The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 86-452

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 87... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page i Phase II Appendices TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A Risk-Based Methodologies.....................................................................................1 HYRISK....................................................................................................................................1 HYRISK Countermeasures Economic Calculator ..................................................................6 Probabilistic Assessment/Geotechnical/Geologic Materials ................................................12 Risk-Based Cost-Benefit Assessment/Prioritizing Methods................................................13 Risk-based Design Methods ..................................................................................................14 Evaluation of Epistemic Uncertainty ...................................................................................16 References ..............................................................................................................................17 Appendix B Read the entire page →
From page 88... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page ii Phase II Appendices Appendix G Scour Evaluation Forms and Tables.................................................................359 Data Collection.....................................................................................................................359 Scour Risk Probability Tables .............................................................................................363 Minimum Performance Levels ............................................................................................364 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Flowchart for HYRISK methodology...........................................................................1 Figure 2 Probability of failure versus expected life...................................................................7 Figure 3 Economic benefit of protection versus countermeasure protection levels.................8 Figure 4 Minimum reasonable expenditure for countermeasure ...........................................11 Figure 5 Maximum benefit from expenditure on countermeasure.........................................11 Figure 6 Maximum benefit/cost from expenditure on countermeasure .................................12 Figure 7 Scaling and adjustment of the HYRISK annual probability of failure table ........106 Figure 8 Final annual probability of failure estimates .........................................................107 Figure 9 Minimum performance levels for each functional classification............................110 Figure 10 Annual probability of failure and minimum peformance levels ..........................111 Figure 11 Surface echo tests ...................................................................................................114 Figure 12 Bending waves method ..........................................................................................115 Figure 13 Ultraseismic testing method..................................................................................116 Figure 14 Spectral analysis of surface waves test .................................................................117 Figure 15 Parallel seismic method .........................................................................................118 Figure 16 Induction field method ...........................................................................................119 Figure 17 Borehole radar method...........................................................................................120 Figure 18 Crosshole tomography method ..............................................................................121 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Probability of Scour Failure Using NBI Data ..............................................................4 Table 2 Scour Vulnerability versus NBI Items 60 and 61 ........................................................5 Table 3 Bridge Overtopping Frequency versus NBI Items 26 and 61......................................5 Table 4 Example Benefit/Cost Analysis of Scour Countermeasures ........................................9 Table 5 Sample Input Table for Countermeasures Costs .......................................................10 Table 6 Assumed Number of Lives Lost in Bridge Failure.....................................................21 Table 7 Categories and Priorities Based on Priority Rating...................................................26 Table 8 Elasticity of Various Measures of Travel Demand.....................................................35 Table 9 Elasticities Used To Determine Travel Demand for Bridge Detours........................37 Table 10 Level 1 Survey Respondents......................................................................................39 Table 11 Tabulation of Responses to Importance of Rebuild Time Factors ...........................69 Table 12 Tabulation of Responses to Weights of Rebuild Time Factors ................................70 Table 13 Summary of state records regarding scour failures at bridges................................81 Table 14 Minimum Performance Levels for Bridges .............................................................108 Table 15 Effectiveness of NDT Methods ................................................................................123 Table 16 Case Study Respondents..........................................................................................126 Table 17 Bridge Case Study Comparison...............................................................................239 Table 18 Overtopping Frequency ...........................................................................................363 Table 19 Scour Vulnerability ..................................................................................................363 Table 20 Annual Probability of Scour Failure .......................................................................364 Table 21 Minimum Performance Levels ................................................................................364 Read the entire page →
From page 89... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 1 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX A RISK-BASED METHODOLOGIES During the review of available literature, several risk-based methodologies were encountered, some of which may be useful in development of guidelines for managing bridges with unknown foundations. Read the entire page →
