Tested versus code capacity of existing bridges - Three examples
|
|
|||||||||||
Bibliographic Details
| Author(s): |
Gabriel Sas
(Northern Research Institute, Narvik, Norway)
Niklas Bagge 
(Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden)
Jens Häggström (Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Jonny Nilimaa (Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Arto Puurula (Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Thomas Blanksvärd (Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Björn Täljsten (Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden) Lennart Elfgren
(Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden)
Anders Carolin (Trafikverket, Luleå and Borlänge, Sweden) Björn Paulsson (Trafikverket, Luleå and Borlänge, Sweden) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medium: | conference paper | ||||
| Language(s): | English | ||||
| Conference: | IABSE Conference: Structural Engineering: Providing Solutions to Global Challenges, Geneva, Switzerland, September 2015 | ||||
| Published in: | IABSE Conference Geneva 2015 | ||||
|
|||||
| Page(s): | 727-734 | ||||
| Total no. of pages: | 8 | ||||
| Year: | 2015 | ||||
| DOI: | 10.2749/222137815818357845 | ||||
| Abstract: |
This paper presents the results from three tests to failure of different types of bridges: a two span reinforced concrete railway trough bridge; a five-span prestessed concrete beam bridge; and a one span metal railway truss bridge. The results show that the capacity of the structures are underestimated by current standards, while numerical analysis combined with material testing can provide more accurate results. Some examples are also presented on how deficiencies in capacity can be mitigated using fiber reinforced polymer strengthening systems. |
||||
| Keywords: |
structural design bridges modelling testing life-cycle assessment (LCA) guidelines strengthening repair prestressing assessment methods
|
||||