CCA treated timber that
has been cured for 6 weeks, normal corrosion rates for fasteners will apply.

1.4.5 Shrinkage and Splitting


Moisture can exist in wood as water or water vapour in the cell cavities and as
chemically bound water within the cell walls. As green timber loses moisture to the
surrounding atmosphere, a point is reached when the cell cavities no longer contain
moisture, but the cell walls are still completely saturated with chemically bound
water. This point is called the "fibre saturation point". Wood is dimensionally stable
while its moisture content remains above the fibre saturation point, which is typically
around 30% for most timbers. Bridges are normally constructed from green timber
which gradually dries below its fibre saturation point until it reaches equilibrium with
the surrounding atmosphere. As it does so, the wood shrinks but because it is
anisotropic, it does not shrink equally in all directions. Maximum shrinkage occurs
parallel to the annular rings, about half as much occurs perpendicular to the annular
rings and a small amount along the grain.

The relatively large cross section timbers used in bridges loose their moisture through
their exterior surfaces so that the interior of the member remains above the fibre
saturation point while the outer layers fall below and attempt to shrink. This sets up
tensile stresses perpendicular to the grain and when these exceed the tensile strength
of the wood, a check or split develops, which deepens as the moisture content
continues to drop. As timber dries more rapidly through the ends of the member than
through the sides, more serious splitting occurs at the ends. Deep checks provide a
convenient site for the start of fungal decay. Figures 1.4.5 (a) and (b) show
longitudinal splitting of timber girders and piles.

Shrinkage also causes splitting where the timber is restrained by a bolted steel plate or
other type of fastening. This splitting can be avoided by allowing the timber to shrink
freely by using slotted holes. As timber shrinks, it tends to lose contact with steel
washers or plates, so the connection is no longer tight. Checking the tightness of nuts
in bolted connections is therefore a standard item of routine maintenance for timber
bridges.

1.4.6 Fire

References include CSIRO (1975), Bootle (1983)

Wood itself does not burn. The effect of heat is firstly to decompose the wood (a
process known as 'pyrolysis') and it is some of the products of this decomposition that
burn if conditions are suitable. This concept is important in discussions on the action
of retardants.

In theory, wood decomposes even at temperatures as low as 20
o
c (at the rate of 1%
per century). At 93
o
c the wood will become charred in about 5 years.

When wood is heated, several zones of pyrolysis occur which are well delineated due
to the excellent insulating properties of wood (thermal conductivity roughly 1/300
that of steel). These zones can be described generally as follows:

zone A: 95
o
c - 200
o
c
water vapour is given off and wood eventually becomes charred.

zone B: 200
o
c - 280
o
c
water vapour, formic and acetic acids and glyoxal are given off,
ignition is possible but difficult

zone C: 280
o
c - 500
o
c
combustible gases (carbon monoxide, methane, formaldehyde, formic
and acetic acids, methanol, hydrogen) diluted with carbon dioxide and
water vapour are given off. Residue is black fibrous char. Normally
vigorous flaming occurs. If, however, the temperature is held below
500
o
c, a thick layer of char builds up and because the thermal
conductivity of char is only 1/4 that of wood, it retards the penetration
of heat and thus reduces the flaming.

zone D: 500
o
c - 1000
o
c
in this zone the char develops the crystalline structure of graphite,
glowing occurs and the char is gradually consumed.

zone E: above 1000
o
c
at these temperatures the char is consumed as fast as it is formed.

As the temperature of the wood is lowered, the above mentioned behaviour still holds,
eg, combustion normally ceases below 280
o
c.

Large section round timbers, as used in bridge construction, have good resistance to
fire, and, except during a severe bush fire, usually survive quite successfully.

1.4.7 Weathering

Weathering is the gradual deterioration of sawn or log timber due to its exposure to
sun, wind and rain. Weathering can be a serious problem especially to the exposed
end grain of untreated or unprotected wood, where severe rotting can occur around
the connections. The exposed ends of transverse deck planks are susceptible to this
defect. Figures 1.4.7 (a) and (b) illustrate weathering and rotting in the ends of timber
deck planks.

1.5 Masonry

Based on Ontario Ministry of Transportation, Ontario Structure Inspection Manual
(Ref. 1)

Masonry is made of stones or bricks bonded together by mortar. Although not a
common construction material today, masonry has been used in retaining walls,
abutments, piers or arches. Types of masonry construction are Ashlar masonry,
squared stone masonry and rubble masonry.

The following defects commonly occurring in masonry are described:

- Cracking
- Splitting, Spalling and Disintegration
- Loss of Mortar and Stones

1.5.1 Cracking

A crack is an incomplete separation into one or more parts with or without space in
between. Cracks develop in masonry as a result on non-uniform settlement of the
structure, thermal restraint and overloads.

Cracks develop either at the interface between the stone and mortar, following a
zigzag pattern, when the bond between them is weak; or, go through the joint and
stone in a straight line, when the mortar is stronger than the stone.

1.5.2 Splitting, Spalling and Disintegration

Splitting is the opening of seams or cracks in the stone leading to the breaking of the
stone into large fragments.

Spalling is the breaking or chipping away of pieces of the stone from a larger stone.

Disintegration is the gradual breakdown of the stone into small fragments, pieces or
particles.

The splitting, spalling and disintegration of masonry is caused by the actions of
weathering and abrasion; or, by the actions of acids, sulphates or chlorides, which
cause deterioration in certain types of stones, such as limestone.

1.5.3 Loss of Mortar and Stones

Loss of mortar is the result of the destructive actions of water wash, plant growth or
softening by water containing dissolved sulphates or chlorides. Once the mortar has
disintegrated it may lead to loss of stones. Excessive loss of mortar will also reduce
the load-carrying capacity of a structure.

1.6 Protective Coatings

Coating defects are not necessarily serious but they are indicative of potential
weaknesses in the coating system and eventual loss of protection to the surface
coated.

It is rare for a protective coating to outlast the life of the structure.

Breakdown of paint or loss of galvanising is inevitable and should be anticipated.
The rate of breakdown is dependant on a number of interrelated factors, with "Time
of wetness" being the most important. This usually results from condensation and
may be increased by absorption of the moisture by windborne salts on areas not
subject to rain washing. Accumulation of debris, bird droppings, flaking paint, etc,
will all retain moisture and promote corrosion.

In addition to eventual failure of a coating system by weathering, premature failure
may result from:

Loss of coating adhesion due to faulty specification or application.
Incompatibility of successive coats.
Subsurface rusting due to inadequate surface preparation and/or priming paint.
Localised failure due to mechanical damage.
Inadequate film-build on sharp edges, welds and paint "shadow areas".

In some cases, expert advice may be required to establish the cause and recommend
suitable remedial action.

2.0 COMMON CAUSES OF OLDER BRI DGE DETERI ORATI ON

2.1 Concrete Bridges

The following section lists the various types of reinforced and prestressed concrete
bridges and generally lists the main problems associated with each type.

2.1.1 Monolithic and simply supported T-beams

Most monolithic structures are T-beam bridges with the whole structure cast-in-situ.
Spans tend to be small but groups of as many as 5 continuous spans may be built this
way in a bridge. This puts strains on the columns of the piers and at the abutments
due to temperature movements, and it is not uncommon to see a crack and signs of
movement around the beam/wall joint at the abutment. There may also be signs of
tension cracking in the face of the columns of the furthest pier from the centre of the
span group, due to movements and temperature. These structures are often
overstressed in negative moment with cracking and staining observed at the underside
of deck at the beam/deck/pier diaphragm joints.

The T-beam bridges often have sufficient shear reinforcement near the supports and
diagonal shear cracking may be observed as far away as 1/3rd of the span from the
support. The abutments and wings were usually cast as one and heavy cracking,
spalling and movements may be observed at the wing joint especially where high
abutment walls were built.

The simply supported precast T-beam structures tended to be a later design with
improved shear reinforcement of the beams and hence shear cracking is not normally
seen. Some flexural cracking of the beams will normally be seen at midspan
especially on structures which carry a reasonable number of heavy loads. Some
beams had a locating dowel at one end of span which made that end of beam fixed
with the other end free to move. The allowance for movement was often lost, with
the consequence that the beam moved relative to the dowel, cracking and sometimes
spalling the ends of the beams. The support directly under the beams also tended to
spall due to friction, as a layer of malthoid was all that often separated the beam and
substructure.

2.1.2 Precast I Beams

Precast "I" beam construction began in the early 1960's, using precast high strength
prestressed concrete beams with spans up to 22 metres approximately. These beams
have generally performed well over the years.

The NAASRA beam sections came into use in 1970 and Type 3 and Type 4 girders
have been used extensively for spans up to 25m and 31m respectively. Longer spans
have been accomplished by casting load bearing diaphragms at the piers which
encased the ends of the beams to create continuous spans. The beams were also
connected on the bottom flange by heavy steel bars welded together. In recent years a
"bulb tee" section has been used in place of the type 4 NAASRA beam for spans up to
36.5 metres.

The biggest problem associated with prestressed beams for large spans is the amount
of hog of the beam, especially as they continue to hog further after delivery until
loaded by the weight of the bridge deck. The beams can also crack towards the ends
due to stressing if insufficient end steel in provided.

2.1.3 Precast Prestressed I nverted "T" Beams

These beams were used during the 1970's to produce a flat undersurface to bridges
crossing the highways. This was done for aesthetic reasons as the flat bottom is more
appealing to the driver that the interrupted underside of an "I" beam bridge. Spans
were usually in the region of 10 metres. These beams were not an efficient section
and lost favour with designers. No problems have been encountered with these types
of structures. Top slab construction or concrete infill between beams have both been
used.

2.1.4 Box Girder Bridges

Box girder bridges have been used extensively on or over freeways in Queensland.
They are generally cast-in-place and then post-tensioned. Some box girders have
been precast in segments and post tensioned when erected in place. Problems can
regularly occur during construction and at post-tensioning.

The major maintenance concern for these bridges is where grouting around the post
tensioning is incomplete and does not adequately protect the steel tendons. Serious
concerns have been identified in some overseas countries where de-icing salts are
used on the deck but to date no evidence of tendon corrosion has been observed in
Queensland bridges.

2.1.5 Prestressed Voided Flat Slab Bridges

A number of cast-in-place prestressed voided flat slab bridges have been built on or
over freeways and highways and these provide an attractive shallow depth
superstructure, ideal for very wide bridges and with spans to approximately 34
metres. Problems with flotation and distortion of the void formers have been
experienced during construction, but these structures are relatively cheap,
aesthetically pleasing, and have performed well up to now.

2.1.6 Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs

These structures are monolithic cast-in-place and have performed very well with the
slab providing considerable lateral load distribution. Structures can be continuous
over a number of spans, hence there is a possibility of cracking of the columns due to
movement.

The slabs themselves often have a shrinkage crack which runs almost directly down
the centreline of the slab. Provided this remains dry it is of no concern.

2.1.7 Precast Prestressed Deck Units

Introduced in 1954 these units are held together by transverse tensioning rods in cored
holes.

This has been the principal form of bridge superstructure constructed over the last
thirty years. These 596mm wide, rectangular section, voided planks cover the span
range from 8.0m to 27.0m varying in depth from 300mm to 900mm respectively.

Typically these elements are erected with a 20mm gap between adjacent units which
is subsequently filled with poured mortar. The mortar acts both as a shear key and a
means of providing an even bearing surface between units for the transverse
prestressing forces. The latter is applied by way of transverse stressing bars slotted
through cored holes in the units. Following the application of prestress force the gaps
around the bars and joints at the ends of units, at piers and abutments, are also filled
with mortar.

The mortar in the joints inevitably cracks as a consequence of shrinkage and girder
deflections and rotations. This permits water to penetrate from the surface to the unit
soffits and substructure elements. Recently there have been failures of the transverse
stressing bars which have corroded as a consequence of this. Additionally, in regions
where Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) is a problem that reaction is exacerbated by
water leaking through the deck. The extent and severity of cracking and the
production of reaction products are more pronounced in the wetter areas of the bridge.
That is, adjacent to the joints between units and spans and around the kerb unit. It is
imperative that deck drainage is efficient on those structures and that any cracking of
the surfacing around deck joints is sealed. Current designs detail waterproofing of the
longitudinal joints between units to avoid the problems discussed above.

Generally, the deck units alone comprise the superstructure however a reinforced
concrete deck slab acting compositely with the units is often adopted. In this case the
transverse prestressing is omitted. Currently the slab is made continuous at fixed pier
joints to improve the rideability and minimise the number of pier joints.

Erection of deck units on elastomeric bearings, especially at expansion joints, can be
compromised by excessively hogged units or lateral shearing on headstocks with
crossfall unless the unit is supported and braced adequately until the levelling layer of
epoxy has cured.

2.1.8 Precast Prestressed Voided "T" Slabs

These standard slabs span form 8 metres to 19 metres and were developed in 1986 by
VicRoads and have recently been introduced in Queensland. The slabs vary in depth
form 250 to 750 mm and have a 140 mm overlay on top. Width of the top flange of
the 'T' slab varies from 900 to 1500 mm to suit the width of bridge. These slabs are
now being used and are suitable for spans up to 19 metres.. The potential problems
identified include high neoprene bearings placed on sloping headstocks beneath the
T-slabs and loss of cover due to void formers floating during fabrication.

2.1.9 Decks and Overlays

Reinforced concrete decks are usually cast-in-place over the beams and generally
have a 50 millimetre or larger thickness of bituminous surface added on top. For high
structures or bridges over highways and railway lines, thin precast prestressed
concrete formwork slabs or sacrificial formwork is usually used to negate the need for
stripping after casting the deck.

Earlier concrete decks, however, were increased in depth by 12 millimetres allowing
for wear of the top surface. This practice was used in the past but now discontinued
due to temperature cracking of the surface which allowed moisture to penetrate into
the deck concrete.

The concrete beams have ligature bars which project into the deck for composite
action, whilst steel beams and girders have welded stud or other anchors at their top
to provide composite action. On some older bridges a bevelled concrete cap was cast
between the deck and beams. Cracking of the cap can occur along the fillet line a the
deck, or cracking coinciding with the location of the shear connectors may be visible.
Unless severe, this cracking is not serious.

2.1.10 Diaphragms

At the ends of the deck a stiffening beam will be noticed joining the ends of the
beams. This diaphragm (crossgirder) may be the full depth of the beams, but on some
structures it will only be in the order of 200 to 250 mm in depth.

Diaphragms may also be found at midspan or at the third points to provide web
stiffening against debris loads and impact forces and aid in load distribution between
beams.

On precast prestressed 'I' beam bridges continuous for live load, a wide heavily
reinforced load bearing diaphragm can be found at the piers. This diaphragm is
required to support the full superstructure loads and transfer that load back to a pier or
to isolated columns which form the pier.

All these diaphragms should be checked for cracking.

2.1.11 Kerbs, Footways, Posts and Railing

Most of the old concrete bridges used either narrow kerbs (sometimes tapered in cross
section) or wider kerbs tapered (in plan) at the ends. These kerbs had a barrier facing
and were well in front of the railing causing a dangerous situation whereby errant
vehicles could "take-off" and land on top of the barrier rather than be redirected by it.
Where footways are constructed on bridges they should be inspected for pedestrian
safety, ie. ensure level of precast or cast-in-place footway slabs is good with no
depressions or rises which could trip pedestrians. Moisture will penetrate the footway
slabs and adequate drainage of the area under the footway is required. If drainage is
not adequate weed growth will form and the underside of deck will form
efflorescence with the dampness penetrating the deck.

Many different forms of post and railing have been used on concrete bridges ranging
from guideposts, timber posts and rails, reinforced concrete posts with precast
reinforced concrete rails, reinforced concrete posts with steel tube rails, steel channel
posts with steel guardrail, rectangular rolled hollow steel posts and rails, and
reinforced concrete new jersey barriers with steel posts and rail on top.

Pedestrian grillage is usually associated with footways, or on pedestrian bridges, and
should be inspected for damage and tightness of the attachment bolts.

For all bridges it is important for the steel guardrail on the approaches to attach to the
bridge endposts or to continue over the bridge. This will prevent the possibility of a
vehicle hitting the approach rail and being redirected directly into the endposts, or the
other situation of a vehicle hitting an unprotected endpost.

2.1.12 Abutments

Abutments can vary considerable but will generally be of the following types;

(a) spill through abutments using a reinforced concrete headstock supported on driven
precast concrete piles or of a frame type with reinforced concrete columns supported
by a footing below ground; or

(b) wall type abutments either reinforced or mass concrete; or

(c) wall type consisting of straight columns and a headstock with infill wall panels
between the columns; or

(d) masonry walls; or

(e) sill beams behind a reinforced earth wall.

Spill through abutments are possibly the most common type to be found and usually
have little or no cracking of the headstock, except for shrinkage cracks. Frame type
headstocks are more highly stressed and some flexural cracking may be found at
midspan between the columns, or over the columns. Loss of retaining fill in front,
beneath and behind the headstocks is also a common problem which requires
correcting to retain the embankment fill behind the abutment.

The columns or piles are not usually a problem although cracking of the front face of
piles has been noticed where the superstructure has propped the abutment against
large movements of the embankment fill. This is only a problems if the cracking
becomes severe. The ballast walls will often crack if beams bear hard against them or
if an overhanging deck puts pressure of the top of the wall. This cracking is not
considered very important provided excess moisture is not allowed through the walls.

Wall abutments are usually in good condition with differential movement between
panels the only area of concern. Mass concrete walls are usually small in height and
have only movement problems or in some instances scour problems of fill in front of,
and beneath, the footing. Wall abutments consisting of columns with headstocks and
thin infill panels can have cracking from the effects of earth pressure and shrinkage.

The side wings on the high abutment walls often move relative to the abutment walls
due to earth pressure. The wings are not normally self-supporting and rely on a
concrete key or few bars of light reinforcement to hold them in place. Cracking and
differential movement between the wing and the abutment wall are quite common and
can be a problem if severe.

Highway and freeways structures are designed to have reinforced concrete approach
slabs which rest on top of the ballast walls. These are installed to eliminate live load
earth pressures behind the abutments and to provide a smooth transition onto and off
the bridge for fast moving and heavy traffic, thus reducing the impact loads on the
structure.

Stone masonry abutment walls have been constructed on older structures. Care
should be taken in assessing these walls for possible signs of settlement of the blocks,
settlement cracking or cracking of the wall especially under heavily loaded areas.
Where loadings on the wall are at isolated points such as girders rather than a
distributed load, a reinforced concrete cap may be cast on top of the wall to distribute
the stress.

If this cap overhangs the masonry for a bridge widening, particular attention should
be noted of the edge loading occurring on the masonry.

2.1.13 Piers

Piers of various types include headstocks supported on piles or columns, wall type
piers some of which consist of columns with a headstock and thin in full panels,
straight walls of constant or variable thickness, box type concrete piers and masonry
piers.

Cracking of these pier types will be similar to the cracking mentioned above for the
abutments. With the higher wall piers horizontal cracking may occur around the
construction joints.

With continuous superstructures and large movements occurring at the abutments,
horizontal cracking of the pier wall or column face can occur as bending pressure is
exerted on the wall.

Bending pressure can also be put on high slender columns or piles if the bridge is on a
large skew or a sharp circular curve, causing lateral cracking of the piers low down.

Long monolithic T-beam bridges often have split piers at the deck expansion joints.
Cracking and spalling is a problem with these piers due to the high moments on the
slender sections.

Many of the older structures have poor quality sandy concrete which can suffer
severely from the action of water, sand, pebbles and grit as they wash past. This can
significantly reduce the amount of cover concrete to the steel reinforcement and
guniting may have been used to reinstate the concrete surface.

2.2 Steel Bridges

Composite steel beams with reinforced concrete decks were used in the past for
longer span structures but are seldom used today. The reasons for this were cost,
(fabricated plate girders are much more expensive than prestressed concrete beams)
and future maintenance problems with repainting.

These superstructures also tend to deflect substantially and continuous steel girders
vibrate with loading of adjacent spans. Because of this movement under load, the
reinforced concrete deck will often crack through at approximately the third points of
the spans. Moisture, corrosion and efflorescence at the cracks will normally be seen
on these type of structures.

Steel beams should be checked for signs of corrosion and the condition of the
paintwork noted. Simply supported beams should have steel angle crossframes or
concrete diaphragms at midspan to prevent lateral buckling and aid in stiffening the
beams. Continuous beams should have these at the supports and at midspan. Splice
plates on the web, top and bottom flanges should be inspected to ensure no weld
cracking or separation has occurred. All welded connections, splices and stiffeners
should be closely inspected for any signs of cracking of the weld or metal
immediately adjacent to it.

Bolted and riveted connections require inspection to check whether all connections
are tight, intact and the protective cover is in good order. Loose bolting can
sometimes be detected by cracks in the coating system, movement of the bracing or
by associated noises as transient loads cross the deck.

Any signs of excessive wear at pinned joints in trusses or other movement joints
should be observed and recorded.

Areas around the junction of members should be inspected for straightness as these
can be the first sign of permanent deformation resulting from buckling of
compression flange or member or a sign of inadequate bracing.

The thin steel sections are also susceptible to permanent deformation caused by
vehicle impact and if severe can significantly reduce the load carrying capacity of the
structure. This can be caused by impact from a high vehicle travelling under bridge
damaging the bottom flange or chord member, or by vehicles at deck level causing
damage to through girders and trusses.

2.3 Timber Bridges

The following section is a general description of common defects found in timber
bridges. For a detailed description of element-specific defects, refer to Parts One and
Two of the Timber Bridge Maintenance Manual.

2.3.1 Timber Girders

Timber girders may be either round, hewn or sawn. Hewn or sawn girders will
generally not have any outer sapwood except in the case where CCA preservative
treatment has been applied.

Timber girders should be inspected for pipe or external rot at their maximum stress
location at midspan. Inspection at the girder ends should also be carried out as pipe
rotting is generally more severe at these locations. Girder ends are prone to crushing
failure when excessive loss of section has occurred.

The girders should also be checked at their ends for splitting (some timber girders
may have anti-split bolts at their ends to control any splitting), they should have full
bearing on corbels and they should be checked for end rot especially at abutments
where moisture or wet fill is prevalent.

Splitting of timber girders can effect their performance and working life considerably.
Much of the splitting will be along the grain and, unless severe, is not of significance
unless it allows considerable moisture into the splits. Spiking of the decking to the
timber girders can cause splitting at the top, and, with the presence of moisture and
vibration of the spikes under traffic, spike rot of the girders occurs. For this reason
spiking of decking directly to girders should be avoided. Generally, decking will be
spiked to a sacrificial spiking plank on the outer girders with no spike connection to
inner girders. Longitudinal cracking of girder ends, when combined with large pipe
size, will lead to the girder section being split into a number of discrete segments
which will reduce shear and crushing strength at the support ends.

If the girder is severely split in the vertical plane loading can tend to widen the splits
causing premature failure. By far the most dangerous splits are the fracture of the
timber due to overloading, and the split which starts from the bearing area and travels
diagonally across the timber grains towards the top of the girder. In both cases the
girders will require relieving or replacing, though steel banding could control the
diagonal splitting if load limits are placed on the structure.

Other problems which may occur with timber girders are the presence of rotting knot
holes (especially if at midspan), sagging of the girder at midspan, or excessive
deflection of the girder under live load due to poor lateral distribution of the decking,
or the member being too small for the span.

Loss of section due to termite attack can seriously effect the performance of timber
girders and care should be taken in searching for any evidence of their presence.

2.3.2 Corbels

Corbels should be checked for splitting and pipe rot at their ends. If piping or
splitting is severe then crushing of the corbel can occur with subsequent excessive
vertical movement of the timber girder at the end. Many corbels have anti-splitting
bolts through their ends in an attempt to prevent crushing from occurring.

2.3.3 Decking (Timber and Steel Trough)

The most common form of decking consists of transverse planks spiked to the outer
girder spiking plank with no mechanical connection to the internal girders. The ends
are also restrained by the bolting down of the kerbs and jacking of internal girders
(cambering) is used to provide tightness to the whole superstructure. However, this
type of structure will always work loose due to shrinkage and creep in the members
and will require continual tightening of bolts and recambering. Timber running
planks are often used with transverse deck planks and these planks aid in load
distribution to the deck planks. The running planks are usually of a thin section
(about 50mm thick) and being usually spiked down, tend to work loose quite easily.
They tend to split quite easily, requiring constant replacement and form a moisture
trap which hastens rot of the decking beneath. Longitudinal timber distributor planks
are often bolted to the bottom of the decking to reduce differential movement between
the transverse deck planks under the action of wheel loads. Though distributors may
help with load support in deteriorated decking, they are of no benefit in improving the
distributing of loads to the girders. Most bridges have an asphalt or penetration
macadam wearing surface over the transverse decking, but the surface becomes quite
bumpy and cracked due to movement of the decking below, although it does offer
improved load distribution. It also tends to build up a reservoir of moisture which
rots out the timber at a quicker rate.

Transverse deck planks should be inspected for end and top rot (particularly in the
kerb region) bulging on top due to ingress of water, sagging at midspan due to
excessive span length, fracture and severe splitting. Severe splitting and top rot can
often be caused by spiking of decking and the practice should be discouraged except
at the outer edge connection.

The inspector must always be alert for signs of termite damage as the consequence on
these small sections can be severe.

CCA treated plywood is often used for deck replacement on timber bridges.
Differential movement of sheets under traffic loads and inadequate sealing of joints
can cause damage to the roadway surface. As well, the long term performance of the
ply in wet tropical area, or where submergence is common should be monitored to
check for delamination of the plys. The exposed outer ends of the sheets should also
be examined for evidence of delamination.

A relatively uncommon form of timber decking consisting of plank cross beams and
longitudinal decking has been used.

The timber crossbeams should extend across a minimum of three beams unless
designed specially for simple spans. They should be firmly bolted to the beams and
all bolts should be regularly checked.

Longitudinal decking should be laid in long lengths and should be securely bolted to
the cross beams at their ends and at alternate intermediate crossbeams. This is done
to stop flexing of the longitudinal decking under load, and reducing the pulling
motion that shears the bolts through the ends of the longitudinal deckings planks,
which is a commonly occurring problem.

Longitudinal decking should be laid with the heartwood down to prevent it rotting
and splitting at the centre, or possibly curling up at the edges.

As the timber shrinks and dries out gaps will form between the planks and jacking of
the deck may be required to close up the gaps with insertions of thin sections. This is
especially important on bridges used by cyclists, and timber bridges should be signed
to warn cyclists of the possible dangers when crossing the bridge.

Many timber bridges now have steel trough decking replacing the timber decking.
The troughs were initially filled with premix asphalt or mass concrete to a level of
approximately 50 millimetres above the top of the trough sections. Neither of these
infills has performed well as both are porous, permitting water entry to the troughing.
Compaction of bituminous infill under traffic loads occurs and approximately 2 to 5
years after opening (depending on traffic volumes and loads), the infill should be
resurfaced to regain both longitudinal grade and lateral crossfalls. It is vital with this
type of decking to maintain a crack free surface with good drainage to remove all
surface water from the deck, so that it will not seep through the infill and lay in the
steel trough causing corrosion to occur. Some trough sections were tack welded
along their joints whilst others have been bolted or screwed together. A check should
be made of the joining arrangements in case the rough sections are tending to spread
under load. If this problem is occurring, it will normally be reflected in the road
surface above as an area of heaving, dips or even pot holes in the infill or areas of
heavy cracking. They are signs that the trough sections are deflecting excessively
under load or are not being effectively held down to the girders. Refer to Figures
2.3.3 (a) and (b) for commonly visible defects.

Concrete infill with mesh reinforcing over the troughing has been the most successful
infill material used. In addition, where troughing is in very poor condition, a number
of bridges have had a structurally reinforced deck poured, using the troughing as
formwork.

2.3.4 Kerbs, Posts and Railing

Visual inspection should be conducted of the kerb condition and bolting to the
decking or beams. The kerbs should be firmly held in place as the barrier posts rely
on this for strength of support.

The endposts may be round timber and suffer from settlement, splitting, sap rot, base
rot, piping, and top rot due to weathering. If the post can be moved by hand it is
usually a sign that replacement is required, though in some cases this can be caused
simply by a lack of embedment in the fill.

Inspection usually consists of visually inspecting the bolting, paintwork and damage
caused by glancing blows from vehicles.

Standard timber rails are mainly use on timber bridges but steel guardrail is also
reasonably common. Connections need to be inspected for rigidity, and paintwork
inspected for traffic safety reasons. With timber rails, rot and splitting may require
early replacement of some sections.

2.3.5 Piles

Piles can be classified into two main groups; those which take vertical loads and
support headstocks, and those which take moments such as wingwall piles or stream
fender piles. Abutment piles are required to take both vertical loads and horizontal
earth pressure loads.

Areas where rot is most likely to occur are at ground level, normal water level
(usually 300 to 600 mm below walings) or around areas of numerous bolt holes such
as walings and crossbracing.

Piles which take moments are particularly susceptible at ground or normal water level
where maximum stress and suspected rot areas coincide. If pipe rot has been detected
in these critical areas the extent of the rottings needs to be defined so the length of
repair or replacement of the pile can be determined (refer Figure 2.3.5).

Care also needs to be taken in determining natural ground level as scour, filling or
siltation may have occurred. If filling or siltation has occurred, the pile may have
substantial pipe rot well below the current ground level. If the pile has rotted out
below ground and moving under load, a void will be seen around the pile. Under load
the pile will be seen to visually move. If this occurs in water, ripples will be seen to
emanate from the moving pile. In scoured areas the pile will need to be inspected
higher up at what was originally the ground level.

Piles should be visually checked for areas of rot or splitting in the loaded areas at the
top, especially splits originating beneath the headstocks (refer Figure 1.4.5 (b)).

Where the bridge is submersible, the adequacy of the headstock/pile bolted
connection should be checked. Weakening of the piles above this section due to pile
rot may allow the superstructure to float off. The presence of the top pile strap bolt
should also be confirmed.

Termites are a continual problems with timber piles in all areas of the state. The
termites can enter the piles as low as 300 mm below ground, but usually enter via
splits in the timber. Their presence can be seen with their small covered runways in
the splits or along the outside of the pile. They may also be encountered stuck to the
probe when testing the pile for rot. The termites eat out runways within the timber
and when probing the test hole it feels as if you are scraping over a lot of thin timber
sections.

Piles can often wear away at ground level or at bed level due to the action of abrasive
gravels or sands and this should be checked. The abrasive gravels occur in the
mountainous regions and the wear can usually be seen, but abrasion by sands usually
occurs at the mouth of the rivers and is due to sand movement with the tides.
Structures in these locations should have the pile diameters at bed level checked by
divers to ascertain the loss of section.

Timber piles in marine situations can also suffer attack from teredo. This attack can
occur anywhere between bed level and mean low tide level. Presence of teredo can
be judged from either sacrificial oregon timber attached to the pile group, or by
smooth runways along the hardwood timber in the mean low tide area (they may
often only attack the softwood) or by small 5 to 10 mm diameter holes in the piles
below water. Teredo will eat out the timber similar to a swiss cheese with the damage
completely unnoticed until failure of the pile below water occurs, hence the
importance of early detection.

2.3.6 Walings and Crossbraces

Walings and cross bracing should be visually checked to ensure that the members are
adequately stiffening the piles and providing a rigid frame against the action of the
stream and possible debris and log impact forces. Walings are usually encountered
300 to 600 millimetres above normal water level and give a good guide as to the
relative water level at the time of inspection, ie. if the water level is too high then the
timber piles should be reinspected when the level drops to normal water level.
Walings can also be good guide as to whether scour or silting is occurring at the pier.

2.3.7 Headstocks

Most headstocks on timber bridges consist of sawn timber approximately 300 x 180
mm in section and need only be visually inspected. Some bridges however have solid
hewn sections which require checking for pipe rot.

Inspection of headstocks should cover the following areas:

(a) check for presence of termites;
(b) check for top rot due to the presence of wet fill;
(c) check for weathering or end rot;
(d) check for splitting;
(e) check for any rot or separation of headstocks that are spliced at an inner pile;
(f) if the beams are not directly over the piles then the headstocks should be
checked for sagging, indicating they are being overloaded;
(g) check for any settlement of piles causing a sag in the headstocks;
(h) be especially wary of loaded timber overhangs;
(i) check that the headstocks have mechanical support on the piles and are not
purely relying on bolting to transfer their loads (headstock seating may have
been removed to allow placement of pile bracing);
(j) check all bolting is tight and in place. Severely corroded bolts are to be
replaced;
(k) check for loss of section due to excessive cuts in headstock (typically in the
vicinity of the bracing).

2.3.8 Abutments

Bedlogs and Props

Some timber bridges have bedlogs stacked on top of each other to form abutments,
whilst others have props resting on a bedlog to form a relieving abutment in front of
the original abutment.

Items to check for are:

(a) pipe rot in main load bearing areas;
(b) load bearing of the timber girders or props on the bedlogs;
(c) check for severe crushing of the bedlogs under loaded areas;
(d) check for excessive splitting or end rot of the bedlogs;
(e) check for leaning of the bedlogs.

Sometimes a timber bedlog may be placed in front of the other bedlogs to support the
fill on which the bedlogs bear. These bedlogs do not support the girders but are still
important in retaining the fill and preventing scour beneath the bearing bedlogs.

Props are used to aid in taking vertical load from suspect piles or suspect abutments
and usually bear on bedlogs or heavy sawn timbers. The props should be inspected
for rot if they consist of round or hewn timber which still has the heartwood within. If
the prop is of sawn timber there can be no pipe rot, but its condition such as end
bearing support, connection to bedlog, splitting etc should be noted.

The prop must be securely attached to the girder or relieving headstock, and capable
of taking the direct load. Stability of the props is also important and any leaning prop
listed for repair.

Headstock on Piles

The majority of abutments will be of this form. Refer to paragraphs 2.3.5 and 2.3.7.

Abutment Sheeting, Ballast Boards and Wing Sheeting

The abutment and wing sheeting and ballast boards are structural elements.
Abutment and wing sheeting may consist of timber planks or precast reinforced
concrete units, placed behind the piles to hold the embankment fill in place. The
inspector should check for rot, cracking, bulging and undermining by the stream.

Ballast boards can consist of timber sheeting or precast reinforced concrete units.
The inspector should again look for rot, cracking, bulging or breaking out of concrete.
Once again, the function of the member is to adequately retain the embankment fill,
and, provided the rot, cracking or bulging is not too extreme, these members are
usually adequate.

2.4 Deck J oints

Various types of expansion joints have been used in the past to cater for movements
of the bridge superstructure. Early bridges had small simply supported spans and
hence only small movements needed to be catered for.

These joints included materials with small compressions such as cork, bituminous
impregnated fibreboard, butyl impregnated polyurethane foam, styrene and foam
strips. Asphalt, rubberised bitumen or polyurethane were often poured on top in an
effort to seal the joint from moisture penetration. Many of these joints failed to seal
due to the joint material debonding or being inelastic. If the sealant was placed too
high in the groove, traffic tended to crack the sealant and rip it out.

As spans increased, so did the width of expansion joint, and compression seals were
required to cater for the movements expect. The earliest seal used was the neoprene
hose but this product proved to be inelastic and often fell through the joint leaving it
completely open. "Wabo" compression seals were then used firstly between steel
angles, and currently between fibre reinforced concrete nosings. One problem with
this seal is that it can tend to debond from the concrete deck or steel and gradually
work its way to the top of the joint where traffic damages the seal or, in some cases,
rips the seal completely out. A problems can also occur with the steel angles which
take high impact loadings from the tyres, especially where dry packed mortar has
been rammed beneath the angle. This mortar breaks up under impact and loss of
support cracks the anchor bars into the deck. The angles then start rattling and
moving under load which cracks the bitumen at the edge of the angle.

"Alustrip" expansion joints are now commonly used and these consist of a thin
neoprene sheet anchored into aluminium blocks which in turn are bolted down to the
deck. These blocks can break loose if bolting was provided via cored holes rather
than bolts cast into the deck. The seals also can become damaged and require
resealing.

On large span bridges steel finger plates and steel sliding plate joints have been used.
These joints have never offered a seal to moisture penetration and the sliding plates
continually vibrate loose causing a danger to traffic. They have been superseded by
heavy duty rubber joints such as "Transflex", "Waboflex" and "Felspan". A problem
with these joints is possible debonding of the metal and rubber sections.

Epoxy mortar noses were used in the past to support the joints but these thin sections,
cast after the deck, only broke up under repeated impact loads.

On bridge decks with small movements and a large asphalt cover a product called
"ThormaJ oint" has been use. This joint consists of a hot mix of selected stone and an
elastomer modified bitumen binder, and looks like a strip (approximately 500 mm
wide) of very dark asphalt. Performance is generally very good where it has been
used, and provides improved rideability over the joint.

For small expansion joints a repair being used at present is to pour a polymer modi-
fied bitumen (Mobil N345 or "megaprene") into the joint with a thickness of ap-
proximately 20 mm. Care must be taken to ensure overfilling does not occur and a 6
to 10 mm depth from the top is required so that traffic will not rip the material out
when expansion of the deck occurs. This product has better elastic properties than the
previously used rubberised bitumen. Reasonable performance has been found though
it tends to expand greatly when heated, and a slightly stiffer and less elastic product
would be a better option.

2.5 Bearings

The large number of different bearing systems have been used in the past and only the
more common types will be discussed here. The first precast and cast in situ beams
usually sat on the headstocks with the only form of bond breakers between the two
being a layer of clear grease, a sheet of malthoid or in some cases a sheet of lead.
Locating dowels from the headstock were used but these have simply tended to break
out the ends of the concrete beams, or in some instances, break out the top of the
crosshead beneath the beam due to movement and edge loadings.

Mortar pads have had considerable use in the past and are generally found in good
condition, though some rammed mortar pads beneath the beams tend to crack badly
and spall the mortar.

Also to be found on many bridges are steel base plates on which rest the smaller steel
bearing plates of the beams. Sometimes a phosphor bronze sliding plate may be
inserted between the steel plates to aid in longitudinal movement between them.

Cast iron bearing blocks with sliding plates or pins, mild steel rollers and rocker
bearings have also been used where large steel beam spans are present. Dirt, grit and
corrosion due to moisture are a continual problem with these type bearings, with
many rollers and rockers being completely seized up by corrosion.

Large span, heavy concrete bridges such as box girders can be supported on pot
bearings or bearings with a P.T.F.E. (teflon) sliding disc. These are specialised high
load bearings but the position of the P.T.F.E. strip should be noted, especially as it
can tend to be squeezed out by vibration. Excessive rotations of the bearings should
also be noted.

The most common bearing in use today is the elastomeric bearing in two different
forms; as a 25 mm thick neoprene pad, or as a larger depth bearing with metal shim
plates between elastomeric slices. The thinner bearing strips usually support small
span beams and have few problems although if the bearing pedestals are poorly
constructed then some areas of the pads may not carry load. The larger bearings can
suffer from irregular bulging and shearing of the elastomeric/metal shim surface if
poorly designed or manufactured. Rotation and shear of the bearings can occur with
bridge movement, and this can cause lift-off of the bearings at the edge, and hence
over-stressing at the opposite edge.

A common problem associated with large bearings is poor uneven pedestal
construction resulting in significant areas of the bearing pads being unstressed.

Creep, shrinkage and elastic shortening due to post-tensioning in some structures
cause shear stresses on the bearings. These bearings should be reset by jacking the
structure, but this is rarely done unless shear is excessive. Slippage of the bearings
can also occur in girder structures where retainers on the sole plates were not
provided, with bearings working their way forward from the support area.

2.6 Other Structure Types

2.6.1 Box Culverts

The early type box culverts were cast-in-place and many suffer from cracking and
spalling due to lack of concrete cover or ingress of moisture. Once repairs are
required to these structures they tend to be ongoing problems as the other areas fail
due to general dampness through the porous concrete.

Precast concrete crown units have been used extensively and have generally been
found to perform satisfactorily. However, in many structures fabricated in the 1960's,
where calcium chloride was used as an accelerator, the reinforcement has corroded
severely leading to extensive spalling of the cover concrete.

Link slabs have been used on multi cell culverts to reduce construction costs and
time. The link slabs take the place of the intermediate row of precast crown units by
spanning across the gap between alternate rows of crown units. The link slabs may
be either precast in a casting yard, or cast on top of the culvert base slab and simply
lifted into position as required. No service problems have been noted with these slabs
at present.

In recent years a variety of proprietary modular culvert systems have been adopted
which comprise discrete wall and roof sections that are designed to be connected
through a combination of dowels and a series of fabricated bolted connections.

Construction tolerances have proven to be a problem and the jointing system should
be inspected for completeness, fit and tightness of bolts. In addition, the panel
alignment has also been compromised in some areas and the structure should be
checked for consequential damage such as cracking or spalling caused by bolts or
panels bearing excessively on the panel faces.

2.6.2 Pipe Culverts

Early pipe culverts were predominantly of masonry construction, formed from
engineering red bricks or similar materials. Where conditions were found to be
suitable, the pipe was carved through solid rock.

The majority of these structures were built around the early 1900s, and the ones
inspected to date appear to be performing satisfactorily, with no major defects found.
However, a number of minor defects have been identified, such as perished mortar,
groundwater infiltration (resulting in limescale leaching and the passing of fines
through the culvert lining) and spalled brickwork, which are attributable to general
deterioration over the life of the structure (refer Figures 2.6.2 (a) and (b)).

Modern pipe culverts are typically constructed from precast concrete segments or
corrugated steel sections, and may be circular or elliptical in shape.


2.7 Causes Of Deterioration Not Related To Bridge Materials

A number of items need to be inspected which are not related to defects in
construction materials used in the bridge but which if not observed or maintained
could be a cause of future deterioration.

2.7.1 Damage due to accidents

The most common components affected by vehicular impact are barriers, kerbs,
footpath slabs and end posts which can be severely abraded, spalled or damaged.
Damage is usually self evident.

Other areas that can be affected are columns, outer beams or soffits of overpass
structures. Steel beams are particularly susceptible to damage from over-height
vehicles which can cause severe deformations to the bottom flange or web of the
member.

Bridges over navigable waterways may also have damage to pier columns and pile
caps due to impact of vessels. The damage may be sufficient to cause major
structural damage or movement of the column requiring an assessment of the
structural adequacy of the bridge, or cause abrasion and spalling of concrete which
can result in eventual corrosion of reinforcement.

2.7.2 Drainage

Ineffectual drainage may affect the bridge in several ways;

Flooding of the bridge deck which may create a serious traffic hazard.

Water flowing uncontrolled over concrete or steel surfaces or bearings below deck
level may result in corrosion or unsatisfactory performance of bearings.

Debris carried by drainage flows will build up in areas, retain moisture, and promote
corrosion.

Uncontrolled discharge from the deck can cause erosion of approaches, batters and
possibly undermine foundations.

Leakage from the bridge deck through joints and cracks will cause unsightly staining
of beams, piers and abutments.

Inadequate collection of drainage from the bridge approaches can also cause erosion,
piping and washout or scour of the approach embankment and batter slopes,
particularly in areas where flows are concentrated at the end of the bridge around the
end post and at ends of kerbs or service ducts. These areas should be inspected
particularly after heavy rain or flooding.

2.7.3 Debris

The build up of debris on the upstream side of the bridge can cause the following
adverse affects on the bridge:-

(a) Impose loads on the bridge during flooding for which it was not designed.

(b) Cause blockage of the bridge waterway during flooding which can exacerbate
problems of scour, undermining of foundations, flooding and in extreme cases
total blockage and diversions of the watercourse.

The build up of debris is dependant on upstream catchment conditions and is usually
most severe in bridges with small openings or low freeboard.

Additionally, the build up of debris below a bridge may become a fire hazard,
increasing the risk of fire damage to piles and headstocks.

2.7.4 Vegetation

Uncontrolled and excessive growth of vegetation under or adjacent to the bridge does
not in itself cause damage to the bridge. It can however cause fire hazard, blockage
to the waterway and build up of debris and moisture around abutments and bearings,
and for these reasons should be reported.

2.7.5 Scouring of Foundations

Scouring of foundations caused by excessive stream flows or changes in the
alignment of the stream channel can result in progressive settlement or movement of
abutments and piers, which if not rectified may ultimately cause total failure of the
bridge. Figures 2.4.1 (a) and (b) illustrate the effects of significant localised scour.

Where evidence of scour, degradation or aggradation of the stream bed exists, the
inspector shall take soundings at regular intervals across the upstream side of the
structure as a record of the existing condition, which then may be compared to past
and future inspections.

Adequacy of protection of batters at the abutment and stream bed around pier footing
shall also be noted as well as changes in conditions of the stream bed upstream and
downstream of the bridge.

2.7.6 Movement of the Structure

Movement of the piers and abutments of the structure may result from:

(a) General scour of the stream bed in the vicinity of the structure

(b) Local scour of the stream bed at piers or abutments

(c) Movement of the ground due to land slips at or around the bridge abutment

(d) Excessive earth pressure caused by movements or settlements of the approach
fill.

(e) Collisions, in the case of bridges over navigable waterways, roads, or
railways.

(f) "Freezing" up of bearings or expansion joints

Movements can usually be detected by observing:

(a) Total closures or excessive openings of deck expansion joints.

(b) Bearing or jamming up between the end of the superstructure and abutment
ballast wall with associated cracking and spalling that will occur.

(c) Cracking or excessive settlement of the approach embankments or heaving at
its toe.

(d) Scour causing undermining of the foundations.

(e) Out of verticality of columns or adjacent poles, fences etc.

Reporting any of these observations should be made as the movements of the
structure or approaches could continue over a period of time and comparisons with
past and future inspections is important to assess whether it is continuing, seasonal or
has ceased.

2.7.7 Condition of Approaches

The purpose of the embankment is to provide a stable road between the bridge and
surrounding ground. Often it is also required for providing horizontal, and sometimes
vertical support for the abutment foundation.

The most common defect of approach embankments is usually excessive settlement
adjacent to the bridge abutment which causes unsatisfactory riding quality and
possible damage to deck and expansion joints.

This can be caused by poorly compacted embankment, and or continuing settlement
of the underlying ground. Instability of ground and embankment can also be
observed in its early stages by excessive settlement or movement of the embankment.

It should be noted that while the subsidence behind bridge abutments is often
attributed to settlement of embankment fill the defect is often caused by defects in the
bridge substructure. Typically it is the consequence of the settlement or rotation of
walls which opens a crack or void that permits the loss of embankment material
generally as a result of leaching of fines. The settlement of infill panels or backing
slabs, which generally occurs as a result of softening of moisture susceptible founding
material or following scouring of the footing, is the usual source of the road
subsidence. Other defects commonly encountered are erosion, piping, washout and
scour of the embankment, particularly after heavy rain or flooding, or due to
inadequate or blocked drainage.

3.0 REFERENCES

1 Ministry of Transportation, Ontario 1989 - Highway Engineering Division. Ontario
Structure Inspection Manual.

2 Austroads, 1991 - Bridge Management Practice

3 Transit New Zealand, 1991 - Bridge Inspection and Maintenance Manual

4 Austroads, 1991 - Guide to Bridge Construction Practice

5 Bootle K R, (1983) Wood in Australia, Types, Properties and Uses, McGrawHill,
Sydney

6 CSIRO, Division of Building (1975), Effect of fire on Timber Engineering.
Melbourne, Lectures given by Officers of CSIRO Div. of Building Research, Highett

7 McGregor K (1991) Guidelines for Timber Bridge Inspection, Maintenance & Repair,
VicRoads

8 McGregor K (1991) Guidelines for Concrete Bridge Inspection, Maintenance &
Repair, VicRoads
Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL
Transport Technology Division PART TWO

Figure 1.2.1 (a)
Corrosion Of Headstock Reinforcement Due To Chloride
I on Penetration I n A Marine Environment

Figure 1.2.1 (b)
Corrosion Of Reinforcement I n The Soffit Of A Cast I nsitu Culvert Due To
Carbonation


Figure 1.2.1 (c)
Calcium Chloride I nduced Corrosion Of Suspended Slab Soffit I n An RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (d)
Spalling Due To Calcium Chloride Distress I n An RCBC

Figure 1.2.1 (e)
Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Cantilever Soffit Due To Poor Cover And
Chloride Penetration

Figure 1.2.1 (f)
Corrosion Of Reinforcement And Spalling Of Deck Slab Surface Due To Poor Cover
And Chloride Attack

Figure 1.2.2 (a)
Carbonation Testing Of A Freshly Broken Concrete Core
Note Carbonated Zone Remains Clear While Uncarbonated
Zone I s Pink

Figure 1.2.2 (b)
Carbonation I nduced Corrosion


Figure 1.2.3 (a)
General View Of Longitudinal Cracking
Due To ASR I n Prestressed Deck Units

Figure 1.2.3 (b)
View Of Deck Unit Soffit Cracking Due To ASR

Figure 1.2.3 (c)
View Of Vertical Crack Due To ASR I n A Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.3 (d)
View Of ASR Gel Exudations

Figure 1.2.4 (c)
Plastic Settlement/Shrinkage Cracking I n A Bridge Deck

Figure 1.2.4 (d)
Plastic Cracking Passing Completely Through a Bridge Deck (Max Width 1.0mm)

Figure 1.2.4 (e)
Shear Cracks I n R.C. Headstock

Figure 1.2.4 (f)
Bursting Cracks I n Anchorage Zone OF Post-Tensioned Girder


Figure 1.2.8 (a)
General View of Prestressed Pile

Figure 1.2.8 (b)
Water Wash I ncluding Aggregate Particles Causing

Figure 1.4.1 (a)
Fungal Fruiting Body And Decay Of Girder

Figure 1.4.1 (b)
Rot Pocket I n Girder


Figure 1.4.2 (a)
Termite Damage in Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.2 (b)
Section of Pile Showing Termite Nest in I nternal Pipe


Figure 1.4.2 (c)
Termite Galleries On Pile And Headstock


Figure 1.4.5 (a)
Splitting I n Timber Girder


Figure 1.4.5 (b)
Splitting I n Timber Pile


Figure 1.4.7 (a)
Weathered And Rotted Timber Deck Planks

Figure 1.4.7 (b)
Rotted Ends Of Deck Planks

Figure 2.3.3 (a)
Corrosion Of J oints Between Trough Sections

Figure 2.3.3 (b)
Cracking And Perforation Of Steel Troughing

Figure 2.3.5
Rotting Of Abutment Pile Below Ground Level

Bridge Asset Management BRIDGE INSPECTION MANUAL
Structures Division PART TWO
DETERIORATION MECHANISMS

Figure 2.4.1 (a)
Scour of Stream Bed and Significant Loss of Material Around Pier Pilecap and Piles

Figure 2.4.1 (b)
Localised Scour of Stream Bed and Debris Build-Up Around Pier Piles

Structures Division PART TWO
DETERIORATION MECHANISMS

Figure 2.6.2 (a)
General View of Masonry Pipe Culvert, Showing Efflorescence and
Spalling of Base Brickwork

Figure 2.6.2 (b)
View of Efflorescence and Staining due to Chemical Leaching of Mortar

PART THREE
Procedures

Structures Division PART THREE - PROCEDURES J une 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page Nos

1.0 General..........................................................................................................3.3
1.1 Levels of I nspection..........................................................................3.3
1.2 Safety.................................................................................................3.3
1.3 Bridge Component Designation......................................................3.4
1.4 Advice Notes.....................................................................................3.5

2.0 Level 1 - Routine Maintenance I nspections...............................................3.6
2.1 Purpose..............................................................................................3.6
2.2 Scope..................................................................................................3.6
2.3 Frequency of I nspections.................................................................3.6
2.4 Extent of I nspections........................................................................3.6
2.5 I nspector Accreditation...................................................................3.7
2.6 I nspection Procedure.......................................................................3.7
2.6.1 Preparation for I nspection..................................................3.7
2.6.2 I nspection..............................................................................3.7
2.7 Data Recording...............................................................................3.10

3.0 Level 2 - Bridge Condition I nspections....................................................3.12
3.1 Purpose............................................................................................3.12
3.2 Scope of the I nspection..................................................................3.12
3.5.1 Preparation for I nspection................................................3.14
3.5.2 I nspection............................................................................3.15
3.6 Data Recording...............................................................................3.16
3.7 Data Transfer .................................................................................3.16
3.8 Condition Rating............................................................................3.17
3.8.1 General................................................................................3.17
3.8.2 Compilation of the Component I nventory.......................3.17
3.8.3 Condition State Criteria....................................................3.19
3.8.4 Component Condition Assessment...................................3.19
3.8.5 Measurement......................................................................3.20
3.8.6 Structure Condition Assessment ......................................3.22
3.8.7 Exposure Classifications....................................................3.22
3.9 I nventory Data...............................................................................3.23
3.10 Timber Drilling Survey.................................................................3.24
3.11 Measurement of Scour...................................................................3.25


4.0 Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering I nspection............................3.26
4.1 Purpose............................................................................................3.26
4.2 Scope................................................................................................3.26
4.4 Frequency.......................................................................................3.27
4.7 Data Recording in the Field..........................................................3.28
4.8 Reporting........................................................................................3.28
4.9 Load Capacity................................................................................3.29


1.0 GENERAL

1.1 Levels Of I nspection

The DMR Bridge Inspection Policy has identified the need for a systematic
programme of bridge inspections based on three levels of inspection.

The three levels of inspection are:-

(a) Routine Maintenance Inspections (Level 1) which are carried out to check the
general serviceability of the structure for road users, and may be carried out in
conjunction with routine pavement maintenance.

(b) Bridge Condition Inspections (Level 2) which are to be managed by the
District Director on a District basis to assess the condition of each structure
and its components.

(c) Detailed Engineering Inspections (Level 3) which are arranged by District
Directors through the Bridge Asset Management section of Structures
Division on a needs basis to assess the structural condition behaviour and
capacity of structures and appropriate management options.

1.2 Safety

All inspection procedures shall comply with the Workplace Health and Safety Act
(1995) and Amendment No. 162 (1996), Part 19 - Workplace Health and Safety Plans
and Workplace Inductions is of particular relevance to bridge inspection activities.
Under this amendment, an Employer is required to prepare a safety plan prior to
commencing "specified work". While investigations, inspections and maintenance
activities do not fall under the "specified work" category, Workplace Health and
Safety plans shall be prepared in order to:-

(a) reduce the risk to staff undertaking field work

(b) provide documentary evidence that the Department of Main Roads has
fulfilled its obligation as an employer under the Act.

If inspection is required from water, any vessel used for this purpose and its operation
will be required to satisfy the legal obligations of the marine Act 1988, other relevant
Acts, and associated regulations.

Where inspections are to be carried out on bridges located over or under the assets of
other Authorities, the relevant regulations and Codes of Practice relating to work on
or close to their assets must be adhered to, and where necessary, referred to in the
procedures developed for the inspection.


1.3 Bridge Component Designation

The general terminology used to label bridge components is shown in Figure 1.5.
Figures 1.6 and 1.7 show specific terminology used in the labelling of timber and
masonry bridges.

The bridge component location shall be designated by status (if modified), group,
component and standard component reference in accordance with the following
principles.

(i) Principal groups of components comprising abutments (A), piers (P), spans or
culvert cells (S) and approach roads (AP) shall be progressively numbered in
the direction of the ascending through chainage of the road. In the case of a
footbridge or overbridge carrying a local road, component groups shall be
progressively numbered from left to right, facing the direction of ascending
through chainage of the road over which the structure passes. Refer to Figure
1.2 - Appendix G for an example.

(ii) Principal components comprising wingwalls (WW), piles (P), columns (C),
girders (G), bearings(B), joints (J ), box culvert units (BC), etc. shall be
progressively numbered from left to right as viewed in the direction of
ascending chainage. For a complete listing of components, showing standard
component abbreviations and their relationship with component groups, refer
to Figure 1.0 - Standard Component Matrix

(iii) The standard component reference, as defined in Appendix C - Standard
Component Identification Guidelines, of this manual, must be assigned when
a Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspection is carried out. Where a component
observed during the inspection does not conform to one of the predefined
components its details shall be recorded on the Standard Procedure
Exceptions Report form, the component photographed and the details
forwarded to Bridge Asset Management (RS&E) for advice.

(iv) Components which form part of a modification shall be designated separately
from those of the original structure by the addition of a prefix indicating the
type of modification. For a widening, a prefix is used which indicates the
location and construction sequence of the widening as viewed in the direction
of chainage. Thus WL2 describes the second of two widenings on the left
hand side of the original structure.

Similarly for a lengthening, a prefix is used which indicates the location of the
added spans with respect to the direction of chainage. Thus L1 describes
any spans which have been added to the AP1 end of the structure, while any
spans added to the AP2 end of the structure will be described with the prefix
L2. Also note that any abutments which are modified in the course of a
lengthening will thereafter be included in the lengthening modification and
removed from the original component listing.

In addition, if a new deck has been constructed, the components involved shall
be attributed the Re prefix to identify this modification. Similarly, to other
modifications, the overall condition of this group of components shall be rated
independently of the original structure.
In the event of the structure being raised the Ra prefix shall be attributed to
those components involved. The overall condition of this group of
components shall be rated independently of the original structure.

In the event that spans are removed from a structure then the shortening prefix
"S" shall be used to describe substructure and approach groups modified by
the works. As before, "S1" and "S2" denote modifications at the "AP1" and
"AP2" ends respectively. Only components modified by the works shall be
assigned the "S" prefix. Naturally, any groups and components removed as
part of the works shall be deleted from the inspection inventory.

(v) The relationships between the various groups and elements are summarised in
Table 1.3 - Appendix B and illustrated in Figures 1.3 and 1.4.

(vi) In some instances, inspectors may encounter a structure with a configuration
that does not fit within the terminology described previously. Guidance on the
designation of bridge components for complex or non-standard structures has
been provided in Appendix G, but it is generally recommended that Bridge
Asset Management be contacted to provide advice on component breakdown
of the structure and other related issues.