From page 90... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 2 Phase II Appendices ⎭⎬ ⎫ ⎩⎨ ⎧ ⎥⎦ ⎤⎢⎣ ⎡ +⎟⎠ ⎞⎜⎝ ⎛ −++= S DAdTCTOCDAdCWLCKPRisk 100100 1 4321 where: Risk = risk of scour failure ($/year) , K = risk adjustment factor based on foundation type and type of span based on NBI items and where available from more developed databases, foundation information, P = probability of failure based on NBI items 26, 60, 61, 71, and 113 C1 = unit rebuilding cost ($/ft2) Read the entire page →
From page 91... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 3 Phase II Appendices In this equation K1 is a bridge type factor based on NBI data, and K2 is a foundation type factor based on information, which may be obtained from State inventories but not in the NBI. The values presently recommended for K1 are 1.0 for simple spans and 0.67 for rigid continuous spans with lengths in excess of 100 ft. Read the entire page →
From page 92... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 4 Phase II Appendices from 0–9, then this code is used for the scour vulnerability in Table 1. However, if NBI field 113 is coded as "U' (unknown foundation) Read the entire page →
From page 93... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 5 Phase II Appendices Table 2 Scour Vulnerability versus NBI Items 60 and 61 Substructure Condition (NBI Item 60) Channel Protection (NBI Item 61) Read the entire page →
From page 94... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 6 Phase II Appendices Data readily available in the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) Basic economic assumptions The assumption that unknown foundations are generally poor (shallow or susceptible to scour) Read the entire page →
From page 95... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 7 Phase II Appendices are encouraged to adjust PA based on what may be known about the specific bridge being investigated. As an example, if scour analysis indicates that a bridge will fail during a 20-year return period flood, PA should be set to 0.05. Read the entire page →
From page 96... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 8 Phase II Appendices ⎟⎠ ⎞⎜⎝ ⎛ ′−= LLF PPCB In this equation B is the present value benefit and ′LP is the probability of failure over the expected life of the protected bridge. This relationship may be used to explore the range of economic benefits offered by providing various levels of protection at the bridge site. Read the entire page →
From page 97... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 9 Phase II Appendices Table 4 Example Benefit/Cost Analysis of Scour Countermeasures Countermeasure Cost Return Period Protection (yrs) ′ LP Net Benefit Benefit/Cost Ratio Small Riprap $125,000 25 0.435 -$50,327 0.60 Large Riprap $175,000 50 0.246 $88,642 1.51 Grout Mats $275,000 100 0.131 $103,746 1.38 Bridge owners may use this information to make a better-informed decision about which form of protection provides economic value while accounting for the expected (or desired) Read the entire page →
From page 98... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 10 Phase II Appendices A designer may have several countermeasure alternatives available. It is also reasonable to assume that one alternative will be either preferable for some non-economic cause or be the most cost effective for a given flood level. Read the entire page →
From page 99... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 11 Phase II Appendices Return Period Protection of Countermeasure (time) Read the entire page →
From page 100... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 12 Phase II Appendices Return Period Protection of Countermeasure (time) B en ef it /C os t R at io Maximum Benefit/Cost Figure 6 Maximum benefit/cost from expenditure on countermeasure Probabilistic Assessment/Geotechnical/Geologic Materials One focus of the literature search was to identify work that has used probabilistic methods to estimate the probability distribution of a particular parameter (e.g. Read the entire page →
From page 101... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 13 Phase II Appendices (visual) dam safety inspections. Read the entire page →
From page 102... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 14 Phase II Appendices There are many examples of risk-based cost-benefit analyses and prioritization methods in available literature. The following is a brief summary of the work that was reviewed. Read the entire page →
From page 103... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 15 Phase II Appendices U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (11) Read the entire page →
From page 104... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 16 Phase II Appendices For each category a performance level (i.e., life safety, confinement of hazard materials, etc.) , risk reduction and acceptable probability of unsatisfactory performance are defined. Read the entire page →
From page 105... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 17 Phase II Appendices The report by Budnitz et al. Read the entire page →
From page 106... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 18 Phase II Appendices 7. Kunreuther, K., C Read the entire page →
From page 107... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 19 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX B SPECIFIC DOCUMENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST The literature review for this report also yielded several documents of particular interest to the current research. Read the entire page →
From page 108... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 20 Phase II Appendices • A closure plan should be developed and implemented detailing closure trigger events, closure methods, a recommended detour route, and contact information for the District Engineer and traffic enforcement personnel. • Once a bridge is closed due to high flow, it should be inspected for stability prior to reopening the bridge to traffic. Read the entire page →
From page 109... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 21 Phase II Appendices classification (see Table 6) Read the entire page →
From page 110... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 22 Phase II Appendices Vertical or lateral displacement of the superstructure Visible damage to the bridge deck, low chord, or substructure Sinkholes in the roadway behind the abutments Massive debris buildup, especially if near the low chord If any of these or other qualitative signs of structural distress are apparent at any time, the crew should implement an emergency bridge closure, call for formal or full bridge closure, and should avoid getting on the bridge if at all possible. Read the entire page →
From page 111... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 23 Phase II Appendices Scour Critical Bridges: High-Flow Monitoring and Emergency Procedures In this Idaho DOT report (2) the following information was considered noteworthy. Read the entire page →
