Pl 08016

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

1/60

Bridge EvaluationQuality Assurancein Europe

S P O N S O R E D B Y:

M A R C H 2 0 0 8

I N C O O P E R A T I O N W I T H :

American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

2/60

NOTICE

The Federal Highway Administration provides high-

quality information to serve Government, industry,

and the public in a manner that promotes public

understanding. Standards and policies are used to en-sure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and

integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews

quality issues and adjusts its programs and process-

es to ensure continuous quality improvement.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

3/60

1. Report No.

FHWA-PL-08-016

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Bridge Evaluation Quality Assurance in Europe

5. Report Date

March 20086. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s)

Thomas D. Everett, Peter Weykamp,

Harry A. Capers, William R. Cox, Thomas S. Drda, Lawrence Hummel,Paul Jensen, David A. Juntunen, Tod Kimball, Glenn A. Washer

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

American Trade Initiatives

P.O. Box 8228

Alexandria, VA 22306-8228

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-99-C-005

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Ofce of International Programs

Ofce of Policy

Federal Highway Administration,U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Ofcials

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA COTR: Hana Maier, Ofce of International Programs16. Abstract

The National Bridge Inspection Standards require transportation agencies to use quality control and

quality assurance procedures to maintain accuracy and consistency in their bridge inspection programs.

The Federal Highway Administration, American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Ofcials, and National Cooperative Highway Research Program sponsored a scanning study to lookat European bridge inspection practices related to quality assurance.

The scan team found that European agencies use their bridge inspection programs to insure highway

user safety, meet durability and serviceability expectations, and enhance capital investment decisions.

They emphasize quality assurance through well-dened inspector qualications, periodic calibration

of inspectors, data collection, and the use of appropriate equipment to evaluate structures.

Team recommendations for U.S. implementation include developing a rational basis for bridge

inspection frequency, guidelines for developing quality assurance/quality control procedures,

illustrations and reference photos for manuals, and integrated inspection repair approaches.

17. Key Words

bridge inspection, inspector training,

nondestructive testing, quality assurance,

quality control

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public from the:

Ofce of International Programs,

FHWA-HPIP, Room 3325, U.S. Department of Transportation,

Washington, DC 20590

[email protected]

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

19. Security Classify. (of this report)

Unclassied

20. Security Classify. (of this page)

Unclassied

21. No. of Pages

56

22. Price

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

Technical Report Documentation Page

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

4/60

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

5/60

Acknowledgments

THE SCAN TE AM ME MB ER S wish to acknowledgeall of the international host transportation agencies andpivat ms fo ti siiat otibutios to tsuccess of this scan. We also thank them for theirgracious hospitality, their excellent presentations, andtheir sharing of their knowledge and experiences with

the team. We truly learned much from our interactionwith them all.

The team also thanks the Federal Highway AdministrationOf of Itatioa Poams ad t Amia

Association of State Highway and TransportationOfias fo ti adsip, visio, ad suppot oftis ffot ad Amia Tad Iitiativs, I. fomaking this effort happen.

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE iii

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

6/60

iv

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

7/60

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE v

P R E P A R E D B Y T H E I N T E R N A T I O N A L S C A N N I N G S T U D Y T E A M :

March 2008

Thomas D. Everett (cochair)FHWA

Peter Weykamp (cochair)

New York State DOT

Harry A. Capers (report facilitator) Arora and Associates

William R. Cox

Texas DOT

Thomas S. Drda

FHWA

Lawrence Hummel

Van Buren County, MI,

Road Commission

Paul JensenMontana DOT

David A. Juntunen

Michigan DOT

Tod Kimball

FHWA

Glenn A. Washer

University of Missouri–Columbia

for

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

American Association of State Highway

and Transportation Officials

National Cooperative Highway

Research Program

Bridge EvaluationQuality Assurancein Europe

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

8/60

The InTernATIOnAl TechnOlOgy Sai Poam, sposod b t Fda hiwa

Administration (FHWA), the American Association ofStat hiwa ad Taspotatio Ofias (AAShTO),and the National Cooperative Highway ResearchPoam (nchrP), vauats iovativ foi t-oois ad patis tat oud siiat btU.S. highway transportation systems. This approachallows for advanced technology to be adapted and putito pati mu mo fit witout spdiscarce research funds to re-create advances already

developed by other countries.

FHWA and AASHTO, with recommendations fromnchrP, joit dtmi pioit topis fo tams ofU.S. xpts to stud. Tams i t spi aas biinvestigated are formed and sent to countries wheresiiat advas ad iovatios av b madin technology, management practices, organizationalstutu, poam div, ad ai. Sa tamsusually include representatives from FHWA, Statedepartments of transportation, local governments,transportation trade and research groups, the privatesector, and academia.

After a scan is completed, team members evaluatedis ad dvop ompsiv pots, iudirecommendations for further research and pilot projectsto verify the value of adapting innovations for U.S. use.Scan reports, as well as the results of pilot programsand research, are circulated throughout the country toStat ad oa taspotatio ofias ad t pivatsector. Since 1990, about 70 international scans havebeen organized on topics such as pavements, bridgeconstruction and maintenance, contracting, intermodaltransport, organizational management, winter road

maintenance, safety, intelligent transportationsystems, planning, and policy.

T Itatioa Too Sai Poam assutd i siiat impovmts ad savis iroad program technologies and practices throughoutt Uitd Stats. I som ass, sa studis avfacilitated joint research and technology-sharingprojects with international counterparts, furtherconserving resources and advancing the state of theart. Scan studies have also exposed transportationprofessionals to remarkable advancements and inspired

implementation of hundreds of innovations. The result:large savings of research dollars and time, as well assiiat impovmts i t natio’s taspotatiosystem.

Scan reports can be obtained through FHWA free ofcharge by e-mailing [email protected]. Scan reportsare also available electronically and can be accessed ont FhWA’s Of of Itatioa Poams Wb sit atwww.international.fhwa.dot.gov.

vi

International TechnologyScanning Program

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

9/60

International Technology

Scanning Program:

Bringing Global Innovations

to U.S. Highways

SafetySafety Applications of Intelligent Transportation Systems

in Europe and Japan (2006)

Trafc Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: Safety,

Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Roadway Human Factors and Behavioral Safety in

Europe (2005)

Trafc Safety Information Systems in Europe and

Australia (2004)

Signalized Intersection Safety in Europe (2003)

Managing and Organizing Comprehensive Highway

Safety in Europe (2003)

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001)Commercial Vehicle Safety, Technology, and Practice

in Europe (2000)

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays

in European Work Zones (2000)

Innovative Trafc Control Technology and Practice in

Europe (1999)

Road Safety Audits—Final Report and Case Studies

(1997)

Speed Management and Enforcement Technology:

Europe and Australia (1996)

Safety Management Practices in Japan, Australia, andNew Zealand (1995)

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety in England, Germany,

and the Netherlands (1994)

Planning and Environment Active Travel Management: The Next Step in Congestion

Management (2007)

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Transportation Asset Management in Australia, Canada,

England, and New Zealand (2005)

Transportation Performance Measures in Australia,

Canada, Japan, and New Zealand (2004)

European Right-of-Way and Utilities Best Practices

(2002)

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads (2002)

Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Across European Highways

(2002)

Sustainable Transportation Practices in Europe (2001)

Recycled Materials in European Highway Environments

(1999)

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, and

Technology (1999)

National Travel Surveys (1994)

Policy and InformationEuropean Practices in Transportation Workforce

Development (2003)

Intelligent Transportation Systems and Winter

Operations in Japan (2003)Emerging Models for Delivering Transportation

Programs and Services (1999)

National Travel Surveys (1994)

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information From

Abroad (1994)

International Guide to Highway Transportation

Information (1994)

International Contract Administration Techniques for

Quality Enhancement (1994)

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy, and

Technology (1994)

OperationsCommercial Motor Vehicle Size and Weight Enforcement

in Europe (2007)

Active Travel Management: The Next Step in Congestion

Management (2007)

Managing Travel Demand: Applying European

Perspectives to U.S. Practice (2006)

Trafc Incident Response Practices in Europe (2006)

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE vii

International TechnologyScanning Reports

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

10/60

All publications are available on the Internet at

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov.

Underground Transportation Systems in Europe: Safety,

Operations, and Emergency Response (2006)

Superior Materials, Advanced Test Methods, and

Specications in Europe (2004)

Freight Transportation: The Latin American Market

(2003)

Meeting 21st Century Challenges of SystemPerformance Through Better Operations (2003)

Traveler Information Systems in Europe (2003)

Freight Transportation: The European Market (2002)

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001)

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays in

European Work Zones (2000)

Innovative Trafc Control Technology and Practice in

Europe (1999)

European Winter Service Technology (1998)

Trafc Management and Traveler Information Systems(1997)

European Trafc Monitoring (1997)

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996)

Winter Maintenance Technology and Practices—

Learning from Abroad (1995)

Advanced Transportation Technology (1994)

Snowbreak Forest Book—Highway Snowstorm

Countermeasure Manual (1990)

Infrastructure—General Audit Stewardship and Oversight of Large and

Innovatively Funded Projects in Europe (2006)

Construction Management Practices in Canada and

Europe (2005)

European Practices in Transportation Workforce

Development (2003)

Contract Administration: Technology and Practice in

Europe (2002)

European Road Lighting Technologies (2001)

Geometric Design Practices for European Roads (2001)

Geotechnical Engineering Practices in Canada and

Europe (1999)

Geotechnology—Soil Nailing (1993)

Infrastructure—PavementsWarm-Mix Asphalt: European Practice (2008)

Long-Life Concrete Pavements in Europe and

Canada (2007)

Quiet Pavement Systems in Europe (2005)

Pavement Preservation Technology in France,South Africa, and Australia (2003)

Recycled Materials in European Highway

Environments (1999)

South African Pavement and Other Highway

Technologies and Practices (1997)

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction (1996)

European Concrete Highways (1992)

European Asphalt Technology (1990)

Infrastructure—BridgesBridge Evaluation Quality Assurance in Europe (2008)

Prefabricated Bridge Elements and Systems in Japan

and Europe (2005)

Bridge Preservation and Maintenance in Europe and

South Africa (2005)

Performance of Concrete Segmental and Cable-Stayed

Bridges in Europe (2001)

Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies in Europe and

Japan (2001)

European Practices for Bridge Scour and Stream

Instability Countermeasures (1999) Advanced Composites in Bridges in Europe and

Japan (1997)

Asian Bridge Structures (1997)

Bridge Maintenance Coatings (1997)

Northumberland Strait Crossing Project (1996)

European Bridge Structures (1995)

viii

I N T E R N A T I O N A L T E C H N O L O G Y S C A N N I N G R E P O R T S

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

11/60

Executive Summary ......................................... 1Overview ........................................................................ 1Summa of Iitia Fidis ........................................... 2

Dtaid ad Iustatd Isptio rfsand Tools ...................................................................2Reports and Data Management ...............................2Bid Ispto Taii ad ctiatio ..............2Isptio Tps ad Fquis .......................... 2Use of Reference Bridges ......................................... 3Nondestructive Testing ..............................................3Cause of Damage Determination .............................. 3

Other .......................................................................... 3Recommendations ......................................................... 4Impmtatio Ativitis ............................................... 4

Chapter 1: Introduction ................................. 5Background .................................................................... 5Objectives ...................................................................... 5

Amplifying Questions .....................................................5Host Countries ............................................................... 5Team Members .............................................................. 6

Chapter 2: Findings on Bridge

Evaluation Quality Assurance ...................7Dtaid ad Iustatd IsptioReferences and Tools ....................................................7

Finland ....................................................................... 7Norway....................................................................... 8Germany .................................................................... 8

Reports and Data Management ..................................10Finland .....................................................................10Norway..................................................................... 11Germany .................................................................12

Bid Ispto Taii ad ctiatio .................14Finland .....................................................................15

Norway..................................................................... 16Sweden ....................................................................17France ......................................................................17Germany ................................................................ 18

Isptio Tps ad Fquis ..............................19Finland .....................................................................19Denmark ..................................................................20Norway..................................................................... 20Sweden ....................................................................21France .....................................................................21Germany ..................................................................21

Use of Reference Bridges ............................................22

Nondestructive Testing ................................................23Finland .....................................................................23Norway..................................................................... 23Germany ................................................................. 23

Cause of Damage Determination ................................24Other ............................................................................ 25Recommendations .......................................................25Pad Impmtatio Ativitis .............................. 26

Chapter 3: Recommendations and

Implementation Activities ...........................27Itodutio ..................................................................27K Itms fo Impmtatio ......................................27

Dvop a ratioa Basis fo Bid IsptioFrequency ................................................................27Develop Guidelines for Developing QA/QCPodus fo Stats ..............................................27Dvop Iustatios ad rf Potosfor Manuals ..............................................................28Dvop Itatd Isptio rpai

Approaches ............................................................. 28Transfer Technology Discoveries From theScanning Study .......................................................29Iitiat a Dmostatio Pojt o tUltrasonic Shear Wave Transducer ......................... 29

Appendix A: Amplifying Questions .......31

Appendix B: Team Members .....................33

Appendix C: Host Country Contacts .... 37

Appendix D: Glossary of Terms...............39

Appendix E: Abbreviated Index to the

Finnish Road Administration Bridge

Repair Directives (SILKO) .........................41

Figures

Figure 1. Sample pages from the Finnra Guidelines forBid Isptio tat iud diaams of ow toperform inspections and typical structural details. ....... 7

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE ix

Table of Contents

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

12/60

Figure 2. Sample pages from the Finnra BridgeIsptio Maua povidi spi odiguidelines. ...................................................................... 8

Figure 3. Fia’s Bid rpai Maua

(SIlKO guidis). ........................................................ 8

Figure 4. German federal guidance on describingcracks in superstructures. ...........................................10

Figure 5. Itio of gma isptio vishowing conferencing workspace. .............................. 11

Figure 6. Finnra guidelines for coding condition,damage type, and cause. ............................................11

Figure 7. Standardized report form used byDais m rambo. ................................................... 12

Figure 8. cauatio of coditio Idx. ...................12

Figure 9. Ssot of SIB-Bauwk ras2006 showing cataloged damage to bridgedeck joint. .....................................................................14

Figure 10. Ssot of SIB-Bauwk ras2006 showing inspector-generated rating page. ........16

Figure 11. IQOA adi sm fo bidcondition. .....................................................................21

Figure 12. Ultrasonic shear wave transducer. ............24

Figure 13. Pmat tav o gat lik Bidto provide inspection and maintenance access tounderside of superstructure.........................................25

Tables

Table 1. Scan itinerary. .................................................. 6

Table 2. cassiatio of aks i ot stutus

and recommended repair procedures, from the FinnraBid Isptio Maua. ............................................. 9

Table 3. Damage assessment—structural stability. .... 13

Table 4. Dama assssmt—taf saft..............13

Table 5. Damage assessment—durability. ..................14

Table 6. coditio Idx (1). ........................................15

Table 7. coditio Idx (2). ........................................16

Table 8. Number of reference bridges to be inspectedversus anticipated inspector assignments. .................23

x

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

13/60

AASHTO Amia Assoiatio of Stat hiwa ad Taspotatio Ofias

ADT ava dai taf BASt Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen

BaTMan Swdis road Admiistatio’s bid maamt sstm

BMS bridge management system

BRUTUS nowia Pubi roads Admiistatio’s bid maamt sstm

Danbro Dais road Ditoat’s bid maamt sstm

DOT department of transportation

DRD Danish Road Directorate

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

Finnra Finnish Road Administration

GIS geographic information system

IQOA Ima d a Quaité ds Ouvas d’At

LCPC laboatoi cta ds Pots t caussés

MR&R maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation

NBIS natioa Bid Isptio Stadads

NCHRP natioa coopativ hiwa rsa Poam NDE nondestructive evaluation

NDT nondestructive testing

QC/QA quality control/quality assurance

SETRA Svi d’etuds Tiqus ds routs t Autoouts

SRA Swedish Road Administration

TRB Transportation Research Board

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE xi

Abbreviations and Acronyms

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

14/60

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

15/60

Overview

One OF The PrIMAry gOAlS OF The U.S.transportation community is to improve safety on thenatio’s oadwas. I spos to tat oa, Fda,State, and local transportation agencies consider theisptio of t out’s a 600,000 bids vitaimpotat. Ts ais ivst siiat fuds ibridge inspection activities each year. There is highinterest in making sure that the quality of the bridge

inspection program is maintained at the highest leveland that funds are used as effectively as possible.

