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.
2019 N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 908 Acceptance Criteria of Complete Joint Penetration Steel Bridge Welds Evaluated Using Enhanced Ultrasonic Methods Robert J. Connor Curtis J. Schroeder Bridget M. Crowley Purdue university West Lafayette, IN Glenn A. Washer university of Missouri Columbia, MO Philip E. Fish fish & AssociAtes, inc. Madison, WI Subscriber Categories Bridges and Other Structures Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transporta- tion results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to high- way authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRBâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRBâs relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the Federal Highway Administration. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&Iâs recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or duplicate, other highway research programs. Published research reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 908 Project 14-35 ISSN 2572-3766 (Print) ISSN 2572-3774 (Online) ISBN: 978-0-309-48044-4 Library of Congress Control Number 2019905465 Â© 2019 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research documented in this report was performed under NCHRP Project 14-35 by the Lyles School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Purdue University in West Lafayette, IN. Purdue University is the prime contractor for this study with Dr. Robert J. Connor, Professor of Civil Engineering at Purdue, as the Project Director and Principal Investigator. The Co-Principal Investigator of this report is Professor Glenn A. Washer from the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of Missouri. The other authors of this report are PhD Candidate Curtis J. Schroeder and Bridget M. Crowley, Research Assistants at the Bowen Laboratory for Large-Scale Civil Engineering Research at Purdue University and Philip E. Fish, Senior Consultant formerly with Fish & Associates, Inc. The authors also acknowledge the guidance and input from the Project Panel. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 908 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Waseem Dekelbab, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Heidi Willis, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 14-35 PANEL Field of MaintenanceâArea of Maintenance of Way and Structures Alexander K. Bardow, Massachusetts DOT, Boston, MA (Chair) Steven M. Duke, Florida DOT, Gainesville, FL Karl H. Frank, Austin, TX Heather E. Gilmer, Tampa Tank/Florida Structural Steel, Tampa, FL Richard A. Pimpinella, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Phillip W. Sauser, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul, MN Hormoz Seradj, Salem, OR Justin M. Ocel, FHWA Liaison
F O R E W O R D NCHRP Research Report 908: Acceptance Criteria of Complete Joint Penetration Steel Bridge Welds Evaluated Using Enhanced Ultrasonic Methods presents guidelines for evalu- ating complete joint penetration (CJP) welds in steel bridges and proposes modifications to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)/ American Welding Society (AWS) D1.5. The guidelines are based on comprehensive ana- lytical and round robin testing programs that established the critical flaw size that would be considered rejectable for typical bridge CJP welds and identify best practices for improved flaw detection and flaw characterization. This report will be of immediate interest to steel bridge fabricators and engineers. Inspection of welds in steel bridges is necessary to ensure the quality of workmanship during the fabrication and construction process and later on when the bridge is in service. There are two non-destructive evaluation (NDE) methods for evaluation of complete joint penetration (CJP) welds in steel bridges: radiographic (RT) and ultrasonic (UT). Recent advances in enhanced ultrasonic methods, including the development of phased-array ultrasonic technology (PAUT), allow for efficient detection and characterization of flaws with the option of automated data collection and imaging. Criteria for categorizing weld discontinuities as acceptable or unacceptable are codified in the AASHTO/AWS D1.5M/ D1.5: Bridge Welding Code (BWC). However, these acceptance criteria do not reflect the full use of the capability of enhanced ultrasonic testing methods, and furthermore are not based on the effect of weld discontinuities on bridge performance (e.g., resistance to fatigue and fracture). In addition, some weld discontinuities that are not allowed according to BWC are potentially not harmful and may not decrease service life. An updated acceptance criteria based on enhanced ultrasonic testing methods for evaluation of CJP welds in steel bridges was needed for fabricators and bridge owners. The objectives of this research were to: (1) develop guidelines to evaluate complete joint penetration welds in steel bridges based on updated acceptance criteria and (2) develop proposed modifications to the BWC. The guidelines cover shop and field fabrication and in-service evaluation and include procedures for using enhanced ultrasonic testing methods to evaluate CJP welds in steel bridges and pertinent acceptance criteria. Under NCHRP Project 14-35, Purdue University was asked to: (1) develop guidelines to evaluate complete joint penetration welds in steel bridges based on updated acceptance criteria and (2) develop proposed modifications to BWC. The guidelines address shop and field fabrication and in-service evaluation and include procedures for using enhanced ultrasonic testing methods to evaluate CJP welds in steel bridges and pertinent acceptance criteria. By Waseem Dekelbab Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
A number of deliverables, provided as appendices, are not published but are available on the TRB project website. These appendices are titled as follows: â¢ Appendix AâT and Corner Joint Critical Flaw Size â¢ Appendix BâRound Robin Height and Length Measurements â¢ Appendix CâRound Robin Reported Amplitude â¢ Appendix DâDigital RT Images of Round Robin Specimens â¢ Appendix EâCIVA Modeling Results â¢ Appendix FâAcoustic Property Experimental Results â¢ Appendix GâAWS D1.5:2015 Annex K Markups â¢ Appendix HâDirections Supplied to Round Robin Technicians
C O N T E N T S Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions. 1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Background 4 1.1 Problem Statement and Research Objective 5 1.2 Scope of Study 5 1.3 Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing (PAUT) 8 Chapter 2 Research Approach 8 2.1 Summary of the State of the Practice 12 2.2 Research Methodology 14 Chapter 3 Findings and Application 14 3.1 Critical Flaw Size 24 3.2 Round Robin Results 33 3.3 CIVA Modeling 33 3.4 Acoustic Attenuation 39 3.5 Shear Wave Velocity 44 3.6 Calibration Blocks 46 3.7 Amplitude Limit for Rejection of Flaws 53 3.8 Amplitude Limit for Detection of Flaws 63 3.9 Compression Weld Acceptance Criteria 65 3.10 Comparison to Radiographic Testing 65 3.11 Technician Performance Qualification 69 3.12 Flaw Sizing Acceptance Criteria for Alternative UT Methods 72 Chapter 4 Conclusions and Suggested Research 72 4.1 Conclusions 72 4.2 Suggested Research 74 References