1.3 Advice Notes

Bridge Asset Management have developed an Advice Notes system, allowing the
distribution of revised and new information to bridge inspectors without the
requirement of a formal update to the Bridge Inspection Manual. Formal amendments
to the Manual incorporating new Advice Notes shall be issued periodically.

These Advice Notes contain important information which is directly related to the use
of the Manual, and it is crucial that inspectors be familiar with current updates.
Inspectors who do not currently receive notification via e-mail of the release of new
Advice Notes should contact Bridge Asset Management and request to be included in
the Advice Notes register.

For further information on distribution and requirements, refer to Appendix H
Advice Notes.


2.0 LEVEL 1 - ROUTI NE MAI NTENANCE I NSPECTI ON

2.1 Purpose

To check the general serviceability of the structure, particularly for the safety of road
users, and identify any emerging problems.

Level 1 inspections may be carried out in conjunction with routine maintenance of the
structure and the adjacent pavement.

2.2 Scope

Inspection of approaches, waterway, deck/footway, substructure, superstructure and
attached services to assess and report any significant visible signs of distress or
unusual behaviour, including active scours or deck joint movements.
Recommendation of an exceptional "Bridge Condition" or a "Detailed Structural
Engineerng" inspection if warranted by observed distress or unusual behaviour of
structure.
Identify maintenance work requirements that fall outside the expertise and/or
available material and equipment resources at hand.
Verification of the Structural Inventory data held in the BIS as part of the initial
inspection and as required thereafter (standard forms can be produced from the BIS
for this purpose).
Identification of structures with components that are in permanent standing water.

2.3 Frequency Of I nspections

Routine Maintenance Inspections shall be carried out at the frequency specified in
Table 1.5 of Part One, or as stipulated in a specific Structure Management Plan as
per the guidelines in Appendix F.

2.4 Extent Of I nspections

The Routine Maintenance Inspection is a visual inspection which may be carried out
in conjunction with routine maintenance of the structure and adjacent pavement and
shall cover components above ground and water level listed in the procedure
checklist. Components that need not be inspected for level 1 inspections are:-

(i) Inside Box Girders.
(ii) Areas behind Abutments that are inaccessible.
(iii) Piles and Foundations below ground or water level.
(iv) Piers and Pier Crossheads located in permanent water.
(v) Concrete or steel beams located in spans over permanent water.

These components will be inspected as part of a level 2 or level 3 inspection.

However, a visual assessment of Items (iv) and (v) should be made using binoculars
where practical.


2.5 I nspector Accreditation

Inspections shall be conducted by personnel who have extensive practical experience
in road and bridge routine maintenance. They shall be competent to judge the visual
condition of structures and the road approaches for visual defects. Accreditation
requirements for Level 1 bridge inspectors are detailed in Appendix E.

2.6 I nspection Procedure

2.6.1 Preparation for I nspection

Prior to commencing site inspections, the inspector shall ensure that he has all the
relevant documentation, inspection equipment and safety equipment to carry out the
inspection. Equipment requirements shall be restricted to that which would be carried
on a standard road patrol maintenance vehicle.

The following documentation is required on site for this level of inspection:

Bridge Inspection Manual
Level 1 Inspection Forms
Workplace Health and Safety Plan.
Structural Inventory Verification Forms from BIS, if required

All staff involved in routine bridge inspections must be familiar with this
documentation and their responsibilities under the Workplace Health and Safety Act.

The safety plans for the bridges to be inspected should be reviewed by the
maintenance crew and the major hazards clearly identified prior to the
commencement of the inspection.

While it is acknowledged that traffic control procedures may be covered under
generic road maintenance safety plans, the hazard of operating within the lateral
confines imposed by bridge barriers is significantly different to hazard posed whilst
operating on the "open" road.

Safety equipment shall include signage for traffic management purposes and, where
applicable, other safety equipment relevant to routine maintenance activities.

2.6.2 I nspection

The Site inspection may be carried out in conjunction with Routine Maintenance
activities.

When the Inspection is carried out as part of Routine Maintenance activities, the
Maintenance Contractor shall attend and rectify items requiring attention within the
scope and limitations specified in this procedure for plant, equipment and expertise.
Any major defects identified in the course of this inspection must be photographed
and / or sketched and recorded on the Photos and Sketches Record (B1/2).

At the site, the Inspector shall proceed in a systematic manner to check the following
inspection items:-

Approaches

Signs and delineation for completeness, damage, cleanliness, orientation,
visibility to road user and loose and missing bolts;

Road approach running surfaces for settlement, depressions, cracking and
other deterioration;

Road drainage for accumulations of debris and growth inside drains, channels,
inlet and outlet pits and sumps which may obstruct free drainage and cause
ponding;

Road and bridge drainage pits and other structures for leakage;

Road and bridge drainage for scour, especially at road drainage offlets
adjacent to abutments, outlets to culverts and off deck drainage channels.

Bridge Surface

Bridge bituminous surface for cracking and other deterioration;

Footway (if any) for unevenness;

Bridge drainage for accumulations of debris on the deck, in gutters, scuppers
and drains which may obstruct free drainage and cause ponding;

Deck joints for leakage and loose, missing and damaged bolts and
components, dirt or objects which may impede free movement and proper
functioning or deterioration of nosings;

Barriers for correct alignment and damaged posts and rails;

Delineators for completeness, damage, cleanliness, orientation and visibility to
road user;

Barriers for loose and missing bolts and clamps, missing and damaged spacer
blocks, corrosion, correct rail height and alignment. The approach barrier and
bridge barrier should preferably be interconnected. If not note in "Comments"
section of report form;

Embankments and Waterways

Embankments for erosion and scour;

Slope protection (beaching) for damage and undermining by scour or
embankment;


Clear vegetation from within 2.0m of abutments and wingwalls. Waterway
under bridge for accumulations of debris, vegetation growth and silt and for
scour under and within 5 metres upstream or downstream of bridge;

Substructure

Abutments, piers and wingwalls for looseness and major damage such as
cracking, splitting, distortion and excessive movement, particularly of recent
origin;

Masonry elements for growth in joints between blocks and cracking in
masonry;

Weepholes in abutments and retaining walls for free drainage.

Pier and abutment crossheads and bearing pedestals and substructure drains for
accumulations of dirt and debris which may obstruct free drainage and cause
ponding or restrict bearing movement;

Bridge bearings supporting beams for movement of bearing from under beam
or visual damage to the bearing;

Superstructure

Deck, girders and bearings for obvious defects such as spalling, cracking,
staining, dampness, corrosion and excessive vibration particularly of recent
origin (changes must be reported so detailed or special inspection can be
made);

Iron and steel elements for noticeable build up of deposits of aggressive salts,
silt, debris and bird or bat droppings;

Ventholes in superstructures which prevent flotation of structures which are
subject to inundation by floodwater, for accumulation of dirt or debris which
may effectively seal the vents;

Timber Bridges

Timber members for termite activity, rotting, marine borer and other insect
attack;

Timber members for excessive member deflections;

Timber girders and corbels for excessive sniping;

Loose joints and fasteners;

Propping for tightness of wedges in deck cambering or temporary works;


Miscellaneous

Roadway under bridge for delineation, barriers and road drainage;

Bridge generally for graffiti, damage to installed services and encroaching
vegetation and fire hazards;

Location, extent and condition of services attached to, or in close proximity to,
the bridge.

2.7 Data Recording

All data obtained from the inspection shall be recorded on the Routine Maintenance
I nspection Report (B1/1). This form has been designed to meet the following
objectives.

Assist the inspectors carry out and record an inspection within the scope of
and to the extent required for this level of inspection.

Record the defects and;

a) where the inspection is being conducted in conjunction with routine
maintenance and rectification of the defect is covered by the RMPC
and is within the capabilities and resources available on the patrol
vehicle, record the associated remedial action, or;

b) where the inspection is not being conducted in conjunction with
routine maintenance or rectification of the defect is outside the scope
of the RMPC or the capabilities and resources available on the patrol
vehicle, nominate the required remedial action.

Nominate the need for monitoring based on concerns regarding the visually
assessed condition of the bridge.

Nominate the need for a higher level of inspection based on concerns
regarding the visually assessed condition of the bridge.

Allow the inspector to expand on issues arising from the checklist items in
the comment boxes.

Identify those structures with components that are in permanent standing
water (by ticking Permanent Standing Water box)

The work order number should be recorded where appropriate, permitting the
allocation and tracking of inspection expenditure to a particular structure. Details of
maintenance activities that are carried out, or are scheduled to be carried out on the
structure should be recorded on the Structure Maintenance Schedule (M1). This
identifies the type, nature and cost of any maintenance work carried out and the
maintenance problem areas in a particular structure.


It is intended that an entire inspection be carried out within the scope and to the extent
specified for this level of inspection and that all the required data fields in the Routine
Inspection Report Form are completed. If a partial inspection is effected then the
inspector must record those items that could not be inspected together with the
reasons for their omission.

In addition to the completion of the Routine Inspection Report the inspector should
photograph and / or sketch any major defects and record the relevant details on the
Photos and Sketches Record (B1/2)

The completed report shall be forwarded to the District Office within 30 working
days of the inspection, and the data should be entered in the Bridge Information
System, including:-

Date of inspection
Name of inspector
Deficiencies flagged by Inspector and required actions
Due date of next Routine Maintenance Inspection
Programmed date for an extraordinary Bridge Condition or Detailed Structural
Engineering Inspection if nominated.
Any limits on the extent of the inspection.

In addition, the inspector shall ascertain whether or not a Structural Inventory
Verification Form has been completed for the structure. If not, the inspector shall
forward a completed form, along with the inspection, to the District office within 30
working days of the Level 1 inspection.


3.0 LEVEL 2 - BRI DGE CONDI TI ON I NSPECTI ONS

3.1 Purpose

The purpose of this level of inspection is to rate the current condition of a structure.
This data will be utilised as a basis for:-

Identifying and quantifying structural defects in the structure or its individual
components, and determining maintenance needs and/or other actions;

Estimating budget requirements arising from the maintenance, rehabilitation or
replacement needs determined from the condition inspection.

Determining the residual life of the structure and appropriate replacement strategy.

Assessing the current load carrying capacity.

Re-rating the structure and components after significant maintenance or remedial
works have been carried out.

When sufficient cycles of data have been collected this may be used as a basis for
modelling and forecasting future changes in condition. In addition the data could be
used to assess the effectiveness of maintenance and repair strategies.

3.2 Scope of the I nspection

The scope of the Bridge Condition Inspection will include:

Compilation of an inspection inventory. In compiling the inventory, the bridge
component matrix shown in Figure 1.0 should be referred to. The matrix lists the
codes to be used to identify the bridge components. It also shows the relationship
between the component groups and the components.

Visually inspecting the bridge components to assess their condition using a standard
condition rating system as specified herein.

Reporting the condition and extent over which it applies, of each bridge component.

Providing a general condition rating for the structure as a whole.

Identifying bridges and/or components which warrant a Detailed Structural
Engineering Inspection because of a rapid change in structural condition or
deterioration of critical structural components to Condition Rating 4.

Identifying components which require closer condition monitoring and observation at
the next inspection because they have deteriorated to Condition Rating 3, show rapid
deterioration or other features which warrant reporting.


Identifying supplementary testing as appropriate in accordance with the guidelines of
this manual.

Identifying the exposure classification in the immediate proximity of each bridge
component.

A photographic record of the bridge and any deficient or non-standard components
identified.

Identifying, and quantifying selected components for Bridge Inventory records.

Identifying maintenance requirements and/or deficient maintenance practices.

Verification of the Design Inventory held in the BIS (standard forms can be
produced from the BIS for this purpose). Prior to the inspection, the inspector shall
ascertain whether or not a Design Inventory Verification Form has been completed
for the structure. If not, the inspector shall forward a completed form, along with the
inspection, to the District office within 30 working days of the Level 2 inspection.

As these inspections may be carried out with the use of an Under Bridge Inspection
Unit (UBIU), it is also recommended that on such occasions District personnel take
advantage of the availability of the UBIU and conduct routine maintenance on those
components not normally accessible, such as bearings.


Inspections shall be conducted by trained personnel who also have extensive
experience in the inspection, construction, design, maintenance or repair of road
structures. They shall have extensive practical experience, and be competent to judge
the condition of structures and the importance of visual defects. These inspectors
need not be qualified professional bridge engineers, but should have the backing of
such a person to aid in decision making or interpreting visual defects or unusual
structural action. These inspectors must attain accreditation through attending a Level
2 Training Course for Bridge Inspectors although partial exemption may be granted to
suitably experienced inspectors. In addition, it is a requirement that each inspector
must undertake 5 bridge inspections and submit these to Bridge Asset Management to
enable a desktop review to be carried out. In most cases as part of the assessment
process, this will then be backed up by a field audit, in the form of a Level 3
inspection, to ensure compliance with the Bridge Inspection Manual reporting
requirements. The inspector accreditation appraisal procedure and appraisal forms
have been included as Appendix E

3.4 Extent of I nspection

The Bridge Condition Inspection is to be a visual inspection only and shall cover all
components of the bridge above ground and water level. Additionally, if designated
as being an underwater inspection, then those components below water level shall
also be inspected, with the inspection typically being conducted by suitably qualified
divers, who shall be briefed by the inspector as to what to look for, and shall also be

provided with a proforma of the components to be inspected. The individual
components of the bridge shall be inspected from within 3m of any surface of the
component, or equivalent using telescopic equipment. The surface of the component
shall be in good natural or artificial light sufficient to observe fine cracks in concrete.

All bearings at the abutments and piers shall be inspected, and bearings from at least
one pier shall be inspected at eye level.

Components that need not be inspected for Level 2 inspections are:-

(i) Inside box girders.

(ii) In areas behind abutments that are inaccessible.

(iii) Piles and foundations below ground or water, unless the inspection has been
designated as an underwater inspection.

These components will be inspected as part of a Detailed Engineering Inspection.

The percentage of component in each condition state shall be based on the total
component that can be observed. Where it is estimated that only 25% or less of the
component is visible this fact shall be recorded on the Standard Procedure Exceptions
Report Form, stating the reason why it cannot be fully observed. Such items shall still
be assigned a condition state, which shall be based on the visible portion of the
component.

Photographs shall be taken at the site of all components with condition rating 4, and
of those components that do not fall within the defined component classification.
Photographs shall be taken within 3m of the surface of the component or equivalent
using a telephoto lens. In addition, a photographic record of the bridge is required,
and shall be undertaken in accordance with the guidelines in Section 3.9. In the case
where a photograph does not provide sufficient detail of a defect, a detailed sketch
should be produced which shows the defect and all relevant dimensions.

Inspection of components that are part of identified widenings shall be assessed and
recorded separately to those of the original bridge. Each widening shall be recorded
separately and designated as left or right as viewed from the start of the bridge. The
start of the bridge is defined as the end of the bridge closer to the start of the road
gazettal. Components which are part of other identified modification types (ie.
lengthenings) are to be assessed and recorded with the original structure, but are to be
located with the correct modification classification.


3.5.1 Preparation for I nspection

Prior to commencing inspections the inspector shall ensure that he has all relevant
documentation, inspection equipment and safety equipment and has made the
appropriate arrangements with the relevant road, railway or other authorities for

temporary access as required to carry out the inspection. Safety plans must be
prepared and approved.

3.5.2 I nspection

At the bridge site the inspector shall carry out the inspection in a systematic manner
starting at the deck surface and approaches, proceeding from the start of the bridge
down through the superstructure and substructure to the waterway.

The inspector shall complete the following activities in accordance with this
procedure and the guidelines given in:

Appendix C: Standard Component Identification Guidelines
Appendix D: Standard Component Condition State Guidelines

The results of inspection shall be recorded on the appropriate Inspection Report form
from Appendix A.

(i) Compile an inspection component inventory, with attendant exposure
classifications, by designated group, component and unique reference number
on the Condition I nspection Report (B2/1 and B2/2) form.

(ii) Inspect and assess the condition of each standard component identified above
and the extent of the component to which the rating applies.

(iii) Assess the overall condition of the bridge and any widenings in accordance
with Section 3.8.

(iv) Record separately on the Defective Components Report (B2/3) all those
components that are in:

(a) Condition State 3 and require monitoring, further observation at the
next programmed inspection, urgent remedial action or a Detailed
Structural Engineering Inspection.

(b) Condition State 4 or have shown a rapid rate of deterioration since the
last inspection and require urgent remedial action and/or a Detailed
Structural Engineering Inspection.

The inspector is required to give a brief description of the condition and the
approximate quantity of the component affected. A photograph and/or sketch of
all condition 4 defects is also required. Each photograph and sketch is to be
given a reference number which should be recorded on the form.

(v) Record separately on the Standard Procedure Exceptions Report (B2/4) form.

(a) Components that could not be defined using the standard methodology.
A photograph of the non-standard components is also required. Each
photograph is to be given a reference number which should be stated
on the form.

(b) Components that could not be inspected. Reasons must be stated for
these omissions.

(c) Components where less than 25% is accessible. The exposed
portion must still be rated on the "Bridge Condition Inspection Report".

(d) Any other observation or recommendation not covered by the other
forms

(vi) Record the relevant photographic and sketch details, including reference
numbers, locations and descriptions on the Photographic and Sketches Record
(B2/6) reports in accordance with the guidelines given in Section 3.4.

(vii) Record the results of the underwater inspection, when effected, on the forms
previously described.

(viii) Record the results of the timber drilling survey on the Timber Drilling Survey
Report (B2/5).

(ix) Record the results of the soundings on the Bridge Scour Soundings Report
(B2/7).

A sample of a completed B2/7 form may be found in Advice Note 37. Completed
samples of all other standard forms have been included in Appendix A.

3.6 Data Recording

All information obtained from the site inspection shall be recorded on the following
forms:

(i) Bridge Condition Inspection Report (B2/1 and B2/2)
(ii) Defective Components Report (B2/3)
(iii) Standard Procedure Exceptions Report (B2/4)
(iv) Photographs and Sketches Record (B2/6)
(v) Timber Drilling Survey Report (B2/5)
(vi) Bridge Scour Soundings Report (B2/7)
(vii) Design Inventory Verification Forms from BIS (if required)
(viii) Structure Maintenance Schedule (M1) (if required)

It is intended that each bridge inspection should be carried out to the extent specified
for this level of inspection and all relevant data fields in these forms should be
completed.

3.7 Data Transfer

All data recorded at the bridge site shall be forwarded to the District Office within 30
working days of the inspection. This shall include all photographic records and
general descriptive information recorded on the relevant inspection forms.

The relevant data shall be downloaded from a data capture tool or entered manually in
the Bridge Information System (BIS) within 30 working days of the inspection.
Photographs may be taken using a normal zoom camera and flash and scanned at a

minimum of 100 dots per inch. Alternatively digital images generated by an
approved digital camera may be downloaded. Images shall be saved in the J PG file
format, and shall be no bigger than 150 kB.

The District data control officer shall ensure that the inventory and condition data are
in the correct format and are compatible with existing entries. This data and any
recommended actions including component inventory amendments and the need for a
Detailed Structural Engineering Inspection or maintenance action shall be entered in
the BIS.

Any structurally significant component which has been recorded on the "Defective
Components Report" form must be flagged on the Bridge Information System as a
deficiency, and must remain as such until it has been inspected by a structural
engineer and/or rectified.

In addition, the inspector shall ascertain whether or not a Design Inventory
Verification Form has been completed for the structure. If not, the inspector shall
forward a completed form, along with the inspection, to the District office within 30
working days of the inspection.

3.8 Condition Rating

3.8.1 General

A fundamental requirement of a systematic inspection procedure, that produces
consistent results, is the standardisation and rationalisation of the following variables.

(i) Components that comprise the bridge
(ii) Condition state descriptions, or level of deterioration pertaining to those
components.
(iii) Classification of the degree of aggressiveness of the environment affecting the
rate of deterioration of the component

3.8.2 Compilation of the Component I nventory

The inspector is required to compile a component inspection inventory by designated
status, group, component and unique component reference on the Bridge Condition
Inspection Report form.

The standard bridge components identified to date have been defined in Table 1.3 and
a series of figures representing the majority of structures likely to be encountered has
been included in Appendix C - Standard Component Identification Guidelines to
assist the inspector identify the standard components where necessary.

The inspection components are further divided into five material types comprising
"steel", "precast concrete", "cast-insitu concrete", "timber" and "other". The latter
comprises brickwork, masonry and aluminium while the steel grouping includes cast
and wrought iron members.

Precast concrete members can generally be distinguished from cast-insitu concrete by
the smooth, uniform and dense surface and are typically whiter in colour.

Additionally, when compiling the component inventory for a bridge structure,
roadway items such as surfacing, kerbs, joints and bridge railing are typically defined
per span. With a culvert structure this approach is unfeasible due to the significantly
shorter span lengths and lack of definitive joints in the deck. For this reason, these
components shall be defined per culvert structure and recorded under the Span 1
group, with the corresponding quantities taken from the full length of the structure.
Approach items such as guardrail are not affected by this, and are still to be defined
separately for both approaches.

In some instances, inspectors may encounter a structure with a configuration that does
not fit within the terminology of the Manual. Guidance on the designation of bridge
components for complex or non-standard structures has been provided in Appendix
G, but it is generally recommended that Bridge Asset Management be contacted to
provide advice on component breakdown of the structure and other related issues.


3.8.3 Condition State Criteria

The inspector shall make an assessment of the condition:-

Each standard component
The structure as a whole
Any modification.

The condition ratings have been developed to reflect the discernible stages of
deterioration as tabulated below.

Condition
State
Subjective
Rating
Description
1 GOOD
("as new")
Free of defects with little or no deterioration evident
2 FAIR Free of defects affecting structural performance, integrity and
durability. Deterioration of a minor nature in the protective
coating and/or parent material is evident.
3 POOR
(monitoring
required)
Defects affecting the durability/serviceability which may
require monitoring and/or remedial action or inspection by a
structural engineer. Component or element shows marked
and advancing deterioration including loss of protective
coating and minor loss of section from the parent material is
evident. Intervention is normally required.
4 VERY POOR
(Remedial
Action
Required)
Defects affecting the performance and structural integrity
which require immediate intervention including an inspection
by a structural engineer, if principal components are affected.
Component or element shows advanced deterioration, loss of
section from the parent material, signs of overstressing or
evidence that it is acting differently to its intended design
mode or function.
5 UNSAFE
(Immediate
Remedial
Action
Required)
This state is only intended to apply to the "whole structure"
rating. Structural integrity is severely compromised and the
structure must be taken out of service until a structural
engineer has inspected the structure and recommended the
required remedial action.

3.8.4 Component Condition Assessment

The inspector shall make an assessment of the condition of each standard element and
the extent over which that condition applies.

The inspector shall compare the defects observed on the face of the component with
the "Standard Component Condition State Guidelines" which comprise Appendix D
of this manual. These descriptions cannot possibly cover every situation and the
inspector is expected to exercise judgement based on his knowledge and experience
and the guidelines given in section 3.8.3 to identify the appropriate condition state
applying to each component viewed in the field.


Establishing the mechanism responsible for cracking in concrete elements is crucial to
determining the severity of the defect and the corresponding condition of the element.
Cracks due to structural and non-structural mechanisms have been differentiated
accordingly in the Condition State guidelines in Appendix D. If the inspector is
unable to determine the mechanism responsible for or not completely confident as to
the cause of the crack, then they are to assume the most severe case.

3.8.5 Measurement

The proportion of the component in each condition state shall be determined on the
basis of the total visible portion of that component. That is, the portions in each
condition state (1, 2, 3 and 4) must add up to the total quantity of that element
observed at the site.

Each element to be assessed is quantified using one of the following units of
measurement.

(i) Number of units making up the element - Each (ea)
(ii) Length of element - Lineal metres (Lin m)
(iii) Area of element - Square metres (m
2
)

The unit of measurement to be used for each of the standard components and
associated materials has been indicated in Table 1.3.

In assessing the relative proportions of the component in the various condition states
the inspector should first determine the worst condition affecting the component and
its extent then progress through to the best condition pertaining to that component.

In addition, the inspector is required to expand the condition assessments determined
above by entering additional information in the comments box of the "Bridge
Condition Inspection Report Form". Information to be supplied includes:

Crack widths, extent and location. CW 0.3/L0.3/G1 midspan soffit denotes a
0.3mm wide crack, 0.3m long in the soffit of girder 1 at midspan. Where a
number of cracks are present in a single element, this information is best
shown in a detailed sketch.

The area, depth and location of any spalling or loss of concrete cover material.

The length and condition of any exposed reinforcement.

Residual dimensions of corroded or spalled sections.

Lack of connection of guardrail to bridge.

Presence of and rate of change of scour depths.

Shear deflection or travel on expansion bearings.

Magnitude of the forward movement of the top of retaining walls/abutments.

Depth of subsidence behind abutments.

Reference of sketches and/or photographs which detail the magnitude, extent
and location of defects.

Any component which is found to have defects that could compromise the strength or
stability of the component, or the structure as a whole, must be rated as condition 4
over the whole of the component. In this event, the defective component must be
recorded on the Bridge Information System. Immediate remedial action shall be
undertaken for this level of defect in all structures. If further advice is required, either
a Detailed Structural Inspection shall be commissioned, or sufficient information shall
be sent to Bridge Asset Management section to enable them to conduct a desk-top
assessment of the component or structure.

Typical defects of this nature include:-

Fresh scour holes in excess of 4 metres deep at piled foundations or any scour
below base of spread footing foundations.

Any shear cracks in concrete girders or headstocks.

Flexural cracks in excess of 0.6mm wide in concrete members.

Impact damage to concrete girders which has resulted in exposed
reinforcement or prestressing strands.

Visible settlement or rotation of substructure elements.

Displaced bearings.

Pipe rot in timber girders exceeding 70% of the diameter at midspan and/or
50% of the diameter at the supports.

Pipe rot exceeding 50% of the diameter of timber piles or corbels.

Edge areas of rot in excess of 20% of the cross-sectional area of timber
headstocks, or piping rot with a diameter in excess of 90mm.

Snipes in timber girders with a depth exceeding 30% of the diameter of the
girder, or snipes in a timber corbel with a depth exceeding 25% of the diameter
of the corbel.

10% loss of section due to corrosion in steel members, fasteners,
reinforcement or prestressing tendons at critical sections.

Cracking in welds between plates or loss of rivets or bolts (or their
effectiveness) in steel connections.


3.8.6 Structure Condition Assessment

When the inspection of the components has been completed, the inspector shall make
an assessment of the overall condition of the structure based on observations made at
the site in accordance with the condition rating descriptions tabulated in section 3.8.3.
The inspector is expected to exercise judgement based on his knowledge and
experience to determine the appropriate condition state.

The structure rating shall primarily be based on the condition of the principal
structural members such as girders, headstocks, columns, piles and foundations. Each
component type has been assigned a Significance Rating from 1-4, with a rating of 4
denoting a principal structural member, and a rating of 1 denoting those components
that are non-critical structural members. Refer to Figure 1.0 for a complete listing of
Significance Ratings for all standard components. If more than 25% of any principal
component (Significance Rating 4) in any component group are rated as being in
Condition State 4, then the structure must be given an overall rating of Condition
State 4.

A brief description of the defective members shall be recorded in the comments field.
In addition the inspector should also indicate the urgency of any required action.
Significant defects found in non-critical structural members which expose the road
user to risk and require urgent attention should be noted in the comments field. For
example, defective guardrail and connections to the bridge, damaged or defective
bridge railing or loose and insecure assembly joints.

Separate ratings for the original structure and any other modifications, comprising
widenings, lengthenings, raising or redecking, are required as the construction types
and respective conditions are often substantially different.

The results of these assessments shall be recorded on the Bridge Condition Inspection
Report Form.

3.8.7 Exposure Classifications

The exposure classification is a measure of the degree of aggressiveness of the local
environment in which the component is situated. If the actual exposure classification
is known, as opposed to that assumed in the design, it will assist the manager of the
bridge asset assess the rate of deterioration and/or the residual life of the component
or indeed the bridge.

At the design stage, broad exposure classifications are considered in order to
determine and specify the type and quality of materials, protective coating system
requirements or amount of cover to the reinforcement and prestressing strands.
However, if the quality or integrity of the materials or their protective coatings or
cover are compromised then vulnerable components will become exposed to the local
environment. The aggressiveness of that environment will affect the rate of
deterioration and hence influence the time for repair, rehabilitation or replacement of
the component or the bridge.

Four exposure classifications which approximate those specified for concrete in the
Austroads Bridge Design Code have been adopted as tabulated below.

EXPOSURE CLASSI FI CATI ON
RATI NG ENVI RONMENT
LOCATI ON OF COMPONENT
1 Relatively Benign Interior of most structures and components
above ground on structures located more
than 50km from the coast.
2 Mildly Aggressive Components above ground in structures
located between 1km and 50km from the
coast or where components are in contact
with fresh water or soil.
3 Aggressive Components above ground within 1 km of
the coast not subjected to direct salt spray
(ie. components in very damp
environments such as the wet tropics or
rainforest areas), and all components
within 3m of permanent standing water.
4 Most Aggressive Components in tidal or splash zones or
those subject to direct salt spray or that are
in contact with aggressive, contaminated
or salt rich soils*.

* The assessment of the aggressiveness of the soil cannot be done accurately without
testing but generally can be assumed to be mildly-aggressive unless in salt prone areas,
marshes, mangroves, foul smelling soils, land fills or industrial areas. Removal of
material around the structure may reveal deterioration indicative of aggressive soils.

3.9 I nventory Data

The inspector is required to verify the current Design Inventory data held in the
BIS. If the information has not been verified, the inspector is to complete a Design
Inventory Verification Form as part of the Level 2 inspection and shall submit it to
the District office along with the completed inspection. Standard forms can be
produced from the BIS for this purpose.

The inspector is required to prepare a photographic record of each structure. The
purpose of this exercise is to:

Maintain a chronological photographic record of the condition of the structure,
any widenings and the waterway.

Provide the required structure images for the Bridge Information System.

The information required is as follows:-

(a) Photographic Record

(i) One general photograph from top of deck showing alignment, width,
kerbs and barriers.


(ii) One photograph from side of bridge showing piers, abutments and
waterway or roadway.

(iii) Representative photographs of the main superstructure components (ie
girders), from underneath or side of the structure, used in:-

(a) The original structure.

(b) Any modifications (ie. widenings, lengthenings, etc.)

These photographs are in addition to those required to show the Condition Rating 4
defects.

3.10 Timber Drilling Survey

The purpose of the survey is to determine the residual amount of sound timber in a
member, normally ascertained by using a drill equipped with a 12-16mm diameter bit
to bore holes in timber components at critical and suspect locations. The extent and
severity of any piping or rot within the component is assessed by the inspector based
on the resistance to drilling as "felt", and is supplemented by examination of wood
shavings. This method relies on the experience and subjective judgement of the
inspector and provides information only at the selected drill location.

Drilling is carried out at the locations of maximum stress and/or for those areas most
susceptible to decay, namely:

midspan and end of girders.
ends of corbels.
ends of headstocks.
base and top of end posts.
ground level, normal water level or around connections in piles.
around bolted connections in general.

Obviously, those areas where maximum stress coincides with areas susceptible to rot,
such as piles at ground level, are particularly critical.

However, it should be noted that the test holes can expose the member to more rapid
decay and regular drilling can result in significant strength reduction, even if no decay
is found. Thus the frequency and extent of test drilling should be judiciously
controlled to minimise the risk of weakening the members through excessive loss of
section or accelerated deterioration.

Traditionally, it has been found that test holes drilled horizontally with a 12mm drill
bit cause the least damage to a member. However, the non-destructive and quasi-non-
destructive testing methods detailed in Advice Note No. 24 are preferred.

All test holes shall be plugged with wooden dowels, which have been treated with an
approved preservative, to reduce the potential for accelerated deterioration following
the survey.


The details and results of the testing shall be recorded on the Timber Drilling Survey
Report form. Inspectors shall enter the drilling records of all members found to have
pipes or rot on Form B2/5 however records of drilling in sound timber is at the
inspector's discretion. Normally a note to the effect that the remaining timbers have
been "proved" to be sound will be sufficient.

Additional requirements for the drilling of timber members have been detailed in
Section 2 of Advice Note 24. Advice Notes 5, 23 and 34 also cover various aspects
of the detailing and rating of defects in timber members, and it is crucial that
inspectors be conversant with these Advice Notes prior to inspecting timber
structures.

3.11 Measurement of Scour

Some types of scour, such as that caused by gradual degradation of the stream bed
over a period of years or a number of flood events can be difficult to identify due to
factors such as vegetation regrowth. The reliable checking of the bridge waterway for
scour progression over time can only be made by a measurement of the stream bed
level from a permanent local reference point. The following process, referred to as
sounding, shall be adopted as an integral part of a Level 2 inspection;

If the stream bed is exposed, then the sounding height from the top of the kerb or
other convenient permanent feature (such as the top of a concrete parapet) is to be
measured down to the stream bed at midspan and at either end of each span on the
upstream side of the bridge, or;
If there is standing water at a bridge site then the sounding height from the kerb or
other permanent reference feature on the bridge superstructure is to be measured
down to the water surface, and then down to the stream bed at midspan and at
either end of each span on the upstream side of the bridge.
Where localised scour holes are identified, the inspector shall take stream bed
measurements at 1.0m intervals in the vicinity of the area in which the local scour
was identified. Measurements shall be taken until the extent of the localised scour
has been determined.

Measurements shall be taken using a standard measuring tape with a small weight
fastened to the end. Results of the soundings shall be recorded on the Bridge Scour
Sounding Report form. The locations from which the soundings are measured shall
be recorded on the form, with the precise locations marked discreetly on the structure,
if possible. Inspectors shall endeavour to take measurements from the same locations
at future inspections.

After the first round of soundings has been completed, inspectors shall ensure that
they document stream bed sounding depths from the previous inspection for
comparison with readings obtained during the current inspection.

Refer to Advice Note No. 37 for detailed examples of the process.


4.0 LEVEL 3 - DETAI LED STRUCTURAL ENGI NEERI NG I NSPECTI ON

4.1 Purpose

An extensive inspection carried out by a structural engineer, which may include
physical testing and/or structural analysis, to assess:-

current structural condition, behaviour and capacity;

rate of deterioration and residual life expectancy;

asset management strategies.

4.2 Scope

The scope of the detailed structural engineering inspection will include:-

Review of any previous inspection and testing reports.

Review of traffic counts, traffic studies, culway or WIM records and planning
reports which include the structure;

Review of environmental factors (REF's) including contaminated site records;

Determination and programming of equipment and resources required for the
inspection (in conjunction with the District) including preparation of a safety
plan;

Detailed inspection of all relevant bridge components including such
measurements, testing and analyses as necessary to supplement the visual
inspection. A Level 2 - Bridge Condition inspection shall also be carried out.

Determination of material properties and structural behaviour.

Identification of components which are limiting the performance of the
structure due to their current condition and capacity or are likely to deteriorate
to such a level within the next five years.

Identification of the probable causes and projected rate of deterioration and the
effects of continued deterioration on the performance, durability and residual
life of the structure.

Identification of factors which will influence the dynamic load allowance to be
used in Load Rating. These factors include the geometry and quality of the
bridge approaches, surface discontinuities at deck joints and the dynamic
response of the bridge.

Examination of the hydraulic performance of the structure including any signs
of siltation, scour, debris impact or build-up, bank or embankment erosion and
tree and vegetation encroachment.


Level 3 inspections shall be conducted by a Professional Engineer who has corporate
membership of the Institution of Engineers Australia, or recognised equivalent, with
extensive and current bridge design and construction experience (minimum of 5
years).

Detailed Structural Engineering inspections must be arranged through the Principal
Engineer (Bridge Asset Management) of Structures Division.

4.4 Frequency

A Level 3 - Detailed Structural Engineering Inspection will be carried out under one
of the following circumstances:-

If recommended in a Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspection Report as a
consequence of serious defects identified by the inspector.

If a load capacity assessment is required, and previous Level 2 inspections do
not contain sufficient information to allow an assessment to be carried out.

As part of the technical auditing programme.

4.5 Extent Of I nspections

The Detailed Structural Engineering Inspection comprises a visual examination of all
readily accessible components of the structure supplemented, where necessary, by
examinations, testing or analyses such as:

Underwater inspection of submerged components;

Geotechnical investigation including drilling, instrumentation and monitoring;

Hydraulic investigation of dynamic flood effects including assessments of
flood forces, scour sedimentation, debris size, formation and impact, and
afflux;

Structural analyses;

Location of reinforcement using cover meter;

Coring and testing concrete to assess strength and durability parameters
including compressive strength, density, aggregate reactivity and depth of
penetration of carbonation and chlorides;

Measurement of half cell potential and resistivity of reinforced concrete
components;

Examination of steel members using methods such as dye penetrant, magnetic
particle, radiographic, ultrasonic or x-ray;

Measurement of corroded member dimensions;

Static or dynamic load testing of the structure.


A job specific brief for the Detailed Structural Engineering Inspection shall be
prepared by the District Director's delegate in consultation with a Principal Engineer
from Structures Division.

A Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspection, where required, shall also be carried out in
accordance with the specified procedures.

4.7 Data Recording I n This Field

Data recording will be similar to that required for a Level 2 - Bridge Condition
Inspection with additional references to record the identification references, types and
locations of all testing and sampling conducted as part of the inspection. Component
designation and condition rating shall be identified in accordance with the Level 2 -
Bridge Condition Inspection procedures and the component designations given in
section 1.3.

4.8 Reporting

A written report shall be submitted to the District Director, with a copy to the
Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Mangement) of Structures Division, within 60 days
of the inspection and shall include, where applicable, those inspection activities which
are listed in section 4.2 and recommendations such as:-

Immediate remedial action;

Access restrictions, including load and/or speed limits, vehicle paths or
number of lanes and detour details if applicable;

Further investigation, testing and structural analyses;

Future inspection and monitoring regime;


Future asset management strategy including maintenance, rehabilitation,
strengthening or widening with associated costs and residual life assessments.

The District Director shall consider the recommendations of the report and generally
shall initiate the necessary actions. If the District Director does not agree with the
recommendations, a response to that effect shall be given in writing to the inspecting
engineer and copied to the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset Management) within 30
days of receipt of the inspection report.

A copy of the final report shall be forwarded to the Principal Engineer (Bridge Asset
Management) who shall be responsible for entering the following salient details into
the Bridge Information System (BIS) within 30 days of completion of the report;

An executive summary of the written report, including the distribution list.

A summary of all other reports produced in order to supplement the Level 3
inspection, such as diving surveys and materials testing.

Rating of all primary defects, identification of deterioration mechanisms and
determination of the overall condition of the structure.

Results of any load capacity assessment conducted (desk top assessment, or
static and/or dynamic load testing). Such assessment is to be conducted in
accordance with Section 4.9.

Bridge Equivalence Ratings (if calculated).

A record of the photographs included in the written report. Photograph size
and quality is to be in accordance with Section 3.7.

4.9 Load Capacity

A load capacity assessment may be included in the brief to determine the repeated
live load capacity for the remaining service life of the structure. The assessment shall
be based on:

Original design drawings and specifications;

"As-built" construction records (including pile driving, material testing,
modifications, amendments and defect records);

Material properties, workmanship, condition and loading determined by field
inspections, tests and direct measurement.

The report shall include:

A rating in accordance with "AS 5100, Part 7: Rating of Existing Bridges";


Live load bending moment and shear capacity at critical locations;

Bridge Equivalence Ratings for a number of standard vehicles;

Risk of sudden failure as a consequence of shear or over-reinforced concrete
sections;

Factors influencing the dynamic load allowance used to determine the load
capacity.

J une 2004
FI GURE 1.0
STANDARD COMPONENT MATRI X

Abutments Piers Spans/Cells Approach

Codes Significance
Rating
A1,2 Pn Sn AP1,2
Abutment A 3 50
Abutment Sheeting ABS 2 52
Approach AP 2 70
Arch ARH 4 25
Batter Protection PRO 1 53 53
Bearings B 2 40-43 40-43
Bearing Pedestals PED 1 44 44
Bracing Wale WAL 3 57 57
Bridge Barriers BR 1 2 2
Columns C 4 56 56
Corbels COR 3 27 27
Cross Beam XB 3 28
Cross Girder** XG 3 31, 32
Deck D 3 20, 29, 30
Footing F 3 59 59
Footway FY 1 4 4
Girders G 4 21, 22
Guard Rails GR 1 72
Hanger HR 4 26
Headstock H 4 54 54, 55
Headwall HW 1 84 84
J oints* J 2 10-15, 20 10-15, 20 10,11,13-15
Kerb K 1 3 3
Mortar Pad MP 1 44 44
Pier Wall PW 3 58
Piles & Encasements*** P 4 56, 60 56
Pilecap CAP 3 59 59
Restraint Angle RA 2 45 45
Retaining Wall RW 3 51 51
Sill Log SL 3 59 59
Spiking Plank SP 1 33
Through Truss TT 4 23, 24
Waterway W 2 71
Wearing Surface/Fill WS 2 1
Wingwalls WW 3 51
Arch Culvert AC 2 83
Box Culvert BC 2 81
Modular Culvert MC 2 82
Pipe Culvert PC 2 80
Culvert Base Slab CBS 3 20

* Multiple joints may be entered for a Pier or Abutment group (if there is only one joint,
entry will default to J . Multiple joints will be numbered J
1
, J
2
etc..)
** Load bearing diaphragms shall have a Significance Rating of 4
*** Wing piles shall have a Significance Rating of 3
J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

T
A
B
L
E

1
.
3

-

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

D
e
c
k

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

(
1
-
9
)

1

F
i
l
l
/
W
e
a
r
i
n
g

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

o
n

D
e
c
k

-

-

m
2
-

m
2
2

B
r
i
d
g
e

R
a
i
l
i
n
g
/
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
s
L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

3

B
r
i
d
g
e

K
e
r
b
s

-

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

4

F
o
o
t
w
a
y
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

D
e
c
k

J
o
i
n
t
s

(
1
0
-
1
9
)

1
0

P
o
u
r
a
b
l
e

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
1

C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
2

A
s
s
e
m
b
l
y

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
3

O
p
e
n

E
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n

J
o
i
n
t

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
4

S
l
i
d
i
n
g

J
o
i
n
t

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

1
5

F
i
x
e
d
/
S
m
a
l
l

M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t

J
o
i
n
t
s

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

S
u
p
e
r
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
2
0
-
3
9
)

2
0

D
e
c
k

S
l
a
b

/

C
u
l
v
e
r
t

B
a
s
e

S
l
a
b

-

E
a
c
h

m
2
m
2
-

2
1

C
l
o
s
e
d

W
e
b
/
B
o
x

G
i
r
d
e
r
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

2
2

O
p
e
n

G
i
r
d
e
r
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
-

2
3

T
h
r
o
u
g
h

T
r
u
s
s

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

2
4

D
e
c
k

T
r
u
s
s

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

2
5

A
r
c
h
e
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

L
i
n

m

2
6

C
a
b
l
e
s
/
H
a
n
g
e
r
s

E
a
c
h
-
-
-
-
J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

(
C
o
n
t
)

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

2
7

C
o
r
b
e
l
s
-

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
-

2
8

C
r
o
s
s

B
e
a
m
s
/
F
l
o
o
r

B
e
a
m
s

E
a
c
h

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

2
9

D
e
c
k

P
l
a
n
k
s
-

E
a
c
h

-
m
2
-

3
0

S
t
e
e
l

D
e
c
k
i
n
g
m
2
-
-
-
-
3
1

D
i
a
p
h
r
a
g
m
s
/
B
r
a
c
i
n
g

(
C
r
o
s
s

G
i
r
d
e
r
s
)

E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h
-
-
3
2

L
o
a
d

B
e
a
r
i
n
g

D
i
a
p
h
r
a
g
m
s

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

-

3
3

S
p
i
k
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
k

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

-

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s

(
4
0
-
4
9
)

4
0

F
i
x
e
d

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
1

S
l
i
d
i
n
g

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
2

E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r
i
c
/
P
o
t

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
3

R
o
c
k
e
r
s
/
R
o
l
l
e
r
s

E
a
c
h
-
-
-
-
4
4

M
o
r
t
a
r

P
a
d
s
/
B
e
a
r
i
n
g

P
e
d
e
s
t
a
l
s

-

-

-

-

E
a
c
h

4
5

R
e
s
t
r
a
i
n
t

A
n
g
l
e
s
/
B
l
o
c
k
s

E
a
c
h

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

S
u
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
5
0
-
6
9
)

5
0

A
b
u
t
m
e
n
t
-

-
E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

5
1

W
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
/
R
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
a
l
l

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
5
2

A
b
u
t
m
e
n
t

S
h
e
e
t
i
n
g
/
I
n
f
i
l
l

P
a
n
e
l
s

m
2
m
2
m
2
m
2
m
2
5
3

B
a
t
t
e
r

P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
-

m
2
m
2
-
m
2
5
4

H
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
-

J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

(
C
o
n
t
)

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

5
5

P
i
e
r

H
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s

(
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
)

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

-

5
6

C
o
l
u
m
n
s

o
r

P
i
l
e
s

(
E
n
c
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
*
)

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

5
7

P
i
l
e

B
r
a
c
i
n
g
/
W
a
l
e
s

E
a
c
h

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-

5
8

P
i
e
r

W
a
l
l
s
-

-
m
2
-
m
2
5
9

F
o
o
t
i
n
g
/
P
i
l
e

C
a
p
/
S
i
l
l

L
o
g

-

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-

6
0

W
i
n
g

P
i
l
e
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-
E
a
c
h
-

M
i
s
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s

(
7
0
-
7
9
)

7
0

B
r
i
d
g
e

A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

7
1

W
a
t
e
r
w
a
y
-

-
E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

7
2

A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h

G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

(
8
0
-
8
9
)

8
0

P
i
p
e

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

L
i
n

m

8
1

B
o
x

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

-

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

8
2

M
o
d
u
l
a
r

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

-

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

8
3

A
r
c
h

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

L
i
n

m

8
4

H
e
a
d
w
a
l
l
s
/
W
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
s
-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

*

E
n
c
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s

a
r
e

t
o

b
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

i
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

a
s

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
i
n
g

i
t
e
m
s

o
n
l
y

APPENDI X A
Inspection
Report Forms
Proformas and

Samples

J une 2004
Sheet
Structure Maintenance Schedule M1
1 Of

Structure I D........................................................... Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing.................................................................. Road Number...............................................................
Structure Type....................................................... Owner ...........................................................................
Construction Type................................................. District..........................................................................
Construction Material ........................................... Local Authority...........................................................
I nspector ................................................................. Overall Condition Rating ..........................................

I nspection Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Underwater

Date of I nspection.................................................. Date of Next I nspection .............................................
Chainage(km) on the ..to.Road

Defect Location and Details (from B2 forms)

Component Location (Modification/Group/Component/Standard Number) / / / _
Component Description.. Significance 1 2 3 4
Defect Details Condition State 1 2 3 4

Maintenance Activity Schedule
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

N
o
.

Description
U
n
i
t

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

R
a
t
e

A
m
o
u
n
t

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d

Sub-total $.
I nspectors Comments

Stewards Comments

Total Maintenance Backlog Amount for Structure $

J une 2004
Sheet
Structure Maintenance Schedule M1
Of
Structure I D.................................................................. Bridge Name.......................................................................
I nspection Date............................................................. I nspection Level 1 Level 2 Level 3


A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

N
o
.

Description
U
n
i
t

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

R
a
t
e

A
m
o
u
n
t

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d

Sub-total $.


A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

N
o
.

Description
U
n
i
t

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

R
a
t
e

A
m
o
u
n
t

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d

Sub-total $


A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

N
o
.

Description
U
n
i
t

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

R
a
t
e

A
m
o
u
n
t

P
r
i
o
r
i
t
y

C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
d

Sub-total $

J une 2004
Sheet
Routine Maintenance Inspection Report B1/1
1 Of 3

Crossing.................................................................. Road Number ..............................................................
Structure Type....................................................... Road Name..................................................................
Construction Type................................................. Owner...........................................................................
Construction Material .......................................... District..........................................................................
I nspector................................................................. Local Authority ..........................................................

Permanent Standing Water Programmed Exceptional

Date of I nspection.................................................. Date of Next I nspection ............................................
Chainage(km) on the ..to..........................................................Road
Problem
(tick)
Rectified Maintenance
Required
I nspection
Required
I nspection Elements

(*Refer to bottom of form)
Y N
Location and Comments (include
maintenance activity number)
Y N Y N Y N
Approaches
1 Signs and Delineation
Missing, damaged, obscured
(includes ID plate)

2 Guardrail
Accident damage
Incorrect alignment
Connection to bridge
Delineators

3 Road Drainage
Blocked inlets/outlets
Scour of outlets/embankment

4 Road Surface
Material defects* - concrete
Material defects* - surfacing
Settlement, depressions
Rough joint transition

Bridge Surface
5 Bridge Surface
Material defects*: surfacing
Material defects*: concrete
Material defects*: timber
Scuppers

6 Footpaths
Clean
Even

7 Barriers
Impact Damage
Loose/damaged fixings
Loose post base
Material Defects*
Delineators

8 Expansion J oints
Damaged/missing seals
Deck/nosing/ballast wall
damage
Obstructions in gap

J une 2004
Sheet
2 Of 3

I nspection Date

Problem
(tick)
Required
I nspection
Required
Y N
Y N Y N Y N
Waterway
9 General
Trees or bushes under bridge
Debris against structure
Riverbank/Embankment
Erosion
Scour holes in bed
Damaged bed protection

Substructure
(I ncluding culvert wingwalls)
10 Material Defects*
Piles
Footings
Walls/Stems
Headstocks

11 General
Forward movement of
abutments/wings
Blocked drains/weepholes
Debris on shelf/bearing
Scour/erosion of spillthrough
Dampness/leakage from
deck
Substructure protection
(over-bridges)

12 Bearings
Gap closed/decks in
contact/damaged
Bearing displaced/damaged
Poorly seated
Corroded/Seized/No
lubricant

Superstructure
13 Material defects* in:
Girders (including fasteners)
Cross Girders
Deck
Coatings

14 General
Debris/dirt build-up
Impact damage
Excessive
movement/vibration
Dampness
Ventholes

J une 2004
Sheet
3 Of 3

I nspection Date

Problem
(tick)
Required
I nspection
Required
Y N
Y N Y N Y N
Miscellaneous
15 Damage to services
Fasteners / Brackets
Pipe / Conduit
Openings

16 Roadway under bridge
Delineation
Barriers
Road drainage

Culverts
17 Material Defects* in:
Walls
Roofs
Aprons
Wingwalls/Headwalls
Steel Culverts **

Material * Defects Description
Concrete Cracking, spalling, corrosion of reinforcement, drummy areas
Steel Bending, buckling, cracking, distortion, loose bolts, rivets, corrosion, coating damage
Timber Splitting, crushing, decay, infestation, loose bolts or pins
Masonry Cracking, opening joints, mortar loss, bulging
Bituminous Surfacing Cracking, crazing, breaking up, lifting off, rutting, pushing
Protective Coatings Cracked, peeling, weathered

** Steel Culverts Probe or sound culvert walls at normal water level, check for pitting or loss of culvert
material

General Comments

J une 2004

Sheet
Level 1 - Photos and Sketches Record B1/2
Of

Structure Type....................................................... Road Name..................................................................
Construction Type................................................. Owner...........................................................................
Construction Material .......................................... District .........................................................................
I nspector................................................................. Local Authority ..........................................................

Level 1 I nspection Programmed Exceptional

Date of I nspection.................................................. Date of Next I nspection ............................................
Location
F
i
l
m
/
E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

N
u
m
b
e
r

S
k
e
t
c
h

N
o
.

M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

Description

Deck Surface (full width and alignment)
Side View (waterway, spans, piers, etc)
Underside (deck and pier construction)
Deficient Component and Major Defects
Undefined Elements

J une 2004
Sheet
Structure Condition Inspection Report B2/1
1 Of

Structure Type....................................................... Road Name...................................................................
Construction Type................................................. Owner ...........................................................................
Construction Material ........................................... District..........................................................................
I nspector ................................................................. Local Authority ..........................................................

I nspection Level 2 Level 3 Programmed Exceptional Underwater

Chainage(km) on the ..to.Road
Component Location Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

Location of item/condition
Description of defects by location type,
magnitude, extent
References of sketches and photos (Roll /
Exposure Nos)

Overall Ratings 1 2 3 4 5 Comments
Original Structure (O)

Modification ( )

Modification ( )

Modification ( )

Widening (WLn, WRn), Lengthening (L1, L2), Raised (Ra), Redecked (Re), Shortening (S1, S2), Strengthening (St)
J une 2004
Sheet
Of

I nspection Date I nspection Level 2 Level 3 Underwater
Component Location
Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)

J une 2004
Sheet
Defective Components Report B2/3
Of


Chainage(km) on the ..to.......................................................... Road
Component Location Required
Action ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

Description of Defect

Detailed Description
Estimated Quantity
"Other" action required
Urgency of action (what, who, when, how)
Recommended Testing
Reference of sketches and photos (Roll / Exposure Nos)
M
o
n
i
t
o
r

L
e
v
e
l

3

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

O
t
h
e
r

J une 2004
Sheet
Standard Procedure Exceptions Report B2/4
Of


Component Location Exception ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

U
n
d
e
f
i
n
e
d

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

N
o
t

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

L
e
s
s

t
h
a
n

2
5
%

C
o
m
p
.

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

O
t
h
e
r

Comments

Description of undefined component
Photograph/sketch reference
Reason component not inspected
Any other exceptions

J une 2004
Sheet
Timber Drilling Survey Report B2/5
Of


Component Location Test Details Test Results
(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

S
n
i
p
e

D
e
p
t
h

Comments

% Consumed Test Locations
CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Component Defect
Location (Abbreviation)
(Describe Other (O) in comments)
E MS E MS E MS
1-20
1-20
1-20
1-5
1-20
1-30
1-20
1-5
21-35
21-35
21-35
6-10
21-35
31-50
21-35
6-10
36-50
36-50
36-50
11-20
36-50
51-70
36-50
11-20
Pile
Girder
Corbel
Headstock
1
Headstock
2
Pipe
Pipe
Pipe
Edge Area
Pipe
Top (T), Ground Level (GL), Other (O)
End1 (E1), Midspan (MS), End 2 (E2), Other (O)
End1 (E1), End 2 (E2), Other (O)
1 - 45mm 45 - 65mm 66 - 90mm
Other Component Enter relevant component code and describe location in comments field.
1. Area of headstock (%) for external loss of section (top, bottomor sides).
2. Maximumpipe diameter (mm) in headstock for internal piping defects.
3. Members in excess of CS4 deterioration are critical and should be replaced immediately

J une 2004

Sheet
Photographic and Sketches Record B2/6
Of


Location
F
i
l
m
/
E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

N
u
m
b
e
r

S
k
e
t
c
h

N
o
.

M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

Description

Undefined Elements

J une 2004
Sheet
Bridge Scour Soundings Report B2/7
Of


Sounding
Location
Sounding Depth (m)
Stream bed
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

Permanent
Reference
Feature

Top of kerb, deck
or concrete
parapet

W
a
t
e
r

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s

C
u
r
r
e
n
t

D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

Comments

Depth (metres) Sounding Locations
CS 1 CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Group Location (Abbreviation)
C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

Span End1 (E1), Midspan (MS), End 2 (E2), Other (O) <0.2 <0.5
0.2 to
0.49
0.5 to
1.99
0.5 to
1.0
2 to 4 >1.0 >4.0

Sheet
1 Of 3

Structure I D7799............................... Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing...Barron River................ Road Number..32A .............................................
Structure TypeBridge........................... Road Name..................................................................
Construction Type..Girder / Beam.............. Owner..Department of Main Roads......
Construction MaterialSteel .............................. District.Peninsula District......................
I nspector..Phil Rae........................ Local Authority...Mareeba Shire Council ............

Level 1 I nspection Programmed Exceptional

Date of I nspection03-SEP-2002................ Date of Next I nspection03-SEP-2003............
Chainage12.67.(km) on the .Cairns.to..Mareeba....................Road
Problem
(tick)
Required
I nspection
Required

(*Refer to bottom of form)
Y N
Y N Y N Y N
Approaches
1 Signs and Delineation
Missing, damaged, obscured
(includes ID plate)

Clean

2 Guardrail
Accident damage
Incorrect alignment
Connection to bridge
Delineators

Impact, minor
Too low

Clean and replace

3 Road Drainage
Blocked inlets/outlets
Scour of outlets/embankment

Clean high shoulders

4 Road Surface
Material defects* - concrete
Material defects* - surfacing
Settlement, depressions
Rough joint transition

Abutment A relieving slab

Bridge Surface
5 Bridge Surface
Material defects*: surfacing
Material defects*: concrete
Material defects*: timber
Scuppers

Shrinkage cracking

Clean and clear

6 Footpaths
Clean
Even

Sweep

7 Barriers
Impact Damage
Loose post base
Material Defects*
Delineators

Loose bolts on hand rails
Loose rails

Replace both sides

8 Expansion J oints
Damaged/missing seals
Deck/nosing/ballast wall
damage
Obstructions in gap

Requires cleaning

Sheet
2 Of 3

I nspection Date03-SEP-2003.