T natioa Bid Isptio Stadads (nBIS) wdeveloped to establish standards for a nationwidebridge inspection program. The intent of this program isto monitor and document the condition of bridges andenhance bridge safety. The January 2005 revision of thenBIS spia quis Stat ad Fda ais toassure that quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA)procedures are used to maintain a high degree ofaccuracy and consistency in the bridge inspectionpoam. T Fda ovmt ds quaitassurance as the use of sampling and other measuresto assure the adequacy of quality control procedures toverify or measure the quality level of the entire bridgeisptio ad oad ati poam. It ds quaitcontrol as procedures intended to maintain the qualityof a bridge inspection and load rating at or above aspid v. I additio, ma bid ows avelected to collect data beyond that required by thenBIS. Btt kowd of Qc/QA poams ad datatypes collected abroad should provide meaningfuladvice to the U.S. transportation community.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and mostbridge owners also have strategic goals on improvingthe overall condition of bridges and tactical programsaimed at extending service life. These goals are com-mo divd fom t itptatio of bid di- data idtid ad doumtd tou t bidisptio poam. I additio, FhWA uss t isp-tion data as a factor in allocating and distributinghiwa Bid Poam fuds. Impovi t ovaquality and determining that the right data are reportedthrough the inspection program will help maintain a highlevel of safety for the traveling public, ensure effective

use of limited funds with an equitable distribution, andassist bridge owners in achieving their safety andmobility goals.

A 10-member team was formed to study Europeanbid isptio patis, spia tos atd toquality assurance. This team consisted of three repre-sentatives from FHWA, four representatives from Statedepartments of transportation, a representative from theNational Association of County Engineers, a representa-

tive from academia, and a structural engineering designconsultant who also served as the report facilitator.The scan was sponsored by FHWA, the American

Association of State Highway and TransportationOfias (AAShTO), ad t natioa coopativhiwa rsa Poam (nchrP).

The team conducted a series of meetings and site visitswith representatives of government agencies and privatesector organizations abroad between June 1 and 17,2007. The team visited Denmark, Finland, France, andGermany and also met with representatives from Norwayand Sweden. The countries were selected through a deskscan based on their advanced activities in bridge evalua-tion, bridge management, and quality assurance.

The results of this scanning study are intended to assistbid ows ad FhWA i i ad otiuousimproving actions taken to address the provisions of the2005 nBIS uatio. Atou ma Qc/QA poamsxist i t Uitd Stats, t was siiat itstin exploring the most effective bridge inspection systemsin other countries. FHWA is also obligated to satisfy theguidelines provided through the Data Quality Act passedby the U.S. Congress in 2001. The data collected

through the U.S. bridge inspection program not onlyenhance bridge safety for the traveling public, but alsohelp form the basis for programming bridge mainte-nance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement activities.

Scan team topics of interest included the following:Organizational structure and backgroundIsptio dataPso quaiatiosPoss otoEquipmentDocumentation

v

v

v

v

v

v

BRIDGE EVALUATION QUALITY ASSURANCE IN EUROPE 1

Executive Summary

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

16/60

Summary of Initial Findings

Generally speaking, the team found that the Europeanhost agencies put a tremendous value on their bridgeinspection programs not only to ensure highway usersafety, but also to ensure that durability and service-ability expectations are met and to enhance capital

investment decisions on the existing bridge inventory.The agencies place major emphasis on providing forquait assua tou w-dd isptoquaiatios, piodi aibatio of isptos, datacollection processes, and the use of appropriateequipment to evaluate their structures. Most of theagencies had major programs aimed at inspectionuniformity, developed a multitiered inspection program,and had procedures for performing damage assess-ment and programming maintenance and repairthrough their inspection process.

T sa tam idtid ma bid isptio

practices and technologies related to the topics ofinterest. The order in which they are presented in thispot is fo ait ad dos ot t t pioitrecommended by the team.

Detailed and Illustrated Inspection

References and Tools

Many detailed, heavily illustrated manuals and refer-ences were available as tools for bridge inspectors.These included inspection manuals, maintenanceguides, repair manuals, and coding and recording dataguides. The primary approach in the United States andthe European countries the team visited is visuallybased inspection. The Europeans use visual aids to agreater extent in recording and coding of data, damageassessment, and maintenance and repair. Numerousmanuals are available for inspection and maintenance.To focus inspectors and provide more uniform ratings,types of damage with performance indices werequatid wit aompai potoaps. Tsmanuals contain many photos and drawings showingdamage and corresponding rating levels. Severalcountries have implemented standards to quantifyconcrete cracking in inspection reports. Europeaninspectors were observed to have photographs from

past inspections on site to use in current inspections.Isptio vis i gma w fu quippd witd quipmt, of spa, ad bid ods tosupport activities at the inspection site.

Reports and Data Management

All countries visited practiced standardization ofinspection reports, forms, terms, and ratings. Notewor-thy practices included generating customized bridgeinspection forms by bridge management systems,standardizing terms and rating criteria for inspectors,embedding digital photographs in inspection reports,

and requiring designers to identify critical areas of astutu to b isptd. I t d, t isptosinclude a level of urgency for any required repair intheir assessment of damage found. This level ofurgency is used to determine annual allocationsof funds, program maintenance repairs, and track

repair backlogs.

I gma, isptos us a omput poam iwhich they select a structural condition from a pull-down menu and allow the program to generate a rating.I Dmak, spaat asst maamt poiis,systems, and practices have been established for majorstructures to allow better decisionmaking for capitalinvestments.

Bridge Inspector Training and Certifcation

A variety of approaches are taken by European coun-tries to train and certify inspectors. All countries have

technical educational requirements for inspectors, andmost require those who lead inspectors to have anengineering degree. Many have specialized trainingrequirements for inspectors to ensure the quality of theinspection and the data provided. Specialized trainingat the program manager level and performance-basedtsti quimts w bivd to b siiat.

Maintaining a core of in-house staff with expertise inbridge inspection is a high priority for Europeanowners. Experienced staff provides a cadre of personneto at as tais ad tis of w staff ad vdosprovide quality assurance reviews of work performed onbehalf of the agency, and develop reference materialsin support of agency programs.

Inspection Types and Frequencies

A of t outis visitd ad a ditios ofisptio tps ad sva w-dd sopsfor their inspections.

A tpia di was tat euopa ais avdeveloped a technical decisionmaking process fordetermining inspection frequency. Usually included inthis process is the competency of the inspection crew.

host atios visitd bivd tat ispto quaia-tios ad xpi quimts povidd odin allowing inspectors to determine the duration be-tween cycles of inspections, which are typically up to5 or 6 years but up to 9 years in France. Denmark andFrance use risk acceptance criteria to help determineinspection type and frequency.

I stabisi ti poams, t ost atios osinspection intervals based on the amount of detail intheir inspections, interim maintenance inspections, andquaiatios of ti isptos. howv, t ost

2

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

17/60

nations allow the inspection frequency of any individualbridge to be shorter (or perhaps longer in the case ofFrance) than the set frequency or maximum frequencyto allow for better allocation of human and capitalresources. They base the decision on a number offactors typically related to inventory data, such

as condition, size, structure type, age, averagedai taf, ad ompxit.

Use of Reference Bridges

Finland had a unique approach to insuring quality.The Finnish Road Administration uses 106 bridgesand 26 steel culverts as a control sample or set ofreference bridges. Baseline data are gathered fromthese bridges by experienced in-house bridgeinspection staff to provide consistency.

Data atd a usd to fu a vait of ds,including the following:

Povisio of data o bid sviabiit addurability over timeTrend analysis of data gathered on similar bridgesand updating of deterioration models in the bridgemanagement systemQuality control of inspection data from nonreferencebridges by providing baseline data for comparisonTraining and refresher training of inspectors andevaluation of inspector condition ratings againstcondition ratings provided by in-house staffand the mean of all inspectors

Nondestructive Testing

During inspections, host nation bridge inspectors usenondestructive testing (NDT) to assist in their conditioncoding. Several agencies had detailed referencesoutlining the appropriate use of NDT devices andmtods, iudi tms ad ditios, dfts fowhich they are applicable and, in Germany, independentevaluations of NDT products by users. Also, the teamobserved several unique applications of NDT technol-o, su as t gma us of a spia oudultrasonic shear wave transducer to identify defects.

Several agencies also use bridges to be demolished

to evaluate the effectiveness of NDT methods whenpossible.

Cause of Damage Determination

Most of the agencies visited include a cause-of-damageinvestigation by the inspector as part of their bridgeisptio podu. Isptos a taid to assssdamage to a structural element based on structuralstability, user safety, and effect on the damaged compo-t’s duabiit ad to ommd otiv atio toaddss t dama. Usi t ispto’s kowdof structures, coupled with a determination of urgency,

v

v

v

v

an agency can calculate the immediate and short-termprogramming levels required. All agencies hadprocedures that would initiate actions based on theseverity of the condition found, with or without a higherv of viw ad appova. I a ass i wi itiastructural conditions are found, immediate needs are

addressed by contact with the individual responsible forthe facility, thus ensuring public safety and protectionof the facility from additional damage. Several otherowners have procedures to initiate maintenanceactivities at the direction of the inspector.

Maintenance activities were generally tracked by allagencies in their bridge records. This provided bettermanagement data on actual bridge conditions andcosts associated with a structure.

I euop, t mpasis is at o dtmii tcause of a particular defect in the bridge. This is in

contrast to the U.S. approach of characterizing theelement or component, which essentially characterizesthe effect of the defect. As a result, integration ofmitigation strategies is greater (i.e., repair andabiitatio ativitis spid b t ispto).

Other

A additioa itm of itst idtid fo osidatioin the United States was a DVD developed for use ingma, “Isptio Aodi to gma IdustiaStadad (DIn) no. 1076.” T DVD is itdd foviewing by the general public and outlines the reasonsfor bridge and structure inspection. The DVD not onlyprovides an informative overview of the inspectionprocess, it also appears to be a useful mechanism formaintaining support from its audience for bridgeinspection activities.

The general practice of host agencies was not to usededicated inspectors on bridges, but to rotate inspec-tors on subsequent inspections. This practice providesa fs assssmt of t bid’s oditio, wi iturn should provide for a more reliable assessment or atast omatio of t bid’s tu oditio.

During bridge inspection site visits, the team observedbridge details incorporated in the design process tofaiitat bid isptios. At t gat lik Bid iDenmark, elevators allowed easy access to the towers.Isptos usd a mooai isid t tub id tomove through the structure and transport inspectionequipment. A permanent traveler was installed forispti t stutu’s xtio. A masui sstmintegral with the bearing was used to determine bearingdisplacement. Also, the pier cap at the expansion endwas designed to allow access to inspect the post-tsioi ao bok ad modua joit. I gma,


8/13/2019 Pl 08016

18/60

concrete steps were built along the wing wall to allowfor safe traverse of the side slope. These details wouldalso be helpful in performing bridge maintenanceactivities.

Recommendations

Basd o t abov dis, t pimiarecommendations of the team are as follows:1. Develop a nationally accepted basis for determining

bridge inspection frequencies that combines differentlevels of inspection intensity based on factors suchas safety, condition, age of the structure, andengineering judgment with clear standards forispto duatio, taii, ad quaiatio.

2. Draft national guidelines for developing QC/QAprocedures for use by State in-house staff, as wellas similar guidelines to be made a part of bridge

inspection services contracts.

3. Develop detailed coding guidance, complete withillustrations and reference photos.

4. Develop integrated inspection and repair approaches

for use by bridge inspectors. 5. Consider the following discoveries from the scanning

study as potential candidates for transfer technology:Crack mapping keys and 2-D scaled representationsNondestructive evaluation toolbox data sheets fromt euopa Uio’s Sustaiab Bid pojtExpanded inventory of access equipment forbridge inspection

Available data from the Sustainable Bridge project

6. Iitiat a dmostatio pojt o t utasoishear wave transducer for use in identifying defectsin concrete.

Implementation Activities

The scan team has developed a detailed implementa-tion plan for the recommended initiatives and prac-

tis. Iudd i t pa a a umb of tiapresentations and papers at national meetings andconferences sponsored by FHWA, AASHTO, and otherorganizations to disseminate information from thescan. The plan also includes coordination with

AASHTO and FHWA to advance these initiatives andpractices, including assisting with development ofnew FHWA and AASHTO standards and guidelinesgoverning quality in bridge inspection. These andother planned activities are discussed in Chapter 3.

v

v

v

v

4

E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

19/60

Background

One OF The PrIMAry gOAlS OF The U.S.transportation community is to improve safety on thenatio’s oadwas. I spos to tat oa, Fda,State, and local transportation agencies consider theisptio of t out’s a 600,000 bids vitaimpotat. Ts ais ivst siiat fuds ibridge inspection activities each year. There is highinterest in making sure that the quality of the bridgeinspection program is maintained at the highest leveland that funds are used as effectively as possible.

T natioa Bid Isptio Stadads (nBIS) wdeveloped to establish standards for a nationwidebridge inspection program. The intent of this program isto monitor and document the condition of bridges andenhance bridge safety. The January 2005 revision to thenBIS spia quis Stat ad Fda ais toassure that quality control/quality assurance (QC/QA)procedures are used to maintain a high degree ofaccuracy and consistency in the bridge inspectionpoam. T Fda ovmt ds quaitassurance as the use of sampling and other measuresto assure the adequacy of quality control procedures toverify or measure the quality level of the entire bridgeisptio ad oad-ati poam. It ds quaitcontrol as procedures intended to maintain the qualityof a bridge inspection and load rating at or above aspid v. I additio, ma bid ows avelected to collect data beyond that required by thenBIS. Btt kowd of Qc/QA poams ad datatypes collected abroad should provide meaningfuladvice to the U.S. transportation community.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and bridgeowners also have strategic goals on improving the

overall condition of bridges and tactical programs aimedat extending service life. These goals are commonlydivd fom t itptatio of bid data idtidand documented through the bridge inspection pro-gram. FHWA also uses the inspection data as a factorfo aoati ad distibuti hiwa Bid Poamfuds. Impovi t ova quait ad dtmii tatthe right data are reported through the inspectionprogram will help maintain a high level of safety for thetraveling public, ensure effective use of limited fundswith an equitable distribution, and assist bridge ownersin achieving their safety and mobility goals.

Objectives

The results of this scan are intended to assist bridgeows ad FhWA i i ad otiuous impov-ing actions taken to address the provisions of the 2005nBIS uatio. Atou ma Qc/QA poams xisti t Uitd Stats, t was siiat itst iexploring the most effective bridge inspection systemsin other countries. FHWA is also obligated to satisfythe guidelines of the Data Quality Act, passed by theU.S. Congress in 2001. The data collected through theU.S. bridge inspection program must not only enhance

bridge safety for the traveling public, but also help formthe basis for programming bridge maintenance, repair,rehabilitation, and replacement activities.

The scanning study was cosponsored by the American Association of State Highway and TransportationOfias (AAShTO), FhWA ad, t natioacoopativ hiwa rsa Poam (nchrP).

Scan team topics of interest included the following:Organizational structure and backgroundIsptio dataPso quaiatiosPoss otoEquipmentDocumentation

Amplifying Questions Amplifying questions were developed to help the foreignexperts more fully understand the topics of interest tothe scan team members. These questions, in Appendix

A, were provided to the host countries before the scan.The contacts in each country are listed in Appendix C,and the scan itinerary is in table 1.

Host CountriesThe team conducted a series of meetings and site visitswith representatives of government agencies andprivate sector organizations abroad between June 1 and17, 2007. The panel visited Denmark, Finland, France,and Germany and met with representatives fromNorway and Sweden while in Denmark. These sixcountries were selected through a desk scan based ontheir advanced activities in bridge evaluation, bridgemanagement, and quality assurance.

v

v

v

v

v

v


CHAPTER 1:

Introduction

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

20/60

Team Members A 10-member team was formed to study Europeanbid isptio patis, spia tatiquality assurance. This team consisted of threerepresentatives from FHWA, four representatives from

State departments of transportation (DOTs), onerepresentative from the National Association of CountyEngineers, one representative from academia, and onestructural engineering design consultant who alsoserved as the report facilitator.

DATE LOCATION ACTIVITIES

Monday,June 4, 2007

Helsinki,Finland

Mti i ofs of Fiis road Admiistatio (Fia). Pstatios obridge MR&R in Finland, BMS in Finland (tools: bridge database, inspectiondata, BMS project and network level), and general information on inspections(organizational structure and background, inspection data).

Tuesday,June 5, 2007

Helsinki,Finland

Mti i ofs of Fia. Pstatios o isptio quait (poss oto,pso quaiatios), isptio mtods ad quipmt, f bids,special inspections, and documentation.

Wednesday,June 6, 2007 Helsinki,Finland Mti i ofs of Fia. Pstatios o bid ii sa addevelopment, cooperative programs with northern countries, and the NationalStutua Moitoi Pojt.

Thursday,June 7, 2007

Copenhagen,Denmark

Mti ostd b Dais road Ditoat at eitvds Pakus. Pstatiosby Norway, Denmark, and Sweden on amplifying questions.

Friday,June 8, 2007

Virum,Denmark

Mti i ofs of rambo cosuti eis. Pstatios o tcompany, internal quality assurance procedures, principal inspection, specialinspection (including nondestructive testing), bridge deterioration, evaluatinginspection results, and improving evaluation of bridges, and demonstrationof Ramboll`s inspection van, equipment, and procedures. Field visit to theStobat gat Bt Fixd lik fo pstatios o t opatio of

the Great Belt Bridge and the East Bridge anchor block and tower.

Monday,June 11, 2007

Bagneux,France

Mti i ofs of ct fo Tia Studis of hiwas ad Motowas(SeTrA). Pstatios o mtodoo fo maamt of atioa bids(IQOA, Sustaiab Bid pojt), st bids: us of isptio data foexisting bridges, design versus inspection of steel bridges: fatigue assessmentpiosop, bitt fatu, dtaii, ad taii ad quaiatio of isptos.