From page 112... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 24 Phase II Appendices Scour and Flood Risk at Railway Structures In this report JBA Consulting (3) conducted a study that examined an existing priority system for evaluating scour potential at railway bridges. Read the entire page →
From page 113... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 25 Phase II Appendices What is a failure? How should failure(s) Read the entire page →
From page 114... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 26 Phase II Appendices river) Read the entire page →
From page 115... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 27 Phase II Appendices And PP= 15+ln (TS/FD) For fixed TS and FD =1m study established high priorities for 50.5% of elements using preliminary priorities and high priorities for 26.6% of elements using final priorities. Read the entire page →
From page 116... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 28 Phase II Appendices The causes of undermining scour are the same whatever the use of the bridge, namely flood conditions, an erodible material and the presence of bridge supports in a river. The use of the bridge really only has an influence on the consequences of failure and the mitigation options available (for instance it is slightly easier on a railway to close the bridge to traffic if need be) Read the entire page →
From page 117... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 29 Phase II Appendices work we are undertaking for the RSSB is looking at additional 'tweaks' to the method to allow it to represent abutment scour, scour at inverts and also failure due to water pressure/ loading. Question: Does "Foundation depth" in the document refers to the depth of the piles driven below the river bed if the foundation sits on piles? Read the entire page →
From page 118... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 30 Phase II Appendices Question: Among 2,924 structures a total of 9,305 bridge supports or elements (an element is an abutment or a pier) have been rated. Read the entire page →
From page 119... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 31 Phase II Appendices High - study in more detail to quantify the risk more accurately and to assess mitigation options that may be required (e.g. scour protection, flood warning) Read the entire page →
From page 120... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 32 Phase II Appendices depth is used as a critical threshold the majority of structures on the railway network would be assessed as high priority – a result that is clearly overly conservative and out of sorts with the known historical incidence of scour and flood failure. For this reason, EX2502 sets the critical threshold at 16.0. Read the entire page →
From page 121... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 33 Phase II Appendices Scour Susceptible Bridge Screening Program In this report Renna (4) of the Florida DOT describes a general overview of the bridges crossing various cannels in district four. Read the entire page →
From page 122... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 34 Phase II Appendices Average daily trip demand is impacted when transportation costs increase. Small price changes can create demand shift if there are competitive options. Read the entire page →
From page 123... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 35 Phase II Appendices Table 8 Elasticity of Various Measures of Travel Demand Dependent Variable Short Term Long Term Total Fuel Consumption Mean elasticity -0.25 -0.64 Range -0.01 to -0.57 0 to -1.81 Fuel Consumption Per Vehicle Mean elasticity -0.08 -1.1 Range -0.08 to -0.08 -1.1 to -1.1 Total Vehicle Kilometers Mean elasticity -0.10 -0.29 Range -0.17 to -0.05 -0.63 to -0.10 Vehicle Kilometers Per Vehicle Mean elasticity -0.10 -0.30 Range -0.14 to -0.06 -0.55 to -0.11 Freight transportation companies have mechanisms in place today to recognize the variable cost of fuel. Fuel surcharges are often included in rate contracts and can be indexed to national or regional fuel price indices. Read the entire page →
From page 124... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 36 Phase II Appendices • Day of week • Income level In general high value freight and business/commuter travel is less elastic than recreational or shopping trips. Weekday travel demand is less elastic than weekend travel. Read the entire page →
From page 125... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 37 Phase II Appendices • Excess cost of speed change cycles • Excess running costs of vehicles at reduced speed through work zones • Total hourly excess user cost In general it was found that operating costs in reduced speed work zones are less but do not offset the reduced speed delay costs. The time delay variable is more important than the cost of operations. Read the entire page →
From page 126... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 38 Phase II Appendices 3. JBA Consulting. Read the entire page →
From page 127... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 39 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX C SURVEY RESULTS During the literature search, a survey was prepared and distributed to State DOTs using an AASHTO e-mail distribution list. Read the entire page →
From page 128... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 40 Phase II Appendices Bridge Management 1. Would you consider implementing risk-based guidelines for managing bridges with unknown foundations? Read the entire page →
From page 129... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 41 Phase II Appendices Frederick J Townsend, Jr., VDOT Virginia is divided into nine maintenance/construction districts. Read the entire page →
From page 130... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 42 Phase II Appendices James E Sothen, WV DOT Bridges are prioritized at our district level and repaired based on priority and availability of funds. Read the entire page →
From page 131... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 43 Phase II Appendices Ben Garde, ILDOT Decisions regarding user costs are routinely made for most projects. Traffic volumes and detour lengths play an important role in those decisions. Read the entire page →
From page 132... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 44 Phase II Appendices Harry Capers, NJDOT Scour critical bridges that show signs of scour along their foundations are repaired as a priority regardless of their having an ‘unknown foundation' or not. Should a bridge show signs of a foundation failure, the repairs are made on an emergency basis. Read the entire page →
From page 133... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 45 Phase II Appendices available. Ben Garde, ILDOT Our state retains the soil/rock exploration boring logs and existing structure foundation construction plans for future analysis. Read the entire page →