Problem
(tick)
Required
I nspection
Required
Y N
Y N Y N Y N
Waterway
9 General
Trees or bushes under bridge
Debris against structure
Riverbank/Embankment
Erosion
Scour holes in bed
Damaged bed protection

Clear trees and vegetation.
Excessive litter. Noxious weeds
Singapre Daisy

Substructure
(I ncluding culvert wingwalls)
10 Material Defects*
Piles
Footings
Walls/Stems
Headstocks

11 General
Forward movement of
abutments/wings
Blocked drains/weepholes
Debris on shelf/bearing
Scour/erosion of spillthrough
Dampness/leakage from
deck
Substructure protection
(over-bridges)

12 Bearings
Gap closed/decks in
contact/damaged
Bearing displaced/damaged
Poorly seated
Corroded/Seized/No
lubricant

Superstructure
13 Material defects* in:
Girders (including fasteners)
Cross Girders
Deck
Coatings

Minor cracking on kerb, exposed
reo midstream LHS

14 General
Debris/dirt build-up
Impact damage
Excessive
movement/vibration
Dampness
Ventholes

Sheet
3 Of 3

Structure I D.7799...................................... Bridge Name................................................................
I nspection Date03-SEP-2003..

Problem
(tick)
Required
I nspection
Required
Y N
Y N Y N Y N
Miscellaneous
15 Damage to services
Fasteners / Brackets
Pipe / Conduit
Openings

Remove old bracket LHS

16 Roadway under bridge
Delineation
Barriers
Road drainage

Culverts
17 Material Defects* in:
Walls
Roofs
Aprons
Wingwalls/Headwalls
Steel Culverts **

Material * Defects Description
Concrete Cracking, spalling, corrosion of reinforcement, drummy areas
Steel Bending, buckling, cracking, distortion, loose bolts, rivets, corrosion, coating damage
Timber Splitting, crushing, decay, infestation, loose bolts or pins
Masonry Cracking, opening joints, mortar loss, bulging
Bituminous Surfacing Cracking, crazing, breaking up, lifting off, rutting, pushing
Protective Coatings Cracked, peeling, weathered

** Steel Culverts Probe or sound culvert walls at normal water level, check for pitting or loss of culvert
material

General Comments

Sheet
1 Of 4

Crossing. ..Barron River................ Road Number32A................................................
Structure Type.Bridge........................... Road Name...................................................................
Construction TypeGirder/Beam.............. Owner.Department of Main Roads.......
Construction Material.Steel.............................. DistrictPeninsula District...................
I nspector...Roy West ..................... Local Authority..Mareeba Shire Council..............


Date of I nspection03-SEP-2001................ Date of Next I nspection..03-SEP-2004...............
Chainage12.67(km) on the Cairns.to.Mareeba.Road
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
O AP1 AP 70O 2 1 Each 1
O AP1 GR 72S 2 2 Each 2 Single bolt connection to bridge only. Photo 4_07
O AP1 PRO 53O 2 180 m
2
177 3 Side 1 slight scour at relieving slab. Photo 4_04
O A1 J 1 14S 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5
Loose plate, rattles, leaks water onto headstock. Photos 4_02,
4 08
O S1 BR 2S 2 86 Lin m 86 All posts and rail bolts are loose. Refer to comments.
O S1 K 3C 2 73 Lin m 73 Hairline shrinkage cracks to soffits. Photo 1_01
O S1 WS 1C 2 310 m
2
310
Slightly wavy surface, craze cracked, missing stone. Photo
4 09
O A1 J 2 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5
O P1 J 1 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 First joint in deck after P1
O P1 J 2 11O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 Choked with gravel. Photo 4_10
O P1 J 3 14S 3 8.5 Lin m 8.5 Choked with dirt and grass. Leaks onto bearings. Photo 4_11
O P1 J 4 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 Last joint in deck before P2
O S2 BR 2S 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 All post and rail bolts are loose. Refer to comments.
O S2 K 3C 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 Minor shrinkage cracks below on deck soffits.
O S2 WS 1C 2 388 m
2
388 Craze cracked and wavy
O P2 J 1 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 First joint in slab after P2
O P2 J 2 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 Last joint in slab before P3

Poor condition due to rusting bearings/bolts. At all spans, all bridge
rail bolts are loose and the rails rattle. All bolts are lock nutted and
Modification ( )

set to be loose. The bolt holes are in the post to rail connectors are
slotted. This seems to cater for the amount of movement and bounce
Modification ( )

under heavy traffic
Modification ( )


Sheet
2 Of 4

Structure I D7799....................................... Bridge Name................................................................
I nspection Date03-SEP-2001 I nspection Level 2 Level 3 Underwater
Component Location
Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
O S3 K 3C 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 Minor shrinkage cracks below on deck soffits
O S3 WS 1C 2 388 m
2
388 2 Craze cracked and wavy
O S4 BR 2S 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 All posts and rail bolts are loose. Refer to comments.
O S4 K 3C 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 Minor shrinkage below on deck soffit
O S4 WS 1C 2 388 m
2
388 Craze cracked and wavy. Photo 4_12
O P4 J 1 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 First joint in deck after P4
O P4 J 2 14S 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5
Choked with dirt and grass. Leaks water and rubbish on to
bearings. Photo 4 13
O P4 J 3 11O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5
Choked with dirt and grass. Leaks water and rubbish on to
bearings. Photo 4 15
O S5 K 3C 2 91.2 Lin m 91.2 Minor shrinkage cracks below on deck soffits.
O S5 WS 1C 2 388 m
2
388 Craze cracked and wavy
O P5 J 2 15O 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5
O S6 BR 2S 2 74 Lin m 74 All post and rail bolts are loose. Refer to comments.
O S6 K 3C 2 74 Lin m 74
O S6 WS 1C 2 310 m
2
310 Craze cracked and wavy surface
O A2 J 1 14S 2 8.5 Lin m 8.5 Concrete WS breaking away at joint. Photo 4_15
O A2 PRO 53O 2 120 m
2
120
O AP2 GR 72S 2 2 Each 2
GR1 panels 2 & 4 slight traffic damage. Photo 4_18. Both
sides have damaged/loose drum ends.
O A1 B 43S 2 4 Each 2 2
B4 blistering rusty baseplates. Photo 1_02. A1 rust coming
out of bearings
O A1 A 50O 2 1 Each 1 Badly stained by water from leaky deck joint
O A1 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Buried
O A1 WW 51C 2 2 Each 2
O A1 PRO 53O 2 64 m
2
63 1 Scoured by water pipe outlet. Photos 4_01-02
O S1 G 22S 2 5 Each 5
O S1 D 20C 2 354 m
2
353 1
Hairline shrinkage cracks to soffits D1, D5. Photos 1_01, 1_08 (typical). See Note. D2 - 0.16m
2
spalled area. Photo 3_21. D1 All scuppers blistering and
rusting. Photo 3 23 is typical of whole bridge.
O S1 XG 31C 2 1 Each 1

Sheet
3 Of 4

Component Location
Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
O S1 XG 31S 2 4 Each 4
O P1 B 43S 2 4 Each 4
B1 hold down bolt on outside rusting badly. Photos 3_18, 3_20. B1 Bearing through bolt head very badly rusted. Photos 3_1920. B2 is fixed hinge
bearing in Span 2. G1 rocker hold down bolt almost rusted away. Girder and bearing blistering badly. Photos 1_09, 1_11, 3_09-10. Expansion hinge bearings
in span 2 rusty hold down bolts and rockers. Photos 1_12-13
O P1 H 54C 2 1 Each 1
O P1 C 56C 2 1 Each 1
O P1 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Buried
O S1 W 71O 2 1 Each 1 Scrubby
O S2 G 22S 2 4 Each 4
Rust coming through paint on bottom flanges. Photo 1_22. Ends of girders and top flange rusting at mid-span joint. Photos 1_18, 1_21. Travelling stage rails
are rusting. Photos 1 15, 3 12.
O S2 D 20C 2 442 m
2
441 1
D1 soffit spalled at finger joint plate. Photo 3_11. Shrinkage
cracks D1-D5 soffits.
O P2 B 43S 2 4 Each 3 1 Bearing No. 1 hold down bolt rusting badly. Photo 3_08
O P2 H 54C 2 1 Each 1
O P2 C 56C 2 1 Each 1
O P2 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Underwater
O S2 W 71O 2 1 Each 1
O S3 G 22S 2 4 Each 4 G1-G4 rust coming through paint on lower flanges.
O S3 D 20C 2 442 m
2
442 Numerous shrinkage cracks to soffits D1-D5
O S3 XG 31S 2 6 Each 5 1 XG1 rusting over Pier 2.
O P3 B 43S 2 4 Each 4 All 4 bearings, pedestals, bolts rusting. Photos 2_01-02.
O P3 H 54C 2 1 Each 1
O P3 C 56C 2 1 Each 1
O P3 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Underwater. Photos 2_08-09
O S3 W 71O 2 1 Each 1
O S4 G 22S 2 4 Each 4
Rust spots coming through paint on all lower flanges. G4
rusting on ribs inner side at P3. Photo 2 15
O S4 D 20C 2 442 m
2
441 1 D5 small spall to soffit. Photo 2_11.
O S4 XG 31S 2 6 Each 5 1 XG1 is rusting over P3.
O P4 B 43S 2 4 Each 4
B1-B4 rusting at base plates and bolts. Photos 2_04-06. B1 badly rusted nut on anchor bolt No. 1. Photo 3_05 (O/P4). B2/G2 expansion hinge, girder to
bearing bolt head rusting badly. Photo 3_06. B2/G1 Rocker bolt rusted away. Photo 3_03. Bearing through bolt and anchor bolt rusting badly. Photos 2_16.
3_04. B3/G1, Fixed hinge, Bearing through bolt nut rusting away. Photo 3_01. B3/G1 Bearing ledge rusting. Photo 3_02. Photo 2_21 is outer face. Rusty
gussets. Photo 2_20 is under side of G3 bearing ledge.
O P4 H 54C 2 1 Each 1

Sheet
4 Of 4

Component Location
Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
O P4 C 56C 2 1 Each 1
O P4 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Underwater
O S4 W 71O 2 1 Each 1
O S5 G 22S 2 4 Each 4 Gussets and bearing ledges rusting. Photos 3_02, 2_25.
O S5 D 20C 2 442 m
2
440 2 D3-D5 spalled soffit at finger joint. Photos 2_17-19.
O P5 B 43S 2 4 Each 2 2
B1 bearing hold down bolt rusting badly. Photo 2_24. B4
bearing hold down bolt head rusting away. Photo 2 23.
O P5 H 54C 2 1 Each 1
O P5 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X Buried
O S5 W 71O 2 1 Each 1 Scrubby bank.
O S6 G 22S 2 4 Each 2 2 G3-G4 rust coming through paint on bottom flange.
O S6 D 20C 2 354 m
2
354
O S6 XG 31C 2 1 Each 1
O A2 B 43S 2 4 Each 4
All bearing through bolts and base plates rusting. Photos 4_19-
20, 4 22, 4 24
O A2 A 50C 2 1 Each X X X X
O A2 F 59C 2 1 Each X X X X
O S6 W 71O 2 1 Each 1 Scrubby banks

Sheet
1 Of 2

Structure I D7799........................................... Bridge Name................................................................
CrossingBarron River ........................... Road Number.32A...........................................
I nspector...Roy West ................................. Local Authority..Mareeba Shire Council..........

Date of I nspection..03-SEP-2001.................. Date of Next I nspection.03-SEP-2004................
Chainage12.67(km) on the Cairns..to.Mareeba..................... Road
Action ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e


Estimated Quantity
Recommended Testing
M
o
n
i
t
o
r

L
e
v
e
l

3

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

O
t
h
e
r

O AP1 GR 72S 2 3
Single bolt connection to bridge only. Photo 4_07. Not to standard. Inform ID of need
to fund guardrail improvement program.
3
O AP1 PRO 53O 2 3 Side 1 slight scour at relieving slab. Photo 4_04. RMPC contractor to repair
3
O A1 J 1 14S 2 3
Loose expansion plate, rattles, leaks water onto headstock. Photos 4_02, 4_08. Put on
program for funding and schedule repair.
3
O P1 J 3 14S 3 3
Finger plate joint in Span 2 choked with dirt and grass. Leaks water and rubbish onto
bearings. Photo 4 11. Put on program for funding to be cleaned with other works.
3
O P4 J 2 14S 2 3
Finger plate joint in Span 5 choked with dirt and grass. Leaks water and rubbish onto
bearings. Photo 4 13. Put on program for funding to be cleaned with other works.
3
O A2 J 1 14S 2 3 Concrete WS breaking away at joint. Photo 4_15. To be repaired with other joints.
3
O AP2 GR 72S 2 3
GR1 panels 2 & 4 slight traffic damage. Photo 4_18. Both sides have damaged/loose
drum ends. Photo 4 15. Put on program for funding.
3
O A1 B 43S 2 3 B4 blistering rusty baseplate. Photo 1_02. A1 rust coming out of bearing.
3

O A1 PRO 53O 2 3 Scoured by water pipe outlet. Photos 4_01-02. RMPC contractor to repair.
3
O S1 D 20C 2 3
3
Hairline shrinkage cracks to soffits D1-D5, this is typical. Photos 1_01, 1_08 (typical). D2 0.16m
2
spalled area. Rusty reo. Photo 3_21. Clean reo, patch spall.
D1 All scuppers blistering and rusting. Photo 3 23 is typical. Remove and have galvanised when other major work is done.
O P1 B 43S 2 3
3

B1 hold down bolt on outside rusting badly. Photos 3_18, 3_20. B1 Bearing through bolt head very badly rusted. Photos 3_19-20. B2 is fixed hinge bearing
in Span 2. G1 rocker hold down bolt almost rusted away. Girder and bearing blistering badly. Photos 1_09, 1_11, 3_09-10. B3 Expansion hinge bearings in
Span 2 rusty hold down bolts and rockers. Photos 1 12-13. To br brought to attention of ID for funding outside normal maintenance.
O S2 G 22S 2 3
Rust coming through paint on bottom flanges. Photo 1_22. Ends of girders and top
flanges rusting at mid-span joint. Photos 1 18, 1 21. Travelling stage rails rusty.
3
O S2 D 20C 2 3
D1 spalled soffit at finger joint plate. Photo 3_11. Shrinkage cracks D1-D5 soffits.
Repair with other major works.
3
O P2 B 43S 2 3
B1 hold down bolt rusting badly. Photo 3_08. Bring to attention of ID for funding
outside of normal maintenance.
3

O S3 G 22S 2 3
G1-G4 rust coming through paint on lower flanges. To be brought to attention of ID for
funding outside of normal maintenance.
3

O S3 XG 31S 2 3
XG1 rusting over Pier 2. To be brought to attention of ID for funding outside normal
maintenance.
3

O P3 B 43S 2 3
All 4 bearings, pedestals, bolts rusting. Photos 2_01-02. To be brought to attention of
ID for funding outside of normal maintenance.
3

O S4 D 20C 2 3
D5 small spall to soffit. Photo 2_11. Clean reo. and patch when other major work is
carried out.
3
O S4 XG 31S 2 3
XG1 is rusting over P3. To be brought to attention of ID for funding outside normal
maintenance.
3
O P4 B 43S 2 3
3

B1-B4 rusting at base plates and bolts. Photos 2_04-06. B1 badly rusted nut on anchor bolt No 1. Photo 3_05. (O/P4) B2/G2 expansion hinge, girder to bearing
bolt head rusting badly. Photo 3_06. B2/G1 Rocker bolt rusted away. Photo 3_03. Bearing through bolt and anchor bolt rusting badly. Photos 2_16, 3_04.
B3/G1, Fixed hinge, bearing through bolt nut rusting away. Photo 3_01 Bearing ledge rusting. Photo 3_02. Photo 2_21 is outer face. Photo 2_20 is underside of
G3bearingledge. Tobebrought toattentionof IDfor fundingoutsidenormal maintenance.
O S5 G 22S 2 3
Gussets and bearing ledges rusting. Photos 3_02, 2_25. To be brought to attention of ID
for funding outside normal maintenance.
3

O S5 D 20C 2 3
D3-D5 spalled soffit at finger joint. Photos 2_17-19. To be brought to attention of ID
for funding outside normal maintenance.
3

Sheet
2 Of 2

Structure I D7799........................................... Bridge Name................................................................
CrossingBarron River ........................... Road Number.32A...........................................
I nspector...Roy West ................................. Local Authority..Mareeba Shire Council..........

Date of I nspection..03-SEP-2001.................. Date of Next I nspection.03-SEP-2004................
Chainage12.67(km) on the Cairns..to.Mareeba..................... Road
Action ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e


Estimated Quantity
Recommended Testing
M
o
n
i
t
o
r

L
e
v
e
l

3

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

O
t
h
e
r

O P5 B 43S 2 3
3
B1 bearing hold down bolt rusting badly. Photo 2_24. B4 bearing hold down bolt head rusting away. Photo 2_23. To be brought to attention of ID for funding
outside normal maintenance.
O A2 B 43S 2 3
3

All bearing through bolts and base plates rusting. Photos 4_19-20, 4_22, 4_24. To be brought to attention of ID for funding outside normal maintenance.

Sheet
1 Of 1

Structure I D.7799.......................................... Bridge Name................................................................
CrossingBarron River ........................... Road Number.32A...............................................
I nspector...Roy West ................................. Local Authority..Mareeba Shire Council..............

Date of I nspection..03-SEP-2001.................. Date of Next I nspection03-SEP-2004.............
Chainage12.67.(km) on the .Cairns.to..Mareeba................... Road
Component Location Exception (3)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

U
n
d
e
f
i
n
e
d

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

N
o
t

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

L
e
s
s

t
h
a
n

2
5
%

C
o
m
p
.

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

O
t
h
e
r

Comments


O A1 F 59C 2
3
Buried.
O P1 F 59C 2
3
Buried.
O P2 F 59C 2
3
Underwater.
O P3 F 59C 2
3
Underwater. Photos 2_08-09.
O P4 F 59C 2
3
Underwater.
O P5 F 59C 2
3
Buried.
O A2 A 50C 2
3
Buried. Photo 4_21.
O A2 F 59C 2
3
Buried.

Sheet
1 Of 35

Structure I D.7799.......................................... Bridge Name................................................................
CrossingBarron River ........................... Road Number32A............................................
I nspector...Roy West ................................. Local Authority.Mareeba Shire Council...........

Date of I nspection..03-SEP-2001.................. Date of Next I nspection..03-SEP-2004...............
Chainage12.67(km) on the .Carins.to..Mareeba................ Road
Location
F
i
l
m
/
E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

N
u
m
b
e
r

S
k
e
t
c
h

N
o
.

M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

Description

Undefined Elements
1_01 O S1 D Hairline cracking D5 soffit and kerb
1_02
O
A1 B B4 Blistering to bearing base plate
1_03
O
S1 D D5 Hairline cracking and exposed reo.
1_04-05
O
P1 PW General layout pier 1 from span 1.
1_06
O
S1 D D5 Hairline cracking, rusty scupper.
1_07
O
S1 D D5 Close-up of rusty scupper No. 3
1_08
O
A1 A Layout / general view of A1 from P1. Note travelling stages.
1_09
O
P1 B B2 Midspan bearing
1_10
O
S2 D Waterstained soffit midspan deck joint
1_11
O
P1 B D2 Rusty rocker and bolt
1_12
O
P1 B B3 Rusty rocker and bolt
1_13
O
P1 B B3 Rusty rocker anchor bolt
1_14
O
S2 G G3 Rust starting on girder end at midspan joint
1_15
O
S2 G G3 Rust on rail of travelling stage
1_16
O
P1 B B3 Rusty rocker bolt
1_17
O
P1 J 1 J 3 Rusty rocker anchor bolt (G4)
1_18
O
S2 G G4 Rust coming through paint on bottom flange.
1_19
O
S2 G G4 Rusty top flange at D5
1_20
O
P1 B B4 Rusty main rocker bolt
1_21
O
S2 G G4 Rusty girder ends, stained soffit, rusty bolts in top flange G5
1_22
O
S2 G G4 Rust coming though paint, bottom flange, also of cross bracing.
1_23
O
P2 B B4 Rusty main bolt and rocker through bolt
2_01
O
P3 B G3 B3 rusting bearing pedestals
2_02
O
P3 B G4 B4 blistering rust on bearing base and rocker bolts.
2_03
O
S3 G G4 Rust starting on under bridge gantry rail
2_04
O
P4 B B1 Blistering rust on base plate and bolts
2_05
O
P4 B B2 Rusting bolt on girder flange and through bolt

Pictures
03-SEP-2001
03-SEP-2001
Date
Date
1100006726
1100006727
Id
Id
1_04-05
1_06
Film/ ExposureNumber
Underwater
7799
StructureId
InspectionDate
03-SEP-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
6
B2/6
InspectionLevel 2 9 Level 3
P1/S1 - General layout pier 1 fromspan 1.
S1/D5 - Hairline cracking, rusty scupper.
Description
Description
O
O
Mod
Mod
P
S
Category
Category
1
1
Number
Number
PW
D
CompCode
CompCode
SketchNo
SketchNo
CompNo
CompNo
Level 2InspectionReport- Photos &Sketches Record
35
Pictures
03-SEP-2001
03-SEP-2001
03-SEP-2001
Date
Date
Date
1100006750
1100006751
1100006752
Id
Id
Id
2_06
2_07
2_08-09
Underwater
7799
StructureId
InspectionDate
03-SEP-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
14
B2/6
P4/B3 - Blistering rust on base plate, bolts, bracing and lower
flange.
S5/XG1 - Starting to rust
P3/c - Layout of pier fromspan 4.
Description
Description
Description
O
O
O
Mod
Mod
Mod
P
S
P
Category
Category
Category
4
5
3
Number
Number
Number
B
XG
C
CompCode
CompCode
CompCode
SketchNo
SketchNo
SketchNo
CompNo
CompNo
CompNo
35
Sheet
1 Of 7

Structure I D7388............................................... Bridge Name................................................................
CrossingBlack Waterhole Creek.............. Road Number.33B...............................................
I nspector...Frederick Doyle.......................... Local Authority..Mirani Shire Council .................

Date of I nspection..11-MAR-2003................ Date of Next I nspection11-MAR-2004..........
Chainage46.79(km) on the .Nebo.to.Mackay................. Road
(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O A1 H1 54 180 E1 12 H 180 2

O A1 H1 54 180 O3 12 H 180 2 Drilled at pile 3
O A1 H1 54 180 E2 12 H 0 180 100 4 Headstock completely rotted out at end two. Photos 1_27-28
O A1 P1 56 390 T 12 H 390 1
O A1 P2 56 470 T 12 H 470 1
O A1 P3 56 370 T 12 H 370 1
O A1 P4 56 340 T 12 H 340 1
WR1 A1 P1 56 470 T 12 H 470 1
O S1 G1 22 350 E1 12 H 300 50 14 2
O S1 G1 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
O S1 G1 22 460 E2 12 H 460 1
O S1 G2 22 420 E1 12 H 370 50 12 2
O S1 G2 22 430 MS 12 H 430 1
O S1 G2 22 420 E2 12 H 420 1
O S1 G3 22 435 E1 12 H 245 190 44 4
O S1 G3 22 450 MS 12 H 450 1
O S1 G3 22 415 E2 12 H 415 1
O S1 G4 22 440 E1 12 H 440 1
O S1 G4 22 470 MS 12 H 470 1
O S1 G4 22 420 E2 12 H 390 30 7 2
O S1 G5 22 430 E1 12 H 410 20 5 2
% Consumed Test Locations
CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Component Defect
Location (Abbreviation)
(Describe Other (O) in comments)
E MS E MS E MS
1-20
1-20
1-20
1-5
1-20
1-30
1-20
1-5
21-35
21-35
21-35
6-10
21-35
31-50
21-35
6-10
36-50
36-50
36-50
11-20
36-50
51-70
36-50
11-20
Pile
Girder
Corbel
Headstock
1
Headstock
2
Pipe
Pipe
Pipe
Edge Area
Pipe
1 - 45mm 45 - 65mm 66 - 90mm
3. Members in excess of CS4 deterioration are critical and should be replaced immediately

Sheet
2 Of 7

Structure I D...7388............................................ Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing..Black Waterhole Creek............ Road Number33B............................................
I nspector.Frederick Doyle........................ Local Authority.Mirani Shire Council ..............

(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O S1 G5 22 470 MS 12 H 470 1 O
O S1 G5 22 405 E2 12 H 405 1 O
O S1 G6 22 280 E1 12 H 0 280 100 4 O
Drilled solid, but excessive snipe has caused splitting to occur at snipe chamfer to 20mm wide at side 1 (Photo 1_30) and 30mm wide along bottom (Photo 1_31)
see Sketch 1. Note that Side 1 crack opens up to 25mm wide under load !!!!
O S1 G6 22 370 MS 12 H 370 1
O S1 G6 22 320 E2 12 H 320 1
WR1 S1 G1 22 410 E1 12 H 410 1
WR1 S1 G1 22 470 MS 12 H 470 1
WR1 S1 G1 22 395 E2 12 H 395 1
WR1 S1 G2 22 450 E1 12 H 450 1
WR1 S1 G2 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
WR1 S1 G2 22 450 E2 12 H 450 1
O P1 COR1 27 400 E1 12 H 400 1
O P1 COR1 27 400 E2 12 H 400 1
O P1 COR2 27 460 E1 12 H 375 85 18 2
O P1 COR2 27 460 E2 12 H 360 100 22 3
Badly split E2 and bottom of side 1 crack 20mm wide. Photo
1_26
O P1 COR3 27 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O P1 COR3 27 420 E2 12 H 420 1
O P1 COR4 27 440 E1 12 H 440 1
O P1 COR4 27 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O P1 COR5 27 430 E1 12 H 430 1
O P1 COR5 27 430 E2 12 H 410 20 5 2
O P1 COR6 27 365 E1 12 H 365 1
O P1 COR6 27 365 E2 12 H 365 1
WR1 P1 COR1 27 475 E1 12 H 475 1
WR1 P1 COR1 27 475 E2 12 H 475 1
WR1 P1 COR2 27 360 E1 12 H 360 1
WR1 P1 COR2 27 360 E2 12 H 360 1
O P1 P1 56 450 T 12 H 300 150 33 3
O P1 P1 56 450 GL 12 H 450 1
O P1 P2 56 360 T 12 H 260 100 28 3
O P1 P2 56 400 GL 12 H 400 1
O P1 P3 56 370 T 12 H 240 130 35 3

Sheet
3 Of 7


(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O P1 P3 56 360 GL 12 H 280 80 22 3
O P1 P4 56 350 T 12 H 300 50 14 2
O P1 P4 56 360 GL 12 H 280 80 22 3
WR1 P1 P1 56 430 T 12 H 430 1
WR1 P1 P1 56 440 GL 12 H 440 1
O S2 G1 22 455 E1 12 H 455 1
O S2 G1 22 480 MS 12 H 460 20 4 2
O S2 G1 22 460 E2 12 H 460 1
O S2 G2 22 410 E1 12 H 410 1
O S2 G2 22 460 MS 12 H 460 1
O S2 G2 22 420 E2 12 H 420 1
O S2 G3 22 410 E1 12 H 310 100 24 3
O S2 G3 22 460 MS 12 H 400 60 13 2
Signs of structural distress, some longitudinal splitting to crack width of 12mm, extending from E1 to midpoint of bottom of side 2 (Photo 1_13-14)
O S2 G3 22 420 E2 12 H 420 1
O S2 G4 22 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O S2 G4 22 450 MS 12 H 450 1
O S2 G4 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O S2 G5 22 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O S2 G5 22 450 MS 12 H 450 1
O S2 G5 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O S2 G6 22 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O S2 G6 22 450 MS 12 H 450 1
O S2 G6 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
WR1 S2 G1 22 400 E1 12 H 350 50 13 2
WR1 S2 G1 22 460 MS 12 H 460 1
WR1 S2 G1 22 400 E2 12 H 400 1
WR1 S2 G2 22 450 E1 12 H 450 1
WR1 S2 G2 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
WR1 S2 G2 22 360 E2 12 H 360 1
O P2 COR1 27 400 E1 12 H 400 1
O P2 COR1 27 400 E2 12 H 300 100 25 3
O P2 COR2 27 440 E1 12 H 360 80 18 2

Sheet
4 Of 7


(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O P2 COR2 27 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O P2 COR3 27 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O P2 COR3 27 420 E2 12 H 420 1
O P2 COR4 27 485 E1 12 H 485 3 CS 3 Vertical split E1 4mm wide, anti-splitter bolts required
O P2 COR4 27 485 E2 12 H 485 1
O P2 COR5 27 440 E1 12 H 430 10 2 2 Note: 10mm in pipe refers to 10mm split at E1
O P2 COR5 27 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O P2 COR6 27 380 E1 12 H 380 1
O P2 COR6 27 380 E2 12 H 380 1
WR1 P2 COR1 27 490 E1 12 H 460 30 6 2
WR1 P2 COR1 27 490 E2 12 H 390 100 20 2 100mm rot visible in end of corbel (Photo 1_17)
WR1 P2 COR2 27 380 E1 12 H 310 70 18 2
WR1 P2 COR2 27 380 E2 12 H 380 1
O P2 H1 54 180 E1 12 H 180 3
CS 3 Lateral longitudinal cracking 5mm wide face 1 between
Piles 1 and 2 (Photos 1_15-16)
O P2 H1 54 300 O 12 V 300 3
Drilled vertically under; longitudinally cracked between G1 &
2. Suspect active termites in this end of headstock
O P2 H1 54 180 E2 12 H 180 2 Rated CS 2 due to age
O P2 H2 54 180 E1 12 H 180 2
O P2 H2 54 180 E2 12 V 180 2 Rated CS 2 due to age
O P2 P1 56 370 T 12 H 270 100 27 3 Active termites
O P2 P1 56 350 GL 12 H 270 80 23 3
O P2 P2 56 400 T 12 H 300 100 25 3
O P2 P2 56 370 GL 12 H 340 30 8 2
O P2 P3 56 350 T 12 H 250 100 29 3
O P2 P3 56 360 GL 12 H 360 1
O P2 P4 56 370 T 12 H 370 1
O P2 P4 56 330 GL 12 H 300 30 9 2
WR1 P2 P1 56 380 T 12 H 380 1
WR1 P2 P1 56 380 GL 12 H 380 1
O S3 G1 22 450 E1 12 H 450 1
O S3 G1 22 470 MS 12 H 470 1
O S3 G1 22 470 E2 12 H 470 1
O S3 G2 22 400 E1 12 H 400 1

Sheet
5 Of 7


(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O S3 G2 22 440 MS 12 H 440 1
O S3 G2 22 410 E2 12 H 360 50 12 2
O S3 G3 22 400 E1 12 H 390 10 3 2
O S3 G3 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
O S3 G3 22 400 E2 12 H 400 1
O S3 G4 22 440 E1 12 H 440 1
O S3 G4 22 490 MS 12 H 490 1
O S3 G4 22 400 E2 12 H 330 70 18 2 Drilled at point just past corbel E1
O S3 G5 22 390 E1 12 H 390 1
O S3 G5 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
O S3 G5 22 400 E2 12 H 400 1
O S3 G6 22 320 E1 12 H 320 1
O S3 G6 22 350 MS 12 H 350 1
O S3 G6 22 310 E2 12 H 110 200 65 4
WR1 S3 G1 22 400 E1 12 H 350 1
WR1 S3 G1 22 460 MS 12 H 460 1
WR1 S3 G1 22 380 E2 12 H 380 1
WR1 S3 G2 22 460 E1 12 H 460 1
WR1 S3 G2 22 490 MS 12 H 490 1
WR1 S3 G2 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O P3 COR1 27 390 E1 12 H 310 80 21 3 Badly split at E1 crack 30mm wide (Photo 1_25)
O P3 COR1 27 390 E2 12 H 375 15 4 3
CS 3 Drilled solid but split at E2, crack 15mm wide (Photo
1_24). Install anti-splitter bolts and collars
O P3 COR2 27 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O P3 COR2 27 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O P3 COR3 27 480 E1 12 H 315 165 34 3
Drilled solid but excessive snipe over hstock 165mm
(Photo 1_23)
O P3 COR3 27 480 E2 12 H 315 165 34 3
O P3 COR4 27 430 E1 12 H 430 1
O P3 COR4 27 430 E2 12 H 430 1
O P3 COR5 27 430 E1 12 H 430 1
O P3 COR5 27 430 E2 12 H 430 1
O P3 COR6 27 380 E1 12 H 300 80 21 3
O P3 COR6 27 380 E2 12 H 380 1

Sheet
6 Of 7


(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
WR1 P3 COR1 27 480 E1 12 H 480 1
WR1 P3 COR1 27 480 E2 12 H 480 1
WR1 P3 COR2 27 360 E1 12 H 360 1
WR1 P3 COR2 27 360 E2 12 H 360 1
O P3 H1 54 180 E1 12 H 180 2
O P3 H1 54 180 E2 12 H 180 2 Drilled under girder 5. Solid
O P3 H2 54 180 E2 12 H 180 2 Drilled under girder 5
O P3 H2 54 180 E1 12 V 180 2
O P3 P1 56 340 T 12 H 325 15 4 2
O P3 P1 56 290 GL 12 H 290 1
O P3 P2 56 360 T 12 H 255 105 29 3
O P3 P2 56 300 GL 12 H 270 30 10 2
O P3 P3 56 450 T 12 H 450 1
O P3 P3 56 410 GL 12 H 375 35 9 2
O P3 P4 56 400 T 12 H 270 130 33 3
O P3 P4 56 380 GL 12 H 360 20 5 2
WR1 P3 P1 56 450 T 12 H 450 1
WR1 P3 P1 56 450 GL 12 H 435 15 3 2
O S4 G1 22 420 E1 12 H 420 1
O S4 G1 22 500 MS 12 H 500 1
O S4 G1 22 430 E2 12 H 430 1
O S4 G2 22 440 E1 12 H 440 1
O S4 G2 22 480 MS 12 H 480 1
O S4 G2 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O S4 G3 22 430 E1 12 H 430 1
O S4 G3 22 470 MS 12 H 470 1
O S4 G3 22 440 E2 12 H 390 50 11 2
O S4 G4 22 400 E1 12 H 400 1
O S4 G4 22 460 MS 12 H 460 1
CS 2 Drilled solid active termite trails on outside bottom of
girder
O S4 G4 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O S4 G5 22 400 E1 12 H 400 1
O S4 G5 22 450 MS 12 H 450 1

Sheet
7 Of 7


(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

U
n
d
e
r
s
i
z
e

Comments
O S4 G5 22 440 E2 12 H 440 1
O S4 G6 22 440 E1 12 H 360 80 18 2 Active termites
O S4 G6 22 480 MS 12 H 340 140 29 2 CS 3 Active termites in test hole
O S4 G6 22 420 E2 12 H 420 1
WR1 S4 G1 22 410 E1 12 H 410 1
WR1 S4 G1 22 490 MS 12 H 490 1
WR1 S4 G1 22 420 E2 12 H 420 1
WR1 S4 G2 22 420 E1 12 H 460 1
WR1 S4 G2 22 460 MS 12 H 490 1
WR1 S4 G2 22 490 E2 12 H 440 1
O A2 H2 54 300 E2 12 V 300 2
O A2 H2 54 300 E1 12 V 300 2
WR1 A2 H2 54 300 E1 12 V 300 2
WR1 A2 H2 54 300 E2 12 V 200 100 33 4
Photo 2_1 view of rot E2: Photo 2_2 view of rot in face 1 between WR1 G1 & G2:
Photo 2_3 view of headstock crushing down up to 30mm over original pile 4 (shoulder 2)
O A2 P1 56 380 T 12 H 380 1
O A2 P1 56 380 GL 12 H 380 1
O A2 P2 56 370 T 12 H 370 1
O A2 P2 56 370 GL 12 H 370 1
O A2 P3 56 450 T 12 H 310 140 31 3
O A2 P3 56 450 GL 12 H 140 310 69 4 Back section of pile at GL rotted out
O A2 P4 56 410 T 12 H 290 120 29 3
O A2 P4 56 410 GL 12 H 290 120 29 3
WR1 A2 P1 56 480 T 12 H 480
WR1 A2 P1 56 480 GL 12 H 480
WR1 A2 P2 56 480 T 12 H 480
WR1 A2 P3 56 320 GL 12 H 320 Wing pile
WR1 A2 P3 56 320 T 12 H 320
WR1 A2 P4 56 320 GL 12 H 320

Sheet
1 Of 2

Structure I D13167............................. Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing...................................................... Road Number13H ...............................................
Structure Type.Culvert......................... Road Name...................................................................
Construction TypeSlab Deck.................... Owner.Department of Main Roads...........
Construction Material.Concrete...................... DistrictNorth-West District...................
I nspectorWarren McEvoy.................... Local Authority..McKinlay Shire Council............


Date of I nspection21-NOV-2001............... Date of Next I nspection..21-NOV-2004.............
Chainage78.44(km) on the Kynuna.to.Cloncurry.Road
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
Moderate bumps, depressions. Longitudinal cracking in seal to
10mm depth (Photo #2). Generally smooth transition.
O AP1 PRO 53O 1 30 m
2
30
LHS 10m x 1.5m =15m
2
minor to moderate cracking of grout; RHS 10m x 1.5m =15m
2
minor to moderate cracking of grout
O S1 WS 1O 1 26 m
2
26 Minor bumps
O S2 WS 1O 1 26 m
2
26 Minor bumps
Moderate bumps, depressions. Longitudinal cracking in seal to
10mm depth (Photo #2 typical). Generally smooth transition.
O AP2 PRO 53O 1 30 m
2
30
LHS 10m x 1.5m =15m
2
minor to moderate cracking of grout; RHS 10m x 1.5m =15m
2
minor to moderate cracking of grout
O A1 A 50C 1 1 Each 1 Previous patch repairs to cracking (Photo #5 and Sketch #1)
O A1 WW 51C 1 2 Each 2
WW1 Forward movement to 90mm, gap to 45mm, loss of fill material, weepholes blocked by silt (Photo #5, Sketch #1)
WW2 Slight forward movement, weepholes blocked by buildup of silt, top of wingwalls repaired with concretecapping (Photo #6)
O S1 D 20C 1 15.5 m
2
15.5 Good condition
O S1 CBS 20C 2 15.5 m
2
X X X X Not visible build up of silt to 300mm (Photo #7)
O S1 HW 84C 1 2 Each 2 Headwalls minor cracking: Aprons not visible
O S1 W 71O 1 1 Each 1 Build up of silt to 300mm (Photo #7)
O P1 PW 58C 1 14.5 m
2
14.5
Cracked through in one location to CW 1.0mm(Photo #8),
fine to minor shrinkage cracking, span 2 side rendered over.
O S2 D 20C 1 15.5 m
2
15.5 Good condition
O S2 HW 84C 1 2 Each 2 As S1 / HW1

1. Monitoring of cracking in pier wall and abutments required
2. Waterway requires desilting
Modification ( )

Modification ( )

Modification ( )


Sheet
2 Of 2

Structure I D13167..................................... Bridge Name................................................................
I nspection Date21-NOV-2001 I nspection Level 2 Level 3 Underwater
Component Location
Quantity
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e

R
e
q
d

Comments

magnitude, extent
Exposure Nos)
O S2 CBS 20C 2 15.5 m
2
X X X X As S1 / CBS
O S2 W 71O 1 1 Each 1 As S1 / W
O A2 A 50C 1 1 Each 1
Cracking to CW 1.0mm (Photo #9, Sketch #2), fine to minor
shrinkage cracking.
O A2 WW 51C 1 2 Each 1 1
WW1 Forward movement to 60mm, gap to 20mm, loss of fill material, mortar cracked and breaking out (Photo #10)
WW2 Severe cracking with forward movement to 100mm of broken sections (Photos #11, 12 & 13, Sketch #3). No loss of fill evident CS 4 weepholes of
both wingwalls blocked by buildup of silt / debris

Sheet
1 Of 1

Structure I D13167......................................... Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing.................................................. Road Number.13H ..........................................
I nspector...Warren McEvoy..................... Local Authority..McKinlay Shire Council........

Date of I nspection..21-NOV-2001................. Date of Next I nspection.21-NOV-2004..............
Chainage78.44(km) on the Kynuna..to.Cloncurry................ Road
Action ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e


Estimated Quantity
Recommended Testing
M
o
n
i
t
o
r

L
e
v
e
l

3

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n

O
t
h
e
r

O A1 A 50C 1 3
Cracking and spalling has had mortar patch repair. Monitor at 6 monthly intervals for
any changes in crack patterns (Photo #5, Sketch #1)
3
O A1 WW 51C 1 3
WW1 Gap to 45mm with loss of fill material. Seal gap with Renderoc or similar
(Photo #5, Sketch #1). Both wingwalls require silt to be removed to expose weepholes,
monitor forward movement of WW1

3
O S1 W 71O 1 3 Build up of silt to 300mm. Waterway requires desilting approx 50m
3
(Photos #3-4)
3
O P1 PW 58C 1 3
Cracked through in one location to CW 1.0mm. Monitor at 6 monthly intervals for any
changes in crack patterns (Photo #6)
3

O S2 W 71O 1 3 Build up of silt to 300mm. Waterway requires desilting approx 50m
3
(Photos #3-4)
3
O A2 A 50C 1 3
Cracking to CW 1.0mm. Monitor at 6 monthly intervals for any changes in crack
pattern (Photo #9, Sketch #2)
3

O A2 WW 51C 1 3
WW1 Gap to 20mm with some loss of fill material (Photo #10). Break out and
remove existing mortar and seal gap with Renderoc or similar
3
O A2 WW 51C 1 4
WW2 Severe cracking with forward movement to 100mm along cracks. (Photo #11,
12, 13 and Sketch #1). No loss of fill evident. Monitor at 6 monthly intervals for any
changes in forward movement of broken sections.
3

Sheet
1 Of 1

Structure I D.13167........................................ Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing.................................................. Road Number.13H ..............................................
I nspector...Warren McEvoy..................... Local Authority..McKinlay Shire Council............

Date of I nspection..21-NOV-2001................. Date of Next I nspection21-NOV-2004...........
Chainage78.44.(km) on the .Kynuna.to..Cloncurry.............. Road
Component Location Exception ()
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

U
n
d
e
f
i
n
e
d

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

N
o
t

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

L
e
s
s

t
h
a
n

2
5
%

C
o
m
p
.

I
n
s
p
e
c
t
e
d

O
t
h
e
r

Comments


O S1 CBS 20C 2
3
Covered by silt to 300mm
O S2 CBS 20C 2
3
Covered by silt to 300mm

Sheet
1 Of 9

Structure I D.13167........................................ Bridge Name................................................................
Crossing.................................................. Road Number13H ...........................................
I nspector...Warren McEvoy..................... Local Authority.McKinlay Shire Council.........

Date of I nspection..21-NOV-2001................. Date of Next I nspection..21-NOV-2004.............
Chainage78.44(km) on the .Kynuna.to..Cloncurry............... Road
Location
F
i
l
m
/
E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

N
u
m
b
e
r

S
k
e
t
c
h

N
o
.

M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

Description

Undefined Elements
01 O AP1 AP Alignment AP1 to AP2
02
O
AP1 AP Longitudinal crack to 10mm
03
O
Side view from upstream
04
O
Side view from downstream
05
O
A1 A Previous crack and spall repair
06
O
A1 A WW2 Crack along concrete capping
07
O
S1 W Debris / Silt
08
O
P1 PW S1 side crack to CW 1.0mm
09
O
A2 A Cracking to CW 1.0mm
10
O
A1 WW WW1 Cracking in top of wing
11
O
A2 WW WW2 Cracking, forward movement of sections
12
O
A2 WW WW2 Movement to 100mm
13
O
A2 WW WW2 Movement at top of WW
01
O
A1 A Cracking in abutment, gap between A1/A and A1/WW
02
O
A2 A Cracking to CW 1.0mm
03
O
A2 WW WW2 Cracking, forward movement of broken sections.

Pictures
21-NOV-2001
21-NOV-2001
21-NOV-2001
Date
Date
Date
1000001198
1000001199
1000001200
Id
Id
Id
04
05
06
Underwater
13167
StructureId
InspectionDate
21-NOV-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
3
B2/6
Description
Description
Description
O
O
O
Mod
Mod
Mod
A
A
Category
Category
Category
1
1
Number
Number
Number
A
A
CompCode
CompCode
CompCode
SketchNo
SketchNo
SketchNo
CompNo
CompNo
CompNo
9
Pictures
21-NOV-2001
21-NOV-2001
Date
Date
1000001204
1000001205
Id
Id
10
11
Underwater
13167
StructureId
InspectionDate
21-NOV-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
5
B2/6
Description
Description
O
O
Mod
Mod
A
A
Category
Category
1
2
Number
Number
WW
WW
CompCode
CompCode
SketchNo
SketchNo
CompNo
CompNo
9
Pictures
21-NOV-2001 Date 1000001208 Id
S1
Underwater
13167
StructureId
InspectionDate
21-NOV-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
7
B2/6
Description
O
Mod
A
Category
1
Number
A
CompCode
01
SketchNo
CompNo
9
Pictures
21-NOV-2001 Date 1000001209 Id
S2
Underwater
13167
StructureId
InspectionDate
21-NOV-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
8
B2/6
Description
O
Mod
A
Category
2
Number
A
CompCode
02
SketchNo
CompNo
9
Pictures
21-NOV-2001 Date 1000001210 Id
S3
Underwater
13167
StructureId
InspectionDate
21-NOV-2001
Name
Sheet
Of
9
B2/6
Description
O
Mod
A
Category
2
Number
WW
CompCode
03
SketchNo
CompNo
9

APPENDI X B
Standard
Component
Schedule

J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

T
A
B
L
E

1
.
3

-

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

D
e
c
k

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

(
1
-
9
)

1

F
i
l
l
/
W
e
a
r
i
n
g

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

o
n

D
e
c
k

-

-

m
2
-

m
2
2

B
r
i
d
g
e

R
a
i
l
i
n
g
/
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
s
L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

3

B
r
i
d
g
e

K
e
r
b
s

-

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

4

F
o
o
t
w
a
y
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

D
e
c
k

J
o
i
n
t
s

(
1
0
-
1
9
)

1
0

P
o
u
r
a
b
l
e

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
1

C
o
m
p
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
2

A
s
s
e
m
b
l
y

J
o
i
n
t

S
e
a
l

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
3

O
p
e
n

E
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n

J
o
i
n
t

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

1
4

S
l
i
d
i
n
g

J
o
i
n
t

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

1
5

F
i
x
e
d
/
S
m
a
l
l

M
o
v
e
m
e
n
t

J
o
i
n
t
s

-

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

S
u
p
e
r
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
2
0
-
3
9
)

2
0

D
e
c
k

S
l
a
b

/

C
u
l
v
e
r
t

B
a
s
e

S
l
a
b

-

E
a
c
h

m
2
m
2
-

2
1

C
l
o
s
e
d

W
e
b
/
B
o
x

G
i
r
d
e
r
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

2
2

O
p
e
n

G
i
r
d
e
r
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
-

2
3

T
h
r
o
u
g
h

T
r
u
s
s

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

2
4

D
e
c
k

T
r
u
s
s

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

-

2
5

A
r
c
h
e
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

L
i
n

m

2
6

C
a
b
l
e
s
/
H
a
n
g
e
r
s

E
a
c
h
-
-
-
-
J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

(
C
o
n
t
)

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

2
7

C
o
r
b
e
l
s
-

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
-

2
8

C
r
o
s
s

B
e
a
m
s
/
F
l
o
o
r

B
e
a
m
s

E
a
c
h

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

2
9

D
e
c
k

P
l
a
n
k
s
-

E
a
c
h

-
m
2
-

3
0

S
t
e
e
l

D
e
c
k
i
n
g
m
2
-
-
-
-
3
1

D
i
a
p
h
r
a
g
m
s
/
B
r
a
c
i
n
g

(
C
r
o
s
s

G
i
r
d
e
r
s
)

E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h
-
-
3
2

L
o
a
d

B
e
a
r
i
n
g

D
i
a
p
h
r
a
g
m
s

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

-

3
3

S
p
i
k
i
n
g

P
l
a
n
k

-

-

-

L
i
n

m

-

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s

(
4
0
-
4
9
)

4
0

F
i
x
e
d

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
1

S
l
i
d
i
n
g

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
2

E
l
a
s
t
o
m
e
r
i
c
/
P
o
t

B
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

4
3

R
o
c
k
e
r
s
/
R
o
l
l
e
r
s

E
a
c
h
-
-
-
-
4
4

M
o
r
t
a
r

P
a
d
s
/
B
e
a
r
i
n
g

P
e
d
e
s
t
a
l
s

-

-

-

-

E
a
c
h

4
5

R
e
s
t
r
a
i
n
t

A
n
g
l
e
s
/
B
l
o
c
k
s

E
a
c
h

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

S
u
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e

(
5
0
-
6
9
)

5
0

A
b
u
t
m
e
n
t
-

-
E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

5
1

W
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
/
R
e
t
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
a
l
l

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
5
2

A
b
u
t
m
e
n
t

S
h
e
e
t
i
n
g
/
I
n
f
i
l
l

P
a
n
e
l
s

m
2
m
2
m
2
m
2
m
2
5
3

B
a
t
t
e
r

P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
-

m
2
m
2
-
m
2
5
4

H
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
-

J
u
n
e

2
0
0
4

S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D

C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
C
H
E
D
U
L
E

(
C
o
n
t
)

M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L

N
O

C
A
T
E
G
O
R
Y
/
C
O
M
P
O
N
E
N
T

S
T
E
E
L

(
S
)

P
R
E
C
A
S
T

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
P
)

C
A
S
T
-
I
N
-
S
I
T
U

C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E

(
C
)

T
I
M
B
E
R

(
T
)

O
T
H
E
R

(
O
)

5
5

P
i
e
r

H
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s

(
I
n
t
e
g
r
a
l
)

-

-

E
a
c
h

-

-

5
6

C
o
l
u
m
n
s

o
r

P
i
l
e
s

(
E
n
c
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
*
)

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

5
7

P
i
l
e

B
r
a
c
i
n
g
/
W
a
l
e
s

E
a
c
h

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-

5
8

P
i
e
r

W
a
l
l
s
-

-
m
2
-
m
2
5
9

F
o
o
t
i
n
g
/
P
i
l
e

C
a
p
/
S
i
l
l

L
o
g

-

-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-

6
0

W
i
n
g

P
i
l
e
s
E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h

-
E
a
c
h
-

M
i
s
c
e
l
l
a
n
e
o
u
s

(
7
0
-
7
9
)

7
0

B
r
i
d
g
e

A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
e
s
-

-
-
-
E
a
c
h

7
1

W
a
t
e
r
w
a
y
-

-
E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

7
2

A
p
p
r
o
a
c
h

G
u
a
r
d
r
a
i
l

E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h
E
a
c
h

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

(
8
0
-
8
9
)

8
0

P
i
p
e

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

L
i
n

m

8
1

B
o
x

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

-

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

-

8
2

M
o
d
u
l
a
r

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

-

L
i
n

m

-

-

-

8
3

A
r
c
h

C
u
l
v
e
r
t
s

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

L
i
n

m

-

L
i
n

m

8
4

H
e
a
d
w
a
l
l
s
/
W
i
n
g
w
a
l
l
s
-

E
a
c
h

E
a
c
h
-
E
a
c
h

*

E
n
c
a
s
e
m
e
n
t
s

a
r
e

t
o

b
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

t
h
e

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

i
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y

a
s

S
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
e
n
i
n
g

i
t
e
m
s

o
n
l
y

APPENDI X C
Standard
Component
Identification

Guidelines

APPENDI X D
Standard
Component
Condition State

Guidelines

Structures Division APPENDIX D J une 2004

COMPONENT 1C CONCRETE WEARI NG CAST-I NSI TU
SURFACE CONCRETE

Units of Measurement: Square Metres

This applies to concrete decks which form the running surface for traffic. This element also
includes reinforced concrete overlays placed over deteriorated timber decks (note that such
use is not recommended for the reinstatement of sub-standard timber decks). Also included
are unreinforced concrete wearing surfaces (often coloured) placed non-compositely over T-
beam bridge decks

Condition State 1

The concrete surface is in good condition and may have minor shrinkage or plastic settlement
cracks. The surface texture is pronounced and the aggregate is not worn and there is adequate
crossfall or grade to efficiently drain any surface water. All scuppers are clear.

Condition State 2

Shrinkage or plastic settlement cracks are of moderate width and there may be minor cracking
and spalling due to corrosion of reinforcement. Some wear or polishing of aggregate is
evident but there is only a marginal loss of surface texture and skid resistance. There may be
surface irregularities which hold surface water and the ability to shed and drain surface water
has been slightly impaired. Some scuppers may be blocked with debris and isolated patches
of weed are growing at the kerbs.

Condition State 3

Shrinkage and plastic settlement cracks are moderate to severe and the deck has a crazed
appearance but there is no differential movement between honeycomb sections. Patches of
cover concrete less than 0.5m
2
have delaminated exposing reinforcement which may have lost
up to 20% of its sectional area. The surface matrix is worn. Aggregate may be polished with
surface mortar being continually scaled over irregular areas. There may be significant
depressions or other surface irregularities which are impairing the surface drainage, ie lack of
crossfall or gradient. Deck drainage is not functioning efficiently as a result of obstructions at
or in kerbs and/or scuppers or inadequate provision for drainage.

Condition State 4

The surface matrix is worn and the aggregate polished to the extent that skid resistance is
compromised. The deck has extensive crazed honeycomb cracking with differential
movement between sections. Patches of cover concrete in excess of 1.0m
2
have delaminated
as a result of corrosion of reinforcement and/or defective concrete. Whole patches of concrete
to full overlay depth may be completely missing. Reinforcement may have lost in excess of
20% of the sectional area. Deck drainage has not been provided or has ceased to function as a
result of blocked scuppers and channels. Excessive weed is growing on the surface at the
kerbs.
1C

COMPONENT 1O FI LL / WEARI NG SURFACE OTHER

Units of measurement: Square Metres

This element includes those structures with fill, gravel or asphalt over the deck. This element
includes asphalt overlays which have been reinforced with fibreglass mesh or polypropylene
geogrid mesh. Also included is the pavement on masonry arch bridges in which the fill forms
the road surface.

Please note that if the depth of the asphalt overlay exceeds the depth shown on the design
drawings by more than 40mm, the actual depth should be entered into the Design Inventory
of the Bridge Information System. The details of the structure should also be forwarded to
Structures Division for the purpose of assessing the impact that the additional surfacing may
have on the load-carrying capacity of the structure. This also applies to concrete decks /
wearing surfaces which have been subjected to an asphalt overlay.

Condition State 1

The asphalt surface is in good condition with no cracking, pot holes, rutting, bumps or
depressions. The surface has adequate crossfall or gradeline to efficiently drain surface water
from it. A fine transverse crack may have opened in the asphalt over fixed or buried
expansion joints.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking, rutting, small bumps or depressions. These irregularities cause
a minor hindrance to drainage of the deck. Potholes may be beginning to form in cracked
areas. Ride qualities are beginning to be affected. A moderate crack may have opened in the
asphalt over fixed or buried expansion joints.

Condition State 3

Potholes, cracking, rutting, bumps or depressions are holding moisture on the deck and
allowing it to penetrate the fill. Ride qualities have been affected to a moderate extent.
Asphalt surface may not extend across the full width of the bridge or deck drainage systems
may be poor or inadequate. Severe cracks may have opened in the asphalt over fixed or
buried expansion joints. Crazing of the adjacent asphalt may be evident but there is no
differential movement between sections and asphalt is bonded to deck.

Condition State 4

Potholing, cracking, rutting, bumps or depressions are having a marked effect on the drainage
and rideability of the asphalt surface. Asphalt surface may not extend full width of the bridge
and may have excessive weed or grass growth, or no deck drainage has been catered for. The
asphalt surfacing over fixed joints, buried expansion joints or joints between ply deck sheets
may be cracked and crazed and sections are acting independently and have debonded from
the deck. Sections of asphalt may have been lost.
1O

COMPONENT 2S BRI DGE RAI LI NG/BARRI ERS STEEL

Units of measurement: Lineal Metres

This item defines all types of steel or iron railings including tubes, water pipes, rolled hollow
sections, rolled shapes or beams. Also included in this item are the posts and end posts which
support the railings regardless of material type. Common post types used are RHS, precast
and reinforced concrete, steel channels and timber. It also includes steel girders used to
support the edge of the deck, electrification barriers and pedestrian grilles attached to the
barrier.

Condition State 1

The paint or galvanising on the rails and/or posts is in good condition with no rust spotting.
Posts are in good condition with no splitting of timber, corrosion of steel or cracking of
concrete members. No accident damage is visible.

Condition State 2

The protective system is no longer effective and spot rusting has occurred on the rails and/or
posts. There may be minor splitting of timber posts, minor cracking in concrete posts or spot
rusting of steel posts but all bolting and joint supports are tight. Any accident damage is
minor and of no consequence.

Condition State 3

The protective system may have broken down and there is surface pitting in a number of
locations on the rails and/or posts but there is minimal effect on strength or serviceability.
There may be some corrosion of steel posts, split timber posts or moderate cracking and
spalling of concrete posts. Bolted connections to rails may be loose but there is no cracking
of welds. Nuts and bolts may be corroding. The anchor bolts or sockets for the posts are
tight. Accident damage has only a minor effect on strength or serviceability of the barrier.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced and some loss of section has occurred in the rails and/or posts
which is affecting both strength and serviceability. Bolted connections are extremely loose
and bolts may be missing altogether, or rails may have broken free from mountings. The
anchor bolts or sockets of posts may be loose and the containment capacity is significantly
reduced. Nuts and bolts may be corroding significantly and/or welds may be cracked.
Timber posts are severely split or decayed, concrete posts are badly cracked and spalled, and
steel posts are badly corroded. Accident damage is severe with posts knocked out of line,
loss of rail or badly damaged posts and anchorages. Packers between rails and posts may be
missing.
2S

COMPONENT 2P BRI DGE RAI LI NG/BARRI ERS PRECAST
CONCRETE
Units of Measurement: Lineal Metres

This item defines all types and shapes of barriers where the principal component is precast
concrete. It includes any RC terminals, steel safety rails or traffic barriers mounted on top
and holding down bolts. Inspectors should use the state descriptions for Component 2C Cast-
In-Situ Concrete Barriers in addition to the descriptions given below for the fasteners.