Tuesday,June 12, 2007

Pais, Fa Mti i ofs of cta laboato fo Bids ad hiwas (lcPc).Pstatios o pstssd ot bids (isptio of xta pstss-ing), cable-stayed and suspension bridges, assessment of cable by acousticalmtod ad b vibati mtods, ad lreP pati.

Thursday,June, 14 2007

Bergisch-Gladbach,Germany

Fid visit ad obsvatio of two ooi bid isptios. Mti i ofsof gma Fda hiwa rsa Istitut (BASt). Pstatios o oai-zatioa stutu of fda iwas, bakoud ad pso quaiatios,and training programs.

Friday,June, 15 2007

Bergisch-Gladbach,Germany

Mti i ofs of BASt. Pstatios o bid isptio (us,regulations, and documentation inspection of engineering structure equipment)and nondestructive training bridge management system (post-processing ofthe excursion, results of the inspection).

Table 1. Scan itinerary.

6

C H A P T E R 1 : I N T R O D U C T I O N

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

21/60

The TeAM FOUnD ThAT The eUrOPeAn hOSTagencies visited valued their bridge inspection pro-grams not only to ensure highway user safety, but alsoto ensure that durability and serviceability expectationswere met and to enhance capital investment decisionson the existing bridge inventory. The agencies placedmajor emphasis on providing quality assurancetou w-dd ispto quaiatios, piodicalibration of inspectors, data collection processes,viatio of data, ad us of appopiat quipmtto evaluate their structures. Nearly all of the agencies

the scan team visited had major programs aimed atinspection uniformity and had developed a multitieredinspection program with procedures for performingdamage assessment and programming maintenanceand repair through the inspection process.

T sa tam idtid ma bid isptiopractices and technologies related to the previouslystated topics of interest. The items that the teambelieves could enhance bridge inspection practices inthe United States are discussed in this chapter. Theorder in which they are presented is for clarity and doesot t t pioit ommdd b t tam.

Detailed and Illustrated

Inspection References and ToolsI t outis t sa tam visitd, ma dtaid,heavily illustrated manuals and references wereavailable as tools for bridgeinspectors, including inspec-tion manuals, maintenanceguides, repair manuals, andcoding and recording dataguides. The primary approach

in the United States and theEuropean countries the teamvisited is visually basedinspection. The host nationsuse visual aids to a greaterextent in recording andcoding of data, damageassessment, and mainte-nance and repair. Numerousmanuals are available forinspection and maintenance.To focus inspectors and

provide more uniform ratings, the types of damage withpfoma idis w quatid wit aompa-ing photographs. These manuals contain many photosand drawings showing damage and correspondingrating levels.

Finland

The Finish Road Administration (Finnra) providesuida i v doumts:

Guidelines and Policy for Bridge Maintenance, Repair,

& Rehabilitation Operation

Guidelines for Bridge Inspection (u 1)Bridge Inspection Manual (u 2, s xt pa)Bridge Repair Manual (SIlKO guidis)(u 3, s xt pa)Bridge Register Inventory and User Guidelines

Two of these, the Bridge Inspection Manual andGuidelines for Bridge Inspection, uid dinspection activities for bridge inspections. Theguidelines set out the procedures for gathering andchecking the structural and damage data at thebridge site, as well as the methods for processingand using the accumulated data. The Finnra bridgeinspection system is presented in the Guidelines forBridge Inspection. Figure 1 illustrates the cover andtwo internal pages from this document. The BridgeInspection Manual provides guidance for classifyingand entering data in the bridge register, a databasecontaining structural and condition data on Finnish

v

v

v

v

v


CHAPTER 2:

Findings on Bridge Evaluation

Quality Assurance

Figure 1. Sample pages from the Finnra Guidelines for Bridge Inspection that

include diagrams of how to perform inspections and typical structural details.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

22/60

bridges. Figure 2 shows the cover and two internal

pages from this document.

A itsti di was tat sva outis adimplemented standards to quantify concrete crackingin inspection reports. For instance, table 2 illustratesa scheme for classifying concrete cracking from theFinnra Bridge Inspection Manual.

The Finnish Road Administration has also issuedstandardized bridge repair directives in its Bridge RepairManual (SIlKO guidis) to stadadiz ad uidpai wok o bids idtid dui t isptioprocess. These manuals and several data sheets are

sow i u 3. T statdgoal of these manuals is toprovide standardized repairscenarios for various typesof damage to a bridge, toimprove durability of a

bridge, and to improvebridge construction andmaintenance. Directives areissued for a wide range ofitems. An abbreviated tableof contents listing thedirectives is in Appendix E.

Each directive contains adetailed discussion on thestructural element, applica-tions and limitations, war-

rants for repair, equipment needed to make the repair,

approved materials for use in making the repair, and job site needs and safety. The directives, issued asindividual brochures for each repair directive, aremaintained in a four-volume set. These directives arelinked to the Finnish bridge management system(BMS) and, when repairs are made using the direc-tives, a record of the repairs is entered in the bridgeregister. Finnra monitors the repair work and uses theinformation it obtains to improve guidance. Training onthese manuals is viewed as essential. The trainingprovides guidance to users on recommending repairmethods and approving materials.

Norway

T nowia Pubi roads Admiistatio Handbookfor Bridge Inspection provides a thorough explanationof condition ratings. The manual contains many photosshowing damage and corresponding rating with bothdegree and consequence of damage. The handbook,prepared to cover the requirements of the staff involvedin bridge inspections, provides thorough and detailedguidance on damage evaluation. Emphasis hasbeen placed on explaining different types of damageto different types of structures using photos andexplanatory damage evaluation guidance. The photos

have been used extensively to facilitate a betterunderstanding of the damage type.

Germany

The Federal Department of Transportation, Construc-tio, ad housi’s Of of road costutio adTaf (gma Fda Miist of Taf, Buidi,and Urban Affairs) has issued two documents, DIN1076: Engineering Structures in Connection With

Roads—Inspection and Test and Directive for UniformDetermination Assessment, Recording, and Analysis

of the Results of the Inspection of the Structures in

8

C H A P T E R 2 : F I N D I N G S O N B R I D G E E V A L U A T I O N Q U A L I T Y A S S U R A N C E

Figure 2. Sample pages from the Finnra Bridge Inspection Manual

providing specic coding guidelines.

Figure 3. Finnra’s Bridge Repair Manual

(SILKO Guidelines).

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

23/60

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

24/60

references, and a complete set of bridge records forthe bridges being inspected. The interior of onesu vi is sow i u 5. O xampobserved was a manual from a bearing manufacturertat povidd spi isptio uida fo tispto i t d. A ok is povidd fo toos ad

diagnostic and NDT devices necessary to perform aninspection to accepted standards. Storage space forpersonal safety equipment and boots is also provided.These inspection vehicles, along with other necessaryaccess and safety vehicles, enable bridge inspectorsto work in a variety of inspection scenarios and inremote areas for a prolonged period without

dependence on other assets, thereby promotingfit d ativitis.

Reports and Data Management

All countries visited practice standardization of

inspection reports, forms, terms, and ratings.Noteworthy practices included generating customizedbridge inspection forms by bridge managementsystems, standardizing terms and rating criteria forinspectors, embedding digital photographs in inspec-tion reports, and requiring designers to identify criticalaas of a stutu to b isptd. T ispto’s

recommendations are integrated intomaintenance activities and are usedto initiate agency actions to correctdiis idtid basd orecommended action, timing, andcost. The inspector, through various

agency-established protocols,addresses critical needs.

Finland

The coding of the type of damage,cause of damage, and conditionati is stadadizd i Fiad’sisptio uidis (u 6).

Finish bridge inspectors include thefollowing minimum information intheir written report:

Isptio tp, dat, ispto,ad ispto’s oaizatioOverall bridge conditionCondition of the main structuralpartsNext inspection: type and yearFree commentsIsptio quipmtBridge repair recommendationsPotosData from physical testing

Damage data are recorded by the

inspector and include the followinginformation:loitudia ad tasvslocation in the bridgeIdtiatio of stutuacomponent and materialType of damageCause of damageClass of damageExtent of damageEffect of damage on the bearingcapacity of the bridge

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

10


Transverse crack

in the cap

Longitudinal crack

in the cap

Transverse crack in ledge

Longitudinal crack

Transverse crack

Transverse crack

Transverse

crackLongitudinalcrack

Diagonal crack

Longitudinalcrack

Longitudinal

crack

Diagonal

crack

Diagonal

crackTransverse crack

Longitudinal cracks = Cracks parallel to the structure’s axis

Transverse cracks = Cracks perpendicular to the structure’s axis

Transverse crack in cross beam

Transversecrack

Longitudinal crack

in bottom slab

Diagonal

crack

Longitudinalcrack

Diagonalcrack in

cross beam

Transverse crack in bottom slab

Longitudinal crack in cross beam

Figure 4. German federal guidance on describing

cracks in superstructures.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

25/60

Basd o t ispto’s d obsvatios, pairecommendations are included as part of the inspectionreport. Recommendations include the following:

Repair urgency classRecommended repair measure, cost, and extent

T ispto’s ommdatios a usd to iitiata atios to ot diis idtid

v

v

based on recommended action, timing, and cost.The inspector, through immediate contact with Finnra,addresses critical needs.

