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 42
42
spections may record condition data as indicators of ade-
Casting joint
quacy of work by the maintenance contractor.
Delamination, spalling
Defects in bridges are reported in terms of physical, func-
tional, and economic conditions. Physical condition is reported
Porous or bad quality concrete
as a measurement of an appropriate physical quantity. The quan-
tity and the method of its measurement are fitted to the type of
Area of measurement
damage, structural element, material, and other considerations
(e.g., mode of action of element). Functional condition is re-
Cracks ported on a 0 to 3 rating scale, with 3 being the worst condition
(Table 72). Functional condition is related to the time until the
Cracks > 0,2 mm, < 2,0 mm defect is expected to impair the service of the bridge.
Economic condition is expressed as cost. Economic con-
Cracks > 2,0 mm
dition is computed as defect quantity times average unit cost
Cracking for repair. This is not an estimate of actual project costs,
because project scope may differ from defect quantity.
Visibly corroding reinforcement
However, greater values of economic condition correctly in-
dicate more severe and more extensive defects.
FIGURE 1 Norwegian graphic symbols for
damage.
United Kingdom
During Principal inspections, defect severity is reported on a
South Africa
1 to 5 scale, and defect extent on an "A" to "E" scale. These
SANRAL records defects in bridge components with ratings condition ratings are used in Structures Management Infor-
for Degree, Extent, Relevancy, and Urgency. This system mation System to generate the performance indicator for
employs integer ratings in all four categories (Table 70). Rat- visual condition.
ings range from 0 (no defect) to 4 (critical defect) (Table 71).
ACCESS FOR INSPECTIONS--
Sweden FOREIGN AGENCIES
The SRA collects ratings and other data on conditions of Foreign road agencies reported on the use of traffic lane clo-
bridge components during General, Major, and Special sures, lifts or climbing for acceptance inspections, principal
inspections. A Regular inspection may yield a report of dam- inspections, and special inspections; that is, at longer inspec-
age that is followed up by a Special inspection. The condition tion intervals. These access methods are not used during rou-
data, strictly, are from the Special inspection. Superficial in- tine inspections at shorter intervals (Tables 7375).
TABLE 70
SOUTH AFRICA: DEFECT CATEGORIES
Category Description
D--Degree of defect Severity of defect
E--Extent of defect Prevalence of defect within the bridge element
R--Relevancy of defect Impact of the defect on structural integrity and/or user safety
U--Urgency of defect Recommended time for repair
TABLE 71 TABLE 72
SOUTH AFRICA: DEFECT RATING VALUES SWEDEN: CONDITION RATINGS
Rating Degree Extent Relevancy Urgency Rating Physical Condition Functional Condition
0 None Monitor only 3 Repair needed now Service impaired now
1 Minor Local Minimum Routine 2 Repair within 3 years Service impaired within 3 years
2 Fair >Local Moderate <5 year 1 Repair within 10 years Service impaired within 10 years
3 Poor
43
TABLE 73
USE OF LANE CLOSURES FOR INSPECTIONS--FOREIGN AGENCIES
Country Inspection Type Lane Closures
Denmark Routine, Principal Very rare
Special Nearly always
Finland General Rarely, except if inspection lift is used
Basic, Special Often
France Routine, Annual, IQOA No
Detailed Yes
Germany Superficial, Minor, No
Major Yes, if needed
Norway General No
All other types Inspectors must be at arms length to component
South Africa Principal Yes, if needed
Acceptance Yes, to test water tightness of joints
Other types Seldom used
Sweden General, Major, Special If needed
Routine, Superficial No
United Acceptance, Special Yes, but structure may not be open at time of acceptance
Kingdom inspection. For special inspection, closure may be used
during installation of instruments for monitoring.
All others No
TABLE 74
USE OF LIFTS AND OTHER EQUIPMENT FOR INSPECTION ACCESS--FOREIGN AGENCIES
Country Inspection Type Lifts, Other Equipment
Denmark Special Nearly always uses lifts
Principal, Special Might use boats
Finland General Rarely
General, Large bridge Often
Basic, Special Often
France Routine, Annual, IQOA No
Detailed Yes, France has a special snooper for great
arches and piers.
Germany Superficial, Minor, No
Major Yes
Norway General No
All other types Inspectors must be at arms length to component
South Africa Principal If needed
Other types Seldom used
Sweden General, Major, Special If needed
Routine, Superficial No
United Kingdom Acceptance, Principal, Special Yes
General No
TABLE 75
USE OF CLIMBING, LADDERS, AND OTHER METHODS FOR BRIDGE INSPECTION--
FOREIGN AGENCIES
Country Inspection Type Climbing
Denmark Special Large structures and by special personnel only
Finland All Climbing is not used. Access is by lifts, if necessary.
Germany Superficial, minor No
Major Yes, if needed
Norway General No
All other types Inspectors must be at arms length to component
South Africa Principal If needed
Other types Seldom used
Sweden General, major, special If needed, and performed by trained personnel
Routine, superficial No
United Kingdom Special Yes, abseilers (rappelling)
