Reverse Engineering of existing reinforced concrete slab bridges

Abstract

Most bridges in the Western European road networks are ageing. The vast majority of about 90% of these bridges have reinforced concrete as a building material. The traffic intensity, as well as the axle, and the average vehicle weight have increased since these structures were opened to traffic. Furthermore, the structural (design) codes have changed over the years. Therefore, there is a need to investigate if existing structures meet the safety/reliability level described by the current codes. However, a frequently faced problem in practice is that the original design calculations and technical drawings of a large percentage of the existing bridges are unknown or lost. Especially for bridges in the lower road network, often designed for the lower load classes B/45 and maintained by a local government, the documentation is missing. The national road network, designed for load classes A/60 is maintained by the national government and faces the same problem but to a lesser extent. Bridges within this scope have different detailing rules and execution practices than used nowadays. Plain reinforcement was in general used which is bend-up at a support. Therefore, the study is twofold: first, Reverse Engineering is applied to determine the reinforcement of existing reinforced concrete slab bridges, second the capacity margin of RE bridges are examined with the current assessment codes. A Reverse Engineering-tool is developed to automate the dimensioning of the required reinforcement according to the former design codes. This tool uses the year of design, load class and the geometric dimensions of the bridge as input parameters. A parametric study is performed to examine bridges from different design periods. Consequently, the Reverse Engineering-tool is used to assess the Reverse Engineered bridge according to the current assessment codes. The validation of the model shows for the majority of the Reverse Engineered bridges that the Reverse Engineered reinforcement is slightly less than the reinforcement amounts from the technical drawings. This proves a conservative approach where the actual structural capacity is underestimated. Consequently, an assessment of the Reverse Engineered bridge can be performed with sufficient robustness.The computer code ran with the input parameters having a normal distribution, showed the largest effect for the uncertainty in the design year and load class especially around 1940 and 1962. Therefore, the design year and load class are crucial in Reverse Engineering and assessment of an existing bridge. The capacity margin of the Reverse Engineered bridges is assessed according to the current Eurocode based design codes. The traffic- and permanent load including load factors according to the general assessment codes from the NEN8700/NEN8701 and the RBK-1-1, and the decentralised load model from TNO are applied. The assessment with the Eurocode including the load factors from the NEN8700 showed Unity Checks for bending moment at the mid-supports and mid-spans of larger than 1.0, where the Unity Checks for shear forces resulted below 1.0. The assessment with the Decentralised load model showed Unity Checks for bending moment at the mid-supports and mid-spans and shear force below 1.0. In case the amount of support reinforcement is based on the amount of span reinforcement, the bending capacity margin at the mid-supports is insufficient for large spans. Significant bending capacity margins are obtained in structural design of RC slab bridges in the period 1930-1970. The main contribution of this research is that bridges designed between 1940 and 1962 show the most critical Unity Checks for bending in the assessed period. In this period account the following design methods: The dynamic amplification factor introduced in the GBV1940 for concrete bridges, the traffic load class from the VOSB1933, the N-method to determine the cross-section capacity and the effective width method from the GBV1940 and from the Guyon Massonnet method.The capacity margin for shear is found to be almost independent of the design period. Here can be concluded that the slenderness of the bridge deck is the main contribution in the shear capacity. Bridges designed in the period 1940-1962 with the support reinforcement based on the span reinforcement and with a span length >10m designed for load class B/45 or with a span length of >11m designed for load class A/60, form the group with the most critical bending capacity. However, the size of the group of former bridges designed according to these conditions is unknown.From the results can be concluded that bridges designed between 1940-1962 with RE reinforcement are found to be legally unsafe for bending according to the parametric assessment with the Eurocode.