Condition State 1

Mortar seating is continuous and sound and there is no evidence of moisture ingress into the
base joint. Alignment is true to line and level and all bolts are tight.

Condition State 2

Mortar seating is substantially intact with a few isolated failures. Some moisture may be
penetrating the bedding joint but there is no rust staining evident. There are visible
discontinuities in alignment of panels but barrier is fit for purpose.

Condition State 3

Mortar seating is missing or crumbling out of significant portions of the bedding joint and
surface water run-off is freely passing through some sections of the joint. Rust stains are
evident on the kerb/plinth and anchor bolts may show signs of active corrosion. There may
be visible discontinuities in alignment of panels but the containment capacity is substantially
intact.

Condition State 4

The mortar seating may be missing over large areas and the anchor bolts are significantly
corroded such that the containment capacity has been significantly reduced. Severe rust
staining and leakage through the joint is evident.
2P

COMPONENT 2C BRI DGE RAI LI NG/BARRI ERS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This item defines all cast-in-situ concrete bridge barriers and includes terminals and any steel
safety rails or traffic barriers mounted on top. The item also includes cast-in-situ concrete
portion constructed to join precast concrete parapets to the deck.

Condition State 1

Barrier is in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or corrosion of
reinforcement. The correct traffic face profile has been constructed. Steel rails are in good
condition with no rust spotting and bolted and welded connection show no signs of
deterioration. No accident damage is evident.

Condition State 2

There is minor cracking and spalling due to corrosion of the reinforcement. The correct
traffic face profile has been constructed with no overlays affecting the upstand. Steel railings
on top of the parapet may have rust spotting and bolted connections are tight and in good
condition. There are no cracked welds. Accident damage is slight and of no consequence.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling is evident with in excess of 20% loss of reinforcement area.
The steel barrier may be pitted on the surface and connections slightly loose. Post
anchorages may have minor cracking due to vehicle impact. The traffic face profile may
have been constructed incorrectly or a surfacing overlay placed which reduces the height of
the vertical upstand and barrier. Accident damage has only a minor effect on strength and
serviceability.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking may be visible due to advanced corrosion of the reinforcement which may
have lost in excess of 20% of its sectional area. Corrosion may be well advanced in the steel
barrier, bolts may be loose or rails may have broken free from their mountings. The
anchorage area of the steel barrier posts may be cracked and spalled. Strength and
serviceability of the barrier is adversely affected. The traffic face profile may have been
constructed incorrectly on surfacing overlays placed such that the upstand height is
significantly reduced. Accident damage may be severe with serious cracking and spalling of
the concrete barrier or loss of sections of the railing.
2C

COMPONENT 2T BRI DGE RAI LI NG/BARRI ERS TI MBER


This element defines those rails constructed using timber either from a sawn section or glued
laminated sections. This element includes also the supporting posts.

Timber railing is considered to be inappropriate and represents a significant hazard to road
users. The presence of barriers of this type are to be noted in the comments field in the
"overall rating" section of the "Bridge Condition Inspection Report - Form B2/1".

Condition State 1

The element shows only minor deterioration and all the bolting is tight. No accident damage
is visible.

Condition State 2

The element shows signs of minor decay, splitting or cracking but does not affect the strength
or serviceability. Bolting of the posts and rails is generally tight. Accident damage is only
minor with no effect on strength or serviceability.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting, cracking or crushing may be present affecting the strength and
serviceability of the railing to a minor extent. Bolting may be loose in a number of areas.
Accident damage may have a minor effect on the strength or serviceability of the railing. The
paint system on rails and posts may have broken down.

Condition State 4

Heavy decay, splitting, cracking, crushing or termite damage may be present affecting the
strength and serviceability of the railing. Bolting may be quite loose, corroded or missing
completely, affecting the strength of the railing. Major accident damage is affecting the
serviceability of the railing.
2T

COMPONENT 2O BRI DGE RAI LI NG/BARRI ERS OTHER


This element defines all types of shapes and barrier materials other than those already
covered. Included in this element are masonry parapets, aluminium rails with steel
tensioning cables inside, G.W.I. pipe, post and rails, wire mesh fencing panels, wire or chain
cables. The element covers any posts required to support the railing system or cables.

Condition State 1

The element shows only minor signs of deterioration with minor cracking between masonry
blocks or rusting of steel work. No accident damage is visible.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking, spalling, loss of mortar between masonry blocks, surface or spot rusting has
occurred but having little or no affect on strength or serviceability. Accident damage is very
minor with no effect on strength or serviceability.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking, spalling, loss of mortar between masonry block, or corrosion of metal is
occurring but having a minor affect on strength or serviceability. Accident damage may have
a minor effect on the strength or serviceability of the railing.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking, spalling, loss of mortar or corrosion has a large affect on rail strength or
serviceability. Accident damage is major affecting the strength or serviceability of the
railing.
2O

COMPONENT 3P BRI DGE KERBS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This item defines those upper portions of precast concrete deck units which form an upstand
at the edge of the bridge and/or carriageway. Bridge barriers are normally mounted on these
members.

Condition State 1

The precast kerbs and any cast-in-situ connections are in good condition with no cracking or
spalling.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking or spalling at the joints or face of kerb due to corroding reinforcement. The
repairs to lifting lugs or holes may be cracked or spalled. If ASR is prevalent in the area then
minor map cracking may be evident around the repairs and on the front and top face of the
kerb.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking at joints or on the face of the kerb due to corroding reinforcement.
Cracking and spalling may also be occurring at fixed joints filled with mortar due to bearing
pressures caused by deck flexing. There may be moderate cracking at the base of barrier
posts as a consequence of vehicle impact but containment is still effective. Moderate map
cracking due to ASR may be evident.

Condition State 4

Kerbs are severely cracked and spalled as result of corrosion, ASR, bearing at kerb joints or
the effects of vehicle impact on the barrier. Containment capacity of the barrier may be
reduced to unsafe levels. The reinforcement in the kerb may be exposed and more than 20%
of the sectional area may have been lost.
3P

COMPONENT 3C BRI DGE KERBS CAST-I NSI TU
CONCRETE

This item defines kerbs that are constructed of cast-in-situ concrete on deck units or deck
slabs which form an upstand at the edge of the bridge and/or carriageway. Bridge barriers are
normally mounted on these members. Also included are concrete kerbs cast on timber bridge
decks, with or without attached barriers.

Condition State 1

Kerbs are in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or corrosion of
reinforcement.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking or spalling at the joints or on faces due to movement restraint, shrinkage or
corrosion of reinforcement. Bolts to timber girders may be slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking or spalling at the joints or on faces due to movement restraint, shrinkage
or corrosion of reinforcement. The reinforcement may have lost up to 20% of its section.
Some minor flexural cracking may be evident on the top face over piers on continuous joints.
There may be moderate cracking at the base of barrier posts as a consequence of vehicle
impact but containment is not impaired. Bolts to timber girders may be moderately loose.

Condition state 4

Severe cracking and spalling is evident as a result of movement restraint at joints, corrosion
of reinforcement or the effects of vehicle impact on the barrier. Containment capacity may
be reduced to unsafe levels. The reinforcement may have suffered a loss of section in excess
of 20%. Bolts to timber girders may be very loose, severely corroded or missing completely.
3C

COMPONENT 3T BRI DGE KERBS TI MBER


This item defines kerbs that are constructed of timber which form an upstand at the edge of
bridge and/or carriageway. Kerbs may be formed from either hardwood or plywood
construction.

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition and firmly bolted, nailed or screwed in place. There is little
or no evidence of rot or decay. Minor splits and cracks may be evident, however these will
have no effect on member strength.

Condition State 2

Minor decay, splitting or cracking may be present but not sufficient to affect the strength or
serviceability of the member.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting or crushing may be present affecting the components serviceability,
including containment capacity if barrier attachment capacity is reduced. In most instances
timbers will have loosened considerably. There may be an active termite presence but with
only minimal damage sustained. The paint system on the kerb may have broken down.

Condition State 4

Heavy decay, splitting or crushing may be present, affecting the serviceability of the
component. Timbers will be loose or may in fact be missing. There may be an active termite
infestation causing severe damage. The paint system on the kerb may have broken down.
Attachment bolts may be very loose, missing completely or heavily corroded. Unsleeved
attachment bolts may be severely corroded due to contact with preservative treatment in
stress-laminated decks. With ply kerbs, bolt heads may be punching into the kerb if
insufficient washer sizes are used.
3T

COMPONENT 4S FOOTWAYS STEEL


This element describes those footways which are constructed of steel plates. Any thin layer
of surfacing material should be included with this element as it greatly influences the action
and rate of deterioration of the steel decking.

Condition State 1

The steel is in good condition with no evidence of any corrosion. The plates are rigidly
bolted to supports and are good and tight. The surfacing is in good condition with no
evidence of cracking, pop-outs or delaminations.

Condition State 2

Minor pitting of the surface due to corrosion may be evident but there is no loss of section.
Plates remain firmly bolted to supports and are good and tight. There may be minor cracking
of the surfacing.

Condition State 3

Moderate corrosion may have occurred, occasioning a loss of section of up to 10%. The hold
down connections may be slightly loose, permitting excessive flexing or vibration or rattling
of the plates. The surfacing may exhibit moderate cracking and some local loss of material.

Condition State 4

Severe corrosion may have occurred, occasioning significant loss of section. The hold down
connections may be loose and the plates are rattling up and down under load. Bolts or edge
material of the plates may have sheared under this action. The surfacing is breaking up and
delaminating from the plates.
4S

COMPONENT 4P FOOTWAYS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element describes those kerbs constructed using precast concrete RC kerb units
connected by small cast-in-situ infills, or footways which are constructed using precast RC
slabs spanning between cast-in-situ road and outer kerbs and includes all components making
up the footway.

Condition State 1

The precast kerbs and their cast-in-situ connections are in good condition with no cracking or
spalling. Footway slabs are in good condition with only minor superficial cracking, and all
units are at the same level.

Condition State 2

Precast kerb units may have minor cracking or spalling at the joints or in the face of kerb due
to corroding reinforcement. Minor cracking and/or steps of less than 10mm between footway
units may exist but present no danger to pedestrians.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling at the kerb joints may exist. Steps in excess of 10mm
between footway slabs may present some danger to pedestrians. Some precast slabs may be
badly cracked or broken.

Condition State 4

Kerb joints are heavily cracked and spalled affecting their operation. Large stepping between
footway slabs with numerous broken slabs presents a danger to pedestrians.
4P

COMPONENT 4C FOOTWAYS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines those kerbs or footways which are fully constructed from cast-in-situ
concrete.

Condition State 1

The slabs are in good condition with no cracking or spalling. Footway slabs may have minor
superficial cracks of no importance.

Condition State 2

Kerbs may have minor cracking or spalling due to movements or corrosion of steel
reinforcement. Footway slabs may also have minor cracks or spalls due to shrinkage,
temperature, relative movement or corroding reinforcement. Differential vertical movement
between footway slabs should be less than 10mm to present minimal danger to pedestrians
tripping over.

Condition State 3

Kerbs and footways may have moderate cracking and spalling due to movement or steel
reinforcement corrosion. Differential movement between footway slabs may have caused
broken edges and vertical displacements greater than 10 mm, presenting a danger of tripping
to pedestrians.

Condition State 4

Kerbs and footways may have severe cracking and spalling. Footway slabs may be badly
broken and uneven in areas or have large vertical displacements causing major danger to
pedestrians.
4C

COMPONENT 4T FOOTWAYS TI MBER


This element defines those kerbs or footways constructed of timber.

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition and firmly bolted, nailed or screwed in place. There are no
large gaps between footway timbers and ends of timbers are at a similar level.

Condition State 2

Minor decay, splitting or cracking may be present but not affecting the strength or
serviceability of the timber. A few planks may be loose but do not cause a danger
topedestrians. Gaps or uneven timbers are small enough not to be a danger to pedestrians.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting or crushing may be present affecting the components serviceability.
Planks are generally loose and along with gaps and uneven ends of timbers present a danger
of tripping to pedestrians. Non-slip surfacing on ply decks may be starting to delaminate.

Condition State 4

Heavy decay, splitting or crushing may be present affecting the serviceability of the
component. Planks may be broken, missing or very loose presenting a major danger to
pedestrians. Non-slip surfacing on ply decks may be missing in substantial areas. Acute
termite infestation and damage may have occurred. The exposed ends of ply decking may be
badly weathered and delaminated.
4T

COMPONENT 4O FOOTWAYS OTHER


This element defines those kerbs or footways constructed with a gravel or asphalt or sprayed
seal surface, brick or masonry blocks. The surface of asphalt-filled steel decking is also
included in this element. The steel trough sections shall be covered under Item. No. 30S
Kerbs may also be in a steel plate with gravel or asphalt behind, or simply be a built up
mound of asphalt.

Condition State 1

The element is in good condition with only minor superficial cracking of the surface, minor
rusting of the steel kerb face plate or edge plate or broken masonry blocks.

Condition State 2

The asphalt surface may have some minor cracking, but no broken-up areas. Steel kerb face
plate or edge plate may be rusty but no corrosion pitting. Masonry kerb blocks may be
cracked or have minor edge spalls but still basically in fair condition.

Condition State 3

The kerb face plate or edge plate may have moderate corrosion but still be effectively holding
the footway material in place. Masonry kerb blocks may be heavily cracked and broken up
but still be effectively holding the footway material in place. Asphalt surfacing may have
moderate cracking or small broken up areas.

Condition State 4

Asphalt surface may be heavily cracked and broken up in large areas. Steel kerb face plate or
edge plate may be severely corroded with holes or loss of edges. Masonry kerb blocks may
be completely broken with sections missing.
4O

COMPONENT 10O POURABLE J OI NT SEALS OTHER


This element defines those joints filled with pourable joint sealant or asphalts, and includes
buried expansion joints.

Materials used in pourable joints are bitumen, polyurethanes, 2 part pack polyester
polyurethanes, rubberised bitumen, megaprene and polymer modified bitumens. Epoxy or
fibre reinforced concrete nosings are also included.

Asphalt joints encompass normal asphalt, rubberised asphalts and polymer modified asphalts,
such as the Thormajoint or SAMIfilla HM bridge joint systems.

Condition State 1

The seal shows little or no deterioration and completely seals the joint against moisture
penetration. There is no cracking of the nosings or fretting of the surrounding asphalt.
There are no adhesion cracks along the sides of the joint or any cohesion cracks due to
elongation of the sealant.

Condition State 2

There may be minor fine adhesion and/or cohesion cracks allowing minor leakage of the
joint. The deck or asphalt adjacent to the joint may have minor spalling. Overfilled sealer
may be flowing out of the joint or may be impacted by traffic. Thin asphalt surfacing over the
joint may be cracked. Minor cracking may be evident in the nosings but there is no loss of
adhesion to deck.

Condition State 3

Adhesion and/or cohesion cracking may be moderate allowing reasonable leakage of
moisture through the joint. The adjacent deck or asphalt may have medium spalling.
Overfilled sealer may be heavily impacted by traffic and tending to rip the sealer out. Thin
asphalt surface over the joint may be breaking up with minor areas lost. The nosings may be
badly cracked but there is no differential movement between sections and there is no loss of
adhesion to deck. The asphalt is beginning to fret at the edges.

Condition State 4

The joints have completely failed allowing extensive moisture penetration. Pourable joint
sealant may be almost completely lost. Bitumen/cork filler may be broken up and being
ripped out in chunks by traffic. The nosings may be excessively cracked and sections are
delaminating from the deck. The surrounding asphalt is fretting and some material may be
lost from the margins.
10O

COMPONENT 11O COMPRESSI ON J OI NT SEALS OTHER


This element describes all joints using preformed compression type seals such as plastic foam
strips, rubber based hose joints, Wabo seals or Hercules/Honel seals. Epoxy or fibre
reinforced concrete nosings are also included.

Condition State 1

The joint seal and its armouring (if any) are in good condition with no movement of the
armouring visible, and no adhesion or sealing problems with the compression seal. There is
no cracking of the nosings or fretting of the surrounding asphalt.

Condition State 2

The joint may have lost adhesion with the deck or armouring in small areas allowing minor
leakage of moisture. The adjacent deck may have minor spalls or the armouring may be
moving slightly with cracks developing between the asphalt surface and the steel. Minor
cracking may be evident in the nosings but there is no loss of adhesion to the deck.

Condition State 3

The joint may have lost adhesion over a long length allowing excessive moisture penetration.
The seal may have worked to the road surface and may be suffering damage due to traffic
impact. The adjacent deck may have moderate spalling or the armouring may be moving with
the asphalt surface breaking away from the steel. The nosings may be badly cracked but
there is no differential movement between sections and there is no loss of adhesion to the
deck. The asphalt may be fretting at the edges.

Condition State 4

The joint may have completely lost adhesion and is no longer operative or may be lost. Steel
armouring may be moving considerably and breaking free. The joint seal may be impacted by
traffic to the extent that the seal has suffered extensive damage.

The nosings may be excessively cracked and sections are delaminating from the deck. The
surrounding asphalt is fretting and some material may be lost from the margins.
11O

COMPONENT 12O ASSEMBLY J OI NT SEAL OTHER


This element defines those joints which have an assembly mechanism which consists of end
dams bolted down to the deck with a gland or gland type seal between. Common joints
which are included in this element are products such as Transflex, Alustrip, Felspan, Wabo
Maurer gland seals, Cipec and Firmsec (small) joints.

Condition State 1

The seal and anchorages are in good condition and there is no cracking of the surrounding
deck, concrete nosings or asphalt.

Condition State 2

There may be minor splits of the seal or gland. Some rubber may be peeling from the end
dams. Anchorages may be slightly loose and surrounding deck or concretenosings may be
cracked. Asphalt nosings may be breaking away from the end dams which may also be
slightly higher than the approach asphalt due to slight rutting in the wheel paths.

Glands may be pulling out of their housing due to traffic impacting or poor installation.

Condition State 3

The glands may be severely split or pulled out of their housings allowing moisture and road
grit to penetrate. Rubber may have peeled from the end dams exposing steel shims which
may be damaged by traffic. Some anchorages may be quite loose allowing excessive
movement of the end dams. Surrounding concrete or concrete nosings may be badly cracked.
Asphalt nosings may be badly rutted or cracked.

Condition State 4

Glands may be severely damaged or completely out of their housings. End dams may be
severely damaged by traffic, or have broken loose due to anchorage failure. Concrete nosings
may be completely broken up or asphalt nosings are potholing next to the joint.
12O

COMPONENT 13S OPEN EXPANSI ON J OI NT STEEL


This element defines those open expansion joints constructed with steel edge armouring and
designed to allow moisture and grit to penetrate the deck, to be removed by specially
designed substructure elements. This element does not include those expansion joints where
the expansion seals have been completely lost. Those joints should be considered under their
original element with the seal in place.

Condition State 1

The element shows no deterioration with the steel armouring firmly in place. There is no
cracking of the concrete block around the steel armouring. The joint width is sufficiently
wide to pass any road grit without it jamming in the joint.

Condition State 2

The steel armouring may have rust staining and/or minor corrosion but it is firmly in place.
The deck may have very minor cracking in the vicinity of the joint. Width of the joint is
sufficient.

Condition State 3

The steel armouring is showing advanced corrosion and there may be moderate cracking in
the deck around the joint indicating the armouring is loose due to traffic impact. Width of
joint may be small allowing road grit to jam in the joint, or joint width may be excessive
allowing high traffic impact forces onto the armouring.

Condition State 4

The steel armouring may be loose due to excessive traffic impact. The deck may be heavily
cracked and spalled due to the loose or broken anchorages of the armouring. The deck joint
may have closed up allowing dirt and grit to be trapped in the joint.
13S

COMPONENT 13O OPEN EXPANSI ON J OI NT OTHER


This element defines those expansion joints constructed without armouring and designed to
allow moisture and grit to penetrate the deck into drainage systems on the substructure
elements. This element does not include those expansion joints where the expansion seals
have been completely lost. These joints are to be considered under their original element
with the seal in place.

Condition State 1

The ends of the deck slab are intact and the joint width is sufficiently wide to pass any road
grit without it jamming the joint.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking of the deck slab adjacent to the joint. Width of the deck joint
gap is adequate.

Condition State 3

The ends of the deck slab adjacent to the joint may show moderate cracking and/or minor
spalling due to traffic impact. Width of deck joint gap may be small allowing grit to jam in
the joint or joint width may be excessive allowing high traffic impact forces onto the ends of
the deck slabs.

Condition State 4

The ends of the deck slabs may be severely cracked and spalled as a result of excessive traffic
impact loading caused by an excessively wide gap or uneven deck slabs. Alternatively, the
deck joint may have closed up or the gap has been blocked with dirt and grit, and the
consequential restraint of movement has generated the cracking and spalling.
13O

COMPONENT 14S SLI DI NG J OI NT STEEL


This element describes those joints constructed mainly of steel which move or slide over or
within a mating element on the other side. The joints may have a compression seal, gland,
membrane or catch drain beneath, which should be considered as part of the joint element.

J oints included in this element are steel sliding plates, steel finger joints, PSC FT joints,
CIPEC and FIRMSEC (large) joints.

Condition State 1

The element is in good condition with only minor rusting. All hold down bolts are in good
condition with no movement of the anchorages. The joint shows no moisture penetration.

Condition State 2

Minor corrosion may be showing on the steel and there may be some slight loosening of the
anchorage bolts. The adjacent asphalt may have minor cracking at the joint. The joint may
show signs of medium moisture penetration.

Condition State 3

Heavy corrosion of the steel plates may be present, and some bolts may have failed allowing
the anchorages to move. Cracking and minor breaks in the asphalt may be occurring. The
joint may show signs of heavy moisture penetration. Catch drains may be full of grit etc. and
may not be functioning or catch membranes may have badly deteriorated. Steel fingers may
be rubbing due to side movement or fingers may be raised well above the mating fingers, or
widening of the gap may only have the ends of the fingers in line.

Condition State 4

Advanced corrosion of the steel may be present and a number of bolts may have failed
allowing excessive movement of the anchorages. The asphalt around the joint may be badly
cracked and pieces breaking out. Steel fingers may be broken or completely apart due to
excessive movement, or rotations. Catch drains or membranes may have completely failed or
are missing.
14S

COMPONENT 15O FI XED J OI NT OTHER


This element describes those joints which are basically fixed but may allow very small
movement of 1 or 2 mm. Deck joints, with or without a sprayed seal on top, where the decks
are cast against each other or with a thin separator such as cork, bitumen impregnated
fibrebord, styrene sheets or malthoid sheets are included in this element.

If fill or surfacing has been placed over the joints, any defect in the road surface resulting
from the joint should be considered under item number 1 Fill/Wearing Surface on Deck. As
the actual joint material will not be visible, the joint should be rated on the basis of observed
moisture leakage through the joint (typically evident from the degree of water staining on the
headstock).

Condition State 1

The element shows no deterioration and the joint material is held firmly in place by the
surrounding concrete. There is no moisture penetration of the joint.

Condition State 2

Minor deterioration of the material may have occurred allowing slight moisture leakage of
the joint through the fine crack.

Condition State 3

Moderate deterioration of the material has occurred due to weathering, pressure or movement
of the surrounding concrete. Moderate leakage is occurring as the joint material pulls away
from the surrounding concrete.

Condition State 4

Severe deterioration has occurred and the joint material has pulled well apart from the
surrounding concrete, or the joint material has badly weathered or been lost. Heavy leakage
is occurring through the joint and may be affecting the surrounding concrete.
15O

COMPONENT 20 P DECK SLABS PRECAST
CONCRETE

Units of measurement: Each

This element includes all contiguous precast concrete superstructure units forming both the
span and the deck. These units include:

Transversely stressed deck units. (Deck units with a composite slab are considered as
components 21P:Closed Web Girders and 20C:RC Deck Slab.

T-Slabs: A trapezoidal beam with an integral top flange developed by VicRoads. A
reinforced concrete in situ slab is cast over the top flange.

U-Slabs: (Sunshine coast only) Units are transversely stressed through cast insitu
diaphragms.

Inverted T Slabs: Bottom flanges are contiguous. Voids between units may be filled
with insitu concrete, alternatively a conventional deck slab may be cast over the top
flanges.

Separate condition states have been defined for the U slabs while the remaining types are
covered under a single category.

U-SLABS

Condition State 1

The units are in good condition with no moisture or staining between the units though there
may be minor efflorescence powder under the slab section of the beams. The units may have
faint flexural cracking at midspan but there is no spalling. Bolts between high strength U-
Slabs are all tight.

Condition State 2

The U-Slabs may have fine flexural cracking of the legs and there may be other minor
cracking or spalling due to corroding steel reinforcement. Moderate moisture andstaining
between the units indicates the shear key concrete is cracked in high strength U-Slabs bridges
and there may be longitudinal cracking of the asphalt on top of the slabs. Bolts between the
units are generally tight though there may be a few loose. If the bearings are badly positioned
at the ends of the U-Slabs, there may be minor cracking in the bearing areas. Impact damage
has not exposed reinforcement.
20P

Condition State 3

Medium flexural cracking may be noticed in the U-Slab legs with moderate moisture staining
between the units. The asphalt surface will be moderately cracked and U-Slab bolts will be
loose between these units. The shear key concrete between the tops of the units will be badly
cracked. There may be moderate cracking and spalling of the U-Slab legs due to corroding
reinforcement. If bearings are badly positioned at the ends of the U-Slabs there may be
moderate cracking in the bearing areas of the U-Slab legs. Impact damage comprising spalls
of cover concrete of less than 0.5m
2
with no significant damage to reinforcement or
prestressing strands.

Condition State 4

Medium flexural cracking may be seen in the U-Slab legs at midspan with heavy moisture
staining between the units. The asphalt surface may be heavily cracked with some areas
completely broken out. The shear key concrete between the high strength U-Slabs may be
badly cracked and sections may be broken out. U-Slab bolts will be loose, many with nuts
completely missing, or they may have been retightened and badly cracked the top of the slab.
There may be severe cracking and spalling of the U-Slab legs with heavy corrosion of the
reinforcement with section loss of 20% or greater.

There may be severe cracking of the ends of the U-Slab legs due to badly positioned
bearings. Impact damage comprising spalls of cover concrete in excess of 0.5m
2
and
damaged or severed prestressing strands.

PRESTRESSED SLABS (I ncludes Deck Units)

Condition State 1

The units are in good condition with minor moisture staining and white efflorescence powder
in the joints between units. The units may have minor faint cracking but no spalling. The
transverse tensioning rods are in good condition, and show no signs of corrosion.

Condition State 2

The units may have moderate moisture staining with stalactite growths and efflorescence
powder visible but no rust staining due to corrosion of the transverse rods. There may be
minor cracks and spalls but no exposure of the stressing strands. Impact forces have caused
minor damage but has not exposed reinforcement. Fine longitudinal cracking of the soffit
and edges of the units near the supports may be evident as a result of ASR in deck units. The
transverse tensioning rods may have minor surface corrosion.
20P

Condition State 3

The units may have medium moisture staining and efflorescence powder in the joints, along
with heavy rust staining due to corrosion of transverse tensioning rods. The asphalt surface
may have moderate cracking due to differential movement between the units or loss of
tensioning force in the transverse rods. However the anchorages are still tight in the
recesses. There may be moderate cracking and spalling with minor loss of section of the
stressing strands due to corrosion. Non-prestressed reinforcement may be heavily corroded
with up to 20 % section loss. Impact damage comprising spalls of cover concrete less than
0.5m
2
with no significant damage to reinforcement or prestressing strands.

Condition State 4

The units may have heavy moisture staining and efflorescence powder in the joints with
heavy rust staining due to corrosion of the transverse tensioning rods. The asphalt surface
may be badly cracked or broken along the lines of the precast units. There may be severe
cracking and spalling with substantial loss of section of the non-prestressed reinforcement.
Stressing strands may be broken or have lost up to 10% of section due to corrosion.
Transverse tensioning may be loose and the bar anchorages may have popped clear of the
recess. Impact damage comprising spalls of cover concrete in excess of 0.5m
2
and damaged
reinforcement or severed prestressing strands.
20P

COMPONENT 20C DECK/SLABS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all reinforced concrete decks cast-in-situ, including overlays cast non-
composite with precast units beneath. It also includes thin slabs cast over the top of defective
timber deck planks, however such use is not recommended for the reinstatement of
deteriorated timber decks. Cantilevers in excess of 1.0m long on closed web girders,
Component Number 21, shall also be included in this item.

Condition State 1

The deck shows little or no deterioration though there may be some dampness and
efflorescence. Minor cracking due to corroding reinforcement may be present. The
characteristic shrinkage crack down the centre of flat slab bridges is fine and dry.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be present with corroding reinforcement visible. Dampness
patches and efflorescence powder may be more prominent. The characteristic shrinkage crack
along the centre of flat slab bridges is fine and dry.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking due to structural mechanisms, or moderate to severe cracking and spalling
due to non-structural actions such as corrosion of the reinforcement, with loss of section up to
20 % in areas. Patches of dampness and efflorescence may be large with numerous stalactites
and lime flows visible. The characteristic shrinkage crack along the centre of flat slab bridges
may be medium with some moisture and staining around the adjacent crack. Deck has
extensive crazed cracking but no differential movement between sections.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking due to structural mechanisms or advanced corrosion of the reinforcement
over large areas, with loss of section of reinforcement greater than 20% (and any cracking or
spalling associated with it). The characteristic shrinkage crack along the centre of flat slab
bridges may be severe with excessive moisture penetration and heavy staining around the
crack. Deck has extensive crazed cracking with differential movement between sections of
the deck ie lateral load distribution has been greatly affected.
20C

COMPONENT 20T DECK/SLABS TI MBER


This element includes all types of timber decks constructed using fully treated timber and
acting as a plate deck. Included in this element are stress laminated timber decks and glued
laminated timber sheet (plywood) decks either as a longitudinal decking or transverse
decking replacement or as a span replacement. Distributor members are also covered.

Condition State 1

The timber may have minor cracks, splits or checks but is fully protected by the
preservatives, with no untreated heartwood exposed. The decks are well bolted to the
supports. Tensioning rods have adequate stressing and there is no damage to the timber at the
stressing plates. Distributor members are connected tightly.

Condition State 2

Preservative protection may be beginning to dissipate with minor leaching of preservative
salts (white powder on underside of deck) and with minor weathering and rot of timber.
Bolting of the deck may be slightly loose with fine reflective cracks through the asphalt on
top. Tensioning rods should still have adequate stressing and there should be no damage to
the timber at the stressing plates. There may be minor corrosion on the protruding ends of
tensioning rods. Distributor members may be slightly loose or held down at the ends only,
and decking surfacing at joints is mostly intact.

Condition State 3

Further leaching of the preservative is occurring with the timber looking well weathered and
rot pockets forming. The exposed ends of ply sheeting may be starting to delaminate. Bolting
of the decks' may be loose and there may be minor bolt corrosion, with medium reflective
cracking through the asphalt on top. With transverse sheeting, reflective cracking may also be
occurring due to differential movement between the slabs under loading, or due to inadequate
bolting and/or joint treatment. Tensioning rods may be losing stress with minor movement or
separation of the laminations beginning to occur. There may be moderate corrosion on the
protruding ends of tensioning rods. There may be noticeable squashing of timber behind
stressing plates. Distributor members may be deteriorated with possible loss of section or
member connections may be loose, allowing minor movement under traffic and resulting in
cracking of surfacing at decking joints.

Condition State 4

Deterioration of the timber may be well advanced with substantial loss of the preservative
protection. Weathering and rot of the timber is severe with some laminations almost rotted
out. The exposed ends of ply sheeting may be badly delaminated and there may be substantial
impact damage to the ends. With transverse sheeting the surfacing material may be breaking
up as a result of differential movement between the slabs under loading or due to inadequate
bolting and/or joint treatment.

20T
Bolting of the decks is very loose with excessive movement of the decking, and there may be
severe corrosion of the bolts. If small washers were used, the bolts may have punched
through the decking. Tensioning rods may be loose with movement and separation of the
laminations. Longitudinal cracking in the asphalt above the laminations will be seen if this is
occurring. The decking will also deflect excessively under load, particularly beneath the
wheel paths of heavy vehicles, as the lateral distribution has been severely affected. There
may be severe corrosion on the protruding ends of tensioning rods. There may be substantial
squashing of timber behind stressing plates. Distributor members are broken or have
experienced complete loss of section, and members may be moving significantly under
traffic, resulting in significant cracking of surfacing at decking joints.
20T

COMPONENT 21S CLOSED WEB/BOX GI RDERS STEEL


This element includes all closed web steel box girder bridges with concrete or steel deck
closing the top of the box or boxes. The steel may be painted. The element does not include
the deck.

Condition State 1

The paint system is generally sound with minor chalking, peeling or curling but no exposure
of the metal. All welds or bolts in good condition with no corrosion, cracking or loose bolts.

Condition State 2

Rust spotting of the paint system is occurring and the paint system is no longer effective. No
corrosion or section loss has occurred. All welds or bolts are in good condition with no
cracking, corrosion or loose bolts.

Condition State 3

Paint system has completely broken down with surface pitting present in a number of
locations. Active corrosion is occurring in isolated areas, but no significant loss section is
occurring to affect the strength of the member as a whole. Nuts and bolts may be corroding
but are still tight and no cracking of welds has occurred. Any evidence of vehicular impact
damage to webs/soffit.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced and significant loss of section has occurred which may have a
detrimental affect on the strength of the member ie, severe corrosion of webs or top flange
over support or bottom flange at midspan. Welds may be cracked. Nuts or bolts are severely
corroded and possibly no longer functioning to full capacity. Gross distortion of webs/soffit
as a result of vehicular impact. Buckling or distortion of webs, flanges or stiffeners.
21S

COMPONENT 21P CLOSED WEB/BOX GI RDER PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all closed web or box girder bridges constructed of precast units and
includes segmental post tensioned box girders and precast prestressed "U" beams with a cast-
in-situ deck to form the closed box shape. This element includes the deck whether precast
with the box or cast-in-situ at a later date. Deck cantilevers in excess of 1.0m long will be
assessed as deck/slab component No 20.

Condition State 1

There may be only minor cracking of the units due to a lack of distribution reinforcement but
definitely no spalling or cracking of a structural nature. Some minor discolourationor white
efflorescence powder may be visible at the former lifting hole locations.

Condition State 2

There may be a few minor cracks or spalls due to corroding reinforcement in isolated areas
but there should be no exposure of any stressing tendons or stressing ducts. Some minor
discolouration or white efflorescence powder may be visible at a few joints between the
precast units. Minor transverse cracking may be evident on the box soffit at midspan or on
the deck surface over supports. Impact damage to box that has not exposed reinforcement.

Condition State 3

There may be some delamination or spalling in isolated areas with the stressing tendons or
stressing ducts exposed but with little or no corrosion occurring. Other exposed
reinforcement may have corrosion up to 20% of the area of the bars in isolated areas.
Moderate transverse cracking may be evident on the box soffit at midspan or on the deck
surface over supports. Impact damage comprising spalls of less than 0.5m
2
of cover concrete
with no significant damage to reinforcement or prestressing strand/duct.

Condition State 4

Delamination or spalling is present in large areas with heavy corrosion of reinforcing bars.
Stressing tendons exposed in the spalled areas may have corrosion up to 10 % of their area.
Some strands may also be broken or there may be severe cracking or failure at the
anchorages. There may also be severe transverse cracking of the underside of the box at the
midspan or severe cracking in the deck above the supports. Any evidence of failure of glued
or cast-insitu joints between segments. Impact damage comprising spalls of more than 0.5m
2

of cover concrete and damaged or severed prestressing strand/ducts.
21P

COMPONENT 21C CLOSED WEB/BOX GI RDER CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all cast-in-situ, post tensioned concrete box girder and voided slab
bridges, and includes the deck as part of the element. Voided slab bridges can be recognised
by their shallow depth compared to a box girder. These structures are generally built on, or
over freeways and are well suited to spans of 34 to 40 metres. Voided slabs greater than 35
metres will generally have a variable depth due to their massive dead load compared with box
girders. Deck cantilevers in excess of 1.0m long will be assessed as deck/slab component No
20.

Condition State 1

There may be minor cracking of the girder or deck due to corroding reinforcement or a lack
of distribution reinforcement, but there should be no structural cracking or spalling. Minor
discolouration of efflorescence powder may be visible in a few locations. Minor longitudinal
cracking on soffit under void formers.

Condition State 2

There may be a few minor cracks or spalls due to corroding reinforcement in locations but
there should be no exposure of the stressing ducts. Some minor discolouration or white
efflorescence powder may be visible in a few locations. Minor cracking on soffit
transversely at midspan, longitudinally under void formers and on deck over supports.
Impact damage to box that has not exposed reinforcement.

Condition State 3

There may be some delaminations or spalling in isolated locations with stressing ducts
exposed but with little or no corrosion occurring. Other exposed reinforcement may have
corrosion up to 20 % of the area of the bars in isolated areas. Moderate cracking on soffit
transversely at midspan, longitudinally under void formers and on deck over supports.
Impact damage comprising spalls of less than 0.5m
2
of cover concrete but no significant
damage to reinforcement or prestressing strand/ducts.

Condition State 4

Delamination or spalling is present in large areas with heavy corrosion of reinforcing bars.
Stressing ducts may be exposed in areas with active corrosion of the ducts and tendons
within. Some strands within the tendons may have up to 10% loss of section or be broken.
Severe cracking or failure may have occurred at the anchorages. There may also be major
transverse cracking of the underside of the box at midspan, or the top of the deck above the
supports. Impact damage comprising spalls of more than 0.5m
2
of cover concrete and
damaged or severed reinforcing bars or prestressing strand/ducts.
21C

COMPONENT 22S OPEN GI RDERS STEEL


This element includes all girders constructed of wrought iron or steel. The girders may be
rolled sections, welded plate girders, riveted girders constructed of plates and angles, or
lattice girders using flat sections crossing each other to form the vertical web/webs. Metal
may be painted or galvanised.

Condition State 1

The paint or galvanising system is generally sound with only minor chalking, peeling or
curling, but with no exposure of metal. All welds, bolts or rivets are in good condition with
no movement of plates or sections in the element.

Condition State 2

Spot rusting of the paint or galvanising system is occurring and the paint system is no longer
effective. No corrosion of the section has occurred. All member lines are true. All welds,
bolts or rivets are in good condition with no movement of plates or sections in the element.

Condition State 3

The paint or galvanising system has completely broken down with surface pitting in
locations. Active corrosion occurring in isolated areas but no loss of section area has
occurred which would affect the strength of the member. Nuts and bolts may be corroded but
are still tight and no cracking of welds has occurred. Riveted plates may have very minor
movements of 1 to 2 mm but rivets are generally sound. For structures without a composite
concrete deck the top flanges of the girders should be effectively braced at no more than 5m
centres such that no lateral bowing of girders occurs under load. Minor deviations in member
line. There may be some evidence of excessive deflection or movement under load.
Significant permanent distortion of members as a result of impact damage.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced and loss of section has occurred having a detrimental affect on
the strength of the member, ie, severe corrosion of webs or top flange over supports or
bottom flange at midspan. Bracing may be ineffective or missing forcing the girder to visibly
bow under traffic loading. Permanent bowing of girders may be evident. Girders may also
exhibit excessive vertical deflections under load. Buckling or distortion of webs, flanges or
stiffeners. Gross distortion of members as a result of impact damage.

There may be some cracking of the welds between the plates. Rivets or bolts may be
severely corroded and no longer carrying full load or functioning as intended. Rivets may be
broken or missing allowing excessive movement of plates of fabricated girders. Splice bolts
may be missing. Cracking of tension flanges may have occurred as a result of impact or
unsatisfactory welding procedures.
22S

COMPONENT 22P OPEN GI RDERS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes a variety of girders developed over the years using reinforced and
prestressed concrete. The vast majority are pretensioned, prestressed concrete members
however post tensioned girders, including some segmental constructions, have also been
adopted. This component description includes:

Non standard "I" girders (including segmental constructions)
Standard NAASRA "I" and "U" sections
Bulb-T (basically a thickened I section with a 1.2m wide top flange. Some units have
been constructed segmentally.
Super-T (a trapezoidal beam with an integral 2.0m wide top flange developed by
VicRoads)

Condition State 1

The girders are in good condition with only very minor cracking due to corroding
reinforcement, shrinkage, lack of curing or prestressing (longitudinal cracks in webs of ends
of girder).

Condition State 2

The girders may have minor cracking due to corrosion of reinforcement but there is no rust
staining in cracks. There are a few minor spalls but stressing strand is not exposed. Impact
damage has not exposed reinforcement (some minor discolouration or efflorescence powder
may be visible at joints between segments).

Condition State 3

Crack widths are moderate and a few spalls may have occurred which has exposed stressing
strands. The stressing strands should not show any evidence of corrosion whilst reinforcing
bars may exhibit a 20% loss of section. Minor flexural cracks may be evident in girders at
midspan or in the deck over supports if girders are continuous. Impact damage comprising
spalls of less than 0.5m
2
of cover concrete with no significant damage to reinforcement on
prestressing strands. (Heavy staining and/or cracking occurring at joints between girder
segments)

Condition State 4

Delaminations, spalls and corrosion of reinforcement is prevalent with loss of reinforcement
section is excess of 20%. Exposed prestressing strands may have lost up to 10% of their
section. Severe cracking or failure of anchorages may have occurred. Heavy flexural
cracking may be present in girders or in the deck above supports. Impact damage comprising
spalls in excess of 0.5m
2
of cover concrete and damaged or severed prestressing strand/ducts.
(evidence of opening of segmental girder joints)
22P

COMPONENT 22C OPEN GI RDERS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all reinforced concrete beams cast in situ, generally prior to 1950
though a few structures were built as late as 1955 using varying depth beams continuous over
pier supports with a larger central span.

These structures were called RC T-beam or grillage bridges and are generally continuous
monolithic small span bridges with the longest span being approximately 13 metres. (beam
shape is always rectangular).

Condition State 1

The girders have minor cracking due to corroding reinforcement but there should be no shear
cracking or spalling of the concrete. Minor cracking may exist at the built-in supports or fine
vertical shrinkage cracks may appear in the beams due to the locked up movements of the
structure.

Condition State 2

The girders may have fine flexural and/or shear cracking. Vertical shrinkage cracks and
cracking at built-in supports may be fine. Longitudinal cracking along the bottom of the
beams due to reinforcement corrosion may be of fine size with a few minor spalls.The ends
of simply supported beams may have minor cracking in the bearing areas due to the bearings
or locating dowels.

Condition State 3

Flexural cracking and shear cracking may be medium sized with minor cracking along the
beam deck joint. Vertical shrinkage cracks and cracking at built-in supports may be medium
in size. Longitudinal cracking may be medium along the bottom of the beams due to
reinforcement corrosion and there may be large spalls with delaminated cover concrete.
Exposed reinforcement may have heavy corrosion with section loss up to 20% in areas. The
beams may have moderate cracking in the bearing areas at the ends of the beams.

Condition State 4

Flexural and shear cracking may be heavy with moderate cracking along the beam/deck joint.
Vertical shrinkage cracks and cracking at built-in supports may be heavy in size. Severe
spalling or delamination of the underside of the beams may be occurring, with advanced
corrosion of the reinforcement. The beams may have severe cracking in the bearing area with
severe loss of bearing support.
22C
Structures Division APPENDIX D 1une 2004
22T

COMPONENT 22T OPEN GIRDERS TIMBER


This element includes all timber stringers such as round or octagonal hewn timber logs
and saw cut timber sections. Note: Pipe rot is quoted as a percentage oI the diameter oI the
girder, while snipe depth is quoted as a percentage oI the depth oI the girder (which is
essentially the diameter oI the girder minus the depth oI the contact Ilat or benching` on the
upper Iace oI the girder). Please note that where snipes have been treated in accordance with
the recommendations in Advice Note No. 23, they may be ignored Ior the purpose oI rating
the member (but their presence should be noted on the Timber Drilling Survey Report). II
the treatment is not perIorming as desired, the member must be repaired or replaced.

Condition State 1

The girders are in good condition with little or no pipe rot or decay. There may be minor
splits or checks having no eIIect on member strength. Girder to corbel bolts are tight.

Condition State 2

Girders are in good condition and may have pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 30 oI the
diameter at midspan and/or 20 at the supports. They may also have minor surIace or non-
central decay, Iire damage, splitting, checking or crushing but not oI suIIicient magnitude to
aIIect the strength oI the member. Depth oI snipes is less than 10 oI the depth oI the girder.
Girder to corbel bolts are slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Girders have a reasonable amount oI pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 50 at midspan and/or
35 at the supports. They may have large splits or checks which may reduce the strength oI
the member. Splits may be separating under load causing crushing oI the member, or
crushing may be due to water ingress soItening the load bearing areas oI the timber. Depth oI
snipes may range Irom 10 to 15 oI the depth oI the girder. There may be a medium
amount oI surIace or non-central decay or Iire damage present. Girder to corbel bolts are
loose or corroding.

Condition State 4

The timber girders may have excessive pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 70 at midspan and/or
50 oI the supports, accompanied by severe splitting or crushing. Strength oI the member
has been severely aIIected and Iailure may be imminent. The girder may be exhibiting
noticeably greater deIlection under traIIic than adjacent members. Depth oI snipes may range
Irom 16 to 30 oI the depth oI the girder. There may be severe surIace or non-central
decay, Iire damage or possibly large rot holes present. Girder to corbel bolts may be very
lose, with threads or nuts severely corroded.

NOTE: Members with pipe rot/termite attack/snipes in excess oI the values shown in
Condition State 4 are critical and should be replaced immediately.

COMPONENT 23S THROUGH TRUSS STEEL


This element includes all steel (or wrought iron) trusses that are above the deck level of the
roadway. The element includes all truss chords (top and bottom), verticals, crossbraces,
windbracing or arch braces. This element does not include the floorbeams supporting the
roadway

Condition State 1

The steelwork is in good condition with no rust spotting of the paint system, though there
may be minor chalking, peeling or curling. All welds, bolts and rivets are in good condition
with no corrosion, cracking or looseness. There is no accident damage to the trusses or
bracing.

Condition State 2

cracking, corrosion or loose bolts. Minor accident damage of no consequence.

Condition State 3

locations. Active corrosion is occurring in isolated areas, but no significant loss of section is
occurring to affect the strength of the member as a whole.

Nuts and bolts may be corroding but are still tight and no cracking of welds has occurred.
Accident damage to truss or overhead bracing has a minor effect on the stiffness of the
trusses. Minor distortion of members is evident.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced and some loss of section has definitely occurred which may have
a detrimental affect on the strength of the member, ie, flanges, webs or gussets badly
corroded over much of its length. Welds may be cracked. Nuts or bolts are severely
corroded and possibly no longer functioning to full capacity. Accident damage to trusses is
of major concern affecting strength of the trusses. Gross distortion of webs, flanges,
stiffeners, gussets, etc. as a result of overstressing due to loss of member or connector section
or as a result of accident damage.
23S

COMPONENT 24S DECK TRUSS STEEL


This element includes all steel or wrought iron trusses that are below the deck level of the
roadway. The element includes all truss chords, verticals, crossbraces and windbracing. This
element does not include crossbeams or floorbeams supporting the roadway.

Condition State 1

The paint system is generally sound with minor chalking, peeling or curling but no exposure
of the metal. All welds or bolts in good condition with no corrosion, cracking or loose bolts.

Condition State 2

cracking, corrosion or loose bolts.

Condition State 3

locations. Active corrosion is occurring in isolated areas, but no loss of section is occurring
that will affect the strength of the member as a whole. Nuts and bolts may be corroding but
are still tight and no cracking of welds has occurred.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced and some loss of section has definitely occurred which may have
a detrimental affect on the strength of the member ie a flange badly corroded over much of its
length. Welds may be cracked. Nuts or bolts are severely corroded and possibly no longer
functioning to full capacity.
24S

COMPONENT 25S ARCHES STEEL


This element includes all large corrugated multi-plate arches, Superspans, Nova spans or
multi-plate underpasses used to pass road or rail traffic through. Smaller units or units used
specifically to allow water or cattle traffic through shall be considered as culverts.

Condition State 1
The element shows no corrosion of the metal. Any concrete at the base of the arch is in good
condition with no cracking or spalling. No evidence of plate buckling or seam shearing. All
bolts connecting the multiplates are in good condition and are tight. No distortion of arch
shapes with attendant change in dimensions is evident. There is no damage to the element
from vehicular traffic.

Condition State 2
The element may show minor spot rusting. All bolts are tight with no movement of the
plates. No evidence of plate buckling or seam shearing. There is no damage to the element
from vehicular impact. Any concrete at the base of the arch may have minor cracking or
spalling due to corroding reinforcement but there should be no cracking due to settlement of
the foundations. No distortion of the arch shape is discernible however there may be a minor
change in dimensions.

Condition State 3
The element may show rusting and areas of minor corrosion. Some bolts may be a little loose
and some plates may have slipped slightly. The plate around some bolts may be damaged or
torn allowing distortion to occur. The arch may be developing a small discernible flat spot
due to movement of a footing. The arch span may have increased by more than 25 mm since
last inspection. If cover is small then there may be a deflection at the crown under live load.
Plates adjacent to thrust blocks have buckled or compressed and connections are shearing the
plates. Accident damage from vehicles is minor and does not affect the structure. Any
concrete at the bottom of the arch may have moderate cracking and spalling due to corroding
reinforcement or it may have minor cracking due to minor differential settlement of the
foundations.

Condition State 4
The element may have heavy rusting and corrosion. Some bolts may have pulled loose and
plates have moved or bolts have pulled through the plates. Plates may have crinkled at the
bolt line or may have bulged due to earth pressures. The arch span may have increased by
more than 50mm since the last inspection and gross distortion of the arch shape is evident.
The arch may have a large flat spot at the top due to movement of a footing. Plates adjacent
to thrust blocks are badly buckled and compressed and the connections have sheared.
Accident damage may be severe and have a definite effect on the structure.

Concrete at the base of the arch may have severe cracking and spalling due to corroding
reinforcement or moderate cracking due to differential settlement.
25S

COMPONENT 25P ARCHES PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes precast concrete arches such as Bebo, Techspan, Humes and other
three pinned arches.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with only minor efflorescence or minor fine
superficial cracking of no consequence. Shape, line and level of the arch units is good and
straight. The concrete footing and base slab are in good condition with no cracking or
spalling.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be evident due to corroding reinforcement in isolated areas.
There may be minor cracking or moisture penetration around the hinge areas with moderate
efflorescence powder visible. Shape, line and level of the arch units should be good and
straight. The footing may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement,
but no cracking due to movement or differential settlement.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking due to structural mechanisms, or moderate to severe cracking and spalling
due to non-structural actions such as corrosion of the reinforcement may be evident, with up
to 20% loss of section of exposed reinforcement. The shape and line of the arch may show
some deviation due to movement or differential settlement, with minor spalling at the hinge
points. The footing may show fine cracking due to movement pressures or differential
settlement.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking due to structural mechanisms or advanced corrosion of the reinforcement
may be evident, with loss of section of reinforcement greater than 20% and associated
cracking and spalling, with large delaminated areas. The shape and line of the arch may
show a dip due to movements and differential settlements with medium to heavy spalling
around the hinge points. The footing may have moderate cracking due to movement
pressures or differential settlement.
25P

COMPONENT 25C ARCHES CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all cast-in-situ reinforced concrete arches and small portal bridges built
pre 1950. Large freeway "portal" bridges may be considered as monolithic structures built
according to their superstructure type ie flat slab, box girder or voided slab bridges.

Condition State 1

The element shows only minor superficial cracking, scaling or efflorescence having no effect
on strength.

Condition State 2

The element may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement, or there
may be a fine horizontal crack in the portal wall at the thickening due to earth pressures on
the walls or simply a construction joint opening up. Scaling of the concrete surface may be in
larger patches with an increase in white efflorescence powder on the surface.

Condition State 3

The element may have moderate to severe cracking and spalling due to corroding
reinforcement, with loss of section of reinforcement no greater than 20%. There may be a
medium size horizontal crack in the portal wall at the thickening. In arches there may be
leakage, staining and spalling at the arch/side wall joint due to wet fill inside the arch.
Scaling and efflorescence may be prevalent. The arch may be beginning to loose shape with
a flat spot at the top due to movement of a footing, or there may be cracking due to slight
differential movement of the foundations.

Condition State 4

There may be severe horizontal cracking in the portal wall at the thickening. Corrosion of the
reinforcement may be severe, with loss of section of the reinforcement in excess of 20% and
associated cracking, spalling and delamination. Scaling and efflorescence may be prevalent
and leakage at the arch/side wall joint may be excessive. The arch may have lost shape with
a large flat spot due to movement of a footing, or there may be severe cracking due to
differential settlement of the foundations. Accident damage may be severe and having a
definite effect on the structure.
25C

COMPONENT 25O ARCHES OTHER


This element includes all arch bridges constructed of masonry which have earth fill inside.
The condition of the road surface should be considered under Component Number 1 and is
not included as part of this item. The arch sidewalls however should be included as part of
this item.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with no cracking of mortar or loss of mortar
between the blocks. There may be small areas of dampness and efflorescence.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking of the mortar or minor loss of mortar between the blocks, but
not sufficient to affect the strength of the arch. The shape of the arch is still good and there is
no cracking or bulging of the sidewalls. There may be large areas of dampness and
efflorescence.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking or loss of mortar between blocks which has a minor affect
on the strength of the arch. Some soffit blocks may have slipped slightly due to the loss of
mortar. Minor settlements, movements, loss of arch shape, or cracking and minor bulging of
the sidewalls may be present, but not of sufficient magnitude to cause concern.

Condition State 4

There may be severe cracking or loss of mortar between blocks which has a significant effect
on the strength of the arch. Some soffit blocks may have slipped significantly and some
blocks may have cracked through or edges broken off. Abutments or piers may have settled
or moved significantly causing a loss of shape of the arch. Differential settlement of the
foundations may have also caused severe cracking along the arch soffit. Earth pressure on
the sidewall may have caused severe cracking, movement or large bulging of the blocks to
occur.
25O

COMPONENT 26S CABLES/HANGERS STEEL


This element includes all steel cables or hangers used to support the deck. The cables may be
galvanised, painted, coated or wrapped in grease with a protective outer wrapper, but are not
embedded in concrete.

Condition State 1

There is no evidence of rusting or corrosion and any paint system or protective wrapping is in
good condition. There are no signs of distress at anchors, sockets or saddles.

Condition State 2

The cables or hangers may show signs of rust or the protective wrapping may be broken or in
poor condition. There are no signs of distress at anchors or sockets but the saddles may be
rusty and in need of lubrication.

Condition State 3

The cables or hangers may be rusty with signs of minor corrosion. Any paint system,
coating or protective wrapping has been lost or is in very poor condition.Anchors may have
minor cracking, sockets may be a little loose or saddles may have fine cracks in the metal.
The cables may have slackened off slightly or the hangers are slipping on the cable. Cables
may be beginning to abrade but there are no wire breakages.

Condition State 4

The cables or hangers are badly corroded or the hangers are loose and are sliding along the
cables. The cables may have slackened noticeably. Anchorages may have severely cracked or
anchorages have moved or slipped. Sockets may have loosened or saddles are badly
damaged. Cables may be severely abraded with a number of broken wires.
26S

COMPONENT 27C CORBELS REI NFORCED
CONCRETE

This element covers discrete reinforced concrete corbels built out from reinforced concrete
substructures to support timber girders.

Condition State 1

The corbel is in good condition with minimal deterioration and no cracking. Bolted
connections to girders are tight.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and minor spalling may be evident as a result of edge loading or corrosion of
the reinforcement. There is no significant loss of bearing area. Bolted connections to girders
may be slightly loose or corroded.

Condition State 3

A significant loss of bearing area may be evident. Moderate spalling and cracking as a result
of edge loading, or moderate to severe cracking and spalling due to corrosion of the
reinforcement may have occurred, with loss of section of reinforcement up to 20%. Rust
staining is evident in the cracks and under connections. Bolted connections to girders are
loose and girders move slightly under load. Bolts may have lost up to 20% of their sectional
area as a result of corrosion.

Condition State 4

Corbels are severely cracked and spalled as a result of edge loading or impact loading caused
by loose connections to the girders which move markedly under load. Severe corrosion of the
reinforcement may have occurred, with loss of section of the reinforcement greater than 20%
and associated cracking, spalling and delamination. Bolted connections may have lost more
than 20% of their sectional area. The bearing area is significantly reduced and the capacity of
the corbel is significantly compromised.
27C

COMPONENT 27T CORBELS TI MBER


This element includes all timber corbels whether they be round or octagonal hewn or sawn
log, or sawn timber blocks. Note: Pipe rot is quoted as a percentage of the diameter of the
member, while snipe depth is quoted as a percentage of the depth of the corbel (which is
essentially the diameter of the corbel minus the depth of the contact flat or benching on the
upper face of the corbel).

Condition State 1

The corbels are in good condition with no termite attack or decay though there may be minor
splits or checks having no effect on strength. The ends of the corbels show no pipe rot and
connections to the substructure and girders are tight.

Condition State 2

The corbels may have minor termite attack, decay, splitting, checking or crushing but not of
sufficient magnitude to affect their strength. The corbels may have up to 20% pipe rot at the
ends. Connections to the substructure or girders may be slightly loose. Depth of snipes is less
than 10% of the depth of the corbel.

