Click for next page ( 4


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 3
3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES the text does not include Canadian information. However, it AND INFORMATION SOURCES does include an appendix (Appendix C) that presents the set of Canadian information that was obtained. Where the syn- This synthesis on bridge inspection practices is based on infor- thesis offers findings on "foreign practices," these findings mation collected from department of transportation (DOT) do not include Canada. source documents including inspection manuals, blank inspec- tion forms, technical memoranda, job announcements, and Standard manuals and guides used in U.S. bridge inspec- training course descriptions; from a standard questionnaire tion are included in Table 1. Table 2 lists inspection manuals distributed to DOTs in the United States and Canada; and from from foreign sources. individualized questionnaires sent to countries that participated in the 2003 FHWA/AASHTO scan trip on bridge preservation (Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Sweden, South OVERVIEW OF INSPECTION PRACTICES Africa, and the United Kingdom). Road Agencies Responses to the standard questionnaire were obtained from Most nations included in this synthesis have road agencies at 28 U.S. state transportation agencies and six Canadian trans- three administrative levels: national, state, and local (see portation agencies. U.S. respondents were Alaska, Arizona, Table 3). National agencies perform relatively few bridge Arkansas, California, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, inspections. Instead, inspections are delegated to state DOTs Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, in U.S. practice, to inspection consultants in many foreign New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, nations, and to federal states or departments, respectively, in Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Germany and France. Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia. Canadian respondents were the provinces of Alberta, New Brunswick, Ontario, and Quebec and the cities of Edmonton and Ottawa. Inspection Personnel Bridge inspection manuals or other documentation were Most U.S. state DOTs have a central office inspection pro- gram manager, district program managers, and inspection obtained from U.S.DOT Eastern Federal Lands and the team leaders based in districts. Some DOTs have central following 26 U.S. state transportation agencies: Alabama, teams for statewide work on underwater inspections, emer- California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, gency inspections, or quality assurance inspections. Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Min- nesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, U.S. federal regulations do not require a professional engi- Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Vir- neering (PE) license for inspection program managers or ginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. Bridge inspection manu- inspection team leaders. Instead, a PE license obviates federal als were obtained from the Canadian provinces of Alberta and requirements for bridge inspection experience both for pro- Ontario. gram managers and for team leaders. Many U.S. state DOTs require a PE license for inspection program managers and The synthesis also presents information obtained from the some state DOTs require a PE license for inspection team following foreign transportation agencies: Danish National leaders. Many state DOTs require bridge inspection experi- Roads Directorate, Finnish National Roads Administration, ence for all inspection team leaders, and do not accept a PE French National Roads Directorate, German Federal High- license as a substitute. ways Research Institute, Norwegian National Roads, Swedish Roads Administration, South African National Roads Lim- U.S. federal regulations establish qualifications for inspec- ited, and the United Kingdom Highways Agency. tion team leaders and for divers, but not for other inspection team members. Foreign practice recognizes two or three lev- Because this synthesis lacks information from the major- els of qualification of inspectors, and relates qualification to ity of Canadian provinces and territories, the main body of inspection type (see Table 4).

OCR for page 3
4 TABLE 1 STANDARD MANUALS AND GUIDES USED IN U.S. BRIDGE INSPECTION Publisher Document AASHTO Commonly Recognized (CoRe) Structural Elements (2001). Manual for Condition Evaluation of Bridges, 2nd ed. (2000). Movable Bridge Inspection, Evaluation, and Maintenance Manual (1998), 608 pp. Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals, 4th ed. (2001), 272 pp. FHWA Bridge Inspector's Reference Manual, FHWA NHI 03-001(2002), 1,762 pp. Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures Experience, Selection, and Design Guidance, 2nd ed., NHI-01-003 (2001). Culvert Inspection Manual, FHWA-IP-86-2 (1986). Highway and Rail Transit Tunnel Inspection Manual, FHWA-IF-05-002 (2005), 112 pp. Inspection of Fracture Critical Bridge Members, FHWA-IP-86-26 (1986), 232 pp. Recording and Coding Guide for the Structural Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation's Bridges, FHWA-PD-96-001 (1995), 124 pp. Underwater Inspection of Bridges, FHWA-DP-80-1 (1989). USDA Timber Bridges Design, Construction, Inspection, and Maintenance (1992), Forest Service. TABLE 2 INSPECTION MANUALS--FOREIGN SOURCES Nation Document Denmark Inspection of Bridges (1994), Danish National Road Directorate, 175 pp. Finland Guidelines and Policy for Bridge MR&R Operation Guidelines for Bridge Inspection Bridge Inspection Manual Bridge Repair Manual (SILKOGuidelines) Germany Highway Structures Testing and Inspection, DIN 1076 (1999), Deutsche Norm, 10 pp. Preservation and Maintenance (n.d.), Construction and Housing, German Federal Department of Transportation, 23 pp. Guideline for the Structural Design and Equipment of Bridges for Monitoring, Inspection and Maintenance (1997), German Federal Department of Transportation, 6 pp. Recording and Assessment of Damages, Guideline RI-EBW-PRF, 1998. ASB Structure Inventory, (coding manual for SIBBauwerke) (1998). Norway Handbook for Bridge Inspections (2001), Norwegian Public Roads Administration, 339 pp. United Requirements for Inspection and Management of Bridges, BD 62/94 and BD 63/94. Kingdom Canada, BIM Inspection Manual, Version 3 (2005), Alberta Infrastructure and Transportation. Alberta BIM Inspection Manual--Level 2, Version 1 (2004), Alberta Transportation, 153 pp. Canada, Ontario Structure Inspection Manual (2000), Ontario Ministry of Transportation, 380 pp. Ontario TABLE 3 ROAD AGENCIES, ADMINISTRATIVE LEVELS Nation National Agency State/Provincea Local United FHWA State DOTs County, municipal States Denmark National Roads Directorate Regional road agencies Municipal agencies Finland Road Administration Municipal agencies b France National Road Directorate Inter-departmental road Conseil Gnral agencies (11) Germany Federal Ministry of Transport, State road agencies (16) County, municipal, Building and Urban Affairs and rural Norway Public Roads Administration (PRA) PRA regions (5) Local road agencies South Africa National Roads Agency Limited Provincial departments of Municipal transport transport (9) agencies Sweden Roads Administration Regional road agencies (7) Municipal road agencies United Highways Agency Highways Agency Local road agencies Kingdom maintenance areas (14) a Number of agencies in parentheses. b A French department is similar to a U.S. state.

