Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
92 Conclusion The preceding chapters have presented bridge pier protec- tion guidelines proposed for inclusion in both the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and the RDG. Procedures, background regarding the development of those procedures, example problems, and comparisons to RSAPv3 have been presented. In the LRFD Bridge Design pier protection procedures, the user proceeds by looking up site-specific values in four tables and then inserting these values into a short calculation to determine the annual frequency of bridge collapse. If that value is less than 0.001 for a typical bridge or 0.0001 for a critical bridge, the pier system need not be shielded. These acceptance criteria values can be modified by AASHTO or adopting states should they want to make the criteria either more or less conservative. The proposed LRFD pier protection guidelines describe what types of pier systems need to be evaluated for shielding and also provide lateral capacity suggestions. If a shielding barrier is required, it must be a MASH crash-tested TL-5 rigid concrete barrier positioned on the site according to RDG Section 5.6.4. Additionally, a minimum 60-ft TL-5 rigid con- crete barrier should be provided in advance of the leading pier component. Reference has been made to the RDG to ensure conflict between publications is not created. The 60-ft minimum is suggested to ensure that, regardless of how the length-of-need calculations are presented in the RDG in the future, the LRFD will include the minimum barrier necessary to redirect a heavy vehicle. Similarly, for the passenger-vehicle occupant protection procedures, the user proceeds by looking up site-specific val- ues in three tables, then uses those values in a short calculation to determine the annual number of severe and fatal injury crashes. If that value is less than 0.0001 severe or fatal injury crashes per year, then the pier system need not be shielded for occupant protection. These criteria can be modified by AASHTO or adopting states should they want to make the criteria either more or less conservative. If a shielding bar- rier is required for passenger-vehicle occupant protection, a MASH crash-tested TL-3 w-beam guardrail positioned on the site according to RDG Section 5.6.4 is suggested. Four example problems were presented that illustrate the application of both the LRFD and RDG procedures and com- pare the results to RSAPv3 simulations. The results of the pro- cedures compare closely with the RSAPv3 estimates. C H A P T E R 7