Condition State 3

Corbels may have moderate termite attack, rot or decay, splitting, checking or crushing which
may have a minor effect on strength. Corbels may have up to 35% pipe rot at the ends.
Connections to the substructure or girders may be quite loose and the corbels rock slightly
under load. Depth of snipes may range from 10% to 18% of the depth of the corbel. Bolts
may be moderately corroded.

Condition State 4

Heavy rot, termite attack, decay, splitting, or crushing have a marked effect on the strength
and serviceability of the corbel. Corbels may have up to 50% pipe rot at the ends.
Connections to the substructure or girders are very loose and the corbels rock noticeably
may be severely corroded.

NOTE: Members with pipe rot/termite attack/snipes in excess of the values shown in
Condition State 4 are critical and should be strengthened or replaced immediately.

27T

COMPONENT 28S CROSSBEAMS/FLOORBEAMS STEEL


This element includes all steel crossbeams or truss floorbeams whether painted, galvanised or
unpainted.

Condition State 1

The paint system is generally sound with only minor chalking, peeling or curling with no
exposure of the metal. All welds or bolts are in good condition

Condition State 2

Rust spotting is occurring and the paint system is no longer effective, though corrosion has
not yet commenced. All welds or bolts are in good condition, though a few of the bolts may
be slightly loose. All member lines are true.

Condition State 3

The paint system has completely broken down and minor corrosion and pitting is occurring
but the member strength is not affected. Minor deviations in member line may be occurring.
There may be some evidence of girder deflection or movement under load. Nuts and bolts
may be corroded and may be loose. Welds to RSJ 's are in good condition.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced with significant loss of section which may affect member
strength. Webs, flanges or stiffeners may be buckled or distorted. Girders may be exhibiting
excessive deflection or movement under load. Nuts and bolts may be heavily corroded and
no longer functioning properly. Bolts may also be very loose or welds may be cracked.
28S

COMPONENT 28T CROSSBEAMS/FLOORBEAMS TI MBER


This element includes all crossbeams or floorbeams constructed using sawn timber sections
which do not include the centre of the original log (ie no pipe rot).

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition with only minor splits or checks having no effect on strength.
All bolted connections are tight and in good condition.

Condition State 2

The timber shows signs of minor decay, splitting and checks but does not affect the strength
of the members. The tops of the member may have some moisture ingress and be wet and
slightly spongy. Bolted connections may be slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting and checking may be present. Moisture ingress into the top of the
member has caused a softness with indentations and slight bulging from the deck planks. The
strength of the member has been affected to a minor extent. Bolted connections may be loose
allowing the member to move excessively when loaded.

The member may have cracked due to overloading, ineffective support, or supports being too
far apart or crossbeams being non-continuous, ie only two supports.

Condition State 4

The member is heavily decayed, split or rotted, with large indentations at the top along with
excessive bulging due to the top being very wet and spongy. Bolted connections are very
loose and the member is moving excessively when loaded causing deterioration of the
member. The member may be cracked through due to overloading, ineffective support or
crossbeams being non-continuous. The strength of the member has been significantly
affected.
28T

COMPONENT 29P DECK PLANKS PRECAST
CONCRETE
Units of Measurement Each

This item covers precast concrete deck planks which are placed transversely over girders.
Distributor members which connect the planks are also covered.

Condition State 1

The units are in good condition with only minor faint cracking or minor edge chipping of the
units. Minor efflorescence powder may be visible. Distributor members are connected tightly

Condition State 2

Minor cracks or spalls may be present with only minor reinforcement corrosion. Some of the
hold down bolts for the precast deck slabs may be loose. Edge spalling of the units may have
exposed some reinforcement. Distributor members may be slightly loose or held down at the
ends only, and decking surfacing at joints is mostly intact.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be present with up to 20% loss of section of the non-
prestressed reinforcement in areas or minor loss of stressing strand due o corrosion. Many of
the hold down bolts are loose or missing and the units are moving when loaded, causing edge
spalling of the units. There may be moderate edge spalling due to stones and debris in the
joints. Distributor members may be deteriorated with possible loss of section or member
connections may be loose, allowing minor movement under traffic and resulting in cracking
of the surfacing at decking joints.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking, heavy spalling and advanced corrosion may be present, or the precast deck
units are completely loose and moving excessively under load. Heavy edge spalling or
delaminated concrete may be present. There may be advanced corrosion of non-prestressing
reinforcement over large areas. Stressing strands may be broken or have lost up to 20% of
section due to corrosion. Distributor members are broken or have experienced complete loss
of section, and members may be moving significantly under traffic, resulting in significant
cracking of the surfacing at decking joints.
29P

COMPONENT 29T DECK PLANKS TI MBER


This element includes both transverse deck planks and the less common longitudinal deck
planks with or without thin longitudinal running planks on top or distributor planks on the
underside. Spiking planks which are used at the abutment ends of skewed decks to act as
trimming beams are also included in this item. The cross members supporting longitudinal
decking are listed under Item No. 28T, Cross Beams.

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition with minor splits, checks or weathering which have no effect
on strength.

Transverse planks are securely spiked to outer spiking planks and kerb fasteners are tight.
The cambering of the internal girders is tight with no deterioration evident at the interface.

On skewed decks, the bevelled ends of transverse planks are securely bolted or screwed to the
end spiking planks.

Running planks and/or distributor planks are tight.

Longitudinal decking planks are tightly bolted at the ends and at each alternate crossbeam
and are continuous over at least three (3) crossbeams.

Condition State 2

The timber shows minor signs of decay, weathering, splitting or checks having no effect on
member strength. There may be active termite presence at interfaces, but only minor
apparent damage.

Transverse planking may be slightly loose as a result of decay of the spiking planks, kerbs,
cambering wedges or at the interface between the internal girders and the planks. Running
planks/distributor planks may be slightly loose or held down at ends only.

Bolted connections to longitudinal planks may be slightly loose or only held down at the
ends.

Bolted or screwed connections to end spiking planks on skewed decks may be slightly loose.

Condition State 3

The timber shows moderate decay, weathering, splitting or checks which affect the strength
of the member to a minor extent. There may be moderate termite damage, whether from
active or past infestation.

29T
Transverse planking may be loose as a result of loss of fixity at the outer girders/kerb and/or
loss of cambering of the internal girders. Planks may be rocking or deflecting vertically over
internal girders under traffic. Planks may be rotting under the kerbs or running planks.

Running and distributor planks may be split with sections broken away or planks split in half.
Bolts are loose allowing planks to move under traffic. Bolted connections to longitudinal
planks may be loose or the planks may only have two supports.

On skewed decks, the connectors to the end spiking plank may have loosened sufficiently to
allow movement of the supported end of the deck planks under traffic.

Condition State 4

The members are severely damaged, weathered, split or rotted which significantly affects the
strength. There may be severe termite damage, whether from active or past infestation.

Transverse planking is excessively loose and rotates or flaps or deflects vertically over
internal girders readily under traffic as a result of loss of fixing at the outer girders/kerbs or
loss of cambering. Kerbs, spiking planks, bolts and cambering wedges may have deteriorated
markedly. Planks are rotted at these interfaces and under running planks.

Running and distributor planks are split, broken or completely loose. Planks may be flapping
up and down under traffic.

Ends of longitudinal planks may be in poor condition and bolting may be completely loose
allowing members to flap up and down when loaded. Cross decking under the planks may be
rotted or completely loose.

On skewed decks, the old spiking plank may have rotted and connections loosened, resulting
in lack of vertical support and excessive movement of the supported end of the deck planks
under traffic.
29T

COMPONENT 30S STEEL DECKI NG STEEL

Units of Measurement: Square metres

The most common form adopted is heavy gauge steel corrugated decking units spanning
transversely over steel or timber girders. Infill material includes weak cast insitu concrete,
asphalt and more recently reinforced concrete. Decking sheets have also been placed
longitudinally over cross beams with similar infills. This element also includes a number of
deck support plates made of steel or wrought iron. Included are buckle plates, usually held to
the beams and braces by riveted connections, with a weak concrete and asphalt seal placed on
top or light gauge steel trough decking generally with asphalt infill. Not included in this
element is corrugated iron sheets which are only used as formwork support and not as a
structural element.

The infill or decking material should be included with this element as it greatly influences the
action and rate of deterioration of the steel decking.

Condition State 1
The steel is in good condition with only minor rusting at the joints. The surfacing or infill is
in good condition with no cracking, rutting or potholes. The decking units are well bolted to
the support, or all rivets are good and tight. Connections between the units are in good
condition with no separation.

Condition State 2
There is rusting and minor corrosion at the joints but all bolting, tap screw connections, welds
or rivets are good and tight. There may be minor cracking and rutting of the asphalt surface.

Condition State 3
Medium corrosion is occurring at the joints. Buckle plates show moderate leakage at the
joints with small stalactites forming. With trough decking the welds between the units may
have minor cracking or some tap screws may be loose or sheared off with minor separation of
the units. The hold down connections of the units may be slightly loose allowing too much
flexing of the sections. The asphalt surface may have moderate cracking, rutting, small
broken up areas or small potholes. Concrete infill may be breaking up allowing excessive
moisture penetration.

Condition State 4
Heavy corrosion is occurring with holes appearing in the trough decking and concrete or
asphalt fill above. Trough decking units may be separating with many of the joining
tapscrews broken or missing. Hold down bolts may be completely loose and the sections are
flexing up and down under load. The asphalt surfacing is severely cracked, rutted, or has
large badly broken areas and potholes. Rivets holding the buckle plates in position may have
sheared or the edge material of the buckle plates may have sheared. The buckle plates may
have severely corroded with holes appearing. Large stalactite growths indicates excessive
moisture penetration of the severely cracked weak concrete above. Deck troughing may be
cracked transversely to the ribs. Holding down bolts and/or channels may be severely
corroded.
30S

COMPONENT 31S DI APHRAGMS/BRACI NG STEEL


This element includes all stiffening devices for the ends of the deck and between steel girders
and includes wind bracing of large girder bridges. The diaphragms may have stud connectors
into the deck to support and stiffen the ends of the deck. Bracing may be simple steel rods,
straps or small angles crossing between the girders, or be heavy channel connectors between
the beam webs. Wind bracing may be by steel angles or steel rods.

Condition State 1

The paintwork is generally sound with only minor chalking, peeling or curling, but no
exposure of the metal. All welds, bolts and rivets are in good condition. Distance between
bracing is no more than 5 metres unless the RSJ s have a composite reinforced concrete deck.

Condition State 2

Spot rusting of the paint system is occurring and the system is no longer effective. No
corrosion has occurred as yet. No cracking of welds has occurred, but there may be some
minor rusting of nuts or bolts. Bracing may be too far apart to adequately stiffen girders, or
bracing may be too light if deck is not solid.

Condition State 3

The paint system has completely broken down with corrosion and pitting in areas. Nuts and
bolts may be corroded with minor loss of tension in bolt. Welds may be cracked with minor
loss of effectiveness. Bracing is far too light or inadequate, offering little effect in stiffening
of the superstructure, especially if deck is not concrete. Lateral bowing of girders may be
evident under load.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced having a definite detrimental effect on the strength of the
element. Braces are inadequate or have broken loose or buckled and the girders are bowing
noticeably under load. There may be no transverse distribution of wheel loads and the girders
are acting independently. Bolts or rivets may be missing.
31S

COMPONENT 31C DI APHRAGMS/BRACI NG CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes cast-in-situ reinforced concrete end of deck stiffening and deep
diaphragms between girders. In monolithic cast-in-situ flat slab bridges this element includes
the deck thickening beam at the pier supports.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with only very minor cracking visible. There may be
minor dampness or efflorescence powder visible in a few locations.

Condition State 2

There may be a few minor cracks or spalls due to corroding reinforcement. End of deck
stiffener may be damp and stained due to excessive moisture penetration of the deck joints,
and efflorescence powder may be visible in numerous areas. In monolithic structures there
may be cracking of the tops of the columns or at the bearing areas of expansion type piers.

Condition State 3

Moderate to severe cracking and spalling may be present along with possible delaminated
areas due to corroding reinforcement. Exposed reinforcement may have section loss up to
20% in isolated areas. Local spalling or cracking may have occurred as a result of
obstructions being trapped in expansion joint gaps or insufficient gap provision for free
expansion. In monolithic structures there may be moderate cracking or spalling in the
bearing areas of expansion type piers, or at the column/diaphragm joint of fixed type piers.

Condition State 4

Heavily corroded steel may be visible, with loss of section of reinforcement in excess of 20%
and associated cracking, spalling and delamination of concrete. Entire sections of end
diaphragms may have spalled as a result of obstructions trapped in expansion joint gaps or
insufficient gaps for free expansion. Monolithic structures may have heavy spalling in the
bearing areas with loss of bearing area greater than 40%.
31C

COMPONENT 32C LOAD BEARI NG DI APHRAGMS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines those load bearing diaphragms constructed using reinforced or pre-
stressed concrete which are integral with the superstructure beams and visible to the
inspector. These diaphragms are used as a means of joining precast beams to provide
continuity over the pier supports, and the diaphragm is used to support the beams on the pier
or columns below. Those load bearing diaphragms built-in to box girders or voided slab
bridges and are not visible should be considered as part of the superstructure and are not to be
included in this element.

Condition State 1

The load bearing diaphragm is in good condition with only minor cracking due to corroding
reinforcement. The crossheads should have no moment or shear cracking.

Condition State 2

The load bearing diaphragms may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding
reinforcement. There may be some very fine moment or shear cracks. No stressing strands
should be exposed. Minor cracking at prestressing anchorages may be evident.

Condition State 3

Moderate to severe sized cracks, spalls and possible delaminations may be present with
exposed reinforcement being corroded with up to 20% section loss. Stressing strands may be
exposed with only minor corrosion. Moment cracking may be medium sized but shear cracks
should only be fine. Moderate cracking or spalling may be evident at prestressing
anchorages.

Condition State 4

Reinforcement may be heavily corroded with loss of section greater than 20% and associated
cracking, spalling and delamination of concrete. Moment cracking may be severe but shear
cracks should only be of moderate size. Exposed stressing strands may have up to 10%
section loss. Anchorage efficiency is materially compromised by severe cracking and
spalling.
32C

COMPONENT 33T SPI KI NG PLANKS TI MBER


This item defines the spiking planks that are seated on the outer girders and to which
transverse decking is spiked.

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition and firmly bolted in place. There is little or no evidence of
rot or decay. Minor splits and cracks may be evident, however these will have no effect on
member strength.

For spans up to 7.6m, the spiking plank shall be the full length of the span. For longer spans,
the spiking plank may be butt joined adjacent to the piers. No joints are permitted in the
middle third of the span.

Condition State 2

Minor decay, splitting or cracking may be present but not sufficient to affect the
serviceability of the member.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting, crushing or termite attack may be present affecting the components
serviceability. Attachment bolts to the girders may have loosened due to rotting of member
and deck planks may have started to loosen.

Condition State 4

Heavy decay, splitting, crushing or termite attack may be present, affecting the serviceability
of the component. Decking may be loose due to rotting and crushing of the member.
33T

COMPONENT 40O FI XED BEARI NGS OTHER


This element defines those bearings that may provide for deflection or rotation and includes
steel plates bearing on concrete with or without locating pins or lugs, concrete bearing on
malthoid, lead sheet or a bond breaking layer of colourless grease.

Condition State 1

The element shows minimal deterioration with the paint system in good condition protecting
the steel plates and any material allowing minor movements is in good condition and
functioning properly.

Condition State 2

Minor movement may have caused faint cracking in the ends of the beams due to pressure on
the locating dowels. Protective paint systems may be failing allowing rusting of the metal
plates. Malthoid or lead sheets may be deteriorating or beginning to be squeezed out from
beneath the beams. Bearing support may be cracked but still basically sound.

Condition State 3

Moderate movement may have caused moderate cracking or minor spalling of the ends of the
beams. Protective paint systems may have failed causing medium corrosion of the metal
plates. Malthoid or lead sheets may well be deteriorated or up to 50% extruded from beneath
the beams. Bearing supports may show severe cracking, crumbling of mortar or have sizeable
spalling with some reduction of bearing support area.

Condition State 4

Large movements may have caused heavy spalling of the ends of the beams. Steel plates
may be heavily corroded due to complete loss of protective paint. Malthoid or lead sheets
may be totally deteriorated or almost completely extruded beneath the beams. Bearing
supports may have badly crumbled mortar or heavily spalled concrete with extensive
reduction in bearing support area with possible cracking having occurred.
40O

COMPONENT 41O SLI DI NG BEARI NGS OTHER


This element defines those bearings that provide for movement by the use of a sliding
mechanism. They also may have thin elastomer strips which will allow for some deflection
and rotation, but the main mechanism is to allow for sliding of one surface over another with
the use of copper or phosphor bronze plates, Teflon (PTFE) discs or coated sliding plates.
The bearing may simply be greased surfaces with the sliding plate moving between guides in
a steel base plate.

Condition State 1

The element is in good condition with minimal deterioration. The paint system is in good
condition and sliding elements are in their correct positions and appear to be working as
normal. There is minimal debris in the bearing. Bearing support is sound with mortar or
concrete uncracked and in good condition.

Condition State 2

Protective paint systems may be failing, allowing rusting of the metal plates. Sliding elements
may have moved excessively but the joint is still moving correctly. Debris in the bearing or
corrosion may be having a minor effect on the movement capabilities of the bearing. Bearing
support may be cracked but still basically sound.

Condition State 3

Protective paint systems may have failed causing medium corrosion of the metal plates.
Sliding elements may have moved excessively and are being extruded between the steel
plates. The PTFE coating is delaminating from its base plate and is buckled and being
destroyed. The lubricating system may have failed and the joint is failing to operate normally.
Bearing support may show severe cracking, crumbling of mortar or sizeable spalling with
some reduction of bearing support area.

Condition State 4

Steel plates may be heavily corroded due to complete loss of protective paint. Sliding
elements may have slipped out and are no longer functional or the PTFE coating has
completely delaminated, buckled and destroyed. The lubricating system may have failed and
the joint has seized and is no longer functional. Bearing support may have badly crumbled
mortar or heavily spalled concrete with extensive reduction in bearing support area, with
possible crushing having occurred.
41O

COMPONENT 42O ELASTOMERI C/POT BEARI NGS OTHER


This element defines those bridge bearings constructed primarily of elastomers, with or
without metal shims reinforcing the elastomer. The bearings may be free to move or have
anti-sliding containment or be fully contained in pot bearings.

Condition State 1

The element shows minimal deterioration. Shear deformations are correct for the
temperatures and structural movements. Bearing support surfaces are flat and sound with no
cracking of the mortar or concrete.

Condition State 2

The element may have faint cracking, splitting or signs of weathering. Shear deformations
may be large but not excessive, and the bearing is functioning normally. Bearing support
surfaces may not be flat with only partial support to the bearings, or the bearing support may
be cracked but still basically sound.

Condition State 3

The bearing may have slight bulges between the shims and the elastomer may have minor
cracking or splitting. Rotation or shear deformations may be excessive with rollover of the
edges of the bearing. Bearing is still functioning but is being overstressed. Bearing support
may have sizeable irregularities or spalling with loss of bearing support area. Pot bearings
may have faint cracking of the container. Bearing may have large rotation or sliding
elements are showing large movements. Elastomer may be beginning to be extruded from the
top of the container.

Condition State 4

The bearing may have excessive bulging with cracking or splitting at the shims which have
delaminated from the elastomer. Shear or rotation deformations may be excessive with a
sizeable reduction in the bearing contact surface area and load transfer properties. Bearing
support may have heavily spalled concrete with some crushing possible. Pot bearing
container may be cracked with elastomer being extruded from the crack or through the top of
the container. Bearing may show excessive rotation or sliding elements may have excessive
movement and no longer functioning correctly.
42O

COMPONENT 43S ROCKERS/ROLLERS STEEL


This element defines those bearings that may provide for rotation and movement by means
of steel rollers or rocker mechanisms.

Condition State 1

The element shows minimal deterioration. The paint system is in good condition with the
bearing well lubricated and functioning correctly. Bearing support is sound with no cracking
of the mortar or concrete.

Condition State 2

Protective paint systems may be failing allowing rusting of the metal. Debris has lodged in
the bearing hampering the movement or rotation of the bearing. Rocker has rotated correctly,
but not excessively, for the temperature and movements of the bridge. Bearing support may
be cracked but still basically sound.

Condition State 3

Protective paint systems may have failed causing medium corrosion of the metal. Debris is
preventing the movement of the bearing and its correct operation. Rockers may have rotated
to their tolerance limits. Bearing support may show severe cracking, crumbling of mortar or
sizeable spalling with some reduction of the bearing support area.

Condition State 4

The steel may be heavily corroded due to complete loss of protective paint. Lubrication
systems have completely failed and excessive debris has seized the bearing. Rockers may
have rotated to their tolerance limit and the shear key may have cracked off. Bearing support
may show badly crumbled or heavily spalled concrete with extensive rotation in bearing
support areas with possible crushing having occurred.
43S

COMPONENT 44O MORTAR PADS/ OTHER
HI GH BEARI NG PEDESTALS


This element defines those bearings consisting entirely of dry pack or wet boxed mortar, or
high concrete pedestals greater than the nominal 50 mm thickness, unreinforced or reinforced
with distribution steel. This section does not cover the packing mortar placed under a steel
bearing base plate. That mortar is covered under the relevant bearing on top of the base plate.

Condition State 1

The element is in good condition with minimal deterioration and no cracking.

Condition State 2

The mortar pads may show signs of minor dampness and leaching. The pedestals may have
some minor cracking due to bearing movement or edge loading, but the strength of the
bearing has not been affected.

Condition State 3

Heavy leaching due to excessive dampness is exhibited by the mortar pads. The pads may
also show cracking, crumbling or minor crushing of the mortar, with minor loss of bearing
area.

Condition State 4

The mortar is crushing or has been lost with large subsequent loss of bearing area. The high
concrete pedestals may have severe cracking with large spalls and subsequent loss of bearing
area.
44O

COMPONENT 45O/S RESTRAI NT ANGLES OTHER

Units of Measurement: Each (per girder)

This component includes the restraint angles, holding down bolts and anchor blocks used to
locate and secure precast concrete girders.

Condition State 1
The steelwork is in good condition with no rust spotting of the protective coating. Angles
have been installed correctly to the correct level and location and there is sufficient travel in
the slotted holes to permit free thermal movement of the structure. All bolts and welds are in
good condition with no signs of corrosion, cracking or looseness.

Concrete anchor blocks are in good condition with only minor cracking due to corrosion.

Condition State 2
The protective system is no longer effective and rust spotting may be occurring. No
corrosion or section loss of the parent metal has occurred. All welds and bolts are in good
condition with no signs of corrosion, cracking and looseness. The installation may be
imperfect or there may be minor bending of angles but system is still fit for purpose and there
is no restriction to thermal movements.

Concrete anchor blocks may have minor cracking and spalling due to corrosion or girders
bearing directly on the blocks.

Condition State 3
The protective system may have broken down and there is surface pitting in a number of
locations. Active corrosion may be occurring but there is no significant loss of section that
affects the strength of the member. Nuts and bolts may be corroding but they are still tight
and no cracking of welds has occurred. There may be lack of fit, distortion of angles or
anchor bolts against end of slotted holes due to faulty installation or overstressing and there is
some loss of function and/or strength. However there is no consequential damage to girders
or bearing shelf as a result of the movement being restricted.

Anchor blocks may be moderately cracked and/or spalled as a consequence of corrosion of
the reinforcement or girders bearing on the blocks.

Condition State 4
Corrosion is well advanced and some loss of section has occurred which may affect the
strength of the members. Welds may be cracked and nuts or bolts may be severely corroded
and possibly no longer functioning to full capacity. There may be a lack of fit with gross
distortion of angles and anchor bolts may be bearing hard against end of slotted holes due to
faulty installation or excessive movements of the structure.

The ends of girders, bearing shelf and anchor blocks may be severely cracked and spalled as
a consequence of these movements.
45O

COMPONENT 50C ABUTMENTS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all abutments constructed of reinforced concrete and includes the short
integral return walls which support the barrier end posts or terminals, ballast walls and side
keeper walls. Wingwalls whether integral, attached or independent are considered separately
under item No 51. Damage to seating areas caused by faulty bearings is covered under the
bearing items.

Condition State 1

The abutment and ballast walls are in good condition with only minor cracking due to
corroding reinforcement. There is no flexural cracking due to earth pressures or differential
settlement of foundations. The bearing shelf/headstock are reasonably dry and clean. No
forward movement of abutment should be discernable, ie bearings shearing towards ballast
wall or subsidence of the road surface behind the abutment.

Condition State 2

The abutment wall may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement,
earth pressure, beam friction on differential movements. The bearing shelf/headstock should
be reasonably clean and dry. Forward movement of wall is less than 10mm. Headstocks may
have fine moment, ASR or shear cracking. The ballast wall may be cracked or spalled as a
result of earth pressure, girders bearing on it or corrosion of reinforcement. Minor
subsidence of the road surface may be evident behind the abutment.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be visible due to earth pressure, beam friction, edge
bearing or differential movements. Reinforcement may be corroded, with loss of section up to
20% and associated moderate to severe cracking, spalling and delamination of concrete. The
bearing shelf/headstock may be damp but there is no heavy staining or evidence of water
being retained on the shelf. Forward movement of the abutment is less than 20mm.
Headstocks may have medium ASR or moment cracks or fine shear cracks. The ballast wall
may be severely cracked or spalled. The road surface behind the bridge has subsided
noticeably.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling due to structural mechanisms is evident in abutment and ballast
walls. Corrosion of the reinforcement is well advanced with section loss in excess of 20%.
The bearing shelf/headstock may be very wet, heavily stained or have excessive water resting
on top. Severe moment cracks or moderate shear cracks may be evident. The ballast wall
has failed, is bearing against the girders and embankment material is being lost. Forward
movement of the abutment wall is in excess of 20mm. There may be severe subsidence of
the road surface behind the abutment.
50C

COMPONENT 50O ABUTMENTS OTHER


This element describes all abutment types other than concrete or timber, and includes stone
masonry walls, red brick walls or grouted rubble walls. The element does not include any
reinforced concrete cap on top of the walls. If masonry blocks are used to cap the walls, the
sill cap should be considered as part of this element. Foundations, if visible should be
considered as part of this element.

Condition State 1

The wall is in good condition with only minor fine cracks in the mortar between bricks,
stones or masonry blocks. There should be no cracking due to differential settlement of the
foundations, or bulging due to earth pressures on the walls. There should be no loss ofmortar
between the blocks. The wall and sill cap should be reasonably dry with no staining.

Condition State 2

The wall may have a number of fine cracks in the mortar but no cracking of the blocks. There
may be minor loss of mortar of no concern. Fine cracks may exist due to differential
settlement of the foundations or minor bulging due to earth pressures. The wall and sill cap
should be reasonably dry. Minor subsidence of the road surface may be evident behind the
abutment.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking of the mortar or moderate mortar loss may be occurring due to water
wash. There should be only minor mortar loss beneath any masonry sill caps. Moderate
cracking may exist due to differential settlement of the foundations. Abutment walls may
have moderate bulging due to earth pressure. Moderate subsidence of the road surface may
be evident behind the abutment.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking of the mortar or heavy loss of mortar may be occurring in the wall. There
may be medium loss of mortar beneath the masonry sill caps. Severe cracking may exist due
to differential settlement of the foundations or bulging of the walls due to earth pressures.
Moderate subsidence of the road surface may be evident behind the abutment.
50O
51P

COMPONENT 51P WINGWALLS / PRECAST
RETAINING WALLS CONCRETE


This element includes all bridge wingwalls and retaining walls constructed using precast
reinIorced concrete, and covers elements such as precast RC sheeting planks, precast RC
earth retaining walls, Precast RC Iacing panels Ior reinIorced soil walls and precast RC crib
walls.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with only minor cracking or spalling noticed. There
should be no movement or moment cracking in the wingwalls. There should be no settlement
oI the elements or gaps between elements allowing loss oI embankment Iill to occur. Where
the elements Iorm retaining walls they must be securely positioned and have no bulging due
to earth pressure.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinIorcement or due to earth
pressures. Retaining walls may be showing signs oI minor rotation or movements oI up to
10mm which are oI no consequence. There may be minor bulging or settlement oI elements
but allowing only minor loss oI embankment Iill Irom behind.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking and spalling due to corroding reinIorcement or due to earth
pressures. Retaining walls may be showing signs oI moderate rotation or movements oI up to
40mm but having little eIIect on serviceability. Moderate bulging, settlement or separation oI
the elements may be allowing medium loss oI embankment Iill

Condition State 4

There may be severe cracking or spalling due to corroding reinIorcement or due to earth
pressures. Retaining walls may be showing signs oI large rotation or movements in excess oI
40mm or may be leaning due to earth pressure on them, with possible loss oI embankment Iill
behind. Excessive bulging, settlement or separation oI the elements may be allowing heavy
loss oI embankment Iill.

COMPONENT 51C WI NGWALLS/ CAST-I NSI TU
RETAI NI NG WALLS CONCRETE


This element includes all bridge wingwalls and retaining walls constructed using cast-insitu
reinforced or plain concrete. Wingwalls whether integral, attached or independent are
included.

Condition State 1

The wall is in good condition with no cracking, spalling, rotation, movement or moment
cracking. Independent wingwalls are hard up against the abutment walls.

Condition State 2

There may be some cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or earth pressures.
Any joint with the abutment may be cracked as a result of differential movement.
Independent walls may be rotating or moving forward by up to 10mm but there is no loss of
embankment material.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or earth
pressures. Any joints with the abutment may be cracked and spalling of the adjoining edges
may be evident. Retaining walls and independent wingwalls may show moderate rotations or
movements of up to 40mm. There is some loss of fill but little effect on serviceability as a
result of differential movements.

Condition State 4

There may be heavy cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or earth pressures.
Any joint with the abutment is cracked and badly spalled as a result of differential
movements. The water bar may be torn and fill escaping through the gap. Retaining walls
and independent wingwalls may show large rotations or movements in excess of 40mm due
to earth pressure causing excessive loss of fill material from behind.
51C

COMPONENT 51T WI NGWALLS/ TI MBER
RETAI NI NG WALLS


This element includes all bridge wingwalls and retaining walls consisting of timber sheeting
spanning between the wing piles. Note that wing piles should be covered under Item No.
60T.

Condition State 1

The timber may have minor decay, splits or checks but is generally in good condition.

Condition State 2

Timber units may have moderate decay, splits or checks, but are generally in good condition.

Condition State 3

Timber units may be heavily decayed with sheeting planks rotted out or attacked by white
ants. Settlement of sheeting units may be occurring or a loss of fill may be occurring due to
water wash beneath the sheeting or due to sheeting rotting out, and subsidence of the
embankment may be evident.

Condition State 4

Timber units may be severely decayed and whole areas may have rotted out or been eaten out
by white ants. Loss of embankment fill or wingwall fill is occurring due to earth pressure or
the material is being lost due to water wash at the base of the wingwalls, and severe
subsidence may be evident.
51T

COMPONENT 51S WI NGWALLS/ STEEL
RETAI NI NG WALLS


This element includes all wingwalls and retaining walls where the main embankment support
material consists of corrugated steel/iron sheeting or steel sheet piles between the wing piles.

Condition State 1

The steel is in good condition with only minor rusting at the ends of streets. Soil retention is
effective and there is no bulging of sheets between supports.

Condition State 2

There is minor corrosion at the sheet ends but no corrosion of the main body of the sheeting.
Soil retention is substantially effective and there is only minor bulging of sheets between
supports.

Condition State 3

Moderate corrosion is evident in the sheeting, bulging of sheets between supports is
significant and some of the joints between sheets may have sprung. Soil retention has been
compromised and there may be evidence of subsidence of the road surface behind the
abutment.

Condition State 4

Severe corrosion is evident in the sheeting, bulging of sheets is excessive and joints in the
sheeting have sprung.

Loss of embankment fill or wingwall fill is occurring due to earth pressure or the material is
being lost due to water wash at the base of the wingwalls. Severe subsidence of the road
surface in the vicinity of the wingwall or retaining wall may be evident.

51S

COMPONENT 51O WI NGWALLS/ OTHER
RETAI NI NG WALLS

Units of Measurement: Each

This item includes all bridge wingwalls and retaining walls constructed using ashlar blocks,
rubble masonry or brickwork.

Condition State 1

The wall is in good condition with only fine cracks in the mortar joints. There should be no
cracking due to differential settlement of foundations or bulging due to earth pressure. There
should be no loss of mortar between blocks, the wall should be dry and no forward rotation or
movement is evident.

Condition State 2

There may be a number of fine cracks in the mortar joints but no cracking of the blocks or
there may be minor loss of mortar of no concern. Fine cracks may exist due to differential
settlement of the foundations or minor bulging due to earth pressures. The wall is reasonably
dry and there is only a slight forward movement or rotation but no loss of fill.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking of mortar or loss of mortar may be evident. Moderate cracking due to
differential footing settlement and moderate bulging due to earth pressure may be seen.
Walls have rotated or moved forward by up to 40mm causing some loss of fill material.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking or loss of mortar is occurring. Severe cracking is evident as a result of
differential settlement or bulging due to earth pressures. Walls have rotated or moved
forward in excess of 40mm causing excessive loss of fill material from behind.
51O

COMPONENT 52P ABUTMENT SHEETI NG/ PRECAST
I NFI LL PANELS CONCRETE


This element describes all precast concrete elements used in abutments. Included in this
element are precast RC sheeting planks, precast RC earth retaining slabs, precast RC facing
panels for reinforced soil walls and precast RC crib walls. Wingwalls and retaining walls are
covered by Item No. 51P

Condition State 1

The units are in good condition with only minor cracking of no consequence. There should
be no settlement of units or gaps between units allowing loss of embankment fill to occur.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking or minor spalling of the units due to corroding reinforcement or
earth pressure. There may be minor bulging or settlement of units but allowing only minor
loss of embankment fill from behind. Minor subsidence of the road surface may be evident
behind the abutment.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking or spalling of the units due to corroding reinforcement or
earth pressures. Moderate bulging, settlement or separation of units may be allowing
medium loss of the embankment fill. The road surface behind the abutment may have settled
noticeably.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling of the units may be occurring due to reinforcement corrosion or
earth pressure. Excessive bulging, settlement or separation of the units may be allowing
heavy loss of embankment fill. There may be severe subsidence of the road surface behind
the abutment.
52P

COMPONENT 52C ABUTMENT SHEETI NG/ CAST-I N-SI TU
I NFI LL PANELS CONCRETE


This element includes abutments where the main embankment support material consists of
mass concrete wall panels between the piles and / or acting as a ballast wall. Wingwalls and
retaining walls are covered by Item No. 51C

Condition State 1

The panels are in good condition with only minor cracking of no consequence. There should
be no discernable settlement or forward rotation of the panels or gaps at the substructure
interfaces which would permit the loss of fine material from the retained fill. The movement
of the panels should be isolated from the substructure by compressible filler interfaces and
there should be no evidence of any cracking or spalling thereof. Sufficient weepholes have
been provided and are all functioning correctly.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking or spalling of the panels at the joint interfaces and / or some
minor degree of settlement or forward rotation of the panels as a consequence of earth
pressure and / or inadequate foundation capacity. Marginal gaps may have opened at the
substructure interfaces allowing a minor loss of the retained fill. Minor subsidence of the
road surface behind the abutment of less than 20mm may also be evident. Some weepholes
may be blocked but otherwise drainage is adequately provided for.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking or spalling of units at the joint interfaces and / or there may
be significant settlement or forward rotation of the panels as a consequence of earth pressure
and / or inadequate foundation capacity. Significant gaps (10-25mm wide) may have opened
at substructure interfaces allowing the loss of retained embankment material. Panels may be
heavily stained as a consequence. Moderate subsidence of road surface behind the abutment
of up to 30mm may be evident. Weepholes may be blocked or inadequate.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking or spalling may be occurring at joint interfaces and / or there may be
excessive settlement or forward rotation of the panels as a consequence of earth pressure and
/ or inadequate foundation capacity. Gaps in excess of 25mm wide may have opened at the
substructure interfaces allowing severe loss of the retained fill material. Significant
subsidence of the of the road surface behind the abutment in excess of 30mm may be evident.
Weepholes have either not been provided or have ceased to function.

52C

COMPONENT 52T ABUTMENT SHEETI NG/ TI MBER
I NFI LL PANELS


timber sheeting between the piles or acting as a ballast wall. Timber piles and headstocks at
timber abutments will be considered under other substructure elements because of their
uniqueness. Timber sill beams resting on a concrete footing may be considered in this
element as well as timber bedlogs embedded in the embankment. Wingwalls and retaining
walls are covered by Item No. 51T

Condition State 1

The timber may have minor decay, splits or checks but is generally in good condition.

Condition State 2

Timber units may have moderate decay , splits or checks, but are generally in good condition.

Condition State 3

Timber units may be heavily decayed with sheeting planks rotted out or attacked by termites.
Settlement of sheeting units may be occurring or a loss of fill may be occurring due to water
wash beneath the sheeting or due to sheeting rotting out. Subsidence of the road surface
behind the abutment may be evident.

Condition State 4

Timber units may be severely decayed and whole areas may have rotted out or been eaten out
by termites. Loss of embankment fill is occurring due to earth pressure or the material is
being lost due to water wash at the base of the abutment. Severe subsidence of the road
surface behind the abutment may be evident.
52T

COMPONENT 52S ABUTMENT SHEETI NG/ STEEL
I NFI LL PANELS


corrugated steel/iron sheeting or steel sheet piles between the piles or acting as a ballast wall.
Wingwalls and retaining walls are covered by Item No. 51S.

Condition State 1

The steel is in good condition with only minor rusting at the ends of streets. Soil retention is
effective and there is no bulging of sheets between supports.

Condition State 2

There is minor corrosion at the sheet ends but no corrosion of the main body of the sheeting.
Soil retention is substantially effective and there is only minor bulging of sheets between
supports.

Condition State 3

Moderate corrosion is evident in the sheeting, bulging of sheets between supports is
significant and some of the joints between sheets may have sprung. Soil retention has been
compromised and there may be evidence of subsidence of the road surface behind the
abutment.

Condition State 4

Severe corrosion is evident in the sheeting, bulging of sheets is excessive and joints in the
sheeting have sprung.

Loss of embankment fill is occurring due to earth pressure or the material is being lost due to
water wash at the base of the abutment. Severe subsidence of the road surface behind the
abutment may be evident.
52S

COMPONENT 52O ABUTMENT SHEETI NG/ OTHER
I NFI LL PANELS


(grouted or ungrouted) rock or stone or rock filled cages such as gabions. Wingwalls and
retaining walls are covered by Item No. 51O

Condition State 1

The infill protection is in good condition with no damage, differential settlement or gaps
which would allow the loss of embankment fill to occur.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking of the infill due to a buildup of earth pressure. There may be
minor bulging or settlement of the infill but allowing only minor loss of embankment fill
from behind. Minor subsidence of the road surface may be evident.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking in the case of the grouted rock infill while for the gabions
wire cages may be broken, resulting in the consequential loss of the infill material. Moderate
bulging and settlement may be allowing medium loss of the embankment fill and subsidence
of the road surface.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking of the rock infill may be occurring due to earth pressures. Excessive bulging
or settlement may be allowing for the heavy loss of embankment material. Severe subsidence
of the road surface may be occurring behind the abutment.
52O

COMPONENT 53P BATTER PROTECTI ON PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element defines those bridge abutment batters protected by precast concrete units placed
either separately or locked together to prevent loss of embankment fill. Small walls at the toe
of the batter may be included in this item even if constructed of a different material, but high
vertical or near vertical walls with an abutment on top or behind should be included under the
item for abutments. The area of batter protection shall normally be the actual area, however
in cases where protection extends considerably beyond the abutments at approaches then the
extent of the component should generally be no more than 20m behind the abutment. The
actual length considered shall be noted in the comments field for this item.

Condition State 1

The precast concrete units are in good condition with no damage, differential settlement
between units or scour beneath the toe of the units.

Condition State 2

There may be local minor damage to units or minor differential movement between units.
Minor local scour may be beginning to uncover the toe of the batter protection, most likely at
the upstream corner of the abutment due to the acceleration of flow at these locations.

Condition State 3

Local damage is beginning to be more pronounced and spreading to larger areas. Differential
settlement between units is more pronounced with possible loss of batter fill material from
between the units. Scouring is beginning to become a problem with the toe of the batter being
eroded over a reasonable length, most likely at the upstream corner of the abutment
protection and extending downstream under the bridge over a sizeable length and with some
possible loss of batter material from beneath the batter units. A few units may have been
lost or severely damaged.

Condition State 4

Failure of the units, extensive differential movement between units or scour of the toe of the
batter has resulted in loss of whole areas of the protection. Severe scour has undermined the
toe of the protection and batter fill has eroded away from beneath the units.
53P

COMPONENT 53C BATTER PROTECTI ON CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines those bridge abutment batters protected by cast-in-situ concrete.
Concrete may be cast in forms, pumped into a nylon fabric mattress, or sprayed on the batter
with or without anchorage rods into the fill material. Small retaining walls may be used at
the toe of the batter and these should be considered as part of the batter protection. The area
of batter protection shall normally be the actual area, however in cases where protection
extends considerably beyond the abutments at approaches then the extent of the component
should generally be no more than 20m behind the abutment. The actual length considered
shall be noted in the comments field for this item.

Condition State 1

The batter is in good condition with no cracking or spalling noticed. The embedded toe of the
batter is in good condition with no scouring.

Condition State 2

Minor local cracking or spalling may have occurred or separation or movement at casting
joints. Minor local scour may be beginning to uncover the toe of the batter protection, most
likely at the upstream corner of the abutment protection due to the acceleration of flow at
these locations.

Condition State 3

Local cracking and spalling is more pronounced with small areas broken and possibly
missing. Movement at casting joints is more pronounced with possible loss of batter material
from beneath the concrete. Scouring is becoming a problem with the toe of the batter being
eroded over a reasonable length, most likely at the upstream corner of the abutment
protection and extending downstream under the under the bridge over a sizeable length, and
possible erosion of batter material beneath the toe.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling with large broken areas or areas of missing concrete are
providing erosion of batter material from beneath the concrete batter. Movements at the
casting joints are excessive and batter material has been eroded away. Severe erosion has
undermined the toe of the batter with loss of batter material below the concrete.
53C

COMPONENT 53O BATTER PROTECTI ON OTHER


This element includes those batters either unprotected, grassed, protected with stone or rocks
(grouted or ungrouted), stone filled cages or mattresses, stone with reinforcing mesh tied
down on top, or placed fabric tied down by light wire mesh. Small retaining walls may be
used at the toe of the batter and these should be included as part of the batter protection. The
area of batter protection shall normally be the actual area, however in cases where protection
extends considerably beyond the abutments at approaches then the extent of the component
should generally be no more than 20m behind the abutment. The actual length considered
shall be noted in the comments field for this item.

Condition State 1

The batters and protective elements are in good condition with no damage, differential
settlement or movements, and no scour beneath the toe of the protection.

Condition State 2

There may be local damage to the protective system or minor differential settlement or
movement of cages or mattresses. Some wires may be damaged or broken with minor loss of
the stone filling. Minor local scour may be beginning to uncover the toe of the batter
protection, most likely at the upstream corner of the abutment protection due to acceleration
of flow at these locations.

Condition State 3

Damage to the protection is more pronounced and spreading to larger areas. Wire cages are
broken and heavy loss of stone filling is occurring. The batter material is being eroded from
beneath the protective system or unprotected banks are beginning to be erodedaway. The toe
of the protection is exposed over a reasonable distance, most likely at the upstream corner of
the abutment protection and extending downstream under the bridge over a sizeable length,
and with some possible loss of the batter material occurring.

Condition State 4

Failure of the protection has allowed erosion and scouring of the banks to occur. Severe scour
has undermined the toe of the protection and batter fill material is being eroded away.
Settlement or movement of the protection has exposed the underside of the abutments with
loss of fill material in the road embankment.
53O

COMPONENT 54S HEADSTOCKS STEEL


This element includes all pier headstocks which are constructed of steel and are separate from
the superstructure above. The steel may be painted or galvanised.

Condition State 1

The headstock has sufficient size to adequately carry the load of the superstructure and
distribute it to the supporting piles or columns. Painted surfaces should be generally sound
with only minor chalking, peeling or curling, but no exposure of metal. All welds, bolts or
rivets are in good condition.

Condition State 2

Spot rusting is occurring and the paint system is no longer effective but no corrosion has
occurred as yet. Welds are in good condition but there may be minor rusting of nuts or bolts.

Condition State 3

The paint system has completely broken down, and minor pitting corrosion is occurring.
Nuts and bolts may be corroded with only minor loss of tension in the bolt. Welds may have
faint cracking with only minor loss of effectiveness. Headstocks may be too light to carry the
loads imposed on them and may have minor bows or buckles in them.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced having a definite detrimental affect on the strength of the
element. Connecting bolts or nuts may have corroded severely, broken loose or are missing.
Headstocks size may be inadequate with large bows or buckling occurring.
54S

COMPONENT 54P HEADSTOCKS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all precast reinforced or prestressed concrete pier headstocks which are
independent of the superstructure. The headstocks will have blockouts above the columns to
allow for cast-in-situ full connections for transfer of load and moment to the columns or piles
beneath. Damage to bearing support areas by faulty bearings will be covered under the
bearing items.

Condition State 1

There is no deterioration of the elements except for very minor fine cracks around the cast-in-
situ connections.

Condition State 2

The crossheads may have a few minor fine cracks or minor spalls due to corroding
reinforcement. No stressing strands should be exposed in any spall. There should be no
moment cracking in the stressed crossheads. Reinforced headstocks may have fine moment
cracking.

Condition State 3

Moderate to severe cracking or spalling as the result of non-structural mechanisms may exist
and there may be some rust staining in the cracks. Exposed reinforcement may have up to
20% section loss in isolated areas. Exposed stressing strands may have only minor corrosion.
Stressed headstocks may have fine flexural cracking but not shear cracking. Reinforced
headstocks may have medium flexural cracks and/or fine shear cracks.

Condition State 4

Corrosion of the reinforcement is at an advanced state, with loss of section of reinforcement
greater than 20% (and any spalling or cracking associated with it). Stressing strands may
have loss of section of up to 10%. Flexural cracking in reinforced headstocks may be heavy
but in stressed headstocks the flexural cracking should only be medium. Shear cracks may be
of medium size in reinforced headstocks, or fine in stressed headstocks.
54P

COMPONENT 54C HEADSTOCKS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines those pier headstocks constructed of cast-in-situ concrete and includes
the concrete capping on top of masonry or brick walls at both piers and abutments. Damage
to bearing support areas caused by faulty bearings will be covered under the bearing items.

Condition State 1

The headstocks are in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or
reinforcement corrosion. The headstocks should have no moment or shear cracking.

Condition State 2

The headstocks may have minor spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to beam
friction or the girder bearing directly on the headstock edges. Some minor fine cracks due to
moment or shear may exist.

Condition State 3

Medium sized cracks caused by structural mechanisms, or moderate to severe cracking or
spalls and possible delaminations may exist as the result of non-structural mechanisms, with
exposed corroding reinforcement having up to 20% loss of section. Moment cracking may be
medium sized but any shear cracks should only be fine.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking due to structural mechanisms or advanced corrosion of the steel bars, with
loss of section of reinforcement greater than 20% (and any spalling or cracking associated
with it). Moment cracking may be heavy whilst shear cracks may be medium sized.
54C

COMPONENT 54T HEADSTOCKS TI MBER


This element includes those headstocks constructed of sawn timber sections which do not
include the centre pipe rot affected area of the original log. Timber headstocks at the
abutments should also be included in this element due to their importance and susceptibility
to deterioration. Note that members with pipe rot/termite attack in excess of the values shown
in Condition State 4 are critical and should be replaced immediately.

Condition State 1

The headstocks are in good condition with only minor weathering, splits or cheeks having no
effect on strength. All bolted connections are tight and in good condition with at least half the
headstock having good bearing support on the piles

Condition State 2

The headstocks show signs of minor decay, weathering, splits and checks not affecting
member strength. There may be minor sags in the headstocks beneath loaded girders. Bolted
connections may be slightly loose or the headstock may have less than half width bearing on
the piles. Headstocks may have rot/termite attack, resulting in up to 5% external loss of
section or an internal pipe no greater than 45mm in diameter. There may be evidence of
termite activity, but no damage evident. Preservative treatment of headstock ends may be
ineffective.

Condition State 3

The headstock may have moderate decay, weathering, termite attack or crushing at supports,
which may have a minor effect on member strength. There may be moderate splitting present,
particularly over supports or within the ends of the headstock. The headstocks may be sagged
beneath the girders with minor moment cracks. Bolted connections may be loose and there
may be minor corrosion of bolts. Headstocks may have no bearing support at the piles. Bolt
holes are oversized, and may be up to 50% larger than standard. The top of the piles may be
severely rotted offering little bearing support to the headstock bolted connections, and the
headstocks may be pulling off piles. Headstocks may be spliced and the splice is in poor
condition and pulling apart. Significant rot/termite attack has resulted in up to 10% external
loss of section or an internal pipe no greater than 65mm in diameter. Preservative treatment
of headstock ends may be ineffective. Headstocks may be sagging or moving under load at
pile locations.

Condition State 4

The headstocks may be heavily decayed, weathered, termite damaged or cracked, and may
have crushing at the supports. There may be severe splitting present, particularly over
supports or within the ends of the headstock. Large sagging may be evident under girders and
the headstock may have moment cracking. Bolted connections may be completely loose and
bolts may be badly corroded or missing. Headstocks may have pulled off or almost pulled off
the supporting piles. Bolt holes are significantly oversized, and may be up to 100% larger
54T
than standard. Headstock splices may have broken apart with loading on the unsupported
cantilever headstock section. Excessive rot/termite attack has resulted in up to 20% external
loss of section or an internal pipe no greater than 90mm in diameter. There may be a
significant sag or movement under load at pile locations.

54T

COMPONENT 55C HEADSTOCKS (I NTEGRAL) CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines those pier headstocks using reinforced concrete cast-in-situ which is
integral with both the superstructure beams and with the substructure walls or columns,
especially in old monolithic "T" beam bridges and the built-in RSJ 's on old steel girder
bridges.

Condition State 1

The element is in good condition with only very minor cracking visible. There may be minor
dampness or efflorescence powder visible in a few locations.

Condition State 2

There may be a few minor cracks or spalls due to corroding reinforcement but no structural
cracking is visible. There may be fine cracks at the construction joints at the undersides of the
beams.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking due to structural mechanisms or moderate to severe cracking and spalling
may exist as a result of non-structural mechanisms, and there may be minor cracking beneath
supported beams. Minor cracking may exist at the headstock/deck or headstock/girder joints
with moisture, staining and/or efflorescence visible.

Condition State 4

Reinforcement may be heavily corroded, with loss of section of up to 20% (and any spalling
or cracking associated with it). Medium sized cracking may exist beneath supported beams.
Medium or heavy cracks may exist at the deck/crosshead joint due to lack of moment steel,
and heavy moisture staining and efflorescence may be visible.
55C

COMPONENT 56S COLUMNS OR PI LES STEEL


This element includes all columns or protruding piles manufactured from steel at either
abutments or piers. The steel may be painted, galvanised or unpainted and should encompass
ties and braces which may be used to stiffen the columns or piles and to distribute loads.

Condition State 1

The paintwork is generally in good condition with only minor chalking, curling or peeling,
but no metal exposure. The piles are adequately braced and all connections are in good
condition. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive
inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall depth of localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

Painted steelwork has spot rusting and the protective coating is no longer effective. The piles
or columns may not be effectively braced or the connections may be slightly loose or
corroded. Unpainted steel piles may be rusted. The difference between soundings measured
to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m. Overall depth of
localised scour holes ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Steelwork has medium corrosion and the paint system has completely failed. Surface pitting
may be evident but section loss is less than 10%. Bracing may be ineffective or non-existent
and connections may be heavily corroded or loose. The difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m. Overall
depth of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Steelwork is heavily corroded with up to 20% loss of section. Connections may be very
loose or bracing may be missing or totally ineffective. The difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall depth of
localised scour hole is in excess of 4m.
56S

COMPONENT 56P COLUMNS OR PI LES PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all columns or protruding piles manufactured from precast concrete at
either abutments or piers. The precast units may be prestressed or reinforced concrete, and
the element should encompass ties and braces which may be used to stiffen the columns or
piles and to distribute the load. Prestressed concrete piles may exhibit longitudinal cracking
as result of ASR from around ground level to the standing water mark.

Condition State 1

The piles or columns are in good condition with only minor cracking due to reinforcement
corrosion. There should be no moment cracking in the piles or columns. The piles are
adequately braced with unsupported height less than 3.5 metres. The difference between
soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall
depth of localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

The piles or columns have minor cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement. Fine
moment cracking may be visible. Stressing strands should not be exposed and the piles or
columns may not be effectively braced. Prestressed piles may have fine longitudinal cracks
caused by ASR. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive
inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m. Overall depth of localised scour holes ranges from
0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or moderate to severe cracking and
spalling due to non-structural actions such as corroding reinforcement, with up to 20% loss of
section of the bars. Exposed stressing strands should only have minor surface corrosion.
Flexural cracking may be medium sized especially if bracing or ties are ineffective or non-
existent. Prestressed piles may have moderate to severe longitudinal cracking caused by
ASR. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive
2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or advanced corrosion of the
reinforcement with loss of section greater than 20% (and any spalling and cracking associated
with it). Any exposed stressing strands may have up to 10% section loss. Flexural cracking
may be heavy, with bracing or ties totally ineffective or missing. The difference between
soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall
depth of localised scour holes is in excess of 4m.
56P

COMPONENT 56C COLUMNS OR PI LES CAST I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all cast-in-situ columns or cast-in-situ extensions on top of driven
piles, and reinforced concrete pile encasements. This element should also encompass ties and
braces which may be used to stiffen the columns or piles and to distribute loads.

Condition State 1

The piles, columns or encasements show only minor cracking due to reinforcement corrosion.
There should be no moment cracking in the piles or columns. The piles are adequately
braced with unsupported height less than 3.5 metres. The difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall depth of
localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

The piles, columns or encasements have minor cracking or spalling due to corroding
reinforcement. Fine moment cracking may be visible and the piles or columns may not be
effectively braced. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in
successive inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised
scour holes ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

The piles, columns or encasements have moderate cracking caused by structural mechanisms,
or moderate to severe cracking due to non-structural actions such as corrosion of
reinforcement, with up to 20% loss of section in the steel bars. Flexural cracking may be
medium sized, especially if the bracing or ties are ineffective or non-existent. The difference
between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.5m and
0.99m at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking due to structural mechanisms or advanced corrosion of the steel bars, with
loss of section of reinforcement greater than 20% (and any spalling or cracking associated
with it). Flexural cracking may be heavy with bracing or ties totally ineffective or missing.
The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is
1.0m or greater at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised scour holes is in excess of 4m.
56C

COMPONENT 56T COLUMNS OR PI LES TI MBER


This element includes all potted timber piles or columns as well as driven timber piles at both
piers and abutments. Bracing and fender piles are also included in this element. If the
abutment piles have been relieved by props or potted piles then these supports should be rated
rather than the original piles.

Condition State 1

The piles or props are in good condition with little or no pipe rot, termite attack or decay,
though they may have minor cracks, splits or checks having no affect on the strength of the
element. Relieving props are well braced and have wedges or other systems of adjustment to
account for any settlement of the bedding or footing. This is required, especially on soft
ground, to provide full support to the superstructure. Pier piles over 3 m high are to be well
braced and all connections in good condition. The difference between soundings measured to
the stream bed in successive inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall depth of localised scour
holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

Piles or props are in good condition though they may have pipe rot of up to 20 % of the
diameter. They may also have medium decay, termite attack, splitting or checking but not of
sufficient magnitude to affect the strength of the member. Relieving props may be in good
condition but are poorly braced or have settled slightly from beneath the beams. Pier piles
may be in good condition but may have ineffective braces or the connections may be slightly
loose. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive
inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised scour holes
ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Piles or props have a reasonable amount of pipe rot up to 35% of the diameter. They may
also have large splits, especially under load bearing areas, heavy decay, termite attacks or
checks which may cause a reduction in strength of the member. Relieving props may be
completely unbraced and subject to being knocked out easily, or they may have settled well
away from the beam they are supposed to be supporting with load being still carried by the
original pile or crosshead until very heavily loaded. Bracing connections may be heavily
corroded or be reasonably loose having little effectiveness. The difference between
soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m
at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Piles or props have heavy pipe rot up to 50 % of the diameter. Splitting, termite attack or
decay may be severe with a definite reduction in the strength of the member. Relieving props
may be completely ineffective and offer no resistance even under heavy load. Bracing may
be missing or totally ineffective due to very loose connections. The difference between
56T
soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is 1.0m or greater at the pile
cap. Overall depth of localised scour hole is in excess of 4m.

NOTE: Members with pipe rot/termite attack in excess of the values shown in Condition
State 4 are critical and should be replaced immediately.

56T

COMPONENT 56O COLUMNS OR PI LES OTHER


This element includes all pile encasements constructed using composite materials, such as
fibreglass-coated carbon fibre wraps. These elements may also be known as Fibre
Reinforced Polymer (FRP) wraps.

As these encasement systems are relatively new, deterioration mechanisms have not been
identified for these material types. For this reason, the encasements shall be rated in either
Condition State 1 or Condition State 4, based on the criteria shown below. Please note that
any encasement found to be in a state other than Condition State 1 should also be reported
immediately to Alan Carse of Concrete Technology section.