Norway

I t nowia Pubi roads Admiistatio’s bidmanagement system, BRUTUS, the inspector can


Figure 5. Interior of German inspection vehicle showing conferencing workspace.

Structural Part

Extent

Repair

measure

Material

Damage

location

Cost

Urgencyclass

Extent of the

damage

Cost of thedamage

Damageclass2

10

9

8

3

1

9

Type of the

damage4

7

65

Figure 6. Finnra guidelines for coding condition, damage type, and cause.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

26/60

generate tailor-made inspection forms for every bridge.BRUTUS also provides previous inspection results toassist the inspector in reporting changes in structuralconditions since the last report. Digital photographsare used extensively in Norwegian inspection reports.Sketches are more rarely used and, if used, they are

scanned and included as a digital image.

Pap opis of pots fom spia isptios ad i a taditioa i sstm fo bids. Datafrom routine inspections are maintained electronicallyin BRUTUS. Reports are generated and printedfrom the system as needed. Repair and maintenance

activities may be initiated by work orders preparedusing BRUTUS as a result of inspection dataprovided. When the repair or maintenance iscompleted, it is possible to record the date, costs,name of contractor, and a brief description of themaintenance activity or to simply record the

activity as accomplished.

I t d, t isptos od a v of ufor any required repair in their assessment of damagefound. This level of urgency is used to determine annualfund allocations, program maintenance repairs, andtrack repair backlogs.

I Dmak, t xisti bid maamt sstmmainly targets the typical highway bridge or overpassstructure. The management system has the ability toad data fo ma stutus. It iuds data otypical components in a simply organized database.

Separate asset management policies, systems,ad patis av b idtid as ssafor managing major structures to allow betterdecisionmaking for capital investments.

Germany

I gma, a omput poam, SIB-BauwkRelease 2006, is in use. The program allows inspectorsto select a structural condition from a pull-down menuthat allows the program to generate a rating. Theinspector is provided detailed guidance on assessingstutua stabiit (tab 3), taf saft (tab 4),and durability (table 5, see page 14). Based on theseratings, the inspection program calculates a conditionindex for the structural element (tables 6 and 7,see pages 15 and 16), automating the assessmentprovided in the report.

Damage assessment is aided byuse of a detailed catalog of damageconditions contained in the soft-ware and available by keywords.

A screen from the software showingcataloged damage to a bridge deck

joit is sow i u 9 (s pa

14). An inspector has the ability toenter a rating not in the catalog,but a requirement is built into thesoftwa quii justiatio fonot using a standard. A screen fromthe software showing an inspector-generated rating page is showni u 10 (s pa 16). T anow about 1,200 standards, andthe number in the catalog wasexpected to grow to about 1,800 bythe end of 2007. A permanent

12


Figure 7. Standardized report form used

by Danish rm Ramboll.

Figure 8. Calculation of Condition Index.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

27/60


Table 3. Damage assessment—structural stability.

Damage Assessment “Structural Stability”

Assessment Description

0 The defect/damage has no effect on the structural stability of the structural element/structure.

1 The defect/damage negatively affects the structural stability of the structural element;however, it has no effect on the structural stability of the structure.

With respect to the as-planned utilization, individually occurring, small deviations in the condi-tio of t stutua mt, t quait of t ostutio matia, o t mt’s dimsiosare still clearly within the scope of the admissible tolerances.

Repairs to be carried out within the scope of regular maintenance.

2 The defect/damage negatively affects the structural stability of the structural element; however, it has little effect on the structural stability of the structure.

The deviations in the condition of the structural element, the quality of the construction material,or the dimensions or the as-planned stresses resulting from the utilization of the structure arestill within the scope of the permissible tolerances. I idividua ass, t admissib

tolerances of the structural element may be exceeded.Repairs must be undertaken within the medium term.

3 The defect/damage does affect the structural stability of the structural element negatively;the deviations with respect to the condition of the structural element, the quality of theconstruction material, or the dimensions or the as-planned stresses resulting from the utilizationof the structure exceed the permissible tolerances.

The required restrictions on the use are not in place or are ineffective.

The damage must be repaired at short notice. Restrictions regarding utilization must be put

in place immediately.

4 The structural stability of the structural element and the structure no longer exists.

Immediate measures must be taken during the inspection of the structure. Restrictionsregarding the utilization must be put into place immediately. The repair or renovation must

be initiated.

Table 4. Damage assessment—trafc safety.

Damage Assessment “Traffic Safety”


0 The defect/damage has no effect on traffic safety.

1 The defect/damage affects traffic safety only slightly; traffic safety is given.


2 The defect/damage affects traffic safety only slightly; traffic safety, however, is still given.

Repairs must be carried out or warning signs must be put up.

3 The defect/damage affects traffic safety.

Repairs must be carried out or warning signs must be put up at short notice.

4 Due to the defect/damage, traffic safety is no longer given.

Immediate measures must be taken during the inspection of the structure. Restrictions

regarding the utilization must be put into place immediately. The repair or renovation must

be initiated.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

28/60

14


Table 5. Damage assessment—durability.

Damage Assessment “Durability”


0 The defect/damage has no effect on the durability of the structural element/structure.

1 The defect/damage negatively affects the durability of the structural element; however, it hasno long-term effect on the durability of the structure. An expansion of the damages orconsequential damages to other structural elements is not expected.


2 The defect/damage negatively affects the durability of the structural element and can, inthe long term, also negatively affect the durability of the structure. An expansion of the

damages or consequential damages to other structural elements cannot be excluded.

Repairs to be undertaken within the medium term.

3 The defect/damage negatively affects the durability of the structural element and affects, inthe medium term, the durability of the structure in a negative manner. An expansion of thedamages or consequential damages to other structural elements can be expected.

Repairs must be undertaken at short notice.

4 Due to the defect/damage, the durability of the structural element and of the structure is nolonger given.

The expansion of the damages or consequential damages to other structural elements requires immediate repairs, restrictions on utilization, or a renovation of the structure.

committee appointed to oversee this catalog reviewsthe ratings periodically to update it as required.

Another item of interest in European agencies ist pati of avi sio of staff viwa sampling of reports. Several agencies haveposss fo sio i-ous isptos’ viw

ad d k of pots submittd b juioinspectors and vendors.

The general practice of European agencies was not touse dedicated inspectors on bridges, but to rotateinspectors on subsequent inspections. This practicepovids a fs assssmt of t bid’s oditio.

Bridge Inspector

Training and

Certifcation

European countries use a varietyof approaches to train and certifyinspectors. All countries havetechnical education requirementsfor inspectors, and most require

those who lead inspectors to havean engineering degree. Many havespecialized training requirementsfor inspectors to ensure the qualityof the inspection and the dataprovided. Specialized training atthe program manager level andperformance-based testing require-mts w bivd to b siiat. Maintaining a core of in-house staffwith expertise in bridge inspection is

Figure 9. Screenshot of SIB-Bauwerke Release 2006 showing

cataloged damage to bridge deck joint.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

29/60

a high priority for European owners. Experienced staffprovides a cadre of personnel to act as trainers andtis of w staff ad vdos, povid quaitassurance reviews of work performed on behalf ofthe agency, and develop reference materials insupport of agency programs.

Finland

I Fiad, bid ispto taii is aad b tFinnish Road Administration and involves a 3- or 4-daytheoretical course of study with 1 day of onsitetraining. Training culminates in a 1-day performanceevaluation involving inspection of a bridge and a writtentest. Finnra also provides a 2-day course in bridgeregister use that must be completed beforean inspector is granted rights to update the data.

Annually, inspectors are required to undergo a 1-day“aibatio” ivovi a a isptio of two

bids, aft wi adidats iv t ofiaresults of the inspections and discuss them with thexami. To maitai tiatio, isptos otonly have to pass the hands-on bridge inspectionassessment, but are also subject to a QA checkinvolving a bridge inspection with two other inspectors.

The results of the three inspectors are then checked forosist. Psoa quait poits a assid toeach inspector and used in the procurement process.Candidates who repeatedly have weak test results canos ti tiatio.

cadidats fo tiatio must av at ast 2 asof experience as a member of a bridge inspectionteam. The lead inspector on a team must possessa master of science degree in bridge engineeringor civil engineering and have experience in designof load-bearing structures or repair and rehabilitation


Table 6. Condition Index (1).

Grade Description

1.0–1.4 Very good structural condition

The structural stability, traffic safety and durability of the structure are given. Continuousmaintenance is required.

1.5–1.9 Good structural condition

The structural stability and traffic safety and durability of the structure are given.

I t o tm, t durability of the structure may be negatively affected to a small degree.Continuous maintenance is required.

2.0–2.4 Satisfactory structural condition

It is possib tat, i t o tm, t durability of the structure may be negatively affected. An expansion of the damage or consequential damages which, in the long term, would leadto osidab dtioatio of t stutua stabiit ad/o taf saft ad iasd waand tear is to be expected.

Continuous maintenance is required.

Maintenance is requred in the medium term.

Measures to eliminate the damage or warning signs to maintain traffic safety might benecessary at the short notice.

2.5–2.9 Unsatisfactory structural condition

The structural stability of the structure is given.

Traffic safety might be negatively affected.

The durability of the structure may be negatively affected quite a bit. An expansion of thedamage or consequential damages which, in the medium term, would lead to considerabledtioatio of t stutua stabiit ad/o taf saft ad iasd wa ad ta is to bexpected.


Maintenance at short notice is required.

Measures to eliminate the damage or warning signs to maintain traffic safety might be

necessary at short notice.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

30/60

of bridges. Other personnelmust be familiar with inspectionmethods and use of inspectionequipment.

Norway

Norway matches complexity ofbridge inspection assignments toin-house and consultant inspectorsbased on education and experi-ence. The number of bridge inspec-tors is not high, so the person in

charge of ordering the inspectionssoud b awa of isptos’quaiatios. nowa bidinspectors are also knowledgeableabout bridge design and construc-tion. Knowledge and experience inbridge design are considered moreimportant than material knowledge,but knowledge of the materialbeing inspected and degradationprocesses is also integral to theinspection process.

16


Table 7. Condition Index (2).

Grade Description

3.0–3.4 Critical structural condition

The structural stability or traffic safety of the structure is negatively affected.

Possib, durability of the structure is no longer given. An expansion of the damage or consequential damages may, in the short term, lead to the fact that structural stability andtaf saft a o o iv.


Immediate repairs are required.

Measures to eliminate the damage or warning signs to maintain traffic safety or restrictionsin its use might be required as soon as possible.

3.5–4.0 Inadequate structural condition

The structural stability or traffic safety is negatively affected quite a bit or is no longergiven.

Possib, durability of the structure is no longer given. An expansion of the damage orconsequential damages may, in the short term, lead to the fact that structural stability andtaf saft a o o iv ad tat it wi sut i a ipaab dtioatio of tstructure.


Immediate repairs or renovations are required.

Measures to eliminate the damage or warning signs to maintain traffic safety or restrictionsin its use might be required immediately.

Figure 10. Screenshot of SIB-Bauwerke Release 2006

showing inspector-generated rating page.

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

31/60

Sweden

The Swedish Road Administration has requirements forinspection personnel on education, knowledge aboutregulations and materials, etc., but no formal require-mt fo tiatio. no psia quaiatios arequired, either. The choice of inspector is based on the

information submitted in the procurement document,which provides special personnel requirements fort spi isptio. howv, ommo basirequirements for inspectors are the following:

Engineering educationyas of xpi dmostati kowdof Swedish Road Administration inspectionmethodology or inspection educationExperience in measuring and assessing physicaland functional condition based on the measurementmtods podud fo t spi stutu ad itscomponentKnowledge of durability and deterioration processes

affti t spi stutu ad its ompotsKnowledge and experience in predicting damagedevelopmentKnowledge and experience in developing correctiveaction recommendations for structural damages

The Swedish Road Administration sets the requirementsfor bridge inspection on the national road network.Other bridge managers or owners in Sweden complywith the same requirements, but may adjust specialrequirements higher or lower at their discretion.

The same requirements apply to underwater inspectorsas ot isptos. I additio, t Instructions forDiving by the National Board of Occupational Safetyand Health apply. Further, the diving equipment must beinspected and approved and appropriate diver safetypractices must be used during the inspection.

For special situations, nationally or internationally knownxpts i t d ma b id. rquimts aidtia fo bot i-ous staff ad vdos. Isptodata are maintained in the BMS, BaTMan, which tracksv ispto’s idividua pfoma.

France

I Fa, quaiatio is tatd at t ispto adinspection or project manager through six modules oftaii. Idividuas must pass a xam to quaif foa positio i a v. T quaiatio podu ispat of t ISO 9001 quait poss dvopd b ttwok of Pots t caussés rioa laboatois(Pubi road ad Bids laboatois) i t d ofbridge, culvert, and retaining wall inspection. The 17French laboratories perform inspections for the nationalnetwork, departments, cities, and towns as consultants.

v

v

v

v

v

v

Pivat osutats aso pfom bid isptio, adtheir activities will probably increase in the future.

Training modules are organized by the Ecole Nationaleds Pots t caussés ad a op to pubi aboa-tories and private consultants. A questionnaire at the

end of each module tests the knowledge acquired bythe candidates. For the public laboratories, a minimumgrade is required to validate the module.

The goals of the French inspection training modules andquaiatio poss a as foows:

To ensure a quality level of inspectionsTo st a sstm of quaiatio fo t isptio staffTo complement the initial education of new inspectorsTo serve as a reference for the private profession

T ous of quaiatio ovs tia qui-ments only. Requirements for physical ability, health,

and sanitary and safety conditions for inspectors areotod b t dito of t rioa Pots tcaussés laboato.

After a project manager makes a proposal, the trainingis delivered at the regional laboratory by the chief of theBridge Service and, should the need arise, the directorof the regional laboratory. Training is provided in sixmodus, t st v dsid fo bid isptosad t sixt quid fo pojt maa tiatio.

Modules 1 through 5 are as follows:Module 1: A 6-day course on basic knowledge(strength of materials, reinforced concrete bridges,common steel bridges, common prestressedconcrete bridges, masonry bridges, culverts,common retaining walls)Module 2: A 1-day course on large prestressedconcrete bridgesModule 3: A 3-day course on uncommon retainingwallsModule 4: A 2-day course on large steel bridges andcable bridgesModule 5: A 3-day course on tunnels andunderground structures

Modu 6 is a 3-da pojt maa’s ous tatincludes the following:

Methodology of detailed inspectionIvstiatio tiqusMonitoring and surveillance techniquesRepair and strengthening techniques

Actions to be proposed after an inspection T a t vs of quaiatio: isptio at,inspector, and project manager. The director of theioa aboato tis isptio ats oa.

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v

v


8/13/2019 Pl 08016

32/60

hi vs of tiatio (as ispto o pojtmanager) require certain prerequisites, including thefollowing:

lv of t adidat’s iitia duatiocadidat’s kowd ad pofssioa xpii t isptio d

Successful completion of qualifying training modulesExperience working with another inspector or projectmanager

ctiatio of quaiatio as a ispto ma bobtaid two was. T st is b ompti at astmodule 1 of the training, passing a professional exami-nation involving a bridge inspection with a statement ofdis, witi a pot, ad udoi viw b aexamining board. The second way is by undergoing areview of past experience (at least 5 years) acting as aninspector and review by an examining board. Thequaiatio of t ispto ma b xtdd wit

modules 2, 3, 4, and 5.

ctiatio of quaiatio as a pojt maa maaso b obtaid i o of two was. T st is bcompleting modules 1 through 6 and passing aprofessional examination that involves checking abridge report proposed by an inspector, writing thereport conclusions, and undergoing review by anexamining board. The second is by undergoing reviewof past experience acting as a project manager (at least3 years) and review by an examining board.

Germany

Germany has no mandatory professional training forengineers conducting bridge inspections. The Germanstadad DIn 1076 quis o tat a xpidengineer perform construction inspection. The minimumrequirements are a completed study at a university ora university of applied sciences (bachelor or master ofcivil engineering or science degree) and experience inbid buidi o ostutio ii. Psiaability to perform the tasks associated with the job isassumed.

The lack of mandatory training requirements is rooted

i gma’s isto. Dui t post-Wod Wa IIyears, reconstruction was a priority for the country.cod i t stat of too ad t quaitof the materials being used in bridge construction ledto pubi od i t abiit of bids i svito operate for decades without incident.