OCR for page 3
5 TABLE 4 BRIDGE INSPECTORS Nation Inspector Inspections United States Team leader All Denmark Bridge inspectors Principal inspections--6 years Road foreman Annual inspection Roadman Daily inspection Finland Engineer--Certified bridge inspector Basic inspection--5 years Certified bridge inspector General inspection--5 years Road foreman Annual inspection France Certified inspector Detailed inspection--6 years Inspection agent IQOA--3 years Road maintenance agent Annual inspection Germany Bridge inspector Major test--6 years Road maintenance crew Superficial inspection--3 months South Africa Senior bridge inspector Verification inspections--QA Bridge inspector Principal inspection--5 years Maintenance personnel Annual inspection Sweden Bridge inspector Major inspection--6 years Maintenance contractor Annual inspection United Kingdom Supervising engineer Principal inspection--6 years Bridge inspector General inspection--3 years IQOA = Image de la Qualit des Ouvrages d'Art (Image of the Quality of Bridges, Walls, and Tunnels). Bridge Inspections Quality Control and Quality Assurance U.S. federal regulations define eight types of bridge inspec- At most U.S. state DOTs, the inspection program manager tion. Three are periodic: routine inspection, fracture-critical guides quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) poli- member inspection, and underwater inspection. U.S. state cies and execution. U.S. state DOTs make QC reviews of DOTs establish more detailed guidelines providing for peri- inspection reports. QC verifies that inspection reports are odic use of hands-on inspection, close-up access, and collec- accurate and complete; that there are sufficient notes, sketches, tion of quantitative data. State DOTs establish guidelines for and photographs of conditions; and that recommendations for short-interval, interim inspections in response to bridge maintenance are appropriate. defects, conditions, or load posting. State DOTs also establish guidelines for long-interval, in-depth inspections for selected Most U.S. DOTs use peer team leaders to review inspec- bridge types and bridge elements. Foreign road agencies de- tion reports. At some DOTs, the district inspection manager fine between four and eight types of inspection. Each foreign or other staff performs additional QC review of a sample of agency defines two or three routine inspections at different inspection reports. Some DOTs make specific QC reviews intensities and at different intervals. for inspections of bridges that have poor conditions, signifi- cant defects, or posting for load. Ninety-five percent of U.S. routine inspections are per- formed at intervals of 24 months or less. Foreign road agencies For a sample of bridges, QC/QA programs often include perform detailed inspections at 5- or 6-year intervals in com- bination with less detailed check inspections at intervals of field activities such as: 1 to 3 years. Independent inspection by a peer inspection team. Most U.S. state DOTs use two-person teams for bridge Verification by a peer team of the current inspection inspections. At a few DOTs, routine inspections are made by report. individual inspectors. Equal numbers of state DOTs either Joint audit of the current inspection report by a peer rotate inspection teams to new bridges periodically or prefer team and the inspector of record. that inspection teams inspect the same set of bridges each Site visit by an inspection supervisor to an inspection cycle. team at work. Inspection of control bridges as part of periodic work- Most U.S. state-owned bridges are inspected by state shops or training. DOT personnel. Inspection consultants perform underwater inspections, inspections of some large bridges, and inspec- QA activities usually focus on a DOT region or on a local tions of local agency bridges. Foreign road agencies dele- bridge owner. QC activities usually focus on a team leader or gate many inspections to consultants or to maintenance inspection team. Focus determines how samples of bridges contractors. are selected and where findings on quality are directed. QA

OCR for page 3
6 review collects a sample of bridges in a region and discusses Refresher training for bridge inspectors is a part of QA at findings in a close-out meeting with region staff. QC collects most U.S. state DOTs. a sample of bridges for a team, and discusses findings with the team and their immediate supervisors. Foreign practice delegates most QC responsibilities to con- sultants performing inspections. Road agencies require and re- QA activities verify that inspection personnel are quali- view consultants' QC plans as part of contract administration. fied, that staff and equipment are adequate for the workload, that bridge files and bridge lists are maintained, and that there Foreign QA activities center on periodic advanced train- is appropriate follow-up on significant findings. Intervals for ing that usually includes inspection of control bridges and QA review range from 12 months to 48 months. discussions among inspectors at the training.