Condition State 1

The encasements are in good condition, with no splits, bulges or other obvious defects in the
encasement material. The fastenings are in good condition.

Condition State 4

Any observable defects or deterioration of the encasement material or fastenings.

56O

COMPONENT 57S PI LE BRACI NG/WALES STEEL


This element includes all bracing and wales constructed using cast iron, wrought iron or steel.
The bracing may comprise rolled or plate sections, or simple steel rods. Metal may be
painted, unpainted or galvanised

Condition State 1

The paintwork is generally sound, with only minor chalking, peeling or curling, but no
exposure of the metal. All welds, bolts and rivets are in good condition.

Condition State 2

Spot rusting of the paint system is occurring and the system is no longer effective. No
corrosion has occurred as yet. No cracking of the welds has occurred, but there may be some
minor rusting of nuts or bolts.

Condition State 3

The paint system has completely broken down with corrosion and pitting in areas. Nuts and
bolts may be corroded with minor loss of tension in bolts. Welds may be cracked with minor
loss of effectiveness.

Condition State 4

Corrosion is well advanced having a detrimental effect on the strength of the element. Braces
have broken loose or bolts and rivets are missing. Rivets or bolts may be severely corroded
and no longer carrying full load or functioning as intended. In some instances the braces may
have broken loose
57S

COMPONENT 57C PI LE BRACI NG/WALES CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all cast-in-situ reinforced concrete bracing members constructed
between piles or columns to provide resistance to lateral forces and / or buckling of the
vertical members.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with only very minor cracking visible due to corroding
reinforcement. The braces should have no flexural or shear cracking.

Condition State 2

There may be a few minor cracks or spalls due to corroding reinforcement and there may be
some minor flexural cracking.

Condition State 3

Structural cracking should be of minor to moderate severity. Moderate to severe non-
structural cracking, spalls and possible delaminations may be present with exposed
reinforcement being moderately corroded with up to 20% section loss.

Condition State 4

Flexural cracking may be severe and shear cracking may be evident. Reinforcement may be
heavily corroded with section loss in excess of 20%, with associated cracking, spalling or
delamination of concrete.
57C

COMPONENT 57T PI LE BRACI NG/WALES TI MBER


This element includes all bracing and wales constructed using sawn timber sections which do
not include the centre of the original log (ie, no pipe rot).

Condition State 1

The timber is in good condition with only minor weathering splits or checks having no effect
on strength. All bolted connections are tight and in good condition.

Condition State 2

The timber shows signs of minor weathering, decay, splitting and checking but does not
affect the strength of the members. All bolts are in good condition though a few bolts may be
slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Moderate weathering, decay, splitting and checking may be present and the strength of the
member has been affected to a minor extent. Bolted connections may be loose allowing the
member to move excessively when loaded. The member may have cracked due to
overloading or ineffective support or connections.

Condition State 4

The member is severely decayed, split or cracked and the strength of the member has been
significantly reduced. Bolted connections are very loose and the member is moving
excessively when loaded causing further deterioration of the member.
57T

COMPONENT 58C PI ER WALL CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element describes pier walls constructed using cast-in-situ concrete and includes any
thickening at the top of the wall to accommodate the superstructure bearings. If, however,
this thickening cantilevers out from the walls, it shall be considered under the item for
headstocks. If the pier is of a hammerhead type with large overhangs, the wall shall be
considered as a column and included under that item. Damage to bearing support areas
caused by faulty bearings is covered under the bearing items. Piers which have thin infill
panels between columns are not considered under this item. These piers shall be considered
as headstock and column as the infill panels serve no structural purpose.

Condition State 1

The wall is in good condition with only minor cracking due to corroding reinforcement.
There is no cracking due to differential settlement of the foundations.

Condition State 2

The wall may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement. Tops of the
walls may have minor cracking due to friction or edge loading of beams. The wall may have
minor cracking due to differential settlement of the foundations.

Condition State 3

Moderate to severe non-structural cracking and spalling may be visible with loss of
reinforcement section up to 20%. Top of walls may have moderate cracking or spalling due
to friction or edge loading of beams. The walls may have moderate cracking due to
differential settlement of the foundations. Moderate structural cracking may be evident.

Condition State 4

Severe structural cracking may be visible. Advanced corrosion of the reinforcement may
have occurred, with loss of section greater than 20% and associated cracking, spalling or
delamination. Tops of walls may have severe cracking and spalling due to friction or edge
loading of the beams. The walls may have severe cracking due to differential settlement of
the foundations.
58C

COMPONENT 58O PI ER WALL OTHER

Units of Measurement: Square Metres

This element describes all wall types other than concrete and includes stone masonry walls,
red brick walls or grouted rubble walls. The element does not include any reinforced
concrete cap on top of the walls. If masonry blocks are used to cap the walls, those blocks
can be considered in this element. Foundations, if visible should be included in this element.

Condition State 1

The wall is in good condition with only a few very minor fine cracks in the mortar between
the bricks, stones or blocks. There is no cracking due to differential settlement of the
foundations. There should be no loss of mortar between the blocks.

Condition State 2

The wall may have a number of fine cracks in the mortar between brick or blocks, but no
cracking of the masonry. There may be minor loss of mortar of no concern. There may be
minor cracking due to differential settlement of the foundations.

Condition State 3

Moderate Cracking of the mortar between the blocks may be occurring or moderate mortar
loss may be occurring due to water wash. There should be, however, be only minor mortar
loss beneath any masonry capping blocks. Moderate Cracking may exist due to differential
settlement of the foundations.

Condition State 4

The mortar and blocks may have severe cracking through them. Mortar loss may be severe
requiring pressure repointing. Loss of mortar below masonry capping blocks may be
moderate. Differential settlement of the foundations may have caused severe cracking.
58O

COMPONENT 59C FOOTI NG/PI LE CAP CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This item covers all foundations constructed in cast-in-situ concrete such as pile caps and
spread footings. It also covers the concrete pedestal footings used to support timber pile bases
at piers and abutments.

SPREAD FOOTI NGS

Condition State 1

The footing is in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or corroding
reinforcement. There is no cracking due to differential settlement of footings or scouring
under spread footings.

Condition State 2

There is a minor cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or differential
settlement of footings. There is no scour beneath the spread footing base.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking or spalling due to differential settlement or log impact may have occurred.
Moderate to severe cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement may be evident.
There is up to 20% loss of reinforcement section. There is no scour beneath the spread
footing base.

Condition State 4

Footings are severely cracked and spalled due to differential settlement of foundations or log
impact. There may be advanced reinforcement corrosion, with loss of section in excess of
20% and associated cracking and spalling. Spread footings may have been undercut by scour
action.

PI LE CAPS

Condition State 1

The pile cap is in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or corroding
reinforcement. There is no cracking due to differential settlement of piles and the difference
between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is less than 0.2m at
the pile cap. Overall depth of scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

There is a minor cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or differential
settlement of piles. Piles have adequate edge clearances and have been placed within the
specified tolerances. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in
59C
successive inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised
scour holes ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking or spalling due to log impact or differential settlement may have occurred.
Moderate to severe cracking and spalling due to corrosion of reinforcement may be evident.
There is up to 20% loss of reinforcement section due to corrosion. Piles have been driven
significantly out of positional tolerance but the structural strength and serviceability are
adequate. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in successive
inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m at the pile cap. Overall depth of localised scour holes
ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Pile caps are heavily cracked and spalled due to differential settlement of foundations or log
impact. There may be advanced reinforcement corrosion, with loss of section in excess of
20% and associated cracking and spalling. Edges of pile caps may be spalling due to lack of
edge clearance of piles. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in
successive inspections is 1.0m or greater at the pile cap. Depth of localised scour holes is in
excess of 4m.
59C

COMPONENT 59T SI LL LOGS TI MBER


This element includes timber sill logs used to support timber pile bases at piers and
abutments.

Condition State 1

The sill log is in good condition with little or no pipe rot or decay. There may be minor splits
or checks having no effect on member strength.

Scouring of the stream bed has not caused any exposure of the member.

Condition State 2

The sill log is in good condition and may have minor decay, splitting, checking or crushing
but not of sufficient magnitude to affect the strength of the member.

Scouring of the stream bed has not caused any exposure of the member.

Condition State 3

The sill log has a reasonable amount of pipe rot or decay and may have large splits or checks
which may reduce the strength or serviceability of the member. Splits may be separating
under load causing crushing of the member, or crushing may be due to water ingress
softening the load bearing areas of the timber.

Scouring of the foundation has occurred and the sill log is visible but there is still adequate
support for the sill log.

Condition State 4

The sill log may have excessive pipe rot or decay, accompanied by severe splitting or
crushing. Strength and serviceability of the member has been severely affected and may have
significant crushing at the pile support area, resulting in settlement of the bridge structure.

Scour of the foundations has undermined the sill log, resulting in settlement of the bridge.

Bolted connections on the outer upstream and downstream piles may be severely corroded.
59T

COMPONENT 60S WI NG PI LES STEEL


This element includes all columns or protruding piles manufactured from steel at abutment
wingwalls. The steel may be painted or unpainted.

Condition State 1

The paintwork is generally in good condition with only minor chalking, curling or peeling,
but no metal exposure. All connections are in good condition. The difference between
soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is less than
0.2m. Overall depth of localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

Painted steelwork has spot rusting and the protective coating is no longer effective. The
connections may be slightly loose or corroded. Unpainted steel piles may be rusted. The
difference between soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment in successive
0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Steelwork has medium corrosion and the paint system has completely failed. Surface pitting
may be evident but section loss is less than 10%. Connections may be heavily corroded or
loose. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment in
successive inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m. Overall depth of localised scour holes
ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Steelwork is heavily corroded with up to 20% loss of section. Connections may be very
loose. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment in
successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall depth of localised scour holes is in excess
of 4m.

60S

COMPONENT 60P WI NG PI LES PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all protruding piles manufactured from precast concrete at abutment
wingwalls. The precast units may be prestressed or reinforced concrete. Prestressed concrete
piles may exhibit longitudinal cracking as result of ASR from around ground level to the
standing water mark.

Condition State 1

The piles are in good condition with only minor cracking due to reinforcement corrosion.
There should be no moment cracking in the piles. The difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall
depth of localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

The piles have minor cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement. Fine moment
cracking may be visible. Stressing strands should not be exposed and the piles may not be
effectively braced. Prestressed piles may have fine longitudinal cracks caused by ASR. The
0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or moderate to severe cracking and
spalling due to non-structural actions such as corroding reinforcement, with up to 20% loss of
section of the bars. Exposed stressing strands should only have minor surface corrosion.
Flexural cracking may be medium sized. Prestressed piles may have moderate to severe
longitudinal cracking caused by ASR. The difference between soundings measured to the
stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m. Overall depth
of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or advanced corrosion of the
reinforcement with loss of section greater than 20% (and any spalling and cracking associated
with it). Any exposed stressing strands may have up to 10% section loss. Flexural cracking
may be heavy. The difference between soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment
in successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall depth of localised scour holes is in
excess of 4m.
60P

COMPONENT 60T WI NG PI LES TI MBER


This element includes all potted or driven timber piles at abutment wingwalls.

Condition State 1

The piles are in good condition with little or no pipe rot, termite attack or decay, though they
may have minor cracks, splits or checks having no affect on the strength of the element. The
inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall depth of localised scour holes is less than 0.5m.

Condition State 2

Piles are in good condition though they may have up to 20% pipe rot of the diameter. They
may also have medium decay, termite attack, splitting or checking but not of sufficient
magnitude to affect the strength of the member. The difference between soundings measured
to the stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m. Overall
depth of localised scour holes ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m.

Condition State 3

Piles have a reasonable amount of pipe rot up to 35% of the diameter. They may also have
large splits, heavy decay, termite attacks or checks which may have a reduction in strength of
the member. The piles may be leaning slightly forward due to earth pressure. The difference
between soundings measured to the stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is
between 0.5m and 0.99m. Overall depth of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m.

Condition State 4

Piles have heavy pipe rot up to 50% of the diameter. Splitting, termite attack or decay may
be severe with a definite reduction in the strength of the member. Piles may be leaning
forward excessively as a result of earth pressure. The difference between soundings measured
to the stream bed/embankment in successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall depth of
localised scour holes is in excess of 4m.
60T

COMPONENT 70O BRI DGE APPROACHES OTHER


This item defines the carriageway immediately behind the abutments and includes such items
as wearing surface on the approach pavement, relieving slabs and drainage. The length of
approach considered shall be at the discretion of the inspector but generally should be no
more than 20m. The actual length considered should be noted in the comments field for the
item.

Condition State 1

The pavement surface is in good condition with no cracking, pot holes, rutting, bumps or
depressions and the transition between the road and bridge is smooth with a level difference
of less than 10mm. The relieving slabs are in good condition and have not settled. The
pavement surface has adequate crossfall and gradient to efficiently drain surface water to
drainage outlets which are well clear of the bridge and fully functional.

Condition State 2

There may be minor rutting, cracking, bumps and depressions or minor depressions due to
embankment movement which are marginally hindering pavement drainage. The approaches
may have settled slightly (as a result of embankment settlement/consolidation or loss of
material through substructure) but transition is generally smooth with a level difference less
than 20mm. Settling relieving slabs have caused a small height difference and opened up the
expansion joint slightly. Drainage offlets may be blocked or badly positioned causing water
to discharge too close to the bridge abutment but erosion is insignificant.

Condition State 3

Pavement surface defects are trapping surface water and/or allowing it to penetrate into the
fill. Potholes may be forming in cracked areas. Rutting, bumps and potholes are affecting
rideability and settlement of approaches is advancing with a level difference of up to 30mm.
Relieving slabs may have settled substantially and rotated causing an opening of the
abutment expansion joints but without failure of joint. Surface water outlets may be blocked,
inadequate or badly positioned causing water to discharge over the embankment face to close
to the bridge. There may be significant erosion of the embankment face or abutment spill-
through but the stability of the road on bridge has not been compromised.
70O

Condition State 4

Potholing, cracking, rutting, bumps or depressions are having a marked effect on the drainage
and rideability of the approaches. Settlement of the approaches is pronounced with a drop in
level in excess of 30mm. These surface irregularities greatly increase the dynamic wheel
loading on the bridge and the deck surface may also show signs of deterioration. Relieving
slabs may have settled dramatically causing rotation at the expansion joint sufficient to cause
total failure at the joint. Surface water drainage outlets may be inadequate, blocked or badly
positioned and the embankment faces, and abutment spillthrough are severely eroded with
deep gulleys evident on those faces. Footings of the abutment or wingwalls may be exposed
and better drains undercut. Fill material may have been lost from the embankment behind the
abutment. Immediate action may be required to maintain embankment or structural stability.
70O

COMPONENT 71C WATERWAY CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element defines the condition of stream or channel banks and/or bed in the vicinity of
the structure which have been lined with cast-in-situ reinforced concrete or mortar pumped
into a nylon mattress. The element shall be given a single rating only, and this rating should
report the worst condition state applicable to the span.

Please note:- Flood debris should be removed under the Routine Maintenance Inspection and
RMPC cycles, however excessive build-up of debris should be reported under this item.

Condition State 1

There is little or no change in channel shape or bed level at the site. The reinforced concrete
channel or aprons are undamaged with no differential settlement between slabs.

Condition State 2

Channel shape and bed level is unchanged but there may be cracking of the concrete or minor
differential movement between the slabs.

Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing up to 10% of the designed waterway
area in any span.

Condition State 3

Differential settlement or movements have caused concrete edges to break away allowing
water behind the concrete. Some loss of fill material may have occurred.

Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing up to 20% of the designed waterway
area in any span.

Condition State 4

Large settlements or movements have severely damaged the concrete allowing large
washouts beneath the concrete banks or bed.

Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing in excess of 20% of the designed
waterway area in any span.
71C

COMPONENT 71O WATERWAY OTHER


This element defines the condition of unprotected or protected stream banks and bed in the
vicinity of the structure. Protected banks and bed may be constructed of brick, masonry,
stone filled cages or mattresses, a geotextile layer with grass, or rocks held down by wire
mesh. The element should be given a single rating only, and this rating should report the
worst condition state applicable to the span.

Please note:- Flood debris should be removed under the Routine Maintenance Inspection and
RMPC cycles, however excessive build-up of debris should be reported under this item.

Condition State 1

There is little or no change in the stream shape and the difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is less than 0.2m. Overall depth of
localised scour holes is less than 0.5m. Protective works (if any) are in good condition with
no damage visible.

Condition State 2

Minor scour has only a minor effect on the stream shape and the difference between
soundings measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.2m and 0.49m.
Overall depth of localised scour holes ranges from 0.5m to 1.99m. Minor settlement may
have occurred or there may be minor cracking of the mortar between stones. Rock gabions or
mattresses may have lost their shape slightly but only minor loss of rock fill may have
occurred. Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing up to 10% of the designed
waterway area in any span.

Condition State 3

Scour of the banks has altered the stream shape and the difference between soundings
measured to the stream bed in successive inspections is between 0.5m and 0.99m. Overall
depth of localised scour holes ranges from 2m to 4m. Settlement may have badly cracked
mortar between blocks and a few blocks may be missing with possible loss of fill material.
Gabions or mattresses may be badly distorted with some wires broken and a moderate loss of
rock filling may have occurred. Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing up to
20% of the designed waterway area in any span.

Condition State 4

Large settlements or movements may have severely damaged the protection with loss of large
areas of rocks. Gabions or mattresses may be completely broken with almost total loss of
rock filling. Unprotected banks and beds may be severely scoured with loss of approach
embankment occurring, and the difference between soundings measured to the stream bed in
successive inspections is 1.0m or greater. Overall depth of localised scour holes is in excess
of 4m. Accumulated flood debris or bed deposits representing in excess of 20% of the
designed waterway area in any span.
71O

COMPONENT 72C GUARDRAI LS/BARRI ERS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This item defines all cast-in-situ concrete bridge approach barriers and includes terminals and
any steel safety rails or traffic barriers mounted on top. The item also includes cast-in-situ
concrete portion constructed to join precast concrete parapets to the deck. The length of the
approach barrier is at the discretion of the inspector but generally should be no more than
20m. The actual length considered should be noted in the comments field for the item.

Condition State 1

Barrier is in good condition with only minor cracking due to shrinkage or corrosion of
reinforcement. The correct traffic face profile has been constructed. Steel rails are in good
condition with no rust spotting and bolted and welded connection show no signs of
deterioration. No accident damage or rotation of the barriers is evident.

Condition State 2

There is minor cracking and spalling due to corrosion of the reinforcement. The correct
traffic face profile has been constructed with no overlays affecting the upstand. Steel railings
on top of the parapet may have rust spotting and bolted connections are tight and in good
condition. There are no cracked welds. Accident damage is slight and of no consequence.
The barrier may have rotated slightly on the footing with the resultant movement of the top
edges not exceeding 20mm.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling is evident with in excess of 20% loss of reinforcement area.
The steel barrier may be pitted on the surface and connections slightly loose. Post
anchorages may have minor cracking due to vehicle impact. The traffic face profile may
have been constructed incorrectly or a surfacing overlay placed which reduces the height of
the vertical upstand and barrier. Accident damage has only a minor effect on strength and
serviceability. The barrier may have rotated moderately on the footing with resulting
movement of the top edges not exceeding 40mm.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking may be visible due to advanced corrosion of the reinforcement which may
have lost in excess of 20% of its sectional area. Corrosion may be well advanced in the steel
barrier, bolts may be loose or rails may have broken free from their mountings. The
anchorage area of the steel barrier posts may be cracked and spalled. Strength and
serviceability of the barrier is adversely affected. The traffic face profile may have been
constructed incorrectly on surfacing overlays placed such that the upstand height is
significantly reduced. Accident damage may be severe with serious cracking and spalling of
the concrete barrier or loss of sections of the railing. The barrier has rotated excessively on
the footing with the resultant movement of the top edges exceeding 40mm.

72C

COMPONENT 72P GUARDRAI L/BARRI ERS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This item defines all types and shapes of approach barriers where the principal component is
precast concrete. It includes any RC terminals, steel safety rails or traffic barriers mounted
on top and holding down bolts. Inspectors should use the state descriptions for Component
72C Cast-In-Situ Concrete Barriers in addition to the descriptions given below for the
fasteners. The length of the approach barrier is at the discretion of the inspector but generally
should be no more than 20m. The actual length considered should be noted in the comments
field for the item.

Condition State 1

Mortar seating is continuous and sound and there is no evidence of moisture ingress into the
base joint. Alignment is true to line and level and all bolts are tight.

Condition State 2

Mortar seating is substantially intact with a few isolated failures. Some moisture may be
penetrating the bedding joint but there is no rust staining evident. There are visible
discontinuities in alignment of panels but barrier is fit for purpose.

Condition State 3

Mortar seating is missing or crumbling out of significant portions of the bedding joint and
surface water run-off is freely passing through some sections of the joint. Rust stains are
evident on the kerb/plinth and anchor bolts may show signs of active corrosion. There may
be visible discontinuities in alignment of panels but the containment capacity is substantially
intact.

Condition State 4

The mortar seating may be missing over large areas and the anchor bolts are significantly
corroded such that the containment capacity has been significantly reduced. Severe rust
staining and leakage through the joint is evident.
72P

COMPONENT 72T GUARDRAI LS/BARRI ERS TI MBER


This element defines those rails constructed using timber either from a sawn section or glued
laminated sections. This element includes also the supporting posts.

Timber railing is considered to be inappropriate and represents a significant hazard to road
users. The presence of barriers of this type are to be noted in the comments field in the
"overall rating" section of the "Bridge Condition Inspection Report - Form B2/1".

Condition State 1

The element shows only minor deterioration and all the bolting is tight. No accident damage
is visible.

Condition State 2

The element shows signs of minor decay, splitting or cracking but does not affect the strength
or serviceability. Bolting of the posts and guardrails is generally tight. Accident damage is
only minor with no effect on strength or serviceability.

Condition State 3

Medium decay, splitting, cracking or crushing may be present affecting the strength and
serviceability of the railing to a minor extent. Bolting may be loose in a number of areas.
Accident damage may have a minor effect on the strength or serviceability of the guardrail.

Condition State 4

Heavy decay, splitting, cracking or crushing may be present affecting the strength and
serviceability of the guardrail. Bolting may be quite loose affecting the strength of the
guardrail. The guardrail may not be connected to the bridge endposts. Major accident
damage is affecting the serviceability of the guardrail.
72T

COMPONENT 72O GUARDRAI LS/BARRI ERS OTHER


This element defines all types of shapes and barrier materials other than those already
covered. Included in this element are masonry parapets, aluminium rails with steel
tensioning cables inside, G.W.I. pipe, post and rails, wire mesh fencing panels, wire or chain
cables. The element covers any posts required to support the railing system or cables. The
length of the approach barrier is at the discretion of the inspector but generally should be no
more than 20m. The actual length considered should be noted in the comments field for the
item.

Condition State 1

The element shows only minor signs of deterioration with minor cracking between masonry
blocks or rusting of steel work. No accident damage or rotation of the barriers is evident.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking, spalling, loss of mortar between masonry blocks, surface or spot rusting has
occurred but having little or no affect on strength or serviceability. Accident damage is very
minor with no effect on strength or serviceability. The barrier may have rotated slightly on
the footing with resultant movement of the top edges not exceeding 20mm.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking, spalling, loss of mortar between masonry block, or corrosion of metal is
occurring but having a minor affect on strength or serviceability. Accident damage may have
a minor effect on the strength or serviceability of the railing. The barrier may have rotated
moderately on the footing with resultant movement of the top edges not exceeding 40mm.

Condition State 4

Severe Cracking, spalling, loss of mortar or corrosion has a large affect on rail strength or
serviceability. Accident damage is major affecting the strength or serviceability of the
railing. The barrier has rotated excessively on the footing with resultant movement of the top
edges exceeding 40mm.

No Barriers

In the event that no barriers have been constructed then this is considered as a serious
deficiency and a note should be added to the comments field in the "overall rating" section of
the "Bridge Condition Inspection Report - Form B2/1".
72O

COMPONENT 72S GUARDRAI LS/BARRI ERS STEEL


This element defines any approach guardrails or barriers leading up to the bridge endposts
and/or bridge railing, including pedestrian barriers.

Condition State 1

The approach railing is in good condition with no accident damage, and is well connected to
the endpost or bridge railing.

Condition State 2

The approach railing is generally in good condition with only minor rusting and/or minor
accident damage. The railing is well connected to the endposts or bridge railing and has
sufficient strength, i.e. posts closer than 1m centres in the 10m before the bridge and 2m
centres elsewhere.

Condition State 3

The approach railing may be moderately damaged due to vehicular impact or the guardrail is
poorly connected to the end posts of the bridge. The railing may be heavily rusted or the
guardrail may not have insufficient strength, i.e. post spaces may be greater than 1m
immediately prior to the endposts.

Condition State 4

The approach railing has been severely damaged, demolished, not connected to the endposts
or is non existent. The guardrail may have insufficient strength with posts greater than 2m
apart or may be rusted through due to corrosion of the metal.

72S

COMPONENT 80S PI PE CULVERTS STEEL


This element includes all steel pipes, painted or galvanised, circular, elongated or elliptical.

Condition State 1

There is no evidence of rust or corrosion and the paintwork or galvanising is in good
condition. The line and invert of the pipe is straight with no water being retained in the pipe.

Condition State 2

Surface or spot rusting may be evident and the paint system is no longer effective. There is no
corrosion of the metal occurring. The line of the pipe is straight, but minor settlement may be
allowing some water to be retained in the pipe. There may be a minor and insignificant
change in pipe dimensions.

Condition State 3

The paint system has failed and pitting corrosion is prominent especially at normal water
level. Loss of section has occurred but there is still adequate section left to not affect
serviceability of the pipe. There may be some deviation of the line of the pipes due to local
buckling, or moderate settlement of the pipe may be allowing a significant amount of water to
be retained in the pipe. There may be a difference between the measured horizontal and
vertical diameters of up to 40mm.

Condition State 4

Heavy corrosion is occurring and the pipe may have corroded out in areas, particularly at the
invert or the normal water level. There may be large deviation of line of the pipe due to
buckling of plates or plates may have crinkled at the bolt line in large diameter pipes. An
excessive amount of water may be retained in the pipe. Bolts may have torn through the
plates or split the plate edges allowing differential movement and buckling of plates. There
may be a difference between measured horizontal and vertical diameters in excess of 40mm.
80S

COMPONENT 80P PI PE CULVERTS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all precast concrete pipes and includes the jointing arrangements
between them.

Condition State 1

The element may show only minor superficial cracking of no consequence. The line and
invert of the pipe is straight with no water being retained within the pipe.

Condition State 2

The element may show minor cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement in isolated
areas. The line of the pipe is straight but minor settlement of some units may be allowing a
minor pool of water to be retained in the pipe.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking, spalling or delaminated areas may be present having a minor effect on
strength and serviceability of the pipe. Deviation of the line of the pipes may be occurring or
moderate separation and settlement of units may be allowing a significant amount of water to
be retained in the pipe or to leak out at the separated joints. A minor amount of surrounding
fill material may have been lost at separated joints.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking, spalling or delaminated areas may be present having a pronounced effect on
the strength and serviceability of the pipe. Pipe line deviation, separation or settlement may
be excessive allowing a significant amount of water to be retained in the pipe, or to leak out
at separated joints. A significant amount of surrounding fill material may have been lost at
separated joints.
80P

COMPONENT 80O PI PE CULVERTS OTHER


This element includes all pipes of circular or elliptical construction consisting of masonry,
red bricks or plastic.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with only minor areas of dampness or
efflorescence. There is no cracking or loss of mortar between the blocks. Pipe shape, line
and invert level are good and straight. No water is retained in the pipe.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking or loss of mortar between blocks but not sufficient to affect the
strength of the pipe. Minor cracking or spalling of the brickwork / blocks may be evident.
The plastic may have a few superficial splits of no importance. Shape of the pipe is good and
the line of the pipe is straight. Minor settlement of the pipe may be allowing a small pool of
water to be retained in the pipe.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking or loss of mortar between the blocks may have occurred. Moderate
cracking or spalling of the brickwork / blocks may be evident, but not of a sufficient
magnitude to affect the strength of the pipe. Minor loss of pipe shape or bulging of the walls
may have occurred, with splitting of the plastic. The line of the pipe may have minor
deviations, or moderate settling may be allowing a significant amount of water to be retained
in the pipe.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking or loss of mortar has occurred between blocks and some blocks may have
slipped. Severe cracking or spalling of the brickwork / blocks may have occurred, having a
pronounced effect on the strength of the pipe. Loss of shape, bulging of walls, splitting of
plastic, deviation of pipe line or settlement of the invert are excessive and are affecting the
strength and serviceability of the pipe. An excessive amount of water is retained in the pipe
or is leaking out through the joints.
80O

COMPONENT 81P BOX CULVERTS PRECAST
CONCRETE
Units of measurement: Lineal Metres (per cell)

This item includes box culverts, crown units and link slabs between crown units. Wingwalls,
aprons and headwalls are generally classified under Item No. 84 however inspectors may
cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs are to be covered under Item No. 20.
Modular culverts, such as the "Lincrete" system, are covered under Item No. 82.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with only a few fine superficial cracks of no
importance. There may be minor efflorescence especially on the soffit of the roof slab or
near the joints. The culvert has been well constructed, structure lines are true, joints between
legs have been plugged, joints between units taped, weepholes installed in the headwalls and
shoulders sealed. Restraint bolting is complete and intact.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be evident in legs and roof at joints along with moderate
efflorescence and damp stains due to ingress of moisture through the joints. There may be
minor level differentials of up to 5mm between units in the inverts. Shrinkage cracks may be
evident in the legs and roofs.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be particularly evident in legs and roof edges at joints
along with damp patches and rust stains. Lime deposits may be evident in cracks. Active
corrosion is occurring in the reinforcement at these locations and up to 20% of the bar area
may have been lost. Minor cracking and spalling is evident elsewhere. Edge spalling of units
may be more prominent and level differentials may be up to 10mm in inverts. The structure
may have been poorly constructed with; misaligned panels; leaking joints; partly plugged
joints between abutment legs; weepholes in headwalls omitted; and unsealed shoulders. The
serviceability of the structure has been compromised but strength/stability is holding. A
minor amount of surrounding fill material may have been lost at separated joints.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling may be evident with the delamination of large areas of cover
concrete. The reinforcement is severely corroded having lost more than 20% of its section.
Edge spalling may be severe as well as large differential settlement between box units. There
is a substantial reduction in capacity. The structure may have been extremely poorly
constructed with, unplugged joints between abutment legs, untaped roof joints, omitted or
blocked weepholes and unsealed shoulders. If cut off walls are not constructed at each end of
the base slab then erosion of the sub base material may have occurred with some flow
beneath the base slab. In this case the base slab may sound hollow when struck with a
hammer or piece of timber. A significant amount of surrounding fill material may have been
lost at separated joints.
81P

COMPONENT 81C BOX CULVERTS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all monolithic cast-in-situ reinforced concrete box culverts usually
built pre 1950. Wingwalls, aprons and headwalls are generally classified under Item No. 84
however inspectors may cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs are to be
covered under Item No. 20.

Cast-in-situ culverts in which the piers, abutments and deck are made up of distinctly
separate elements are classified as slab deck culverts, and should be covered in accordance
with Figure 1.5 in Appendix C.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with a few minor fine superficial cracks and
minor efflorescence.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be evident along with a moderate amount of efflorescence
in areas. Construction joints at the top of the walls may be opening up slightly or weathering
at the joint.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be evident. Excessive efflorescence may be noticed
with areas of delamination of the concrete cover in the underside of roof or outer walls
especially. Corroded steel may have up to 20 % section loss in areas.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling may be evident with large areas of delamination. If cut off
walls are not constructed at each end of the base slab then erosion of the sub base material
may have occurred with some flow beneath the base slab. In this case the base slab may
sound hollow when struck with a hammer or piece of timber.
81C

COMPONENT 82P MODULAR CULVERTS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This item covers precast modular culverts such as the "Lincrete System". These systems
comprise precast concrete flat panels which are bolted together using proprietary mechanical
jointing systems. Wingwalls, aprons and headwalls are generally classified under Item No. 84
however inspectors may cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs are to be
covered under Item No. 20.

Condition State 1

The culvert has been constructed within the manufacturers tolerances and all joints are tight
with no evidence of overstressing of the surrounding concrete. There is little or no
deterioration with only minor efflorescence or minor fine superficial cracking.

Condition State 2

There is some lack of fit of units and there may be some cracking or spalling around joints as
a result. Some moisture penetration and efflorescence powder may be evident at these
locations. Minor cracking and spalling may be evident in the panels due to corrosion of the
reinforcement. The serviceability of the structure is acceptable.

Condition State 3

There is a significant lack of fit between units and there is moderate cracking and spalling of
the concrete surrounding the mechanical joints. Some bolts may have been omitted or only
partly installed due to the lack of fit. Water and rust staining may be evident at these
locations. Moderate cracking and spalling may have occurred in the panels with up to 20%
loss of section of the exposed reinforcement. The serviceability is severely compromised but
the strength/stability is adequate.

Condition State 4

Construction tolerances may be unacceptable with many missing bolts in the mechanical
joints, misaligned panels and the severe cracking and spalling of the concrete surrounding the
joints. The joints may be heavily water or rust stained. Severe cracking and spalling may be
evident with large delaminated areas. Concrete sounds drummy when tapped by a hammer.
The stability of the structure is in question.
82P

COMPONENT 83S ARCH CULVERTS STEEL


This element includes all arches used for stream flow or cattle underpasses and constructed of
galvanised steel with concrete strip footings. If a cast-in-situ concrete floor has been
constructed, it should be considered as part of this element. Wingwalls, aprons and
headwalls are generally classified under Item No. 84 however inspectors may cover large
wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs in large culverts may be covered under Item No.
20.

Condition State 1

The element shows no sign of deterioration of the metal or galvanising. Bolts connecting the
multiplates are tight and in good condition. The concrete at the base of the arch is in good
condition with no cracking or spalling. Shape, line and level of the arch are good.

Condition State 2

Spot rust may be occurring but all connecting bolts are tight and in good condition. Concrete
footing may have minor cracking or spalling of no concern, though there should be no
cracking due to differential settlement of the footing. Shape, line and level of the arch are
good.

Condition State 3

Rusting and minor corrosion may be occurring in areas having only a minor effect on the
strength or serviceability of the member. The plate around some bolts may be damaged or
torn allowing some looseness in the bolts. The arch may have developed a small flatspot due
to movement or differential settlement of the foundations. Foundations may have moderate
cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or have cracking due to movement or
settlement of the footing.

Condition State 4

Heavy rusting and corrosion may be occurring to the extent they are having an effect on the
strength or serviceability of the arch, especially at the joint to the foundations. Plates may
have moved and bolts may have torn or pulled through the plates. Plates may have crinkled at
the bolt line or badly bulged due to earth pressure, with the shape of the arch badly distorted.
The concrete footings may have severe cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement
or may have moderate cracking due to movement or differential settlement.
83S

COMPONENT 83P ARCH CULVERTS PRECAST
CONCRETE
Units of Measurement: Lineal Metres (Per Cell)

This element includes precast concrete arches such as Bebo arches, Techspan and other 3
hinged arches. If cast-in-situ concrete floors have been constructed, they should be
considered as part of this element. Wingwalls, aprons and headwalls are generally classified
under Item No. 84 however inspectors may cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base
slabs in large culverts may be covered under Item No. 20.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with only minor efflorescence or minor fine
superficial cracking of no consequence. Shape, line and level of the arch units is good and
straight. The concrete footing and base slab are in good condition with no cracking or
spalling.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be evident due to corroding reinforcement in isolated areas.
There may be minor cracking or moisture penetration around the hinge areas with moderate
efflorescence powder visible. Shape, line and level of the arch units should be good and
straight. The footing may have minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement,
but no cracking due to movement or differential settlement.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be evident with up to 20% loss of section of exposed
reinforcement. The shape and line of the arch may show some deviation due to movement or
differential settlement, with minor spalling at the hinge points. The footing may show fine
cracking due to movement pressures or differential settlement.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling may be evident with large delaminated areas. The shape and
line of the arch may show a dip due to movements and differential settlements with medium
to heavy spalling around the hinge points. The footing may have moderate cracking due to
movement pressures or differential settlement.
83P

COMPONENT 83C ARCH CULVERTS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE
Units of Measurement: Lineal Metres (Per Cell)

This element includes all cast-in-situ concrete arches and includes the footings and any
concrete floor in the culvert. Wingwalls, aprons and headwalls are generally classified under
Item No. 84 however inspectors may cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs in
large culverts may be covered under Item No. 20.

Condition State 1

The element shows little or no deterioration with only minor fine superficial cracks and minor
areas of efflorescence. Shape, line and level of the arch units is good and straight. The
concrete footing and base slab have no cracking or spalling.

Condition State 2

Minor cracking and spalling may be evident due to corroding reinforcement along with
moderate efflorescence due to moisture penetration of the concrete. Shape, line and level of
the arch should be good and straight. The footing should have no cracking due to movement
or differential settlement.

Condition State 3

Moderate cracking and spalling may be evident due to corroding reinforcement with up to
20% loss of steel section in isolated areas. Efflorescence and scaling of the concrete surface
may be prevalent along with small delaminated areas. The shape and line of the arch may
show some deviation due to movement of differential settlement. The footing may have
minor cracking due to movement or differential settlement.

Condition State 4

Severe cracking and spalling is evident with large delaminated areas. Heavy scaling of the
concrete surface and efflorescence may be noticed. The shape and line of the arch may show
a dip and the footing may have moderate cracking due to movement pressures or differential
settlement.
83C

COMPONENT 83O ARCH CULVERTS OTHER

Units of measurement: Lineal Metres (Per Cell)

This element includes those arch culverts constructed using brick or masonry, with or without
a base slab which should be considered as part of the element. Wingwalls, aprons and
headwalls are generally classified under Item No. 84 however inspectors may cover large
wingwalls under Item No. 51. Base slabs in large culverts may be covered under Item No.
20.

Condition State 1

The element show little or no deterioration with no cracking or loss of mortar. There may be
small areas of dampness or efflorescence. The shape, line and invert of the arch are good and
straight.

Condition State 2

There may be minor loss of mortar or cracking of the mortar between the blocks. Minor
cracking or spalling of the brickwork / blocks may be evident. The shape, line and invert of
the arch should be in good condition. Large areas of dampness and efflorescence may be
present. There should be no differential settlement of the arch footings.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate loss of mortar or cracking of the mortar between the blocks. There
may also be cracking due to minor differential settlement of the foundations and some blocks
may have slipped slightly due to the movement and loss of mortar. Moderate cracking or
spalling of the brickwork / blocks may be evident, but not of a sufficient magnitude to affect
the strength of the arch. There may be some minor loss of arch shape, line or level, but not of
sufficient magnitude to cause concern for the strength or serviceability of the culvert.

Condition State 4

There may be heavy loss of mortar and/or cracking between and through the blocks, with
some blocks having slipped significantly. Severe cracking or spalling of the brickwork /
blocks may have occurred, having a pronounced effect on the strength of the pipe. There may
be moderate cracking due to differential settlement of the foundations, with significant loss of
shape, line and level of the arch, causing some concern as to the strength or serviceability of
the culvert.
83O

COMPONENT 84P HEADWALLS/WI NGWALLS PRECAST
CONCRETE

This element includes all culvert headwalls, wingwalls and concrete aprons associated with
culverts and constructed using precast reinforced concrete.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with no cracking or spalling noticed. There should be no
movement or movement cracking in the headwalls or wingwalls.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwalls may show minor movements of up to 10 mm which
are of no consequence.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwalls may show moderate movements of up to 40mm but
having little effect on serviceability.

Condition State 4

There may be severe cracking or spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwalls may show large movements or the wingwalls may be
leaning due to earth pressure on them, with possible loss of embankment fill behind.
84P

COMPONENT 84C HEADWALLS/WI NGWALLS CAST-I N-SI TU
CONCRETE

This element includes all culvert wingwalls, headwalls and concrete aprons associated with
the culverts and constructed using cast-in-situ reinforced or mass concrete.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with no cracking, spalling, movement or movement
cracking in the headwalls or wingwalls.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwalls may show cracking or movements up to 10 mm
which are of no consequence.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwalls may show moderate movements of up to 40 mm but
having little effect on serviceability.

Condition State 4

There may be severe cracking and spalling due to corroding reinforcement or due to earth
pressures. The headwalls or wingwall may show large movements or may be leaning over
due to earth pressure on them, resulting in loss of embankment fill from behind.
84C

COMPONENT 84O HEADWALLS/WI NGWALLS OTHER


This element includes all culvert wingwalls, headwalls and concreted aprons associated with
the culverts and constructed using masonry, rubble, brick, or rock filled cages.

Condition State 1

The elements are in good condition with little or no deterioration. There is no movement of
the headwall or wingwalls.

Condition State 2

There may be minor cracking of the mortar between blocks due to slight movements of up to
10mm, or earth pressure. Ungrouted masonry or rubble should be well stacked and quite
stable with only minor movements of the stones. Rock filled cages may have minor
settlement or loss of stone or a few broken wires.

Condition State 3

There may be moderate cracking of the mortar due to movement of up to 40 mm or due to
earth pressure. Ungrouted masonry or rubble may have moved with loss of some stones and
minor loss of embankment fill. Rock filled cages may have distorted with moderate loss of
stone and broken or corroded wires.

Condition State 4

There may be severe cracking of the mortar due to excessive movements or earth pressure,
with loss of embankment fill. Ungrouted masonry or rubble walls may have moved
appreciably, lost numerous rocks or generally be in a very poor condition. Rock filled cages
may be badly corroded, lost substantial filling or have numerous broken wires.

84O

APPENDI X E
Inspector
Accreditation
Appraisal

Procedure

Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL E.1
Structures Division APPENDIX E J une 2004

Objectives

(1) To establish the minimum standard of knowledge the Department considers an inspector
should possess to ensure uniform and accurate assessment of the condition of bridges.

(2) To prepare a standard appraisal system for inspectors applying for;
Level 1 - Routine Maintenance Inspection Accreditation, and;
Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspection Accreditation.

Appraisal System Level 1

Applicants for Level 1 Routine Maintenance Inspection Accreditation must be able to
demonstrate that they have attained the necessary knowledge and proficiency. Form A3 -
Bridge Inspector Accreditation Level 1 has been devised in order to ensure a uniform
approach.

The applicant is required to demonstrate:-

(1) Extensive practical experience in road and bridge routine maintenance. They shall be
competent to judge the visual condition of structures and the road approaches for visual
defects.

(2) Satisfactory completion of an approved briefing session on Level 1 Bridge Inspection
procedures and be familiar with the Bridge Condition Ratings in the Bridge Inspection
Manual

Appraisal System Level 2

Applicants for Level 2 - Bridge Condition Inspection Accreditation must be able to
demonstrate that they have attained the necessary knowledge and proficiency. Forms A1 -
Bridge Inspector Accreditation and A2 - Bridge Inspection Accreditation/Report Assessment
have been devised in order to ensure a uniform approach.

The applicant is required to demonstrate:-

(1) Extensive experience in the inspection, construction, design or maintenance of bridges.
Generally a minimum of 5 years experience in a position of responsibility will be
required.

(2) Satisfactory completion of the Level 2 Training Course for Bridge Inspectors.

(3) Technical knowledge and competency with respect to bridge structures and construction
materials. The applicant must have the ability to correctly identify and interpret the
severity and nature of structural and material defects, assess their criticality and make the
appropriate recommendations with respect to required action. Applicants should submit
inspection reports covering a range of structure types which include a number of
defective components. General accreditation is preferred, however accreditation in a
specific bridge category, such as timber, concrete or steel is permissible. Inspectors shall


specify which type of accreditation they are applying for with their initial submission.

(4) Conversance with the bridge inspection methodology defined in the Departments Bridge
Inspection Manual. This will be appraised by the evaluation of at least five bridge
inspections carried out and submitted by the applicant to Bridge Asset Management.
The Inspections must be completed and reports submitted for appraisal within four
months of attendance at the Level 2 Training Course. This appraisal will generally
include a field audit of the applicants submission. Standard forms A1 and A2 shall be
used by an assessor from Bridge Asset Management to conduct the appraisal and record
the findings. It is recommended that an inspector initially submits a single inspection
and awaits feedback from the review prior to making further submissions, as it has been
found previously that inspectors tend to make the same mistakes throughout their first
series of inspections. Ensuring that all subsequent inspections are corrected accordingly
will reduce both the time and cost involved in the accreditation process.


Minimum Requirements

Measure Minimum Requirements
1. Safety Plan A comprehensive safety plan which correctly identifies hazards
defined in the workplace health and safety legislation and the
measures taken to mitigate these hazards must be compiled prior
to each and every bridge inspection. Inspectors should ensure that
hazards are added to the BIS.

Rating Guidelines

Safety is regarded as the responsibility of local management and
as such shall not be considered in the course of an assessment.

2. I nventory General
The inspection inventories must be compiled in accordance with
the bridge inspection methodology defined in the Bridge
Inspection Manual as itemised below. References quoted
hereafter relate to Part Three - Procedures of the Bridge
Inspection Manual.

Bridge Component Designation
Components must be correctly designated by status (if widened),
group, component and standard component in accordance with
Section 1.3. Standard components must be compiled in
accordance with Section 3.8.2 and Appendix C: Standard
Component Identification Guidelines.

Exposure Classification
The appropriate exposure classification must be correctly
interpreted from the Table in Section 3.8.7.

Data Recording
The inventory must be compiled on Forms 2/1 & 2: Bridge
Condition Inspection Report.

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: >90% of items correctly identified.

Improvement Required: 80-90% of items correctly identified.

Unsatisfactory: <80% of items correctly identified.


3. Structure
Rating
The condition of the overall structure and any associated
widenings must be correctly assessed in accordance with the
guidelines given in Sections 3.8.3 and 3.8.6.

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: Correct structure rating.

Improvement Required: Not applicable.

Unsatisfactory: Incorrect structure rating. In particular
failure to correctly identify major
deficiencies which significantly affect
safety, load capacity or serviceability.
4. Condition
Rating
General
The current condition of each component in the inspection
inventory must be ascertained in accordance with Section 3.8.4
and Appendix D: Standard Component Condition State
Guidelines. It is imperative that the proportion of the component
in each condition state is correctly rated in order that the
criticality of the defects can be accurately determined. In
particular, deficient structural (load bearing) members must be
correctly identified. Further guidelines to assist the identification
of Condition State 4 defects are given in Section 3.8.5.

Commentary
The inspector must be able to demonstrate the ability to accurately
and concisely record salient descriptions and measurements to
supplement the numerical rating of defective members.
Guidelines for such commentary are given in Section 3.8.5.

In addition references to any photographs, sketches or testing (eg.
timber drilling) relating to a component must be recorded in the
comments box and Form B2/6: Photographic and Sketches
Record.

Timber Drilling
Timber drilling will normally be carried out as part of a Level 2
inspection of timber bridges in order that the current condition
state of timber members may be determined. Details of the
testing should be recorded on Form B2/5: Timber Drilling
Survey Report and tests on individual members referenced in the
comments field Form B2/1 & 2: Bridge Condition Inspection
Report. Inspectors must be able to interpret the correct condition
state of a member from the drilling records.


Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: >80% of components in state 1 or 2
correctly rated.
>90% of components in state 3
correctly rated.
100% of components in state 4
correctly rated.

Improvement Required: >70% of components in state 1 or 2
correctly rated.
>80% of components in state 3
correctly rated.
100% of components in state 4
correctly rated.

Unsatisfactory: <70% of components in state 1 or 2
correctly rated.
<80% of components in state 3
correctly rated.
<100% of components in state 4
correctly rated.

5. Defective
Components
General
Defective components in condition states 3 and 4 must be
correctly identified (in accordance with the guidelines given in
Sections 3.8.4 and 3.8.5 and Appendix D: Standard Component
Condition State Guidelines) and recorded on Form B2/3:
Defective Components Report. The inspector is required to
assess the criticality of the defects and recommend the appropriate
actions. Details of the defects must be described in the comments
box and supplemented with photographs, sketches or test results
as appropriate. This field should also record details of
recommended actions other than monitoring or level 3 inspection.
The inspector must be able to demonstrate the ability to
consistently identify defective components and the appropriate
remedial actions. In addition, he must have the ability to
accurately communicate the extent, severity and criticality of
member defects through photograph, sketch and written records.

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: (i) Clear and accurate recording
of defects.
(ii) Appropriate actions
recommended.
(iii) Criticality of defects accurately
and clearly communicated.



Improvement Required: Minor departures from (i) - (iii)

Unsatisfactory: (i) Inability to record extent, severity
or criticality of defects.
(ii) Failure to define the appropriate
actions.

6. Procedure
Exceptions
General
It is expected that inspectors will carry out inspections fully in
accordance with the methodology defined in the Bridge
Inspection Manual. However, it is recognised that physical or
operational restraints may restrict the extent of the inspection or
perhaps components are detected that cannot be identified from
the standard list of components. Inspectors must complete Form
B2/4: Standard Procedure Exceptions Report if there is any
departure from the standard methodology.

Undefined Component
The appropriate box should be ticked and a detailed description of
the component together with sketches and/or photographs
references must be entered in the comments fields.

Partial I nspections
The appropriate box should be ticked and the reasons why the
inspection is incomplete must be recorded in the comments field.

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: (i) All exceptions must be recorded on
Form B2/4.
(ii) Reasons for partial inspections
must be defined.
(ii) Undefined components must be
accurately described and
supplemented with photographs
and/or sketches as appropriate.

Improvements Required: Minor departures from the
satisfactory rating with respect to
comments. All exceptions must be
recorded.

Unsatisfactory: Failure to record exceptions or
incorrect exceptions recorded.
Inadequate or incorrect description of
exceptions.


7. Photographic
and Sketch
Record
An appropriate photographic and sketch record must be compiled
for each inspection covering:-

(i) Mandatory inventory photographs. (Deck surface, side view
and underside).
(ii) Deficient components and major defects.
(iii) Undefined Components.

All photographs and sketches must be given a reference and
details of the subject matter recorded on form B2/6. These
references should also be recorded against the relevant component
and included in the following forms as appropriate:

B2/1 & 2: Bridge Condition Inspection Report
B2/5: Timber Drilling Survey Report
B2/3: Defective Components Report
B2/4: Standard Procedure Exceptions Report

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: Appropriate photographic and sketch
record has been compiled and cross-
referenced on the appropriate forms.

Improvement Required Minor departure from satisfactory
rating.

Unsatisfactory: Failure to compile mandatory
photographic record or to document
records correctly.


8. Technical
Competency
Technical competency is a fundamental requirement for
accreditation at this level. Inspectors must have a minimum of
five years experience in at least one aspect of bridge engineering
to be considered for Level 2 accreditation and must have an
extensive knowledge of bridge structures and construction
materials.

An applicant must be able to demonstrate an ability to identify
structural and material defects, causal mechanisms, the criticality
of the defect and the appropriate corrective action. Implicit in this
is the ability to communicate this information to supervisors by
means of commentary, sketches and photographs to ensure
remedial works are prioritised accordingly.

For example, with respect to concrete elements, the inspector
must be able to distinguish the structural mechanisms causing
cracks in members and quantify the severity and criticality of
these defects. In addition, the inspector must record the date,
crack widths and crack terminations in permanent ink on the
structure.

Rating Guidelines

Satisfactory: The inspector must demonstrate the ability
to consistently:-

(i) Identify defect mechanisms.
(ii) Quantify and record defects
accurately.
(iii) Determine the criticality of defects.
(iv) Recommend the appropriate
corrective action.

Improvement Required: Marginal departure from the satisfactory
standard.

Unsatisfactory: Significant departure from the satisfactory
standard or any incorrect finding or
interpretation that places road users at
risk.


9. Field
Assessment
Field audit of items 1-8 above. At least one of the submitted
inspections should be subject to a field review. An assessor may
use existing Level 3 reports as the basis for review.

10. Overall
Assessment
Satisfactory: A satisfactory rating must be achieved
for six of the eight categories and
must include items (5). Defective
Components and (8) Technical
Competency. The remaining two
categories must be rated as
Improvement Required.

Unsatisfactory: An unsatisfactory rating on any
category or an improvements
required rating for (5) Defective
Components or (8) Technical
Competency.

Award or Denial of Accreditation

The result of the assessment should be documented on Form A1:
Bridge Inspector Accreditation Appraisal and forwarded to the
applicant and their direct supervisor.
If the submission has been found to be satisfactory a
memorandum or letter acknowledging the same shall be
despatched with the form. The individual's details shall be
added to the relevant inspector's register with Bridge Asset
Management and updated accordingly on the BIS.
In the event of an unsatisfactory rating this letter should
include detailed feedback with respect to deficiencies
detected in the submission and constructive advice as to
how these deficiencies might be addressed.

BRI DGE I NSPECTOR ACCREDI TATI ON - LEVEL 2

A1

I nspector ................................................... I nspection Authority .......................................................
Bridge Documents Received (3)
No Name Type 1/1 2/1 2/2 2/3 2/4 2/5 2/6 S/P Date

Mandatory Training:
Awareness Session Location ............................................................................... Date ......................
Level 2 Training Course Location ...................................................................... Date .....................
Note: I nspections must be completed and reports submitted for appraisal within 4 months of training.
Bridge Construction/I nspection Experience (submission)
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
Report Assessment Summary
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................
Accreditation Awarded/Denied (delete as applicable)
Assessor ...................................................... Position ............................................................................
Signature ..................................................... Date ..................................................................................
J une 2004

BRI DGE I NSPECTOR ACCREDI TATI ON/REPORT ASSESSMENT

A2
Bridge I D ...................................................... Bridge Name .......................................................................
I nspector ....................................................... I nspection Authority...........................................................
Date of I nspection ........................................ Date Received ......................................................................
Type of Bridge .............................................. Assessment Type ................................................................
Measure Comments Rating
*(S,I ,U)
* (S: Satisfactory; I : I mprovement required; U: Unsatisfactory)
1. Safety Plan
Conversance with legislation
Ability to identify & mitigate
hazards
Evidence of implementation

2. I nventory
Conversance with methodology
- bridge component designation
- exposure class
- widenings
Ability to compile inventory on
Forms B2/1 & B2/2
- widenings rated separately

3. tructure Rating S
Ability to determine appropriate
to determine appropriate
complete Form B2/1
correctly
rating for structure & widenings
Ability
action
Ability to

4. ondition Rating C
Ability to quantify exte
& criticality of defects
- Appropriate commentary
- Photos & sketches refere
nt, severity
nced

ms B2/1,
B2/2 & B2/5 correctly
- Timber drilling report
referenced & attached
Ability to complete For

5. efective Components D
Ability to identify serious defects
-

complete Form B2/3

appropriate commentary, photos
& sketches
Ability to determine appropriate
action
Ability to
correctly

6. Procedure Exceptions
e with methodology
ons on
nents not inspected
- Appropriate commentary &
actions

Conversanc
Ability to identify excepti
Form B2/4
- Undefined components
- Partial component inspection
- Compo

7. h and Sketch Record Photograp
riate
- Defective Components
- Undefined Components

Ability to compile approp
records
- Inventory

8. Technical Competency
Conversance with technology
- al Bridge construction & materi
Ability to identify defects, caus
mechanisms & defect critic
s
al
ality
sketches, photos
Ability to identify appropriate

Ability to measure and record
defects
- Notes,
actions

9. Field Assessment
Confirmation of data (1-8)

10. Overall Rating
Ability to implement methodology
Quality of records

Technical competence
Quality of recommendations

I mprovements Required/Further Comments
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................................

Assessor ................................................................................... Position .......................................................................................

Signature ................................................................................. Date ..........................................................................................

J une 2004

BRI DGE I NSPECTOR ACCREDI TATI ON - LEVEL 1

A3

I nspector Name I nspection Authority
(Consultant, District, Bridge Engineer, RTCS)

Contact Address

Phone No.
Mandatory Training (Awareness Session)

Location

Date
Qualifications
(e.g., Foreman, Bridge Inspector, Engineer)

Bridge Construction/Routine Maintenance Experience
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................

Head Office Use
Accreditation Awarded
Yes No
Assessor Position
Signature Date
Assessor Comments
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................

Details updated in BI S ? Yes Date

J une 2004

APPENDI X F
Guidelines for the
Management of
Sub-Standard and

Defective Bridges

Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL F.1
Structures Division APPENDIX F J une 2004

1.0 I NTRODUCTI ON
1.1 General
The corporate bridge inspection programme that commenced in 1997 has identified large numbers
of defective bridges; amounting to some 260 in December 2003. These structures have been
classified as being defective as a consequence of severe material degradation in principal load
bearing members, overstressing, deficient design, construction or maintenance works or the
substitution of undersized timber components in lieu of the specified member sizes when the
bridge was constructed or in subsequent maintenance.
Additionally, almost two thirds of the department's bridges have been designed to now obsolete
bridge loading design standards that are grossly inferior to contemporary standards and represent
some 33-75% of the T44 design loading. As a point of reference, the T44 design vehicle produces
a design load effect some 25% greater than the general access 42.5t semi-trailer. It should be
noted that the department is already designing new structures to the proposed SM1600 loading
standard that produces a design load effect approximately 200% greater than the 42.5t semi-trailer.
Theoretical load capacity assessments, conducted in accordance with current Australian
Standards, have found that the department's timber bridge stock, with the exception of A-Class
bridges in good condition, are overstressed when crossed by the general access 42.5t semi-trailer.
Accordingly, these sub-standard timber bridges represent a significant risk to road users when
principal load bearing members are allowed to deteriorate. Conversely, many non-timber
structures that have been designed to obsolete standard have been assessed and found to have
significant reserves of strength and are able to carry current loadings without undue distress.
These defective and sub-standard bridges are vulnerable due to their sensitivity to increasing axle
loads, numbers of freight vehicles, changing vehicle configurations and vehicle dynamics. These
increasing demands tend to accelerate deterioration of the structural condition and load carrying
capacity with a corresponding increase in risk to road users and maintenance expenditure. The
safety of the public is paramount and, while the costs and risks to the public must be assessed
along with other network priorities, these defective and sub-standard structures must be actively
managed.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this document is to detail the corporate procedures to manage defective and sub-
standard bridges safely through a corporate approval and certification mechanism. This will
ensure that thorough operational and structural assessments are conducted and a detailed
management plan is developed and approved for all sub-standard and defective structures that are
identified. This management plan will consider the need for one or more "Interim Management
Measures" from structural engineering inspection and material investigation, load testing, load,
lane, speed or vehicle restrictions, propping of defective load bearing members, temporary closure
or emergency repairs pending replacement or rehabilitation.

Although these guidelines are primarily intended for use within Main Roads, the advice provided
herein is transferable to LGA and private bridge owners.


1.3 Scope
These guidelines cover the safe management of bridges, or structural groups such as abutments,
piers and spans comprising a bridge, that are found to be defective or sub-standard during or
pursuant to an inspection or load capacity assessment. In particular, guidance is provided on the
following topics.
Definitions of defective and sub-standard bridges or structural groups.
Structure Management Plans - Interim management measures pending rehabilitation,
strengthening or replacement.
Immediate Risk Structures
Low risk defective bridges
Monitoring
Approvals and certification process
Departures
Prioritisation of rehabilitation, strengthening or replacement.

1.3 I mplementation
These guidelines shall be used forthwith for any structures that are found to be defective or sub-
standard.

1.4 Definitions
The following definitions apply to terms used in this document.
Condition State The assessed rating of a component based on a whole number scale of 1-4
made by an accredited inspector in accordance with the condition state guidelines stated in the
DMR Bridge Inspection Manual. Condition state 1 represents the "as new" condition while
condition state 4 denotes a component with severe defects that compromise its structural integrity.
Significance Rating A whole number rating on a scale of 1-4, determined by Bridge Asset
Management, which reflects the structural criticality of an individual component type. A ranking
of 4 represents a critical load bearing member such as a girder or a pile while a kerb has a rating of
1. The rankings for all standard components are detailed in Appendix A.
Principal Components Standard structural components that have a "Significance Rating" of 3
or 4.
Risk - The MR "Whichbridge" risk assessment methodology/software generates a numerical
score, which can be used to rate and rank the risk exposure of structures. It should be noted that
the risk scores generated represent a relative ranking of risk rather than an absolute quantification
of risk. The value is specific to a set of criteria applied at a specific point in time and is defined by
the following relationship.
Risk =Probability (of failure) x Consequence (of failure)
STANDARDS AUSTRALIA and STANDARDS NEW ZEALAND (1999)


It is currently considered that a risk score between 750 and 1500 should represent the threshold for
intervention. Currently this represents 408-260 defective bridges respectively.

Defective Structures One or more of the following criteria may define a defective structure.
1. Structures where more than 25% of the principal components have been rated in Condition
State 4 within a single abutment, pier or span group by an accredited bridge inspector. For
example, two girders out of five in a span meet this criterion.
2. Timber structures where more than 25% of the principal components are undersized in a
single abutment, pier or span group when compared with the relevant specified member
sizes for that class of bridge.
3. Structures with a risk rating in excess of 1500.
4. Structures with an overall condition rating of 4 or 5.

Sub-Standard Structures One or more of the following criteria may define a sub-standard
structure.
1. Timber bridges other than A class. (A-modified, B and B-modified class structures are
theoretically overstressed under legally loaded semi-trailers.)
2. Bridges of unknown design class.
3. Bridges that have been assessed by Structures Division and found to be deficient in load
carrying capacity. Typically, a structural engineer, pending rehabilitation or replacement of
a structure, will have recommended formal interim measures.

Low Risk Sub-Standard Structures- Any structure, not covered in the previous definition, that
has been designed to a standard inferior to the T44 design class and has not been assessed by a
structural engineer.

I mmediate Risk Structures- Structures which are considered to represent an immediate and
unacceptable risk to the public.

Structure Management Plan- Formal interim measures that have been certified by the
department to manage a defective or sub-standard structure pending its rehabilitation or
replacement. This requires the submission of Form SMP1 to Structures Division (Appendix B)
and the relevant Regional Director for certification and approval.

Departures (Other I nterim Measures) - Measures short of or different from the "Structure
Management Plan" These must be in the form of monitoring alone or monitoring in conjunction
with other measures.


Monitoring-suitable Structures- Structures which are considered to be suitable for monitoring as
an interim measure by virtue of their predictable and gradual mode of failure.

2.0 I NSPECTI ON AND ASSESSMENT
The processes of inspection, assessment and the preparation and implementation of appropriate
management plans are of crucial importance for ensuring that all highway structures remain in a
safe and serviceable state. The department's policies, methodologies and guidelines must be
applied rigorously and in a consistent manner. If inspection ratings and assessments are unduly
conservative, then structures will be unnecessarily strengthened or maintenance conducted
prematurely. This consumes scarce resources and causes traffic, social and economic disruptions.
Conversely, if these processes are not regulated effectively then some structures may be operating
with an unacceptable margin of safety.
The required bridge management processes are illustrated in the Management Actions Flow Chart
in Appendix C. Form SMP1- Structure Management Plan (Appendix B) shall be used to document
the inspection and assessment findings and the required interim management measures.

3.0 STRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Whenever a "defective structure", as defined in Paragraph 1.4, is detected then a "Structure
Management Plan" detailing the proposed interim measures should be prepared and submitted for
certification and approval. Operational managers may elect to seek advice about the management
of "sub-standard bridges" from Structures Division. In this event, a "Structure Management Plan"
will be developed for these bridges. Districts will normally agree interim management measures
with Structures Division pending the development of the formal Structure Management Plan.
Interim measures may consist of one or more of the following:
1. Close the structure and establish a side track;
2. Close the structure, advertise the fact, and direct traffic to an alternative crossing;
3. Deny access to Excess Mass Vehicles;
4. Impose one or more of mass, width, lane or speed restrictions and advertise the fact;
5. Install height bars on each approach and advertise the fact to reinforce restrictions to vehicle
height;
6. Raise an "Issues Alert" to the DDG when an Immediate Risk Structure is detected;
7. Install temporary propping or other strengthening;
8. Carry out partial or full rehabilitation of the structure; and
9. Initiate a bridge replacement scheme.
10. Increasing the frequency of Level 1 / 2 inspections.

4.0 I MMEDI ATE RI SK STRUCTURES
Districts are required to quickly inform Structures Division and the relevant Regional Executive
Director pursuant to an inspection or assessment finding that a structure poses an immediate and


unacceptable risk to public safety. In assessing the immediate risk to public safety, relevant factors
such as the nature of structural weakness, any corresponding signs of distress, the recent load
history of the structure and the level of inspection and assessment completed to date should be
taken into account.
Once emergency interim measures are agreed and confirmed with Structures Division, a
"Structure Management Plan" detailing the formal interim measures should be prepared, certified
and implemented as soon as is practically possible. These structures are to be termed "Immediate
Risk Structures".
In the event that the structural integrity is considered to be severely compromised, a temporary
emergency closure should be ordered until a bridge engineer from Structures Division has
inspected the structure and/or reviewed available reports and recommended the necessary interim
measures for the "Structure Management Plan". This shall only be effected where there is likely to
be a delay in developing and implementing the "Structure Management Plan" and the risk of
keeping the structure in service in the interim period is considered to be unacceptable.

5.0 LOW RI SK DEFECTI VE BRI DGES
Certain structures that meet the defective or sub-standard bridge criteria may be considered to be
of low risk and do not warrant interim measures other than monitoring while further investigations
are carried out. These structures must be performing normally under traffic with no signs of
significant distress (no excessive deflections of components or progressive development of
observed defects under traffic loading) and the consequences of failure must be extremely low.
Additionally, managers must be certain that the potential failure mechanism will be gradual over
time and capable of detection through the monitoring regime. For example, increases in crack
width severity, extent and length. Individual cases shall be discussed with Structures Division to
confirm whether monitoring is an appropriate management mechanism. It should be recognised
that monitoring in its self will not prevent damage from occurring and the probability of damage
will generally increase with the duration of monitoring. For example, increased loading cycles
and/or increased probability of an overloaded vehicle crossing the structure and/or further material
deterioration. For these reasons, it is recommended that a detailed assessment of the monitoring
strategy be undertaken every six months. Ensuring the safety of a structure through monitoring is
a complex process and requires in-depth knowledge of the techniques, potential problems
structural behaviour and material properties. This should not be undertaken in a casual manner and
must be controlled by professional engineers.

6.0 APPROVALS AND CERTI FI CATI ON PROCESS
1. District to discuss interim management measures with Structures Division immediately
following the detection of a defective structure. (This may include the commissioning of a
Level 3 Detailed Engineering Inspection and structural analysis of the structure);
2. Emergency interim measures to be agreed pending development of the Structure
Management Plan;
3. Structures Division completes Structure Management Plan with recommended interim
management measures pending rehabilitation or replacement and forwards copy signed by
Executive Director (Structures) to the district;


4. District Director accepts and signs the Structures Management plan and forwards it to the
Regional Executive Director for information and approval;
5. If the District Director disagrees with or cannot comply with the recommended interim
measures then a departure as described below may be sought;
6. Regional Executive Director forwards certified copies of the Structures Management Plan
or Departure to the District Director, Executive Director (Structures) and the Deputy
Director General.
7. The interim management measures detailed in the Structures Management Plan are
implemented.

7.0 DEPARTURES
It is a general principle of these guidelines that Structure Management Plans shall be developed
for all defective structures and the interim measures certified by the relevant District Director,
Regional Executive Director and the Executive Director (Structures Division). However, it is
acknowledged that on occasion, the operational areas may elect to adopt measures that fall short
of or are different from those specified by Structures Division. In this event, the Regional
Executive Director and the District Director must detail the reasons for the departure, complete
and certify an amended Structures Management Plan and forward a copy to the Executive Director
(Structures) and the Deputy Director General. The minimum interim measures stated therein shall
be a monitoring regime, that has been approved by Structures Division, generally in conjunction
with one or more of the other previously stated interim measures.

8.0 PRI ORI TI SATI ON FOR REHABI LTATI ON AND REPLACEMENT
In most cases, the rehabilitation or replacement of defective and sub-standard bridges will take a
number of years to effect. These works will have to be prioritised along with other network
demands, while ensuring the safety of the structures in service by maintaining the appropriate
Structure Management Plans. Prioritisation should take account of the following factors:
1. The relative risks of the structures to which the management plans apply as calculated by
the "Whichbridge" methodology;
2. The effectiveness of the interim measures detailed in the Structures Management Plan in
controlling these risks. As stated previously, monitoring is a passive measure and does not
positively control risk;
3. The reserves of strength, traffic loading, probability of overloading, failure mode and
consequences of failure;
4. Traffic delays and associated costs caused by the implementation of the Structures
Management Plan;
5. Other social, environmental and economic consequences to business and the community
associated with the Structures Management Plan;
6. The availability of alternative routes or feasibility of constructing a sidetrack including wet
season considerations, excess mass and dimension restrictions and other route related
considerations;


7. The cost-effectiveness of the rehabilitation or strengthening compared with the replacement
structure costs taking account of the ratio of costs and benefits;
8. Other benefits that will result from the work such as improvements to parapet and guardrail
containment, scour resistance, pedestrian access and bridge geometry.

To ensure the currency and effectiveness of the interim measures adopted, the Structure Management
Plan shall be reviewed every six months until such time as the structure is rehabilitated or replaced.

Appendix A
Significance Ratings

Appendix A : Significance Ratings
COMPONENT
Standard
Component
No
Description
Significance
Rating
(SR)
1 Fill/Wearing Surface 2
2 Bridge Barriers 1
3 Bridge Kerbs 1
4 Footways 1
10 Pourable J oint Seal 2
11 Compression J oint Seal 2
12 Assembly J oint Seal 2
13 Open Expansion J oint 2
14 Sliding J oint 2
15 Fixed/Small Movement J oint 2
20 Deck Slab/Culvert Base Slab J oints 3
21 Closed Web/Box Girders 4
22 Open Girders 4
23 Through Truss 4
24 Deck Truss 4
25 Arches 4
26 Cables/Hanger 4
27 Corbels 3
28 Cross Beams/Floor Beams 3
29 Deck Planks 3
30 Steel Decking 3
31 Diaphragms/Bracing (Cross Girders) 3
32 Load Bearing Diaphragms 4
33 Spiking Plank 1
40 Fixed Bearings 2
41 Sliding Bearings 2
42 Elastomeric/Pot Bearings 2
43 Rockers/Rollers 2
44 Mortar Pads/Bearing Pedestals 1
45 Restraint Angles/Blocks 2
50 Abutment 3
51 Wingwall/Retaining Wall 3
52 Abutment Sheeting/Infill Panels 2
53 Batter Protection 1
54 Headstocks 4
55 Pier Headstocks (Integral) 4
56 Columns, Piles or Pile Encasements 4
57 Piles Bracing/Walls 3
58 Pier Walls 3
59 Footing/Pile Cap/Sill Log 3
60 Wing Piles 3
70 Bridge Approaches 2
71 Waterway 2
72 Approach Guardrail 1
80 Pipe Culverts 2
81 Box Culverts 2
82 Modular Culverts 2
83 Arch Culverts 2
84 Headwalls/Wingwalls 1

Appendix B
Structure Management Plan
Form SMP1

Sheet
Structures Management Plan
J une 2004
SMP1
1 / 2
Structure I d
Crossing Name
Structure Type
Construction Type
Construction Material
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
Name
Alt. Name
Owner
District
LGA I d
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................

Defective Components Form B2/3 Attached Date ...............................
I nterim Plan Final Plan Departure
Road Number .................................................... Road Name....................................................................................
Chainage................................(km) on the .......................................... to......................................................... Road
Deficiencies
Location Details (Nature, Extent, Severity)
Superstructure
......................................
......................................
......................................
Substructure
......................................
......................................
Bridge Function
......................................
......................................

................................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................
..............................................................................................................................................
Programmed Remedial Measures (Repair, Rehabilitate, Strengthen or Replace)
Substructure Superstructure Bridge Estimate($) Fin. Year

I nterim Management Measures - Yes No Attachments

Comments
Weight Restriction

Lane Width Restriction

One Way Working

Prop Structure

Close Structure

Construct Sidetrack

Sign Detour

I nstall Height Bars

Monitor Structure

Load Testing

Other (eg. I nspection Freq.)

Approval of Structures Management Plan
.......................................................................
.......................................................................
......................................................................
District Director ( )
Regional Exec. Director ( )
Executive Director (Structures)
Date .......................................
Date .......................................
Date ........................................

Sheet
Structures Management Plan
J une 2004
SMP1
2 / 2
Structure I d ...................................... Name...........................................................................
Departures
Reasons
........................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................................................................

Alternative I nterim Measures Yes No Attachements

Comments
Weight Restriction

Lane Width Restriction

One Way Working

Prop Structure

Close Structure

Construct Sidetrack

Sign Detour

I nstall Height Bars

Monitor Structure

Load Testing

Other (eg. I nspection Freq.)

Approval of Departures
Comments

............................................................ District Director ( ) Date ...................................................

Comments

............................................................ Regional Executive Director ( ) Date ...................................................
Copy forwarded to DDG Date .............................................
Copy forwarded to ED (Structures)
Date ..............................................

Appendix C
Management Actions Flow Chart

Appendix C
Management Actions Flow Chart

N
Y
DISTRICT NOTIFIES DD
& ED (STRUCTURES)
IMMEDIATE RISK TO
PUBLIC?
SUB-STANDARD
BRIDGE
IDENTIFIED
FURTHER
ASSESSMENT
IMPLEMENT
MEASURES
DEVELOP
STRUCTURES
MANAGEMENT PLAN
(SMP)
DISTRICT DISCUSSES
INTERIM MEASURES
WITH ED
(STRUCTURES)
DEFECTIVE BRIDGE
IDENTIFIED
AGREE EMERGENCY
INTERIM MEASURES
WITH ED
(STRUCTURES)

Y
N
DEPARTURE
SMP APPROVED?
DD, RED, ED(S)
DISTRICT DEVELOPS
INTERIM MEASURES
IMPLEMENT SMP
DEPARTURE
APPROVED BY RED
IMPLEMENT
MEASURES
PRIORITISE &
PROGRAMME
REHABILITATION /
STRENGTHENING /
REPLACEMENT
COPY TO DDG & ED (S)

APPENDI X G
Breakdown of
Complex and
Non-Standard

Structures

Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL G.1
Structures Division APPENDIX G J une 2004

The details and processes described in the manual provide a standardised system for the component
breakdown of the various types of bridges and culverts commonly found in Queensland; however,
there are a number of structures within the state that are not easily definable, either due to the
complexity of their design or the uniqueness of the structure. The purpose of this Appendix is to
provide guidance on the component breakdown of these non-standard structures.

The drawings in this Appendix detail those non-standard structures for which advice has previously
been issued. Figure 1.1 denotes the component designation for those structures that have suspended
spans, and will thus have the deck joints located away from the piers. Figure 1.2 shows the
breakdown of a pedestrian bridge that runs in a number of different directions. Figure 1.3 gives some
guidance on the determination of appropriate modification type for widened structures that share
components with adjacent structures.

Due to the recent introduction of road tunnels in South East Queensland, details have been added to
the Bridge information System to facilitate the inclusion of these structures into the system. Figure
1.4 gives a general overview of the different tunnel types. Such structures should have maintenance
and inspection plans developed during construction, as part of the contractors responsibilities, and
should be inspected and maintained in accordance with these plans. In the event that these
documents are not available, Bridge Asset Management should be contacted to provide advice on
inspection procedures and requirements.

Most large, complex structures (such as steel truss bridges) will require more detailed reporting than
the standard Level 2 inspection report allows for. In such cases, it is recommended that the following
process is adopted;

A specific and detailed inventory of the elements making up each component shall be
compiled by an engineer from Structures Division.
Standard condition state descriptions shall be used to rate each element where appropriate
and unique condition state descriptions shall be developed where necessary.
Component ratings shall be in accordance with the Bridge Inspection Manual, based on an
assessment of the elements making up each component.
The detailed inventory and inspection report shall be appended to the Level 2 or Level 3
report. Word documents may be saved directly into the Photographic and Sketches Record.

Figure 1.5 shows an extract from a detailed inspection of the Burnett River Bridge. The extract
shows the breakdown of a complex component (23S Through Truss) into individual elements, and
the rating of each element in accordance with the Bridge Inspection Manual.

Structures Division APPENDIX G J une 2004

FI GURE 1.5 EXTRACT FROM BURNETT RI VER BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON
Above Bridge I nspection

CS =Condition State
C =Compression Member
T =Tension Member
BC =Bottom Chord
TC =Top Chord
N =Node
TIC =Tie Chord
BA =Bracing Angle

Group Component Exposure
Class
CS Comments
S 1 (U/S) TC (N4) 3 4 Surface corrosion over an area of 100x20 mm. Refer to figure 7-26.
TIC1 3 4 Electrical conduit had broken and become loose. It was removed
during the inspection refer to figure 7-27.
Crevice corrosion of the latticework where they connect to the T
member, refer to figure 7-28 and figure 7-29.
TIC 1-2 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the BA where the two angles intersect. The
electrical conduit used zinc-plated clamps and these should be
replaced with stainless steel clamps. Refer to figure 7-30.
TIC 2 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the latticework where they connect to the T
member, refer to figure 7-33. The T member has a 5mm loss of
section. The measurement was taken at node 3.
TC (N8) 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the angled splice of the top chord lower
flange.
TC (N9) 3 3 Corrosion where the old power line brace attached to the TC.
TIC 3 3 4 A timber post has been attached to the centre of the TIC for the
lighting of the bridge. This timber post is causing the TIC to
corrode, refer to figure 7-34 and 7-36.
TC (N9) 3 4 Damage to the protective coating has occurred during the
installation of the new power line clamp.
TC (N10) 3 4 Surface corrosion at the splice plate to cover plate interface.
TIC 4 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the latticework at node 2, where it connects to
the T member. The T member has a 5mm loss of section in
localised areas.
TC (N12) 3 4 Surface corrosion at the splice plate interface with the cover plate.
TIC 5 3 4 Surface corrosion where the TIC connects to the TC. Serve loss of
section and nodes 6 and 7 where the section has lost 5mm over an
area of 150x65mm. Refer to figure 8-1.
TC (N12-13) 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the angled splice of the top chord lower
flange.
S 2 (U/S)
TIC 1 3 4 Crevice corrosion of the latticework at node 2, where it connects to
the T member. There is a 5mm loss of section, refer to figure 8-7.
Serve corrosion where the BA connects to the centre of the TIC.
Refer to figure 8-8.
TC (N5) 3 4 Surface corrosion of the TC cover plate.

APPENDI X H
Advice Notes

Bridge Asset Management BRI DGE I NSPECTI ON MANUAL H.1
Structures Division APPENDIX H J une 2004

I NTRODUCTI ON

The BAMANDSRS Notes Database was introduced in 2002 to provide a centralised storage and
access point for user queries from Corporate, District and Commercial users of Bridge Asset
Management applications and products within Main Roads. A number of these queries related
directly to usage of the Bridge Inspection Manual, and owners of the manual were recommended
to include a copy of these Advice Notes in their manual for future reference.

In order to formalise the process, this Appendix was created to offer a specific storage location for
Advice Notes within the manual. It is intended that Manual owners will obtain a hardcopy of
relevant Advice Notes, insert them into their copy of the Manual and update the register
accordingly. As specific Advice Notes will be referred to in the main body of the manual, it is
critical that this Appendix be kept up to date.

Please note that access to the BAMANDSRS database is restricted to Department of Main Roads
personnel, and thus external owners of the Manual will not have access to these Advice Notes.
Formal amendments to the Bridge Inspection Manual, incorporating new Advice Notes into the
body of the manual, shall be issued periodically.

ADVICE NOTES REGISTER

DATE NO. TITLE
13/8/2002 2 Culvert Headwalls, Wingwalls & Concreted Aprons (HW-84)
28/8/2002 5 Entering Timber Girder Inspection Data Recording Defects in Sniped Ends
26/11/2002 7 Timber Headstocks 54T Condition States
26/11/2002 8 Revised Overall Structure Condition Rating
1/12/2003 22 Component Breakdown for roadway items over culverts
17/12/2003 23 Guidelines for Sniping (Notching Seatings) of Timber Girders
23/12/2003 24
Non-Destructive Identification & Quantification of Defects in Timber
Components
20/1/2004 28
Recording of Defects in Culverts and Culvert Joints (and other Segmental
Components)
5/7/2004 32 Rating of cracked concrete members
7/8/2004 34 Recording of Timber Drilling in Accordance with Advice Note no. 24
25/8/2004 37 Measurement of Scour
28/4/2005 39 Review of Allowable Snipe Depth Bands for Condition State Guidelines
15/8/2005 46 Review of Rating of Timber Headstocks and Piles
27/7/2006 58 Component Code for Culvert Wingwalls

ADVI CE NOTES REGI STER

DATE NO. TI TLE

Culvert Headwalls, Wingwalls & Concreted Aprons
(HW-84)
BAM Advice Note No 2
Category: Bridge Inspection - Defect Identification Recording & Rating (Link to Request
- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the development of the Standard Components, consideration was given to the relative numbers of
bridges and culverts owned by Main Roads, hence the Standard Components for Culverts as detailed
in the Bridge Inspection Manual (BIM) have been kept to a minimum to reduce the need to collect
superfluous data.
The culvert Headwalls and Aprons are not considered to be principle structural components and
therefore BAM consider that it is adequate to record the condition states of the Headwalls and Aprons
under a single component HW-84. As noted in the description of components 81, 82 and 83,
"Inspectors may cover large wingwalls under Item No. 51".
BAM recommend that the condition states of Headwall and Apron components are recorded as
detailed below and illustrated on the attached inspection form.
If the condition states of all Headwalls and Aprons are determined, the condition states are all
recorded against the component; or
If the condition states of only some items are determined i.e. the condition states of the
Headwalls are determined but the Aprons are not inspected, the condition states of the
Headwalls should be recorded against the component and a note should be included in the
comments field to record that the Aprons were not inspected and why; or
If the condition states of the Headwalls and Aprons are not determined, then the component
should be recorded as an exception.
Advice Note 2 attachment.doc
BAM believe that the condition states of culvert headwalls, wingwalls and aprons can be adequately
recorded under the components available. However BAM are open to discussion and comments from
Inspectors and other users of the Inspection Data.
Owners of Bridge Inspection Manuals may wish to include a copy of this advice note in their manuals
for future reference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approval Date : 13/08/2002 Approved by : Peter Graham
Edit History
Rev. Editor Edit Date/Time
5. Peter Graham 13/08/2002 12:34:50 AM
4. Stacy J Bale 12/08/2002 15:35:16
3. Stacy J Bale 08/08/2002 10:22:43
2. Stacy J Bale 08/08/2002 09:42:58
1. Stacy J Bale 01/08/2002 16:26:25
* Only past five edits are shown
Sheet
Bridge Condition Inspection Report B2/1
1 Of
Structure ID .. Bridge Name ..
Crossing .. Road Number .
Chainage . (km) on the............................... To . Road
District Local Authority .
Inspector .. Inspection Date ..
Programmed or Exceptional .. Underwater .
Next Inspection Date .
Per
Condition
State
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

E
x
p
o
s
u
r
e

C
l
a
s
s

Q
u
a
n
t
i
t
y

U
n
i
t

1 2 3 4
Comments
{ Location of item/condition
{ Description of defects by location type,
magnitude, extent
{ References of sketches and photos (Roll /
Exposure Nos)
O S1 HW 84O 2 4 EA 3 1 HW1-CS4, severe cracking of mortar due to
excessive movements
HW2-CS2, minor movement away from
structure
Minor cracking in both aprons - CS2

O S2 HW 84O 2 2 EA 1 1 HW1-CS4, severe cracking of mortar due to
excessive movements
HW2-CS2, minor movement away from
structure
NOTE: Both aprons covered by silt

O S3 HW 84O 2 4 EA X X X X No headwalls or wingwalls inspected


Modification ( )

Modification ( )

Widening (WLn, WRn), Lengthening (L1, L2), Raised (Ra), Redecked (Re), Shortening (S1, S2)

22T

COMPONENT 22T OPEN GIRDERS TIMBER


This element includes all timber stringers such as round or octagonal hewn timber logs
and saw cut timber sections. Note: Pipe rot is quoted as a percentage oI the diameter oI the
girder, while snipe depth is quoted as a percentage oI the depth oI the girder (which is
essentially the diameter oI the girder minus the depth oI the contact Ilat or benching` on the
upper Iace oI the girder). Please note that where snipes have been treated in accordance with
the recommendations in Advice Note No. 23, they may be ignored Ior the purpose oI rating
the member (but their presence should be noted on the Timber Drilling Survey Report). II
the treatment is not perIorming as desired, the member must be repaired or replaced.

Condition State 1

splits or checks having no eIIect on member strength. Girder to corbel bolts are tight.

Condition State 2

Girders are in good condition and may have pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 30 oI the
diameter at midspan and/or 20 at the supports. They may also have minor surIace or non-
central decay, Iire damage, splitting, checking or crushing but not oI suIIicient magnitude to
aIIect the strength oI the member. Depth oI snipes is less than 10 oI the depth oI the girder.
Girder to corbel bolts are slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Girders have a reasonable amount oI pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 50 at midspan and/or
35 at the supports. They may have large splits or checks which may reduce the strength oI
the member. Splits may be separating under load causing crushing oI the member, or
crushing may be due to water ingress soItening the load bearing areas oI the timber. Depth oI
snipes may range Irom 10 to 15 oI the depth oI the girder. There may be a medium
amount oI surIace or non-central decay or Iire damage present. Girder to corbel bolts are
loose or corroding.

Condition State 4

The timber girders may have excessive pipe rot/termite attack oI up to 70 at midspan and/or
50 oI the supports, accompanied by severe splitting or crushing. Strength oI the member
has been severely aIIected and Iailure may be imminent. The girder may be exhibiting
noticeably greater deIlection under traIIic than adjacent members. Depth oI snipes may range
Irom 16 to 30 oI the depth oI the girder. There may be severe surIace or non-central
decay, Iire damage or possibly large rot holes present. Girder to corbel bolts may be very
lose, with threads or nuts severely corroded.

NOTE: Members with pipe rot/termite attack/snipes in excess oI the values shown in
Timber Headstocks 54T - Condition States
- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Wide Bay Districts query requesting advice and clarification regarding the measurement
of defects in headstocks and confirmation of the condition state guidelines described in the BIM, BAM
have reviewed the condition state guidelines for timber headstocks, standard component 54T.
BAM confirm that the loss of external area is quoted as a percentage of the cross-sectional area of the
headstock. The condition state guidelines have been amended to describe the allowable percentage
loss of external area from the top, bottom or either side of the headstock. In addition the allowable
diameter of any internal pipe defects in the headstocks has been defined and included in the condition
state guidelines.
Amended copies of the Condition State Guidelines for timber Headstocks, standard component 54T
and the Timber Drilling Survey Report form B2/5 are attached. The attached amendments will be
included in the BIM when a formal review is carried out, however it is recommended that owners of
Bridge Inspection Manuals include copies of the attached documents in their manuals for future
reference.
Headstocks 54T 25 Nov 2002.pdf Form B2_5 25 Nov 2002.doc
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
1. Peter Graham 26/11/2002 08:36:42 AM
0. Stacy J Bale 25/11/2002 17:34:18

Road System & Engineering APPENDIX D November 2002

54T

COMPONENT 54T HEADSTOCKS TIMBER


This element includes those headstocks constructed of sawn timber sections. Timber
headstocks at the abutments should also be included in this element due to their importance
and susceptibility to deterioration. Note: Loss of external area is quoted as a percentage of
the cross-sectional area of the headstock and pipe defects are quoted as the actual diameter of
the pipe.

Condition State 1

The headstocks are in good condition with only minor weathering, splits or checks having no
effect on strength. All bolted connections are tight and in good condition with at least half the
headstock having good bearing support on the piles.

Condition State 2

The headstocks show sign of minor decay, weathering, splits and checks not affecting the
member strength. There may be minor sags in the headstocks beneath loaded girders. Bolted
connection may be slightly loose or the headstock may have less than half width bearing on
the piles. The headstock may have up to 5% loss of external section (top, bottom or sides) or
a central pipe up to 45mm diameter.

Condition State 3

The headstock may have moderate decay, weathering, crushing at supports or splitting which
may have a minor effect on member strength. The headstocks may be sagged beneath the
girders with minor moment cracks. Bolted connections may be loose or headstocks may have
no bearing support at the piles. The top of the piles may be severely rotted offering little
bearing support to the headstock bolted connections, and the headstocks may be pulling off
piles. Headstocks may be spliced and the splice is in poor condition and pulling apart. The
headstock may have up to 10% loss of external section (top, bottom or sides) or a central pipe
up to 65mm in diameter.

Condition State 4

The headstocks may be heavily decayed, weathered, severely split or cracked, and may have
crushing at the supports. Large sagging may be evident under girders and the headstock may
have moment cracking. Bolted connections may be completely loose and the headstocks may
have pulled off or almost pulled off the supporting piles. Headstock splices may have broken
apart with loading on the unsupported cantilever headstock section. The headstock may have
up to 20% loss of external section (top, bottom or sides) or a central pipe up to 90mm in
diameter.

Sheet
1 Of 1
Structure ID................................... Bridge Name.....................................................
Crossing.......................................... Road Number ...................................................
Chainage...................(km) on the ....................................................to...............................................Road
District............................................ Local Authority................................................
Inspector......................................... Date of Inspection.............................................
(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

Comments

% Consumed
* Test Locations
CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Component Defect Location (Abbreviation) (Describe Other (O) in comments) E MS E MS E MS
Pile
Girder
Corbel
Headstock
1

Headstock
2

Pipe
Pipe
Pipe
Edge Area
Pipe
20
20
20
5
45mm
20
30
20
5
45mm
35
35
35
10
65mm
35
50
35
10
65mm
50
50
50
20
90mm
50
70
50
20
90mm
1. Area of headstock (%) for external loss of section (top, bottom or sides).
2. Maximum pipe diameter (mm) in headstock for internal piping defects.

RevisedOverallStructureConditionRating
BAMAdviceNoteNo8
Category:BridgeInspection-Procedures(LinktoRequest- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND
Bothtimberheadstocksofapierrecentlyfailedunderanexcessmassvehiclethatwascrossingthe
bridgeunderalocallyissuedpermit.Therewerenoinjuriesordamagetothecargobutthebridge
wasimmediatelyclosedpendingrepairs.
ExaminationoftheinspectionrecordsheldintheBISrevealedthatthebridgeinquestionhadbeen
givenanoverallratingof3despite5of8headstocksbeingratedinconditionstate4(CS4).Ifthe
current"BridgeInspectionManual"guidelines,"3.8.6StructureConditionAssessment",hadbeen
followedthebridgeshouldhavebeenratedinCS4.Theclausestatesthattheoverallrating"shallbe
primarilybasedontheconditionofitsprincipalstructuralmemberssuchasgirders,headstocks,
columns,pilesandfoundations".
AUDITOFNETWORK
An audit of the BIS inspection data has returned some 119 timber bridges and 19 non-timber with
principalcomponentsinCS4whereastherecordedoverallratingisCS3.Amemohasbeenissuedto
all Districts requesting them to review the overall ratings for their bridges and make any required
changestotherecordsintheBIS.
EXCESSMASSMANAGEMENT
Asyouareaware,thisinformationisusedtoassessexcessmasspermitapplicationsthusaccurate,
current overall condition ratings are essential to minimise the potential for overloading defective
bridges.
REVISEDOVERALLSTRUCTURECONDITIONRATING
BAM have reviewed the overall structure condition rating methodology with a view to reducing the
subjectivenatureoftheassessmentandthefollowingguidelineshouldbeadoptedindeterminingthe
overallrating.
Ifmorethan25%ofanyprincipalloadbearingcomponent(SignificanceRating4)inany substructure
orspangroupareinCS4thentheoverallratingmustbeCS4.Theprincipalcomponentsaregirders
(21, 22), trusses (23, 24), arches (25), cables/hangers (26), load bearing diaphragms (32),
headstocks (54, 55) and columns/piles (56). The other subjective aspects of the overall rating still
apply.
AMENDMENTNo1-24thJuly2006
Alsonotethatifmorethan25%ofanyprincipalloadbearingcomponentsareinCS3,thentheoverall
rating for the structure will be at least CS 3. The presence of more serious defects elsewhere may
resultinahigheroverallrating.
The above-mentioned amendments will be included in the BIM when a formal review is carried out,
however it is recommended that owners of Bridge Inspection Manuals include copies of this advice
noteintheirmanualsforfuturereference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ApprovalDate:26/11/2002Approvedby:PeterGraham
EditHistory
Component breakdown for roadway items over
culverts
Category: Bridge Inspection - Standard Component Identification (Link to Request -
)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When compiling the component inventory for a bridge, roadway items such as the surfacing, kerbs and
rails are typically defined per span. With culverts, this approach is unfeasible due to the significantly
shorter span lengths and lack of definative joints in the deck.
For this reason, these components are to be defined per culvert structure. They are to be located in
the Span 1 group, with the corresponding quantites taken from the full length of the structure.
This does not include Approach items (such as guardrail), which are still to be defined seperately for
both approaches
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
1. Peter Graham 01/12/2003 04:17:52 PM
0. Shane P Crawford 01/12/2003 02:33:55 PM

Guidelines for Sniping (Notching Seatings) of
Timber Girders
Category: Bridge Maintenance - Treatments & Repairs (Link to Request - )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
Through the implementation of the Bridge Inspection System it has been found that
excessive snipes are being cut into replacement girders. This practice is occurring as
timber girders are often ordered through standing arrangements and consequently
timber bridge crews may only have access to one size of girder. As such, large
diameter girders are being used to replace smaller girders and consequently large
snipes are required to enable the girder to fit the bridge.
Increasing Girder Shear Capacity
From reviewing literature on notching (sniping) of timber girders the majority of
findings are based on either glulam beams or rectangular sawn sections. Numerous
different testing arrangements have been explored in the literature however the
majority of findings limited notch depths to:
10% in glulam beams; and
25% in solid sawn sections.
The majority of the research undertaken on notching in beams has been on rectangular
shaped softwoods in regions other than Australia. As such Bridge Asset Management
have modified the findings of these investigations to base the limiting factors of
notching on a percentage of the total area of the girder. To ensure that the capacity of
the girder is not exceeded in the notched region anti-splitter bolts are to be installed on
girders with a loss of section (due to notching) of 10% to 25%. This loss of area
correlates to approximately 15% to 29% of the depth of the girder.
Snipes can cause stress concentrations at the region where the girder changes cross
section and as such care should be taken to limit the likelihood of a split forming in
the region of the notch. It is therefore important to avoid over cutting at the root of
the snipe. One possible method to limit over cutting is to drill a hole in the member at
the root of the notch. This hole provides a stop point for cutting while giving a
rounded edge to minimise stress concentrations.
In addition to avoiding over cutting at the snipe it is recommended that a depth to
length ratio of the snipe be cut at 1:4 when a new girder is installed. The addition of
this gradient theoretically increases the capacity of the girder to shear by
approximately 3 times that of a square notch when evaluated using AS1720.1 -
1997.
To aid in determining the depth of allowable sniping before anti-splitter bolts are
required and details on snipe slopes, BAM have provided reference tables and
schematic diagrams in the attached documentation.
Bridge Asset Management is conducting testing on timber girders to evaluate the
effect of snipes. Further information regarding maximum snipe depths and gradients
will be distributed as it becomes available.
Owners of Bridge Inspection Manuals may wish to file a copy of this advice note and
the attachments for future reference.
Notching tables and diagrams.docNotching references.doc
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
5. Peter Graham 17/12/2003 08:38:04 AM
4. Kym L Francey 17/12/2003 08:22:56 AM
3. Peter Graham 16/12/2003 04:16:15 PM
2. Kym L Francey 16/12/2003 02:25:25 PM
1. Kym L Francey 02/12/2003 03:02:43 PM
17 December 2003
C:\temp\Notching tables and diagrams.doc
Timber Girders / Corbels Notching

I nner Girder
X1 =4 (101.6mm)
D Y1 Y2
mm mm mm
inch mm mm
No remedial work
required
Anti splitting bolts Replace
16 406.4 6.5 63 63 <Y2 121 >121
17 431.8 6.1 67 67 <Y2 128 >128
18 457.2 5.7 71 71 <Y2 136 >136
19 482.6 5.4 75 75 <Y2 144 >144

Outer Girder
X1 =8 (203.2mm)
D Y1 Y2
mm mm mm
inch Mm mm
No remedial work
required
Anti splitting bolts Replace
14 355.6 31.9 54 54 <Y2 103 >103
15 381 29.4 58 58 <Y2 111 >111
16 406.4 27.2 62 62 <Y2 119 >119
17 431.8 25.4 66 66 <Y2 126 >126

