Reliability-Based Service III Evaluation for Prestressed Girder Bridges Under Platoon Loads

Bowen Yang, J. Steelman, Jay A. Puckett, D. Linzell
{"title":"Reliability-Based Service III Evaluation for Prestressed Girder Bridges Under Platoon Loads","authors":"Bowen Yang, J. Steelman, Jay A. Puckett, D. Linzell","doi":"10.1177/03611981231208200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Platooning may benefit heavy truck transportation through fuel savings, reduced congestion, enhanced safety, and lower emissions. In the future, platoons may be able to act as mobile-WIM stations, and their permit process and allowable load limits may differ from unregulated trucks in a convoy. Previous reliability-based studies have focused on the Strength I limit state and have shown that trucks can operate at weights exceeding standard legal load limits even with short headways at operating-level reliability. However, the Service III limit state often governs prestressed concrete bridges. The AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation does not specify a target reliability index (β) nor reliability-based evaluation guidance for the Service III limit state. The work presented here performed reliability analyses to investigate implicit reliability indices (βImplicit) inferred from bridges designed according to current and past AASHTO criteria, as well as cracking probabilities. Design live loads were used to evaluate the Service III limit state for prestressed concrete NU I-girder bridges, optimally designed using LRFD and LFD/allowable stress design (ASD). Various span lengths, numbers, continuity conditions, prestress loss methods, and allowable tension stress levels were considered. Cracking probabilities ranged between 10% and 67%, which indicates that optimally designed bridges may crack during their service life. Although beyond the scope of the study, the present work suggests a reexamination of service behavior and performance is appropriate, using an alternate mechanistic approach to estimate potential cyclic damage and aid life-cycle assessment. Such assessments could provide a more rational framework for platoon operations while maintaining bridge health and safety.","PeriodicalId":309251,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231208200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Platooning may benefit heavy truck transportation through fuel savings, reduced congestion, enhanced safety, and lower emissions. In the future, platoons may be able to act as mobile-WIM stations, and their permit process and allowable load limits may differ from unregulated trucks in a convoy. Previous reliability-based studies have focused on the Strength I limit state and have shown that trucks can operate at weights exceeding standard legal load limits even with short headways at operating-level reliability. However, the Service III limit state often governs prestressed concrete bridges. The AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation does not specify a target reliability index (β) nor reliability-based evaluation guidance for the Service III limit state. The work presented here performed reliability analyses to investigate implicit reliability indices (βImplicit) inferred from bridges designed according to current and past AASHTO criteria, as well as cracking probabilities. Design live loads were used to evaluate the Service III limit state for prestressed concrete NU I-girder bridges, optimally designed using LRFD and LFD/allowable stress design (ASD). Various span lengths, numbers, continuity conditions, prestress loss methods, and allowable tension stress levels were considered. Cracking probabilities ranged between 10% and 67%, which indicates that optimally designed bridges may crack during their service life. Although beyond the scope of the study, the present work suggests a reexamination of service behavior and performance is appropriate, using an alternate mechanistic approach to estimate potential cyclic damage and aid life-cycle assessment. Such assessments could provide a more rational framework for platoon operations while maintaining bridge health and safety.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于可靠性的排载下预应力梁桥服役期 III 评估
通过节省燃料、减少拥堵、加强安全和降低排放,排队可能会使重型卡车运输受益。未来,排载可能会成为移动 WIM 站,其许可程序和允许的负载限制可能会与车队中未受管制的卡车不同。以往基于可靠性的研究主要集中在强度 I 极限状态,结果表明,即使在运营级可靠性下,卡车也能以超过标准法定载荷限制的重量运行,甚至在短距离间隔内也是如此。然而,预应力混凝土桥梁通常采用服务 III 极限状态。AASHTO 的《桥梁评估手册》既没有规定目标可靠性指数 (β),也没有为 Service III 极限状态提供基于可靠性的评估指导。本文介绍的工作进行了可靠性分析,以研究根据当前和过去的 AASHTO 标准设计的桥梁推断出的隐含可靠性指数 (βImplicit),以及开裂概率。采用 LRFD 和 LFD/容许应力设计 (ASD) 优化设计的预应力混凝土 NU I 梁桥,其设计活荷载用于评估服务 III 极限状态。考虑了各种跨度、数量、连续性条件、预应力损失方法和允许拉应力水平。开裂概率在 10% 到 67% 之间,这表明经过优化设计的桥梁在使用寿命期间可能会开裂。尽管超出了本研究的范围,但本研究表明,重新审查使用行为和性能是适当的,可以使用另一种机械方法来估算潜在的周期性损坏并帮助进行生命周期评估。此类评估可为排险作业提供更合理的框架,同时维护桥梁的健康和安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Automatic Traffic Safety Analysis using Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Technology at Unsignalized Intersections in Heterogeneous Traffic Role of Bystanders on Women’s Perception of Personal Security When Using Public Transport Comprehensive Investigation of Pedestrian Hit-and-Run Crashes: Applying XGBoost and Binary Logistic Regression Model Insights for Sustainable Urban Transport via Private Charging Pile Sharing in the Electric Vehicle Sector Correlates of Modal Substitution and Induced Travel of Ridehailing in California
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1