Piodi isptio of ostutio was pfomd, butthe practice of construction inspection did not have theimportance it now has. This changed because of twovts i 1976. T st was t faiu of t ris-brücke, a bridge in Vienna, Austria, originally built from

v

v

vv

1872 to 1876 and completely restored from 1934 to1937. On August 1, 1976, the bridge collapsed becauseof substructure damage, killing one person. The lastdocumented general inspection before the failure wasin 1952, almost 25 years earlier.

Also in 1976, considerable damage was detected on

prestressed concrete bridges in Düsseldorf. Cracks 4millimeters wide in the area of the coupling joints andseveral broken prestressing tendons were found. Thisled to a wider investigation that determined that a largenumber of similar bridges had comparable damage.

As a result, both practitioner and public views on theneed for bridge inspection changed.

The initial effort went into improving constructioninspection, which has developed to a very high qualitystandard of practice for bridge construction in Germanytoda. I 2000 t gma Fda Miist of Taspot

18


Typical 1-Week Seminar Offered at Bochum

University of Applied Science in Germany

Day 1 –Itodutio –Itoduto vido o bid isptio

–Judicial and technical rules –Causes of damage–Vulnerable details in special construction

DAY 2 –Organization and costs of inspection –Rules for accident prevention –Psoa pottiv quipmt –Acquisition of damage data with

SIB-Bauwk –Isptio vi ad quipmt

management

Day 3 –Assessment of damage data of buildings—examples

–Isptio of oad sis fo bids –Isptio b spia us –Various topics (e.g., reconditioning of

orthotropic decks)

DAY 4 –Assessment of damage data of bridgeequipment

–Detailed damage analysis (theory, methods) –Causes of damage—test methods –Causes of damage—technical, physical,

and chemical

DAY 5 –Patia taii

–State of knowledge (test) –Pstatio of tiat –Open discussion

8/13/2019 Pl 08016

33/60

and the Road Administrations of the Federal Statesbegan an initiative to set up a professional developmentseminar for bridge inspectors. The purpose of theseminar was to establish a forum for the exchange ofknowledge and experience among practicing bridgeisptos. T st of ts 5-da ouss took pa

in November 2002 at BASt in Bergisch-Gladbach.

From 2003 to 2005, 14 additional courses were heldwith 340 participants attending. The number of partici-pants at each seminar was limited to 25. Seminar seatsnot occupied by employees of the road administrationscould be allocated to interested engineers from theprivate sector, city agencies, waterway administrations,port administrations, and others.

Growing demand for this training required establishingtwo additional seminar locations at Feuchtwangen inBavaria and the Bochum University of Applied Sciences

in North Rhine Westphalia. A fourth location in Dresdenwas scheduled to begin offering seminars in 2007.

The following are prerequisites for seminar participation:Bachelor or master of science degree in civilengineeringSva as’ patia xpi i ostutioengineering and building inspectionKowd i opati t SIB-Bauwk poam

Staff at each site organizes the seminars, but seminarquality is ensured by a national coordinating committee.The coordinating committee consists of representativesof the German Federal Ministry of Transport, BASt, stateroad administrations, training locations, and a universitylecturer. This body determines course content andspeakers, coordinates scheduling, and oversees thequality of each seminar.

Seminar instructors are experienced bridge inspectorsfrom the road administrations of the federal states.They are supported by speakers from BASt, GermanMatias rsa Istitut (BAM), uivsitis, adprivate organizations, as well as by employees ofmunicipal administrations.

An association, Verein zur Förderung der Aus- undWitbidu vo Bauwkspüiu (VFBI, o

Association for the Support of the Training and FurtherTaii of Buidi Isptos), was sdud to bformed in 2007. Association members will be bridgeowners, including the German Federal Ministry ofTransport, the Ministries of Transport of the FederalStates, county and municipal agencies, and privatecompanies. The intent is to integrate the coordinatingcommittee into this association and ultimately turn thesposibiit fo ispto taii ov to VFBI.

v

v

v

After completing the seminar, attendees receivedocuments certifying their completion of the course.no xamiatio is iv bfo tiatio, atoudevelopment of an examination is planned for thefuture. Anonymous tests are conducted, however, toassss quait of t taii. Wi tis tiat is

considered in selecting consultants to perform bridgeinspections, it is not required.

The following are also planned:Development of a curriculum leading to a designationas engineer of inspectionPiodi xamiatio fo wa of a tiatDevelopment of training programs for technicians

Inspection Types and Frequencies

A of t outis visitd ad a ditios ofisptio tps, but a majo di was tat a

out as sva w-dd sops fo tiisptios. A tpia di was tat euopaagencies have developed a technical decisionmakingprocess for determining inspection frequency.

Usually included in this process is the competency ofthe inspection crew. Host nations visited believed thatispto quaiatios ad xpi quimts bais as pvious pstd povidd odin allowing inspectors to determine the durationbetween cycles of inspections, typically up to 5 or6 years but up to 9 years in France. Denmark andFrance use risk acceptance criteria to help determineinspection type and frequency.

I stabisi ti poams, t ost atios osinspection intervals based on the amount of detail oftheir inspections, interim maintenance inspections,doumtatio, ad quaiatios of ti isptos.However, the host nations allow the inspectionfrequency of any individual bridge to be shorter(or perhaps longer in the case of France) than the setfrequency or maximum frequency, based on factorsrelated to inventory such as condition, size, structuretp, a, ava dai taf, ompxit, ad

robustness.

Finland

Isptios a odutd i Fiad ov t if of tstructure are as follows:

The constructor, owner, bridge designer, and otherinterested parties make acceptance inspections aftercompletion of construction or repair work. All defectsand faults found in the inspection are recorded in thebridge register.Road supervisors carry out annual inspections tosu t saft of t bid. Itms of o

v

v

v

v

v


8/13/2019 Pl 08016

34/60

are immediately reported to the appropriate agencybridge engineer.General inspection is the primary inspection of thebridge. Typically, a general inspection is conductedevery 5 years, with larger bridges inspected every8 years, depending on the bridge condition. Finnra-

tid bid isptos odut t isptio.T isptos t t dis of t isptioin the bridge register.

A basic inspection is a general inspection supple-mented with a variety of tests and core samples takenby the Research Centre of Finland (VTT). The resultsare stored in the database as well. The test resultsserve as material for improving bridge age behaviormodels for BMS use and quality control. The basicinspection is used for the reference bridge group andfor large and long bridges. The inspection interval istpia 5 as. T isptos a tid bidinspectors with bachelor or master of science degrees

or higher examinations.Special inspection is carried out when a generalinspection could not determine the reason for dam-age or before a repair plan is made. The inspection ismade by bridge specialists with a master of sciencein engineering or higher degree.ctid bid isptos odut udwatinspections, which usually occur at 5-year intervals.Underwater inspections are made mainly of bridgesover large rivers where the speed of water and risk ofdamage by ice are high. Observations routinely madeduring underwater inspections include the following:– losss i ompots du to oosio (st),

erosion (concrete), or rot (timber)– Damage to components resulting from collisions of

vessels or debris– Bd po aoud foudatios.– loatio ad xtt of udmii at foudatios– Bd po aoss t aItsid moitoi is impmtd w a bidis situatd o a siiat oadwa usd b avvehicles where no weight limits can be imposed andno acceptable detour exists. A regular inspection iscarried out frequently to determine impacts to bridgebearing capacity, condition, and deterioration. The

inspection is carried out by road supervisors ortid bid isptos, dpdi o t dof damage to the bridge.

Denmark

Denmark conducts four types of inspections on itsiwa stutus. T st is a oad twok isp-tion, which maintenance forces perform one to threetimes a week or when crashes or other highway inci-dents occur. Description of any damage found andpotos a tasmittd b po o via t Ittdirectly to the engineer in charge of routine maintenance.

v

v

v

v

v

A routine maintenance inspection, performed at leastannually, is a visual inspection conducted by DanishRoad Directorate (DRD) staff. This type of inspection isperformed when damage is estimated to be less thanUS$16,000. Repairs are handled as routine mainte-nance, and data on the activity are collected and stored

i t Dais road Ditoat’s bid maamtsystem (Danbro). Piipa isptios a odutd v fw motsto every 6 years, depending on condition and theispto’s kowd of t bid. O ava, tsinspections occur every 5.5 years. The inspectordetermines frequency of inspection. This inspection,conducted by DRD staff, is mainly a visual inspection.Condition remarks, damage descriptions, and costestimates are recorded in Danbro. This type of inspec-tion is performed when damage is estimated to be morethan US$16,000. As a result of a principal inspection,

a special inspection may be ordered.

A special inspection is a more detailed inspectionconducted to study a structure condition in more detail.Psia tsti ma b odd as pat of t isp-tion, including sampling of concrete, core drilling, andevaluation, and development of a more accurate costestimate and estimate of duration to the next inspec-tion. Special ins

Documents

Pl 08016