Freight

Cover of Investigating the Development of a Bridge Assessment Tool for Determining Access for High Productivity Freight Vehicles
Investigating the Development of a Bridge Assessment Tool for Determining Access for High Productivity Freight Vehicles
  • Publication no: AP-R398-12
  • ISBN: 978-1-921991-13-4
  • Published: 7 February 2012

This report deals with the first component of the bridge assessment tool and is a scoping study to determine whether there is sufficient data, and whether there exists suitable engineering models, to develop robust and nationally uniform technical approaches for assessing the capacity of bridges to carry increased mass loads for all heavy vehicle types (including HPFVs) and bridge classifications across Australia. The Bridge Assessment Tool Project is a part of Austroads Project FS1580 ‘Bridge Assessment for Future Higher Productivity Vehicles’, which comprises two components, a bridge assessment tool for determining access for HPFVs and a pricing model that identifies the relationship between bridge usage and the marginal costs of bridge wear due to heavy vehicle usage.

  • 1. INTRODUCTION
    • 1.1. Purpose
    • 1.2. Scope
    • 1.3. Challenges
    • 1.4. The current situation
    • 1.5. Methodology
  • 2. STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT
    • 2.1. General
    • 2.2. Glossary
  • 3. DISCUSSION OF THE BRIDGE ASSESSMENT PROCESS
    • 3.1. General approaches to bridge assessment
    • 3.2. Calculation of bridge actions and capacity
    • 3.3. Consideration of serviceability requirements
    • 3.4. Fatigue
    • 3.5. Types of loading to be considered in bridge assessment
    • 3.6. Components to be considered in bridge assessment
    • 3.7. Capacity reduction factors used in bridge assessment
    • 3.8. Dead load factors used in bridge assessment
    • 3.9. Live load factors used in bridge assessment
    • 3.10. Dynamic load allowance
    • 3.11. Girder Distribution Factors
    • 3.12. Multiple presence of vehicles
  • 4. EXISTING TECHNOLOGIES AND TOOLS FOR BRIDGE ASSESSMENT
    • 4.1. Technical approaches for calculating the actions due to loading on a bridge
    • 4.2. Technical approaches for calculating the capacity of a bridge
    • 4.3. Allowing for bridge condition in bridge assessment technical approaches
    • 4.4. Tools for bridge assessment
    • 4.5. Limitations on automated bridge assessment
  • Axle-spacing-mass-schedules
  • Equivalent base length
  • Influence lines
  • Computer modeling and analysis
  • PCBeaman
  • E-Heavy Vehicle
  • Heavy Load Route (HLR)2F
  • ESDAL (Electronic Service Delivery for Abnormal Loads) - UK
  • APRAS (The Automated Permit Routing / Analysis System) – Pennsylvania, USA
  • Bentley Systems – Bridge Modeler/LARS/Superload software
  • 5. CONSULTATION WITH ROAD AUTHORITIES – METHODS OF BRIDGE ASSESSMENT
    • 5.1. Information obtained from SRAs and local councils
    • 5.2. A discussion on the use of overstress ratios for bridge assessment in Australia
    • 5.3. Recommendations arising from consultation with road authorities on methods of bridge assessment
  • New South Wales – Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA)
  • Northern Territory – Department of Primary Industry (DPI)
  • Queensland – Transport and Main Roads (TMR)
  • South Australia – Department of Transport Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI)
  • Tasmania – Department of Infrastructure and Resources (DIER)
  • Victoria – VicRoads
  • Western Australia – Main Roads Western Australia (MRWA)
  • Australian Capital Territory – Territory and Municipal Services (TAMS)
  • New Zealand – New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA)
  • Local councils
  • 6. CONSULTATIONS WITH ROAD AUTHORITIES – BRIDGE ASSET DATA
    • 6.1. Summary of bridge data held by authorities
    • 6.2. Findings from the consultations on bridge asset data
  • Northern Territory – DPI
  • Queensland – TMR
  • South Australia – DTEI
  • Tasmania - DIER
  • Victoria – VicRoads
  • Western Australia – MRWA
  • New Zealand – NZTA
  • Local Councils
  • Summary
  • 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A BRIDGE ASSESSMENT TOOL
    • 7.1. Discussion
    • 7.2. Recommendations for developing a bridge assessment tool methodology
    • 7.3. Time and cost to develop a bridge assessment tool
    • 7.4. Data requirements for a bridge assessment tool
    • 7.5. Stage 2 Methodology
  • REFERENCES
  • APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRES