TY - GEN
T1 - Proof load testing of the viaduct De Beek
AU - Lantsoght, Eva
AU - Koekkoek, Rutger
AU - Yang, Yuguang
AU - Van Der Veen, Cor
AU - Hordijk, Dick
AU - De Boer, Ane
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Ingenta.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Proof load testing can be a suitable method to show that a bridge can carry the required loads from the code without distress. This paper addresses the preparation, execution, and analysis of a proof load test on a four-span reinforced concrete solid slab bridge, viaduct de Beek. The bridge has one lane in each direction, but was restricted to a single lane, since an assessment showed that the capacity is not sufficient to allow both lanes. For this proof load test, the bridge was heavily equipped with sensors, so that early signs of distress can be seen. The difficulty in this test was that, for safety reasons, only the first span could be tested, but that the lowest ratings were found in the second span. A direct approval of the viaduct by proof loading was thus not possible, and an analysis was necessary after the field test. The result of this analysis is that only by allowing 6.7% of plastic redistribution in the second span, sufficient capacity can be demonstrated.
AB - Proof load testing can be a suitable method to show that a bridge can carry the required loads from the code without distress. This paper addresses the preparation, execution, and analysis of a proof load test on a four-span reinforced concrete solid slab bridge, viaduct de Beek. The bridge has one lane in each direction, but was restricted to a single lane, since an assessment showed that the capacity is not sufficient to allow both lanes. For this proof load test, the bridge was heavily equipped with sensors, so that early signs of distress can be seen. The difficulty in this test was that, for safety reasons, only the first span could be tested, but that the lowest ratings were found in the second span. A direct approval of the viaduct by proof loading was thus not possible, and an analysis was necessary after the field test. The result of this analysis is that only by allowing 6.7% of plastic redistribution in the second span, sufficient capacity can be demonstrated.
KW - Bending moment capacity
KW - Existing bridges
KW - Load testing
KW - Proof load testing
KW - Reinforced concrete bridges
KW - Sensors
KW - Slab bridges
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050017312&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Contribución a la conferencia
AN - SCOPUS:85050017312
T3 - IABSE Conference, Vancouver 2017: Engineering the Future - Report
SP - 2824
EP - 2831
BT - IABSE Conference, Vancouver 2017
PB - International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering (IABSE)
T2 - 39th IABSE Symposium in Vancouver 2017: Engineering the Future
Y2 - 21 September 2017 through 23 September 2017
ER -