This article presents a new method for structure assessment based on weigh-in-motion data and simulation analysis. The focus is particularly on the simply supported hollow slab bridges and extra-heavy truck (gross truck weight ≥ 80 t) from the right tail of weigh-in-motion data. The dynamic models of truck types are refined, and the coupling relationship between truck and multi-girder bridge are determined. A self-developed bridge–truck analysis system is established by separate iteration and is used in the simulation analysis of extra-heavy truck load cases. The truck load effect is first analyzed by a comparison with code values. The load rating index is introduced for the structure safety assessment; meanwhile, the key parameters, for example, the dynamic amplification factor, are optimized. The results show that the maximum load effect level of extra-heavy truck is obviously higher than the design vehicle load effect, and the average level is approximate to or a little higher than the latter. The displacements due to extra-heavy truck are seriously transfinite, while the structural stiffness can meet the requirement of serviceability. Both the proposed method and Chinese code method are used to assess the structure safety of hollow slab bridges. The maximum value of load rating index ranges from 0.69 to 0.78 and the average value is 0.53–0.67. The hollow slab bridges have not yet reached the ultimate limit state and have a safety redundancy under the extra-heavy truck load. The loading indices of MOCAT are close to the average values of load index of this study, but lower than those of the maximum values. Some extreme loading conditions may be thoughtless in the proposed safety assessment method by MOCAT.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2011) The Manual for Bridge Evaluation. 2nd ed.Washington, DC: AASHTO.
2.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2012) LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 6th ed.Washington DC: AASHTO.
3.
BellESLefebvrePJSanayeiMet al. (2013) Objective load rating of a steel-girder bridge using structural modeling and health monitoring. Journal of Structural Engineering139: 1771–1779.
4.
BrownjohnJMWMoyoPOmenzetterPet al. (2003) Assessment of highway bridge upgrading by dynamic testing and finite-element model updating. Journal of Bridge Engineering8: 162–172.
5.
CSA International (2006) Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CAN/CSA 06–06). Toronto, ON, Canada: CSA International.
6.
DengLCaiCS (2010) Development of dynamic impact factor for performance evaluation of existing multi-girder concrete bridges. Engineering Structures32: 21–31.
7.
DengYHPharesBMSteffensOW (2016) Experimental and numerical evaluation of a folded plate girder system for short-span bridges—a case study. Engineering Structures113: 26–40.
8.
EnrightBO’BrienEJ (2013) Monte Carlo simulation of extreme traffic loading on short and medium span bridges. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering9(12): 1267–1282.
9.
FrangopolDMStraussAKimS (2008a) Bridge reliability assessment based on monitoring. Journal of Bridge Engineering13(3): 258–270.
10.
FrangopolDMStraussAKimS (2008b) Use of monitoring extreme data for the performance prediction of structures: general approach. Engineering Structures30(12): 3644–3653.
11.
GetachewAObrienEJ (2007) Simplified site-specific traffic load models for bridge assessment. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering3(4): 303–311.
12.
HanWSWangTLiYQet al. (2011) Analysis system of vehicle-bridge coupling vibration with grillage method based on model updating. China Journal of Highway and Transport24(5): 47–55.
13.
HanWSWuJCaiCSet al. (2015) Characteristics and dynamic impact of overloaded extra heavy trucks on typical highway bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering20(2): 05014011.
14.
HanWSYuanYGHuangPMet al. (2016) Dynamic impact of heavy traffic load on typical T-beam bridges based on WIM data. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities. Epub ahead of print 23January. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000991.
15.
HaugenTLevyJRAakreEet al. (2016) Weigh-in-motion equipment—experiences and challenges. Transportation Research Procedia14: 1423–1432.
16.
Hebei Provincial Communications Planning and Design Institute (HPCPDI) (2009) The Annual Report of Highway Bridge Technical Condition in Hebei Province. Shijiazhuang, China: HPCPDI.
ISO 8608:1995 (1995) Mechanical vibration-road surface profiles—reporting of measured data.
19.
JacobBCottineauLM (2016) Weigh-in-motion for direct enforcement of overloaded commercial vehicles. Transportation Research Procedia14: 1413–1422.
20.
LiYQ (2010) Program development and validation of vehicle-bridge coupling vibration with grillage method based on finite element model updating. PhD Dissertation, Chang’an University, Xi’an, China.
21.
LiuC (2016) Research on safety assessment method for bridge structure based on variable weight synthesis method. Perspectives in Science7: 200–203.
22.
LiuMFrangopolDMKimS (2009) Bridge safety evaluation based on monitored live load effects. Journal of Bridge Engineering14: 257–269.
23.
LiuYLuNWDengY (2016) Fatigue reliability assessment of steel bridge decks under measured traffic flow. China Journal of Highway and Transport29(5): 58–66.
24.
Ministry of Communications and Transportation (MOCAT) (2004a) Code for Design of Highway Reinforced Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Bridges and Culverts (JTG D62–2004). Beijing, China: MOCAT.
25.
Ministry of Communications and Transportation (MOCAT) (2004b) General Code for Design of Highway Bridges and Culverts (JTG D60–2004). Beijing, China: MOCAT.
26.
Ministry of Communications and Transportation (MOCAT) (2011) Specification for Inspection and Evaluation of Load-Bearing Capacity of Highway Bridges (JTG/T J21–2011). Beijing, China: MOCAT.
27.
Ministry of Communications and Transportation (MOCAT) (2015) General Code for Design of Highway Bridges and Culverts (JTG D60-2015). Beijing, China: MOCAT.
28.
MoghimiHRonaghHR (2008) Impact factors for a composite steel bridge using non-linear dynamic simulation. International Journal of Impact Engineering35: 1228–1243.
29.
MovaghatiSAbdelnabyAE (2016) Advancements in fragility analysis using numerical calibration methods for a horizontally curved RC bridge. Engineering Structures125: 236–243.
30.
NassifHHLiuMErtekinO (2003) Model validation for bridge-road-vehicle dynamic interaction system. Journal of Bridge Engineering8(2): 112–120.
O’BrienEJEnrightB (2011b) Using weigh-in-motion data to determine aggressiveness of traffic for bridge loading. Journal of Bridge Engineering18: 232–239.
33.
O’BrienEJEnrightBGetachewA (2010) Importance of the tail in truck weight modeling for bridge assessment. Journal of Bridge Engineering15(2): 210–213.
34.
O’BrienEJSchmidtFHajializadehDet al. (2015) A review of probabilistic methods of assessment of load effects in bridges. Structural Safety53: 44–56.
35.
O’ConnorAEnevoldsenI (2007) Probability based modelling and assessment of an existing post-tensioned concrete slab bridge. Engineering Structures30: 1408–1416.
36.
O’ConnorAO’BrienEJ (2015) Traffic load modelling and factors influencing the accuracy of predicted extremes. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering32: 270–278.
37.
OrcesiAFrangopolDM (2013) Bridge performance monitoring based on traffic data. Journal of Engineering Mechanics139: 1508–1520.
38.
QureshiIMWarnitchaiP (2016) Computer modeling of dynamic behavior of rocking wall structures including the impact-related effects. Advances in Structural Engineering19(8): 1245–1261.
39.
RenWXZuoXHWangNBet al. (2014) Review of non-pavement bridge weigh-in-motion. China Journal of Highway and Transport27(7): 45–53.
40.
RoschkePNPruskiKR (2000) Overload and ultimate load behavior of posttensioned slab bridge. Journal of Bridge Engineering5(2): 148–155.
41.
RuanXZhouJYShiXFet al. (2016) A site-specific traffic load model for long-span multi-pylon cable-stayed bridges. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. Epub ahead of print 12April. DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2016.1164724.
42.
SasakiKKParetTAraizaJCet al. (2010) Failure of concrete T-beam and box-girder highway bridges subjected to cyclic loading from traffic. Engineering Structures32: 1838–1845.
43.
SchmidtFJacobBDomprobstF (2016) Investigation of truck weights and dimensions using WIM data. Transportation Research Procedia14: 811–819.
44.
SivakumarBIbrahimFIS (2007) Enhancement of bridge live loads using weigh-in-motion data. Bridge Structures3: 3–4, 193–204.
45.
SungYCLinTKChiuYTet al. (2016) A bridge safety monitoring system for prestressed composite box-girder bridges with corrugated steel webs based on in-situ loading experiments and a long-term monitoring database. Engineering Structures126: 571–585.
46.
ValDVMelchersRE (1997) Reliability of deteriorating RC slab bridges. Journal of Structural Engineering123: 1638–1644.
47.
WangJHShiZHNakanoM (2013) Strength degradation analysis of an aging RC girder bridge using FE crack analysis and simple capacity-evaluation equations. Engineering Fracture Mechanics108: 209–221.
48.
WangYJLinSBFengFet al. (2016) Numerical simulation of aluminum alloy 6082-T6 columns failing by overall bucking. Advances in Structural Engineering19(10): 1547–1574.
49.
XiangTYZhaoRDXuTF (2007) Reliability evaluation of vehicle–bridge dynamic interaction. Journal of Structural Engineering133(8): 1092–1099.
50.
XiaoSX (2011) Carrying Capacity Evolution Theory of Bridge and Application Technology. 1st ed.Beijing, China.
51.
XieHBWangYFZouRF (2015) Reliability analysis of RC T-beam highway bridges in China based on a virtual bridge dataset. Engineering Structures104: 133–140.
52.
XuFYZhangMJWangLet al. (2016) Recent highway bridge collapses in China: review and discussion. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities30. DOI: 10.10 61/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000884.
53.
YuYCaiCSDengL (2016) State-of-the art review on bridge weigh-in-motion technology. Advances in Structural Engineering19(9): 1514–1530.
54.
ZhangJRPengHCaiCS (2011) Field study of overload behavior of an existing reinforced concrete bridge under simulated vehicle loads. Journal of Bridge Engineering16(2): 226–237.