17 December 2003
C:\temp\Notching tables and diagrams.doc

Snipe at Abutments Snipe at Piers
Non-Destructive Identification & Quantification
of Defects in Timber Components
- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attached document details the assessment and validation of the "Lixi Profiler" and "Resistograph"
non-destructive testing methods following investigations conducted by Bridge Asset Mangement
section and provides corporate guidelines for the implementation of the NDT and conventional drilling
methods.
NDT of Timber Components.PDF
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
4. Peter Graham 23/12/2003 04:31:40 PM
3. Stacy J Bale 23/12/2003 04:35:44 PM
2. Lyall R McLean 18/12/2003 08:41:13 AM
1. Stacy J Bale 16/12/2003 02:54:59 PM
0. Stacy J Bale 16/12/2003 12:36:03 PM
Non-DestructiveIdentification&Quantification
of Defects inTimber Components
1 Background _________________________________________________________________ 1
1.1 Timber Structure_________________________________________________________ 2
1.2 Timber Deterioration _____________________________________________________ 3
2 Guidelinesfor Timber Drilling __________________________________________________ 4
3 Investigationof the"Lixi Profiler" (nuclear densometer) NDT Method _________________ 7
3.1 Background_____________________________________________________________ 7
3.2 Assessment&Validation __________________________________________________ 9
3.2.1 Typical InvestigationandResults_________________________________________ 9
3.2.2 InvestigationsinJ une2002_____________________________________________ 13
3.2.3 InvestigationsinMarch2003 ___________________________________________ 13
3.2.4 Discussion__________________________________________________________ 13
3.2.5 HealthandSafety ____________________________________________________ 14
3.3 Recommendations_______________________________________________________ 15
4 Investigationof the"Resistograph" (resistancedrilling), NDT method_________________ 15
4.1 Background____________________________________________________________ 15
4.2 Assessment&Validation _________________________________________________ 17
4.2.1 Typical InvestigationandResults________________________________________ 17
4.2.2 Discussion__________________________________________________________ 20
4.3 Recommendations_______________________________________________________ 22
5 Recommendationsfor I mplementationof the"Lixi Profiler" and"Resistograph" NDT
methods________________________________________________________________________ 23
5.1 Applicationof the"Lixi Profiler" andthe"Resistograph" or Conventional Drilling 23
5.2 Applicationof the"Resistograph" only _____________________________________ 24
5.3 Applicationof "Lixi Profiler" only_________________________________________ 25
23 December 2003 Page 1 of 27
1 Background
Thecurrent methodof identificationandquantificationof defectsintimber componentsasdetailedin
the Bridge Inspection Manual (BIM) is visual inspection and drilling investigation of principal
components.
Inspectorscarryout conventional drillinginvestigationsusinga12-16mmdiameter bit toboreholesin
timber components at critical and suspect locations. The extent and severity of any piping or rot
within thecomponent is assessed by theinspector based on theresistanceto drilling as "felt". This
method relies on theexperienceand subjectivejudgement of theinspector and provides information
onlyat theselecteddrill location.
The BIM defines the locations of maximumstress and/or those most susceptible to decay, where
drillingtests shouldbecarriedout. It also highlights theissuethat test holes canexposethemember
tomorerapiddecayandregular drillingcanresult insignificant strengthreduction, evenif nodecayis
found. It statesthat all test holesshall bepluggedwithwoodendowels, whichhavebeentreatedwith
an approved preservative, to reduce the potential for accelerated deterioration following the survey.
Althoughit is generally acceptedpracticewithintheDepartment to conduct initial drillingtests ona
bridgeat thelocationsdetailedintheBIM andprobetheselocationsat subsequent inspections, recent
inspections of thebridges haveidentified that somemembers havehad significant numbers of holes
drilledinthem, whichcanexposethemember tomorerapiddecayor strengthreduction.
BridgeAsset Management section (BAM) havefound that supplementary drilling in addition to the
Level 2inspectionis oftenrequiredtolocateandquantify defectstotherequiredlevel of detail when
conducting bridge capacity assessments, thus highlighting deficiencies in the current inspection
practices. The need for supplementary drilling is costly in terms of re-establishment, diversion of
resources fromother tasks and is detrimental to bridge members. Despite supplementary drilling,
there has not been a marked improvement in confidence in testing results being representative of
member condition.
In response to the identified need to improve the accuracy and reliability in identification and
quantification of defects within timber components, BAM have assessed and validated two non-
destructive testing (NDT) methods, namely the "Lixi Profiler" (nuclear densometer) and the
"Resistograph" (drill resistance testing). The following sections summarise the assessment and
validationof theNDT methodsanddetail corporateguidelinesfor theimplementationof theNDT and
conventional drillingmethods.
Non-destructive identification and quantification of defects in timber components as detailed in the
followingsections shouldbeconductedinconjunctionwith Level 2 BridgeConditionInspections as
defined in the BIM for the Timber Drilling Survey. In addition it is recommended that material
species and stress grading be determined as part of the Level 2 Bridge Condition Inspection. An
advicenotewill bereleasedinJ anuary 2004detailingtherequirements for species identificationand
visual stress grading. At this time Main Roads have engaged either the Department of Primary
Industriesor aConsultant toconduct all inspectionandtestingrequired.
1.1 Timber Structure
As a natural building material, timber has evolved unique material properties which dictate and
influence use and also maintenance strategies. In the growing tree, the trunk acts as a structural
member, anchoredby theroot system, to support theleaf andbranchsystem. This ability to support
bothtreemassandwindinducedloadsmakestimber apractical material for our structural component
requirement suchasfor girders, pilesanddecking.
Thestructureof timber is essentially acollectionof longitudinally orientedcellulosecells, cemented
together by lignin, a complex polymer compound which also strengthens the cell walls. Figure 1
shows magnified structures for hardwood and softwood timbers and is included to show thegeneral
assemblageof woodcells. Thestructureof hardwoodsismorecomplexthanthoseof softwoods.
Becausetimber isessentially composedof longitudinal cells, itspropertiesareanisotropic, iestrength
andstiffness properties aremuchhigher alongthegrainthanacross thegrain. Another property that
varies between tangential, radial and longitudinal directions in a log is shrinkage, which occurs as
timber moisturecontent graduallyreduces. Shrinkageisgreatest inthetangential directionandresults
intheformationof longitudinal checks or oracles inthetimber dueto its weakness intensionacross
thegrain.
Figure1- WoodStructure
1.2 Timber Deterioration
The major causes of deterioration in timber bridges, as described in part 2, section 1.4 of the BIM
include: Fungal (rotting); Termites; Marine organisms; Corrosion of Fasteners; Shrinkage and
Splitting; Firedamage; andWeathering. Fungal andtermiteattack, andshrinkageandsplittingarethe
causesof deteriorationwhichareof particular interest withregardtotheinvestigationsdetailedinthis
advicenote. ThesketchesshownbelowinFigure2illustratetypical deteriorationof girder members.
It should be noted that visual inspection of the member may not identify the presence of internal
deterioration.
ELEVATION SECTION
ELEVATION SECTION
ELEVATION SECTION
ELEVATION SECTION
PIPING(CLEAN)
Result of internal rot or termiteattack
PIPING(INFILLED)
Heavier, wet debris- possibletermitemudfor nest
(densitygreater thantimber)
Lower densityreducedstrengthtimber duetopartial rot
DOZEY
Piping/ rot beneathspikingplank at topof girder
PIPING(UNDER SPIKINGPLANK)
DEFECTS
NOTE: Sidesof girder maynot indicatedeterioration
Termitenest
Figure2 Typical deteriorationof timber girder members.
2 Guidelines for Timber Drilling
Theguidelines for timber drilling tests currently documented in theBIM providea general standard
for investigation. However, several additional requirements documented below should improve the
reliabilityandconsistencyof thereportinganddeterminationof conditionstates, andthusimprovethe
accuracyof capacityassessments.
Therequirements for conductingthetimber drillingsurvey aredetailedinpart 3, section3.10(BIM).
Thekeypointsareincludedinthefollowingextract fromthemanual.
Thepurposeof thesurveyistodeterminetheresidual amount of soundtimber bydrillingaholein
a member. Therespectiveextent of anypipe, rottedandsolidportions is determinedbygauging
theresistancetodrillingsupplementedbyexaminationof woodshavings.
Drillingiscarriedout at thelocationsof maximumstress and/or for thoseareas most susceptible
todecay, namely:
Midspanandendof girders.
Endsof corbels.
Endsof headstocks.
Baseandtopof endposts.
Groundlevel, normal water level or aroundconnectionsinpiles.
Aroundboltedconnectionsingeneral.
All test holes shall be plugged with wooden dowels which have been treated with an approved
preservative, toreducethepotential for accelerateddeteriorationfollowingthesurvey.
Accepted practice within the Department is to conduct initial drilling tests on a bridge at the
recommended locations with a 12mmdrill bit and probe these locations at subsequent inspections.
Where internal deterioration is evident at the test location additional drilling tests are conducted at
locationsalongthemember (typically500mmintervals) until asolidsectionisidentified.
Typical deterioration mechanisms in standard timber bridge components and guidance on the
inspectionof thesemembersisdetailedinpart 2, section2.3of theBIM. For exampleanextract from
thesectionontimber girdersstates.
Timber girders should beinspected for pipeor external rot at their maximumstress location at
midspan. Inspection of the girder ends should also be carried out as pipe rotting is generally
moresevereat theselocations. Girder ends areproneto crushingfailurewhenexcessiveloss of
sectionhasoccurred.
Thefollowingguidelinesfor drillingtestsareprovidedinadditiontothecurrent guidelinesdetailedin
theBIM, andshouldbereadinconjunctionwithFigure3. Theseguidelines havebeendevelopedby
BAM based on typical deterioration of timber bridge members, critical locations for assessment of
member capacityandguidelinesdevelopedbyRoadTrafficAuthorityof NewSouthWales(RTA) and
WesternAustraliaDepartment of MainRoads.
At theinitial inspection thedrilling test holes should be made at the locations illustrated in
Figure3 andtheseholes shouldbeplugged andprobed at subsequent inspections to monitor
andquantifyprogressivedeterioration.
Test holesshouldbepluggedwithwoodendowels, whichhavebeentreatedwithanapproved
preservativetoreducethepotential for accelerateddeterioration.
Careshould betaken to avoid drilling completely though themembers, and horizontal drills
shouldbeinclinedslightlyupwardstoallowdrainage.
It is recommendedthat drill holes bemadeperpendicular tothefaceof themember suchthat
therecordeddeteriorationisrelativetothesectionsize.
Twotest holesarerequiredtobemadethroughthecrosssectionof girder andcorbel members
to identify deteriorationinthecentreof thesectionandalso v-shapeddeteriorationinthetop
of member.
Where deterioration is identified in the girders from the drilling tests at the locations
illustratedinFigure3, thenadditional drillingtests shouldbecarriedout at 500mmintervals
alongthemember until asoundsectionisidentified.
Where deterioration is recorded in the drilling test at the pile/headstock connection, an
additional drill shouldbemadeapproximately500mmalongtheheadstock fromthecentreline
of thepile.
It is recommended that material samples be taken and submitted to BAM for species
identification as detailed in an Advice Note on Timber Species Identification and Visual
Grading, tobereleasedbyBAM inJ anuary2004.
2
3
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
3
P
a
g
e
6
o
f
2
7
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
h
o
l
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
p
i
l
e
s
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
h
o
l
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
h
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
D
R
I
L
L
I
N
G
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
h
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
i
n
g
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
G
I
R
D
E
R
S
/
C
O
R
B
E
L
S
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
H
E
A
D
S
T
O
C
K
/
P
I
L
E
S
G
I
R
D
E
R
S
/
C
O
R
B
E
L
S
H
E
A
D
S
T
O
C
K
/
P
I
L
E
S
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
-
D
R
I
L
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
1 0 0
C
o
r
b
e
l
l
e
n
g
t
h
(
v
a
r
i
e
s
)
F
i
g
u
r
e
3
G
u
i
d
e
l
i
n
e
s
f
o
r
D
r
i
l
l
i
n
g
T
i
m
b
e
r
M
e
m
b
e
r
s
23December 2003 Page 7of 27
3 Investigationof the"Lixi Profiler" (nuclear densometer)
NDTMethod
3.1 Background
The"Lixi Profiler" is areal timedensity measuringsystem, whichproduces agraphshowingthenet
thickness of the timber section. The "Lixi Profiler" is illustrated in Figure 4 below. It uses a
radioactive isotope, Gadolinium-153 (Gd-153) and generates a highly collimated beamof radiation
that penetrates throughthetimber section. Theamount of radiationthat reaches thedetector opposite
thesourceis proportional to thetotal thickness andaveragedensity of thematerial it passes through.
The"Lixi Profiler" iscalibratedagainst asolidsectionof girder timber andthuscalculatesandreports
thethicknessof thetimber.
Figure 4a : "Lixi Profiler" Inspection system,
consisting of an isotope (A), a micro channel-
plate(MCP) detector (B), alaptop computer (C)
running MS windows based proprietary software
(InticoPtyLtd).
Figure4b: "Lixi Profiler" inoperation
InticoPtyLtdwasengagedbyBAM toprovideinspectionandassessment servicesfor trialsusingthe
"Lixi Profiler". Intico Pty Ltd is thesoleimporter of the"Lixi Profiler" into Australia. Lixi Inc of
Illinois USA manufactures the"Lixi Profiler". "Intico" havetwo "Lixi Profiler" units andprovidean
inspection service which includes the "Lixi Profiler" and a trained technician and a report of the
condition of the members. Intico's head office is in Melbourne, and they also have an office in
Brisbane. All trialswiththe"Lixi Profiler" conductedtodatehavebeenprovidedfromtheMelbourne
officeonacost plusbasis.
The"Lixi Profiler" wasdevelopedasaninspectiontool toassesstheconditionof steel pipingsystems,
inresponseto theproblemof examininginsulated pipingfor blockageandcorrosion. Theobjective
was to provide a method which could quickly scan along the length of the insulated pipe to locate
areas of poor condition without having to take the pipes out of service. The difference with the
applicationof the"Lixi Profiler" to theinspectionand assessment of timber members is thematerial
anddeteriorationcharacteristicsof timber comparedtosteel.
Intico'sstandardoperatingprocedurefor "Lixi Profiler" scanningisattachedfor referenceandseveral
pointsarehighlightedbelow.
Applicable codes and specifications are: Code of Practice for the Safe Use of Radiation
Gauges(1982); andInticoProcedureTP1RT 17.
Personal performing scanning covered by the Procedure shall be the holder of current
radiation license and have relevant experience as specified in AS 3998 and other relevant
Specificationswhichmayapplytothespecificproject.
Equipment shall beregisteredasaRadiationGaugeasper Codeof Practicefor SafetyUseof
RadiationGauges(1982).
Source of radiations shall be collimated 90-110 keV activity Gadolinium 153 (Gd-153)
isotope, housedinstainlesssteel / tungstensourcehead.
Safeoperatinginstructiondetailedintheprocedureshouldbeadheredto.
The"Lixi Profiler" shall becalibratedusingarangeof thicknessusingsamplematerial of the
samedensityof theitemunder test.
As detailedinIntico's standardoperatingproceduretheoperator is also requiredto betheholder of a
current radiation license and have relevant experience as specified in AS 3998 and other relevant
Specificationswhichmayapplytothespecificproject.
"Intico" havebeenengagedto providetestinganddataanalysis services for thetrials usingthe"Lixi
Profiler" conducted to date. Based on the unit rates "Intico" have provided and BAM's experience
withregardto thetimetakento completeinspections conductedto date, BAM providethefollowing
cost estimates for inspections using the "Lixi Profiler". "Intico" have indicated that they intend to
mobilize from Brisbane for work requested by Main Roads, however if "Intico" are required to
mobilize from Melbourne the associated air fares and accommodation costs will be charged at
cost+10%.
Inspectionof all membersonatypical 4spantimber bridgewhichiseasily accessible, should
takeapproximately 8hours. Thecost for theinspectionis estimatedat $4700whichincludes
the"Lixi Profiler", 1technician, 1assistant technicianandassociatedreporting. It ispossible
that the District or RoadTek provide an assistant which would reduce the estimated cost to
$4000. Additional costs aredependant onthelocationof thebridgeandany associatedtravel
andaccommodationcostsincurredby"Intico", thesecostswill bechargedasfollows:
o $80 / night for each member of crew (living away fromhome including meals and
other inconveniences)
o accommodationat cost +10%
o car hireat cost +10%
o consumables(suchasfuel, etc) at cost
Inspectionof all membersonatypical 4spantimber whichrequiresaccessequipment suchas
the UBIU and where access is also limited due to requirements on duration of traffic
disruptions, should take approximately 2 days (16 hours). The cost for the inspection is
estimatedat $8400whichincludesthe"Lixi Profiler", 1technician, 1assistant technicianand
associated reporting. It is possible that the District or RoadTek provide an assistant which
wouldreducetheestimatedcost to $7000. Additional costs aredependant onthelocationof
thebridgeandanyassociatedtravel andaccommodationcostsincurredby"Intico", thesecosts
will bechargedasdetailedabove.
It isnotedthat thecost of anyaccessequipment suchastheUBIU andany associatedtrafficcontrol is
additional tothecostsdetailedabove.
3.2 Assessment & Validation
The"Lixi Profiler" canscanthelengthof themember andidentifythelocationsof deterioration. This
is considered a significant advantage over conventional drilling and "Resistograph" methods, which
provideinformationat aspecific locationonly. Typical deteriorationmechanismsintimber members
as illustrated in section 1, indicate that the deterioration is not generally evident from a visual
inspection of the member. Thus the location of drilling investigations as detailed in section 2 is
typically determined based on expected deterioration and critical locations identified by structural
capacityassessments. Accordinglydefectivezoneswithinthemember maybemissedentirely.
BAM have conducted two trials in J une2002 and March 2003 to investigate the application of the
"Lixi Profiler" to theinspection of timber bridgemembers following an initial demonstration of the
equipment inApril 2002.
3.2.1 Typical InvestigationandResults
The"Lixi Profiler" isrequiredtobecalibratedfor theinspectionof eachmember section. Calibration
of the"Lixi Profiler" isdependant ontheoutsidedimensionof themember anddensityof thesection.
The"Lixi Profiler" maybecalibratedagainst asamplesectionof material inthelaboratoryor basedon
material densities stated in the Australian Standard for Timber Structures AS1720.1 if the member
species is known. Alternatively the"Lixi Profiler" may becalibratedinthefieldonmembers where
thethickness of thesectioncanbemeasuredandtheinternal conditioncanbeverified, suchas at the
ends of corbels and headstocks. This calibration is essential for the thickness measurement to be
consideredvalidasanabsolutemeasureof soundmaterial inthemember. It isalsopossibletoutilise
the results from investigations with the "Lixi Profiler" to provide a relative measure of the
deterioration withinthesection by reviewingthepercentageloss. Thepercentageloss of material is
illustratedontherecordsof thescansreportedby"Intico" andcanbedeterminedonsiteby reviewing
thereal-timescanrecord.
For thepurpose of thetrials conducted to datethe"Lixi Profiler" has been mounted in a U-shaped
bracket andinsomecasesanextensionarmhasbeenattachedtoprovideaccesstothegirdersfromthe
groundlevel asillustratedinFigures4band5a.
Figure5a General viewof scanningwiththe
"Lixi Profiler" (InticoPtyLtd)
Figure5b- Real-timeresultsof thescan
Initially the member is scanned longitudinally along the centreline of the cross section, to identify
locations of deterioration in the centreof the member. Additional longitudinal scans at 50-100mm
abovethecentrelineof girdersarealsocarriedout toidentifyanydeteriorationinthetopof thegirder.
In the field the real-time results of the scans are shown on the screen of the laptop computer as a
determinedmaterial thicknessinmillimetresasillustratedinFigure5b. Inthetrialsconductedtodate
thethickness measurements havebeenrecordedagainst thetimeof thescan. Thereal-timerecordof
thescanallowsareasof identifieddeteriorationtobemarkedonthemember for further investigation.
Theservicesprovidedby "Intico" for thetrialsconductedtodatehaveincludedproductionof areport
of the test scans. The records of the scans have indicated the determined material thickness and
correspondingpercentagelossof thicknessagainst thetimetakentocompletethescanasillustratedin
Figure6. It hasthereforebeennecessarytomark thelocationof deteriorationonthemember whenit
is identified. If the record of the scan is to be referenced at future inspections the location of
deterioration needs to be adequately detailed on the record, thus it would be beneficial if the
equipment wasmodifiedtoprovideadistancebasedrecordof thescan.
Evidence of
deterioration in the
highlighted regions
which requires
further investigation
Figure6 Typical recordillustratingtheresultsof scansalongatimber girder plottedagainst timeand
actual deteriorationwithinthegirder.
Additional testingisrequiredtoprovidemoredetailedinformationof thedeteriorationidentifiedinthe
longitudinal scans or to verify thecondition of areas which appear suspect in the visual inspection.
This additional testingmay includeatransversescanwiththe"Lixi Profiler" and/or drillingwiththe
"Resistograph" or conventional drilling.
The results of a transverse scan with the "Lixi Profiler" are illustrated below in Figure 8. It is
important that theouter dimensionsof themember at thescanlocationarerecordedandplotted(black
line). Theplot of thescan (red line) shows the recorded thickness through themember. Thus the
changeinthickness dueto deteriorationcan bemeasured through thesection andthelocation of the
deteriorationwithinthesectionidentified.
400 300
Figure7- Transversescansshowingrecordeddeteriorationandactual member crosssection.
3.2.2 Investigations inJ une2002
Analysis of theresults fromthetrials conducted on the7th J une2002 concluded that, inthecaseof
deteriorationinthegirders wherethecavities werefilledwithrottedmaterial anddebris, theseverity
of theloss of sectionidentified by the"Lixi Profiler" was reducedby upto 30%. However, loosely
packed debris in the cavity had a minimal effect on the loss of thickness recorded by the "Lixi
Profiler".
In addition to identifying pipe defects in timber components it is believed that a member which is
dozeythroughtheentirecrosssectioncanalsobeidentifiedusingthe"Lixi Profiler". Wherethe"Lixi
Profiler" reading shows a constant thickness which is less than the thickness of the solid girder, a
transversescanshouldallowthedeterminationastowhether thegirder isdozey. If thegirder isdozey
thereductioninrecordedthicknesscomparedtothat of asolidgirder shouldbeconstant for theentire
transversescan. Theaccuracy of this methodology relies on thecalibration of the"Lixi Profiler" to
theactual material andthecontrol of theorientationof thescan.
3.2.3 Investigations inMarch2003
Reviewof theresultsfrominvestigationsat Bremer River bridgehighlightedthefollowing:
Theimportanceof calibratingthe"Lixi Profiler" for thespecificmembersbeinginvestigated.
The need for distance based measurement and recording of the investigations to provide an
accuraterecordof thelocationof anydefectsfor analysisandfuturereference.
The importance of aligning the source with the centreline of themember and square to the
faceof themember, or at 100mmabovethecentrelineof themember asrequiredandasclose
tothesurfaceaspossible.
The "Lixi Profiler" underestimates the size of deterioration within a member when the
member is filled with material, such as rot, because the reported thickness is based on the
measurement of thedensityof thematerial scanned.
Thesizevariationalongthelengthof themember.
3.2.4 Discussion
Thereis somevariability, typically intheorder of 5%to10%inrecordedthickness onalongitudinal
scanof amember withnosignificant defects. Themainreasonsfor thisvariationarelikelytobedue
to, variation in sizeof themember and theeffect of surfaceimperfections such as small splits. The
conditionstatelimitsfor girdersasdetailedintheBIM areCS 335%pipingat endsor 50%piping
at midspanandCS 450%pipingand70%pipingat midspan. Basedonthedeteriorationlimitsfor
thevariousconditionstatesasdetailedintheBIM andnotedabovefor girders, thevariationof 5%to
10%is not considered to beof concernwithregard to identifyingdefectivecomponents in condition
state3or 4.
Thepresent arrangement of moving the "Lixi Profiler" manually, and presenting thedata on a time
scale (approximating a distance) limits its accuracy in mapping out areas of piping or dozey
deterioration, asthelocationof defectsmust bemanuallyrecordedonsite. Inadditiontoerrorswhich
may occur in the manual location of the defect, the speed of recording along the member is not
automated and does not provide a record of deterioration which can be used for future reference.
"Intico" ispresentlydevelopinganalternativesystemof datarecordingthat will allowamoreaccurate
position-basedassessment of thelongitudinal andtransversescans. It is notedthat thissophistication
isonly requiredtoprovideapermanent recordof thedeteriorationalongthelengthof themember. It
is acceptableto scanthemember, mark thelocationof defects as they areidentifiedduringthescan,
record the location of the deterioration by measuring along the member and conducting further
investigationssuchasatransversescanor drillingtoquantifythedeterioration.
It isrecommendedthat acentralizingjigisdevelopedtoensurethat thecentreof thesourceisaligned
with the centre of themember and as closeto thesurfaceas possible. It is noted that the use of a
centralisingjigis arequirement for testingpipes inIntico's TestingProcedurefor the"Lixi Profiler".
Thecurrent bracket arrangement the"Lixi Profiler" ismountedonlimitstheaccessalongthegirder to
approximately300mmfromtheendof thecorbel. "Intico" areawareof theissuesassociatedwiththe
current arrangement of theequipment andhaveindicatedthat theywouldmodifythemountingbracket
shouldthe"Lixi Profiler" beincludedas aninspectionmethodwithinMainRoads inspectionregime,
however themodificationswerenot consideredeconomicintheevaluationphase.
Extracts fromreports provided by "Intico" are included to illustrate theinformation provided. The
report is conciseandprovides theresults of all scans. Thepercentageloss is includedonthevertical
axis of the plots produced in addition to the recorded material thickness, and the condition state
criteriadefinedintheBIM canthenbeappliedtotheresultstodeterminetheconditionof themember.
It isnotedthat thegirder sizesarerequiredtobemeasuredandthemeasurementsshownontherecord
of thescantoillustratethepercentagelossof section.
Thetimetakento investigateatimber bridgemember usingthe"Lixi Profiler" is typically 2minutes
per longitudinal scanof amember suchasagirder or pile. Inspectionof bridgeslessthan3mhighand
over drywaterways, canbeconductedfromthegroundasillustratedinsection3.2.1. However, if the
bridgeishigher and/or thereiswater under thebridge, thentheunder bridgeinspectionunit (UBIU) or
similar equipment is required as for a conventional drilling inspection and the time and cost of the
inspectionisincreasedaccordingly.
3.2.5 HealthandSafety
As noted above, the"Lixi Profiler" technology utilizes low-level gamma radiation and thereforethe
healthand safety of staff must beconsideredwithregardto any recommendationfor theuseof such
equipment withintheDepartments inspectionregime. Documentationprovidedby "Intico" states the
following. "Thetechnologyutilizeslow-level gammaradiation, whichhasbeenapprovedbytheQLD
Health Department. It is safefor theoperators as well as for themembers of public. Thereareno
safetyrequirementstorestrict accesstotheareawhilescanningisinprogress."
3.3 Recommendations
The accuracy of the "Lixi Profiler" is considered appropriate for determining the deterioration of
timber bridgemembers, basedontheresultsof investigationsconductedtodateandtheconditionstate
levelsdefinedintheBridgeInspectionManual.
Based on the health and safety information obtained on the "Lixi Profiler", the equipment is
considered to be safe. However, BAM will continue to monitor research, developments and
requirementsassociatedwiththehealthandsafetyissuesof theequipment.
BAM recommends that the"Lixi Profiler" is usedinconjunctionwith either conventional drillingor
"Resistograph" inspectionmethods, however the"Lixi Profiler" may beusedasthesoleNDT method
if additional investigationsareconductedasdetailedinsection5.1.3.
It is recommended that modifications be made to the "Lixi Profiler" equipment to ensure that the
centreof thesourceis aligned with thecentreof themember and as closeto thesurfaceas possible
andthethicknessof themember alongthescanisrecordedagainst distance.
Where "Intico" are engaged by Districts or RoadTek to conduct investigations using the "Lixi
Profiler", it is recommended that BAM are informed to monitor the performance, service,
implementationandcost of theinspections. Thecontactsat "Intico" arelistedbelow.
"Intico" Melbourne, Wolfgang Mika, Manager, Power Generation Division and Vladimir
Kurbalija, "Lixi Profiler" Technician, phone0393504366.
"Intico" Brisbane, KeithLangdon, Manager Queensland, phone0732167771.
4 Investigationof the"Resistograph" (resistancedrilling),
NDT method
4.1 Background
The "Resistograph" is a quasi non-destructive testing method, which measures the resistance of the
timber to theadvancement of asmall 1.4mmdiameter drill bit. The"Resistograph" is illustrated in
Figure 2 below. The drill is advanced at a constant speed through the timber and the recorded
resistanceprovides ameasureof thedensity of thematerial throughthesample. The"Resistograph"
producesareal-timegraphof therelativemagnitudeof thetorquerequiredby thedrill to keepthebit
movingat aconstant speed, against thedepthof penetration. Thisgraphisalso storedintheonboard
computer.
TreeTestingAustralia(TTA) was engaged by BAM to inspection and assessment services for trials
using the "Resistograph". The "Resistograph" is made in Germany by IML. "TTA" is division of
IML Australiaandarethesoledistributor of the"Resistograph" inAustraliaandNewZealand. TTA's
officeislocatednear Toowoomba.
Information provided by "TTA" also states that, "Resistograph assessments have the advantage of
beinglessinvasive(the2mmholeisself sealingonwithdrawal of theprobe) andmoreaccuratethan
coresamplingandultra-sound." Theback sealingof thetest hole, limitstheopportunityfor moisture
ingressor theinitiationof decayandtheeffect of thedrillingontheoverall structural system.
Theinspectionsconductedtodatehavebeenat acontract rateof $550per day. "TTA" haveindicated
that thereareseveral optionsavailabletoMainRoadsincludingpurchaseor leaseof equipment, or an
inspection servicecontract. TheF300S "Resistograph" unit costs $10,550 plus GST, and additional
costs for training. A lease plan is also available at a cost of $650 per month for a F300S
"Resistograph" unit over a24monthperiod, includingfull warrantyandtraining.
Theinvestigationsat Bremer River Bridgeincludeddrilling37test holesusingthe"Resistograph" and
took1daytocompleteinthefieldand1daystopreparethereport at acost of $1375plusGST. The
testingat Bremer River Bridgedrilledonlydefectivelocationsidentifiedbythe"Lixi Profiler" andthe
timetakenwasincreaseddueaccesslimitationswhichrequiredtheuseof theUBIU whileminimising
trafficdelaysto15minutesonasinglelanebridge.
Investigations using the"Resistograph" takeapproximately 5 minutes, which allows for changing of
batteries, paper indicators, computer identificationcodesanddrill bits. Basedontheratesprovidedby
"TTA" andBAM'sexperiencewithregardtothetimetakentocompleteinspectionsconductedtodate,
BAM providethefollowingcost estimatefor inspectionsusingthe"Resistograph".
Inspection of all members on atypical 4 span bridgewith 4girders per span and 3piles per
pier group will requireapproximately 126 drill holes using the"Resistograph" to drill at the
locationsillustratedinFigure14. For abridgewhichiseasilyaccessible, it isestimatedthat it
will take2 days in thefield to completetheinspection and cost approximately $2000+GST.
Thiscost includesthe"Resistograph", 1technicianandassociatedreporting, andassumesthat
theDistrict or RoadTek provideanassistant.
Inspectionof all membersonatypical 4spanbridgewhichrequiresaccessequipment suchas
the UBIU and where access is also limited due to requirements on duration of traffic
disruptions, is estimated to take 3 days. The cost for the inspection is estimated at
$3000+GST. This cost includes the "Resistograph", 1 technician and associated reporting,
andassumesthat theDistrict or RoadTekprovideanassistant.
It isnotedthat thecost of anyaccessequipment suchastheUBIU andany associatedtrafficcontrol is
additional tothecostsdetailedabove.
4.2 Assessment & Validation
BAM haveconducted two trials to investigatetheapplicationof the"Resistograph" to theinspection
of timber bridge members following initial testing conducted by Southern Region in August 2002.
The trials conducted by BAM included investigation of individual girders in conjunction with
laboratorytestingandtheinvestigationof theBremer River timber bridge.
4.2.1 Typical InvestigationandResults
Initial investigationswiththe"Resistograph" werecarriedout usingthe500mmmodel, however it was
found that the 300mmmodel was more appropriate for timber bridge inspections. "Resistograph"
investigations conducted by BAM in the laboratory and at Bremer River were completed using the
300mmmodel. Standard timber bridgemembers areless than 600mmindiameter and thereforethe
300mm"Resistograph" penetratesmorethanhalf thethicknessof themember asrequired.
The"Resistograph" drillingproducesareal timeprint out andalsostoresthetest resultselectronically.
"TTA" processestheelectronicdatatohighlight thedeterioratedregionsandprovidecommentsonthe
assessment of thetest.
Figure8- The"Resistograph" beingloadedwithpaper torecordthetest.
Eachdrill test isidentifiedbyauniquecode, whichisprogrammedintothe"Resistograph". Thiscode
is in a number in the format ##/ ##, and the corresponding span and girder number, drill location
alongthemember andtheorientationof the"Resistograph" wererecordedfor eachdrill test.
The"Resistograph" wasalignedwiththegirder inaccordancewiththetimber drillingguidelines.
Figure9a- Horizontal test usingthe"Resistograph" Figure9b- Vertical test usingthe"Resistograph"
At theendof eachtest theuniquecodewas writtenonthepaper printout. Any comments regarding
possible problems with the reading were recorded on the printout. At the end of each day the
electronicfilewasdownloadedtoacomputer for storageof thedata.
Analysis of the drilling data was undertaken by "TTA" and electronic records of the tests were
provided. Theelectronic recordincludes asummary of thesectionandtest details andhighlights the
areasof deteriorationidentifiedbythetest.
Several test memberswerecut intosectionstoverifythesectionproperties. Thecorrelationof the
"Resistograph" test printout tothetimber sectionisillustratedinFigures10and11.
Decay / rot at
centre of girder
Splitting / cracking
fromedge of girder
Line of "Resistograph" drill
(girder 500mmdiameter)
Figure10Correlationbetweenreductioninresistanceanddeteriorationof section, inparticular
splitting/crackingfromedgeof girder anddecay/rot inthecentreof thesection.
Line of "Resistograph" drill
Decay / rot / pipe at
centre of girder
Knot / defect in girder
Figure11 Correlationbetweenreductioninresistanceanddeteriorationof section, inparticular
identificationof knots/defectsanddecay/rot/pipeinthecentreof thesection.
A typical processeddrill report isshowninFigure12. Ingeneral theresultsarepresentedclearlywith
both a visual and numerical interpretation of the degree of piping in the member. The use of this
colour codingsystemprovidestheclient withadetailedunderstandingof thestateof themember.
Figure12- "Resistograph" processeddrill record
4.2.2 Discussion
The"Resistograph" providessignificant advantagesover traditional drillingmethods. The1.4mmdrill
bit is smaller than the standard 12mmdrill bit and has a negligible effect on the overall structural
system. Thedrill isadvancedat aconstant speedthroughthetimber andthedensity of thematerial is
determined fromthe recorded resistance and therefore does not rely on the operators experience or
judgement. A real-time graph is produced which illustrates resistance against depth of penetration,
hencethelocationof deteriorationwithinthemember isevident fromtheprintout.
Initial tests conducted using the "Resistograph" identified problems with the drill bits breaking,
however therehavebeen no such problems with themorerecent testing conducted at Bremer River
bridge. Two drill bits werebroken during thelaboratory testingconducted by BAM, however these
occurred when the "Resistograph" battery failed and the drilling had to be restarted with the drill
embeddedinthemember. Therewerenoproblemswiththe"Resistograph" battery duringthetesting
conductedat Bremer River bridge.
Testing conducted in the laboratory on members with significant cracking defects, identified the
importanceof ensuringthat thedrill isnot positioneddirectly onacrack or within20mmof thecrack
to reducethelikelihoodof the"Resistograph" followingthepath of least resistance, alongthecrack.
Thisalsohighlightedtheimportanceof conductingavisual inspectionof thegirder at thedrill location
and recording this information for usein conjunction with the"Resistograph" results, to ensurethat
cracksarecorrectlyidentifiedandnot misinterpretedaspipeor rot defectswithinthemember.
Figure13 Processed"Resistograph" test result withcrackingintheouter 90mmof thesection.
The red line on thepictureof the girder in Figure 13 indicates theapproximate "Resistograph" test
path. Examinationof thephotoindicatedthat therearenovoidsinthefirst 1-9cmof thegirder which
were initially predicted fromthe "Resistograph" tests record. However, further examination of the
cross-sectionrevealedcrackingextendingtowardstheheart of thegirder. Henceit wasconcludedthat
duetothetimber beingsofter inthelocationaroundthecracksthat theresistanceislower intheouter
regionof thegirder.
The recorded depth of penetration of the "Resistograph" was 210mm to 280mm through girders
355mm to 435mm in diameter, which is over half the section thickness but did not penetrate
completely through the section. Where the initial horizontal drill identified defects a second drill
perpendicular tothefirst was completedto providefurther informationonthesizeandlocationof the
defect. TheWest Australian Main Roads Department specify threedrill holes at any timber section
onevertically and two horizontally fromeach sideof themember, to enablethesizeandlocationof
thedeterioration to beaccurately determined. It is also considered necessary to includeat least one
additional horizontal drill at a location 100mmabove the girder centreline to ensure v-shaped rot
deteriorationinthetopof thegirder canbeidentifiedor quantify thedeteriorationif identifiedby the
"Lixi Profiler".
The"Resistograph" has asmall contact areaand no anchoringsystem. Sincethegirder surfaces are
curvedthestability of theequipment duringdrillingmay becompromised. It is recommendedthat a
mounting bracket similar to that used on concretecoring units beadapted for the"Resistograph" to
lock theunit intolocationfor thedrillingtest.
A benefit of determiningthematerial properties of members investigatedusingthe"Resistograph" is
that theinformation may be used to assess thecorrelation between themeasured resistance and the
various material species. This knowledge may enable material species to be determined fromthe
"Resistograph" testsinthefuture.
4.3 Recommendations
The accuracy of the "Resistograph" is considered appropriate for determining the deterioration of
timber bridgemembers, basedontheresultsof investigationsconductedtodateandtheconditionstate
levelsdefinedintheBridgeInspectionManual.
BAM recommendthat the"Resistograph" isusedinconjunctionwiththe"Lixi Profiler", however the
"Resistograph" maybeusedasthesoleNDT methodasdetailedinsection5.
It isrecommendedthat amountingbracket similar tothat usedonconcretecoringunitsbeadaptedfor
the "Resistograph" to lock the unit into location for the drilling test to improve the stability during
drilling.
It is recommendedthat the300mmlongdrill bit recommendedfor testingof timber bridgemembers,
toreducethelikelihoodof thedrill bit breakingduringtheinvestigations.
An adequatepower sourcefor the"Resistograph" is required to beprovided for all investigations to
reduce the likelihood of problems during testing. "TTA" can provide guidance on the appropriate
power sourcerequired.
Where "TreeTesting Australia" is engaged by Districts or RoadTek to conduct investigations using
the"Resistograph", it is recommended that BAM areinformed to monitor theperformance, service,
implementationandcost of theinspections.
Thecontact at "TTA" isPeter Blank, phone0418709846.
5 Recommendations for Implementationof the"Lixi
Profiler" and"Resistograph" NDTmethods
BAM recommendthat the"Lixi Profiler" and"Resistograph" NDT methodsbeusedinconjunctionto
produce consistent and reliable condition data on the condition of timber bridge members. This
information in conjunction with member species and stress grade can then be applied to determine
accurate bridge capacities based on generic code values and assist in the efficient management of
heavyvehiclemovements.
Where "Intico" or "Tree Testing Australia" are engaged by Districts or RoadTek to conduct
investigations usingthe"Lixi Profiler" or "Resistograph", it is recommendedthat BAM areinformed
tomonitor theperformance, service, implementationandcost of theinspections.
Guidelines for the implementation of the "Lixi Profiler" and "Resistograph" non-destructive testing
methods provided in thefollowing sections and guidelines for conventional drilling are provided in
section2.
In addition to the requirements for Level 2 inspection detailed in the BIM, the information listed
belowisrequiredtoprovideacomprehensiverecordfor capacityassessment of timber members.
All bridgecomponentsaretobenumberedinaccordancewiththerequirementsof theBIM.
It isrecommendedthat thematerial speciesandstressgradingof all membersbedetermined. The
requirements for these investigations will be detailed in an Advice Note to be released J anuary
2004.
Thethicknesses of themembers at theend and middleand test locations along themember are
requiredtobemeasuredandrecorded.
Locationsof all NDT andconventional drillinginvestigationsaretoberecordedandnumberedfor
reference.
5.1 Application of the "Lixi Profiler" and the "Resistograph" or
Conventional Drilling
The"Lixi Profiler" isrequiredtobecalibratedif thethicknessmeasurement istobeusedasan
absolutemeasureof soundmaterial inthemember. Alternativelytheresultsfromthe
investigationswiththe"Lixi Profiler" maybeusedasarelativemeasureof thedeterioration
withinthesectionbyreviewingthepercentageloss.
o The"Lixi Profiler" maybecalibratedagainst asamplesectionof material inthe
laboratoryor basedonthematerial densitiesstatedintheAustralianStandardfor Timber
StructuresAS1720.1if themember speciesisknown; or
o The"Lixi Profiler" maybecalibratedinthefieldonmemberswherethethicknessof the
sectioncanbemeasuredandtheinternal conditioncanbeverified, suchastheendsof
corbelsandheadstocks.
Thethickness of themembers at end and middlelocations along thelineof the scan should be
measured using callipers or similar measuring device to verify the calibration of theequipment
andassist inidentificationof anydozeyareaswithinthemember.
The"Lixi Profiler" is requiredto bemountedinacentralizingjig/bracket andit is recommended
that therecordof thescanisdistance-based.
The recommended investigations using the "Lixi Profiler" and the "Resistograph" are described
belowandillustratedinFigure14.
It is recommended that the "Lixi Profiler" be used to carryout longitudinal scans along the
centrelineof thesectionof all componentsinthebridgeincludinggirders, corbels, headstocksand
piles to determinedefectiveregions. Additional longitudinal scans at 100mmabovecentrelineof
girdersarealsorequiredtoidentifyanydeteriorationinthetopof thegirder.
Additional testingisrequiredtoquantifythesizeandlocationof thedeteriorationidentifiedbythe
longitudinal scansusingeither the"Resistograph" or Conventional Drillingmethods.
o Additional testingisalsorecommendedat critical locationsasillustratedinFigure14and
at locationswhichappear suspect fromvisual inspectionbut wererecordedassoundby
thelongitudinal scan, or anylocationswhichwereinaccessiblewiththe"Lixi Profiler".
o All drillingshouldbeconductedinaccordancewiththerelevant guidelines for either the
"Resistograph" or Conventional Drillingmethodsasdetailedwithinthisdocument.
5.2 Application of the "Resistograph" only
Thethicknessof themembersat endandmiddlelocationsalongthemembersisrequiredtobe
recorded.
It isrecommendedthat the300mmlongdrill bit recommendedfor testingof timber bridge
members, toreducethelikelihoodof thedrill bit breakingduringtheinvestigations.
Anadequatepower sourcefor the"Resistograph" isrequiredtobeprovidedfor all investigations
toreducethelikelihoodof problemsduringtesting.
Therecommendedinvestigationsusingthe"Resistograph" aredescribedbelowandillustratedin
Figure14.
Drillingtestswiththe"Resistograph" shouldbecarriedout at critical locationsdescribedinthe
BIM inadditiontoanyareaswhichappear suspect.
o Careshouldbetakentoavoiddrillingcompletelythoughthemembers, andhorizontal
drillsshouldbeinclinedslightlyupwardstoallowdrainage.
o "Resistograph" drillsshouldbemadefrombothfacesof girder andcorbel membersat
eachcrosssectiontoquantifythelocationandextent of thedeteriorationinthemember,
asthe300mmlongdrill bit will onlyprovideinformationjust past thecentreof atypical
timber bridgemember.
o It isrecommendedthat drill holesbemadeperpendicular tothefaceof themember such
that therecordeddeteriorationisrelativetothesectionsize.
o Four test holesarerequiredtobemadethrougheachcrosssectionof girder andcorbel
memberstoidentifydeteriorationinthecentreof thesectionandalsov-shaped
deteriorationinthetopof member. Thesetest holesshouldbelocatedalongthecentreline
of thesectionandat 50to100mmabovethecentrelineof thesectionasillustratedin
Figure14andthe"Resistograph" drillsshouldbemadefrombothfacesof themember at
eachcrosssectionasnotedabove.
o Wheredeteriorationisidentifiedinthegirdersfromthedrillingtestsat thelocations
illustratedinFigure3, thenadditional drillingtestsshouldbecarriedout at 500mm
intervalsalongthemember until asoundsectionisidentified.
o Wheredeteriorationisrecordedinthedrillingtest at thepile/headstock connection, an
additional drill shouldbemadeapproximately500mmalongtheheadstockfromthe
centrelineof thepile.
It isrecommendedthat the"Resistograph" isnot positioneddirectlyonacrack or within20mmof
acrack to reducethelikelihoodof the"Resistograph" followingthepathof least resistancealong
thecrack.
It isrecommendedthat amountingbracket similar tothat usedonconcretecoringunitsbeadapted
for the"Resistograph" to lock theunit into location for thedrilling test to improvethe stability
duringdrilling.
5.3 Application of "Lixi Profiler" only
The"Lixi Profiler" is required to becalibrated if thethickness measurement is to beused as an
absolute measure of sound material in the member. Alternatively the results from the
investigations with the "Lixi Profiler" may be used as a relative measure of the deterioration
withinthesectionbyreviewingthepercentageloss.
o The "Lixi Profiler" may be calibrated against a sample section of material in the
laboratory or basedonthematerial densities statedintheAustralianStandardfor Timber
StructuresAS1720.1if themember speciesisknown; or
o The"Lixi Profiler" may becalibratedinthefieldonmembers wherethethickness of the
section can bemeasured and theinternal condition can be verified, such as the ends of
corbelsandheadstocks.
Thethickness of themembers at end and middlelocations along thelineof the scan should be
measured using callipers or similar measuring device to verify the calibration of the equipment
andassist inidentificationof anydozeyareaswithinthemember.
The"Lixi Profiler" is requiredto bemountedinacentralizingjig/bracket andit is recommended
that therecordof thescanisdistance-based.
Therecommended investigations using the"Lixi Profiler" aredescribed below and illustrated in
Figure14.
The "Lixi Profiler" should be used to carryout longitudinal scans as detailed above in section
5.1.1.
Additional testingrequired to quantify thesizeand locationof thedeteriorationidentified by the
longitudinal scansmayincludetransversescanswiththe"Lixi Profiler".
o Additional testingisalsorecommendedat critical locationsasillustratedinFigure14and
at locations which appear suspect fromvisual inspection but wererecorded as sound by
thelongitudinal scan.
o Thelimitationof usingthe"Lixi Profiler" to conduct thetransversescans comparedto a
drillingmethodisthat noinformationcanbeobtainedfor locationswhichareinaccessible
withthe"Lixi Profiler".
2
3
D
e
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
3
P
a
g
e
2
7
o
f
2
7
N
a
t
u
r
a
l
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
I
N
S
P
E
C
T
I
O
N
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
H
E
A
D
S
T
O
C
K
/
P
I
L
E
S
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
D
R
I
L
L
L
O
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
L
E
V
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
G
I
R
D
E
R
S
/
C
O
R
B
E
L
S
H
E
A
D
S
T
O
C
K
/
P
I
L
E
S
G
I
R
D
E
R
S
/
C
O
R
B
E
L
S
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
f
o
r
h
o
r
i
z
o
n
t
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
i
n
g
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
h
o
l
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
p
i
l
e
s
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
d
r
i
l
l
h
o
l
e
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
h
e
a
d
s
t
o
c
k
s
A
L
L
M
E
M
B
E
R
S
D
e
n
o
t
e
s
L
i
x
i
p
r
o
f
i
l
e
r
p
a
t
h
s
-
l
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l
s
c
a
n
s
a
n
d
t
r
a
n
s
v
e
r
s
e
s
c
a
n
s
a
t
c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
d
e
f
e
c
t
s
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
-
T
R
A
N
S
V
E
R
S
E
L
I
X
I
S
C
A
N
C
o
r
b
e
l
l
e
n
g
t
h
(
v
a
r
i
e
s
)
1 0 0
F
i
g
u
r
e
1
4
I
n
s
p
e
c
t
i
o
n
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
Rating of cracked concrete members
- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A query was raised regarding the rating of a concrete component which was subject to cracking due to
corrosion of the reinforcement. The rating of the defect was dependant on how it was considered, (ie.
considered as cracking, or as spalling and loss of reinforcement due to corrosion). Some clarification
was sought over this issue, and in response the following modifications to the Condition State
descriptions have been made for all concrete members;
Condition State 3:
Moderate cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or;
Moderate or Severe cracking due to non-structural mechanisms, such as corrosion of
reinforcement or ASR, or;
Loss of section of reinforcement due to corrosion of up to 20%
Condition State 4:
Severe cracking caused by structural mechanisms, or;
Loss of section of reinforcement due to corrosion greater than 20% (and the resultant cracking
and spalling this may cause)
The intention is to separate cracking due to structural mechanisms (ie. bending or shear) from
cracking due to non-structural mechanisms (ie. corrosion of reinforcement, or ASR). Please note that
if the inspector is unable to determine the cause of the cracking, or is not 100% confident as to the
cause of the cracking, they are to assume the worst case (ie. cracking caused by structural
mechanisms)
These changes will be incorporated into the Condition State Guidelines as part of the review of the
Bridge Inspection Manual. In the meantime, owners of the manual may wish to include a copy of this
Advice Note in their manuals for future reference
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
3. Peter Graham 05/07/2004 08:29:25 AM

Recording of Timber Drilling in Accordance with
Advice Note no. 24
- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A number of queries have been received regarding the drilling methodology outlined in Advice
Note no. 24, and the recording of associated drilling records.
Advice Note no. 24 outlines a required series of drilling locations for timber bridges, and also
specifies that where deterioration is identified, additional test drills should be carried out at
500mm intervals along the member until a sound section is located, allowing the inspector to
determine the extent of the deterioration in the girder.
There has been some discussion of appropriate intervals for determining the extent of rot within a
member. The following drilling process should be followed;
Take the standard required drills (i.e. E1, MS, E2 for a girder), in accordance with BIM
and issued advice notes.
If rot or piping is found at one of these locations, go back and take drills at 500mm
intervals until the extent of the rot has been determined
If rot or piping is found in a similar location at two or more of these areas, it may be
prudent to take the additional drills at the quarter points of the member to determine continuity
of the rot.
The table shown below gives some guidance as to additional drilling requirements for a given
situation
Pipe / rot Solid Solid 500mm crs from located defect
Pipe / rot Solid Pipe / rot 500mm crs from located defect
Pipe / rot Pipe / rot Pipe / rot 1/4 points of the member
Pipe / rot Pipe / rot Solid 1/4 points of the member (between defects)
Additional drilling requirements
Standard drill results
E1 MS E2
The objective of drilling is to determine presence, extent and magnitude of any internal
defects. Additional drilling should be minimised where possible.
Recording of this information is to be as follows;
Drill information from required locations is to be detailed fully on the Timber Drilling
Survey Report (B2/5).
Information from additional test drills is to be entered into the relative Comments field
The example shown below indicates the desired format in accordance with the drilling
requirements as outlined in Advice Note no 24.
A girder is test drilled at three locations (each end and midspan). The horizontal drill (H) is
taken at the middle of the girder, and another drill (O) is taken at the same location,
approximately 100mm above the horizontal drill. End 1 and Midspan drill solid, but rot is found
at End 2. Test drills are taken at 500mm intervals, moving towards midspan, until solid sections
are located.
Example.doc

Example.jpg
Note that for the second horizontal drill, the diameter shall be the width of the member in the
direction of drilling, at the point at which the drill is taken. The diameter and amounts of solid
and consumed material at this point shall be entered into the Timber Drilling Survey as per usual.
Condition State Ratings for the member shall be adopted from the existing consumption
percentages for the relevant members (i.e. for a girder, 21-35% at the End location). However,
should the inspector observe movement under load of the decking planks / spiking planks
relative to the girders (as a result of lack of support from the girder due to significant canoeing)
the then the member shall be automatically rated as CS 4.
Please also note that it shall be deemed unnecessary to drill new timber elements for up to 2-4
years after they are installed, provided they show no indication of deterioration within that time.
Such indicators might be;
Noticeable excessive deflection relative to adjacent members
Evidence of crushing at girder ends
Presence of fruiting bodies on the member
Evidence of termite nests in the vicinity, or wet patches on the member
Signs of new / developing splits in the member (indicative of overstress due to loss of
section)
This information will be incorporated into the Bridge Inspection Manual as part of the current
review. In the interim, it is recommended that owners of Bridge Inspections Manuals include a
copy of this Advice Note in their manuals for future reference
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History
1. Peter Graham 08/07/2004 11:50:02 AM
0. Shane P Crawford 08/07/2004 11:56:07 AM

Sheet
1 Of 1
Structure I D................................... Bridge Name.....................................................
Crossing.......................................... Road Number ...................................................
Chainage...................(km) on the ....................................................to...............................................Road
District............................................ Local Authority................................................
I nspector......................................... Date of I nspection.............................................
(mm)
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

N
u
m
b
e
r

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

(
m
m
)

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

D
i
a
m
e
t
e
r

O
r
i
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
H
,

V
,

O
t
h
e
r
)

S
o
l
i
d

R
o
t

P
i
p
e

%

C
o
n
s
u
m
e
d

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

Comments

O S1 G1 22 480 E1 12 H 480 0 1
O S1 G1 22 320 E1 12 O 320 0 1 100mm above horizontal drill
O S1 G1 22 490 MS 12 H 490 0 1
O S1 G1 22 330 MS 12 O 330 0 1 100mm above horizontal drill
O S1 G1 22 480 E2 12 H 300 180 38 4 Test drills taken as follows;
500mm - 400S, 80R: 1000mm - 480S
O S1 G1 22 320 E2 12 O 260 60 23 3 100mm above horizontal drill
Test drills taken as follows; 500mm - 320S

% Consumed
* Test Locations
CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Component Defect Location (Abbreviation) (Describe Other (O) in comments) E MS E MS E MS
Pile
Girder
Corbel
Headstock
1
Headstock
2
Pipe
Pipe
Pipe
Edge Area
Pipe
20
20
20
5
45mm
20
30
20
5
45mm
35
35
35
10
65mm
35
50
35
10
65mm
50
50
50
20
90mm
50
70
50
20
90mm

Measurement of Scour
BAM Advice Note No 37 Draft
Category: Bridge Inspection - Procedures (Link to Request - )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scour is the result of flowing water eroding material from the bed and banks of a stream and is
the cause of the majority of bridge failures. Scour can occur as a general degradation of the
stream bed, or can be a localised scour directly attributable to the presence of the bridge.
Localised scour can occur as either constriction scour, where the bridge and its approaches
constrict the flow leading to an increase in flow velocities through the bridge opening, or as
localised scour at piers and abutments. Scour may occur dramatically during a significant flood
event or gradually over a period of several years.
The mechanics of flow and erosion in mobile bed open channels is not well understood. Scour at
bridge crossings in a riverine environment is a result of a complex interaction between river flow,
highly variable channel materials, and bridge structure configuration. It is important to
appreciate that there is a great deal of uncertainty in the estimation of bridge scour and in the
parameters affecting bridge scour such as river hydrology and sediment transport estimates.
Therefore, the reliable measurement of scour during bridge inspections is important in the
consideration of the long-term structural integrity of bridges. It is felt that the process of tracking
and recording of scour is not covered sufficiently in the Bridge Inspection Manual, and
consequentially is not consistently quantified in the field.
The current practice is essentially a qualitative assessment with the aim of detecting and
reporting emerging scour issues. However, without reference to a control level this is difficult
when scour occurs as a gradual degradation of the stream bed resulting from a number of flood
events taking place over several years, and assessment taking place intermittently during bridge
inspections.
Therefore, the reliable checking of the bridge waterway for either stream bed degradation or
aggradation can only be made by the measurement of the stream bed level to a permanent local
reference point. The following process, referred to as sounding, shall be adopted as an integral
part of a Level 2 inspection;
If the stream bed is exposed, then the sounding height from the top of the kerb or other
convenient permanent feature (such as the top of a concrete parapet), is to be measured down
to the stream bed at midspan and at either end of each span on the upstream side of the
bridge, or;
If there is standing water at a bridge site then the sounding height from the kerb or other
permanent reference feature on the bridge superstructure is to be measured down to the water
surface, and then down to the stream bed at midspan and at either end of each span on the
upstream side of the bridge;
Where localised scour holes are identified, the inspector shall take stream bed measurements
at 1.0m intervals each side from the reference point at which the local scour was identified.
Measurements shall be taken until the extent of the localised scour has been determined.
Measurements shall be taken using a standard 30m measuring tape with a small weight (1-2 kg
approx.) fastened to the end. The measurements and sounding locations shall be recorded on the
Bridge Scour Soundings Report (B2/7). If possible, the location from which the measurement
was taken shall be marked discretely on the structure. Inspectors shall endeavour to take
measurements from these same locations at future inspections, to aid the repeatability of the
process.
After the first round of soundings has been completed, inspectors shall ensue that they
document stream bed sounding depths from the previous inspection on the B2/7 form for
comparison with readings obtained during the current inspection.
Refer to the attached diagram and completed B2/7 form for further guidance on this process.
This information (and inclusion of a blank proforma of Form B2/7) will be incorporated into the
Bridge Inspection Manual as part of the current review. In the interim, it is recommended that
owners of the Bridge Inspection Manual include a copy of this Advice Note in their manuals for
future reference.
Scour - Level B2_7 form.docAdvice Note No 37.pdf
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit History

Sheet
Bridge Scour Soundings Report B2/7
Of

Structure ID........................................................... Bridge Name................................................................
Inspector................................................................. Local Authority ..........................................................

Date of Inspection.................................................. Date of Next Inspection .............................................
Sounding
Location
Sounding Depth (m)
Stream bed
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

G
r
o
u
p

L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n

Permanent
Reference
Feature

Top of kerb, deck
or concrete
parapet

W
a
t
e
r

S
u
r
f
a
c
e

P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s

C
u
r
r
e
n
t

D
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n

S
t
a
t
e

Comments
O S1 E1 Top of kerb - 6.2 6.2 0 1

O S1 MS Top of kerb 7.1 7.7 7.8 0.1 1

O S1 E2 Top of kerb 7.1 8.6 8.4 0.2 2

O S2 E1 Top of kerb 7.1 8.8 8.9 0.1 1

O S2 MS Top of kerb 7.1 9.5 8.9 0.6 3 Possible accumulation of material at midspan; monitor
O S2 E2 Top of kerb 7.1 8.8 8.7 0.1 1

O S3 E1 Top of kerb 7.1 8.8 8.8 0 1

O S3 MS Top of kerb 7.1 8.5 8.2 0.3 2

O S3 E2 Top of kerb 7.1 8.1 10.4 2.3 4 Possible localised scour; 1m back =11.2m;
2m back =11.1m; 3m back =8.6m; 1m forward =8m
Void approx. 4m wide, may have undercut footing.
Footing to be rated CS4, underwater inspection reqd
O S4 E1 Top of kerb 7.1 7.6 7.5 0.1 1
O S4 MS Top of kerb - 6.3 6.3 0 1
O S4 E2 Top of kerb - 5.7 5.6 0.1 1

Depth (metres) Sounding Locations
CS 1 CS 2 CS 3 CS 4
Group Location (Abbreviation)
C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

C
h
a
n
g
e

i
n

d
e
p
t
h

L
o
c
a
l

s
c
o
u
r

d
e
p
t
h

Span End1 (E1), Midspan (MS), End 2 (E2), Other (O) <0.2 <0.5
0.2 to
0.49
0.5 to
1.99
0.5 to
1.0
2 to 4 >1.0 >4.0

BridgeInspectionManual -InterimAdviceNote#1
ReviewofallowablesnipedepthbandsforCondition
StateGuidelines
BAMAdviceNoteNo39
Category:BridgeInspection-DefectIdentificationRecording&Rating (LinktoRequest-
)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OverthecourseofdiscussionswithRoadtekregardingthecurrentallowablesnipedepthsfortimber
components22Tand27T,itwasdeterminedthatthelackofaConditionState1categoryforsnipes
wascausingsomeproblemsforinspectors.
Inresponse,theallowablesnipedepthbandshavebeenrevisedtoincorporateasnipelimitwhich
enablesthosememberswithasnipedepthupto5%ofthedepthofthemembertoberatedas
ConditionState1.Thisalterationisunlikelytohaveasignificantimpactonexistingratings,butallows
fortheaggradationofConditionStateduetotheincreaseinsinpedepth,whichismoreinlinewiththe
philosophyoftheBridgeInspectionManual.UpdatedConditionStatedescriptionsforcomponents
22Tand27Thavebeenattachedbelow,thethemodifiedportionsshowninred.Alsoattachedbelow
isanomographdevelopedbyDaveDreier,showingtheConditionStatesnipebandsforgirdersof
variousdiameters.
ThecurrentConditionStatebandsrelatedtosnipedeptharebasedonthestructurallimitsof
rectangulartimbertestmembersinaccordancewiththeAustralianStandard.TheroundQueensland
hardwoodmemberscommonlyusedinDMRtimberbridgesmayhavereservesofstrengthinexcess
oftherectangulartestmembers,butuntilthiscanbeverified,BAMhaveadutyofcareanda
professionalobligationtoconformtotherequirementsoftherelevantAustralianStandard.
ResearchintothecapacityofQueenslandhardwoodmembersisinprogress,andthereissome
indicationthatexcessivesnipinghasanadverseeffectonthecapacityofamember,butduetothe
inherentvariabilityoftimberasamaterial,wehavebeenunabletoconfirmtheextentofthiseffect.
Itishopedthat,overtime,andthroughthecollectionoftimbermemberdatainaccordancewiththe
BridgeInspectionManual,thedepartmentshalleventuallyhavesufficientinformationtodeterminethe
degreeofrelevanceofsnipedepthtothecapacityofroundtimbermembers.
22T and 27T.docCondition State Calculation_Snipes in Timber Gird
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditHistory
Rev. Editor EditDate/Time
3. ShanePCrawford 15/08/200508:47:38AM
1. PeterGraham 27/04/200511:19:45AM

*Onlypastfiveeditsareshown
Structures Division APPENDIX D April 2005
22T

COMPONENT 22T OPEN GI RDERS TI MBER


This element includes all timber stringers such as round or octagonal hewn timber logs and
saw cut timber sections. Note: Pipe rot is quoted as a percentage of the diameter of the
girder, while snipe depth is quoted as a percentage of the depth of the girder (which is
essentially the diameter of the girder minus the depth of the contact flat or benching on the
upper face of the girder). Please note that where snipes have been treated in accordance with
the recommendations in Advice Note No. 23, they may be ignored for the purpose of rating
the member (but their presence should be noted on the Timber Drilling Survey Report). If
the treatment is not performing as desired, the member must be repaired or replaced.

Condition State 1

splits or checks having no effect on member strength. Girder to corbel bolts are tight. Depth
of snipes may be up to 5% of the depth of the girder.

Condition State 2

Girders are in good condition and may have pipe rot/termite attack (including the depth of the
end snipe) of up to 30% of the diameter at midspan and/or 20% at the supports. They may
also have minor surface or non-central decay, fire damage, splitting, checking or crushing but
not of sufficient magnitude to affect the strength of the member. Depth of snipes may range
from 6% to 10% of the depth of the girder. Girder to corbel bolts are slightly loose.

Condition State 3

Girders have a reasonable amount of pipe rot/termite attack (including the depth of the end
snipe) of up to 50% at midspan and/or 35% at the supports. They may have large splits or
checks which may reduce the strength of the member. Splits may be separating under load
causing crushing of the member, or crushing may be due to water ingress softening the load
bearing areas of the timber. Depth of snipes may range from 11% to 15% of the depth of the
girder. There may be a medium amount of surface or non-central decay or fire damage
present. Girder to corbel bolts are loose or corroding.

Condition State 4

The timber girders may have excessive pipe rot/termite attack (including the depth of end
snipes) of up to 70% at midspan and/or 50% of the supports, accompanied by severe splitting
or crushing. Strength of the member has been severely affected and failure may be imminent.
Depth of snipes may range from 16% to 30% of the depth of the girder. There may be severe
surface or non-central decay, fire damage or possibly large rot holes present. Girder to corbel
bolts may be very lose, with threads or nuts severely corroded.

Structures Division APPENDIX D April 2005
27T

COMPONENT 27T CORBELS TI MBER


This element includes all timber corbels whether they be round or octagonal hewn or sawn
log, or sawn timber blocks. Note: Pipe rot is quoted as a percentage of the diameter of the
member, while snipe depth is quoted as a percentage of the depth of the corbel (which is
essentially the diameter of the corbel minus the depth of the contact flat or benching on the
upper face of the corbel).

Condition State 1

The corbels are in good condition with no termite attack or decay though there may be minor
splits or checks having no effect on strength. The ends of the corbels show no pipe rot and
connections to the substructure and girders are tight. Depth of snipes may be up to 5% of the
depth of the corbel.

Condition State 2

The corbels may have minor termite attack, decay, splitting, checking or crushing but not of
sufficient magnitude to affect their strength. The corbels may have up to 20% pipe rot at the
ends. Connections to the substructure or girders may be slightly loose. Depth of snipes may
range from 6% to 10% of the depth of the corbel.

Condition State 3

Corbels may have moderate termite attack, rot or decay, splitting, checking or crushing which
may have a minor effect on strength. Corbels may have up to 35% pipe rot at the ends.
Connections to the substructure or girders may be quite loose and the corbels rock slightly
may be moderately corrosion.

Condition State 4

Heavy rot, termite attack, decay, splitting, or crushing have a marked effect on the strength
and serviceability of the corbel. Corbels may have up to 50% pipe rot at the ends.
Connections to the substructure or girders are very loose and the corbels rock noticeably
may be severely corroded.

Condition State 4 are critical and should be strengthened or replaced immediately.

SNIPE DEPTH (mm)
5
1
0
1
5
2
0
2
5
3
0
3
5
4
0
4
5
5
0
5
5
6
0
6
5
7
0
7
5
8
0
8
5
9
0
9
5
1
0
0
1
0
5
1
1
0
1
1
5
1
2
0
1
2
5
1
3
0
1
3
5
1
4
0
1
4
5
1
5
0
1
5
5
1
6
0
1
6
5
1
7
0
1
7
5
1
8
0
1
8
5
1
9
0
1
9
5
2
0
0
300 2 3 5 7 8 10 12 13 15 17 18 20 22 23 25 27 28 30 32 33 35 37 38 40 42 43 45 47 48 50 52 53 55 57 58 60 62 63 65 67
310 2 3 5 6 8 10 11 13 15 16 18 19 21 23 24 26 27 29 31 32 34 35 37 39 40 42 44 45 47 48 50 52 53 55 56 58 60 61 63 65
320 2 3 5 6 8 9 11 13 14 16 17 19 20 22 23 25 27 28 30 31 33 34 36 38 39 41 42 44 45 47 48 50 52 53 55 56 58 59 61 63
330 2 3 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 15 17 18 20 21 23 24 26 27 29 30 32 33 35 36 38 39 41 42 44 45 47 48 50 52 53 55 56 58 59 61
340 1 3 4 6 7 9 10 12 13 15 16 18 19 21 22 24 25 26 28 29 31 32 34 35 37 38 40 41 43 44 46 47 49 50 51 53 54 56 57 59
350 1 3 4 6 7 9 10 11 13 14 16 17 19 20 21 23 24 26 27 29 30 31 33 34 36 37 39 40 41 43 44 46 47 49 50 51 53 54 56 57
360 1 3 4 6 7 8 10 11 13 14 15 17 18 19 21 22 24 25 26 28 29 31 32 33 35 36 38 39 40 42 43 44 46 47 49 50 51 53 54 56
370 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 11 12 14 15 16 18 19 20 22 23 24 26 27 28 30 31 32 34 35 36 38 39 41 42 43 45 46 47 49 50 51 53 54
380 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 20 21 22 24 25 26 28 29 30 32 33 34 36 37 38 39 41 42 43 45 46 47 49 50 51 53
390 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 31 32 33 35 36 37 38 40 41 42 44 45 46 47 49 50 51
400 1 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 43 44 45 46 48 49 50
410 1 2 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 37 38 39 40 41 43 44 45 46 48 49
420 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 31 32 33 35 36 37 38 39 40 42 43 44 45 46 48
430 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 40 41 42 43 44 45 47
440 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45
450 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44
460 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
470 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 43
480 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 42
490 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
500 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
510 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
520 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 38
530 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
540 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
550 1 2 3 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 35 36
560 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
570 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 32 33 34 35
580 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 34
590 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 14 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 31 32 33 34
600 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 13 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 23 24 25 26 27 28 28 29 30 31 32 33 33
G
I
R
D
E
R

D
I
A
M
E
T
E
R

(
m
m
)
08/08/2006 Condition State Calculation_Snipes in Timber Girders.xls Page 1 of 1
BridgeInspectionManual
InterimAmendment2
BAMAdviceNoteNo46
Category:BridgeInspection-Other(LinktoRequest- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SincethereleaseoftheBridgeInspectionManual,usersofthedocumenthaveidentifiedareaswithin
themanualrequiringcorrections,improvements,orfurtherclarification.Untilsuchtimeasaformal
amendmenttotheManualisissued,theAdviceNotessystemshallbeusedtoissuetherelevant
informationtoManualusers.ManualholdersshouldincludeacopyofthisAdviceNoteinAppendixH
oftheircopyoftheBridgeInspectionManual
ThisAdviceNotecoversadditionalRatingadviceforTimberHeadstocksandPiles-pleasefind
attachedthecorrectedConditionStateDescriptionsfortherelevantcomponents,withtheadditional
portionsshowninred
56T.doc 54T.doc
BIM-IA2.1:SupplementaryRatingAdviceforTimberHeadstocks
Thefollowingrulesshallapplywhenratingatimberheadstock;
IfanypartoftheHeadstockhasaCS4defect,thentheentirememberis z
ratedasCS4(ie.aCS4defectatoneendofaheadstock=entireheadstock
ratedasCS4)
If3ormoreCS3defectsarefoundwithinthesameareaofamemberthen z
thearea(andthereforethemember)shallberatedasbeingCS4
Theinspectormaystilldeemanareawith2defectsofCS3tobeof z
sufficientlypoorconditiontoratethearea(andmember)asCS4-thisshall
belefttothediscretionoftheinspector
Deteriorationfactorsthatshallbeconsideredinadditiontorotwhen
determiningtheconditionstateofatimberheadstock,are;
termiteattack; z
crushingatsupports; z
moderatesplittingoversupportsorinends-theTBMMsaysifthesplitover z
abearingsupportishalfdepthofmemberitscapacityisreducedby50%;
saggingbeneathgirderswithminormomentcracks; z
looseboltedconnections-noneedtoreplace-simplytighten; z
corrosionofbolts; z
nobearingsupport(onpile)-hangingoffthebolts; z
oversizedboltholes; z
conditionofpileheads-littlesupporttoboltedconnections; z
headstockspliceinpoorcondition-pullingapart; z
upto10%lossofsection-causedbyweatheringornotchingorrotatpile z
interface;
preservativetreatmentineffective; z
headstockssaggingormovingunderloadatpilelocations. z
TimberHeadstockswithEndRot /Defects
ThedeterminationofConditionStatefortimberheadstockswithrotordefectsin
theendsoftheheadstockwilldependonthedimensionD,whichreferstothe
length of defect-free headstock (free from rot, splits and other defects)
measuredfromtheouterfaceoftheouterpile(referFigure1below);
Wheretheendoftheheadstockiscompletelyfreeofrotorotherdefects,it z
shallhavenobearingontheConditionStateofthemember;
Wheredefectsarepresent,buttheDisgreaterthan100mm,theheadstock z
end(andthustheentireheadstock)shallberatedasConditionState3;
Wheredefectsarepresent,andDislessthanorequalto100mm,the z
headstockshallberatedasConditionState4
AConditionState3defectmayberepairedbycuttingoffthedefectiveportionof
theheadstockandtreatingtheexposedendwithasuitablepreservativeand
coveringwithatincapandnailplate,aspertheRoutineMaintenancespecified
onPage2.111intheTimberBridgeMaintenanceManual.Pleasenotethatthis
treatmentshouldbeprogrammedinforallunprotectedheadstockends.
FIGURE1-Distance'D'
BIM-IA2.2:SupplementaryRatingAdviceforTimberPiles
Whentheamountofheadstockseatingonthepileislessthanthestandard
amount,thechanceofverticalsplittingoccurringbelowtheseatingareaand
subsequentfailureisincreased.Thefollowingcriteriashallbeusedto
determinetheConditionStateofthepilesbasedontheamountofheadstock
seating;
Wherethefollowingcriteriaaresatisfied,thewidthoftheheadstockseating z
willhavenobearingontheConditionStateratingforthepile;
o For17"diameterpiles,wherethewidthoftheheadstockseatingis70%
ofthewidthoftheheadstockorgreater;
o For16"diameterpiles,wherethewidthoftheheadstockseatingis60%
ofthewidthoftheheadstockorgreater.
Wherethewidthoftheheadstockseatingiswithinthefollowingbands,the z
pileseatingshallberatedasConditionState3;
o For17"diameterpiles,wherethewidthvariesfrom50%-69%;
o For16"diameterpiles,wherethewidthvariesfrom50%-59%.
Wherethewidthofseatingatthepileislessthat50%ofthewidthofthe z
headstockthisisdeemedasinsufficientheadstockseatingandthepile
seatingshallberatedasConditionState4.
In order to achieve additional support for CS3 and CS4 piles, the following
remedialactionsmaybeused;
Wheretheresidualpilethicknessisgreaterthan178mm(asshowninFigure z
10.1(a)onPage2-107oftheTimberBridgeMaintenanceManual),
additionalheadstockseatingmaybecutintothepile.Aminimumpilewidth
of178mmmustbemaintained.
Wherethisisunfeasible,supplementarysupportsmustbeaddedtothe z
headstockasperFigure11.1(f)onpage2-143oftheTimberBridge
MaintenanceManual.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditHistory
3. PeterGraham 15/08/200503:36:58PM
2. ShanePCrawford 15/08/200503:31:07PM

ComponentCodeDesignationforCulvertWingwalls
BAMAdviceNoteNo58
Category:BridgeInspection-StandardComponentIdentification (LinktoRequest- )
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TheConditionStateDescriptionforculverts(ItemNumbers81,82and83)statethatwingwallsare
normallytobecoveredunderItemNumber84,butthatinspectorsmaycoverlargewingwallsunder
ItemNumber51.However,nospecificcriteriaisgivenfordeterminingthecorrectitemnumberfora
particularstructure,leavingthedecisionuptothejudgementoftheinspector.
InresponsetoaqueryfromRoadtekpersonnel,andforthesakeofconsistency,thefollowingcriteria
isprovided;
Forculvertwingwallslessthanorequalto2metresinheight,ItemNumber84shouldbeusedto z
recordtheconditionoftheelement
Forculvertwingwallsgreaterthan2metresinheight,ItemNumber51shouldbeusedtorecord z
theconditionoftheelement.
This amendment will be included in the BIM when a formal review is carried out, however it is
recommended that owners of Bridge Inspection Manuals include copies of this advice note in their
manualsforfuturereference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EditHistory
1. PeterGraham 27/07/200602:13:10PM


BridgeInspectionManual (QLD)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

BridgeInspectionManual (QLD)

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Bridge Inspection

Potrebbero piacerti anche