From page 134... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 46 Phase II Appendices foundation investigations, or may be subjective based on engineering judgment derived from observation of stream flow or performance during past high water events. Until a screening is performed, a plan to monitor the foundation during flood events is required to be filed. Read the entire page →
From page 135... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 47 Phase II Appendices Phil Brand, AHTD Of bridges with unknown foundations: In parts of the state without rock or rock-like soil at or near the surface, short span bridges(< ≈40') have driven piles; longer spans are often supported by wall-type piers with foundations below channel bottoms. Read the entire page →
From page 136... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 48 Phase II Appendices piers. Wayne Seger, TDOT Many older bridges (prior to 1960s) Read the entire page →
From page 137... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 49 Phase II Appendices Harry Capers, NJDOT H-Piles or steel pipe piles are used in North Jersey where soft soils sit above bedrock and concrete or pre-stressed concrete piles are used along the coastline, which is in a marine environment. Gary Peterson, MnDOT Exposed bottom of footing or piling. Read the entire page →
From page 138... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 50 Phase II Appendices Brian Summers, GDOT Corrosion of exposed steel piles in certain environments. However, exposed steel is protected with concrete encasing and bituminous or paint coatings, thus reducing or eliminating this problem. Read the entire page →
From page 139... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 51 Phase II Appendices Wayne Seger, TDOT Debris build up on bridge piers will damage pile bents and/or increase scour potential. Timber piling weathers quickly, especially if in a wet/dry zone. Read the entire page →
From page 140... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 52 Phase II Appendices Harry Capers, NJ DOT How do you determine whether the bridges with unknown foundation are scour critical or not? Do you adopt any particular methodology? Read the entire page →
From page 141... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 53 Phase II Appendices What kind of counter measures do you adopt for scour critical bridges with unknown foundation? Do you prioritize them in any particular manner? Read the entire page →
From page 142... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 54 Phase II Appendices estimate what the delays will likely be in person-hours. Regionally we estimate what the average cost per person-hour is and that's how the user cost is developed. Read the entire page →
From page 143... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 55 Phase II Appendices Does your organization have any database containing information on bridge foundation depth and information on soil characteristics on which foundation sits (or piles are driven) Read the entire page →
From page 144... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 56 Phase II Appendices they are available. Wayne J Read the entire page →
From page 145... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 57 Phase II Appendices Tri Buu, IdahoDOT For piling foundation, our standard specifications require a minimum pile penetration of 10 feet (this specification has been revised recently requiring 20 feet minimum penetration for piles embedded in soft or loose soils) Read the entire page →
From page 146... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 58 Phase II Appendices 3. When foundation information is unavailable are there any foundation generalizations you can make? Read the entire page →
From page 147... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 59 Phase II Appendices Andrea C Read the entire page →
From page 148... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 60 Phase II Appendices Meeting with MD State Highway Administration (MSHA) , February 09, 2005 Attendees: Andy Kosicki, Ralph Manna (Structures, Bridges) Read the entire page →
From page 149... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 61 Phase II Appendices estimates change in scour depth between present and past records. If there is one foot increase in scour depth in five years, they take borings. Read the entire page →
From page 150... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 62 Phase II Appendices Meeting with VDOT on March 09, 2005 Attendee: The attendee at the meeting was Frederick J Townsend (Structure and Bridge) Read the entire page →
From page 151... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 63 Phase II Appendices countermeasures for one significant storm. If the counter measures performance is satisfactory, they monitor the bridge on a regular cycle. Read the entire page →
From page 152... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 64 Phase II Appendices Additional Telephone Conversations with State DOT Officials Garland Land, Heavy Bridge Maintenance Engineer, Arkansas DOT: Arkansas DOT officials routinely inspect bridges once every two years. They also plot the profile of the channel once every five years to see the changes due to erosion. Read the entire page →
From page 153... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 65 Phase II Appendices countermeasures if the bridge is scour susceptible. The riprap used for scour protection falls into one of the following categories. Read the entire page →
From page 154... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 66 Phase II Appendices 1990s, and ranked bridges with unknown foundations into one of five categories regarding scour vulnerability. A systematic maintenance program does not exist but they do monitor their scour critical bridges closely, especially during significant events. Read the entire page →
From page 155... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 67 Phase II Appendices footing and they have information on bottom of the footing, then this is used in their scour analysis. If a foundation is pile-supported and if no information is available to estimate the bottom of the pile, they assume a depth of 10 feet and perform scour analysis. Read the entire page →
From page 156... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 68 Phase II Appendices of reroute, and political interest are considered dimensions of an average level of service concern, then this question arguably confirms the ratings from the first question. The third question asked the experts if they were aware of any relationships between traffic characteristics and the rebuild time within their jurisdiction. Read the entire page →
From page 157... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 69 Phase II Appendices Table 11 Tabulation of Responses to Importance of Rebuild Time Factors Factor Average Rating Median Rating Rated First or Second ADT 2.35 2 14 Structure type 5.12 5 9 Bypass length 4.04 4 7 Political pressure 4.00 3 6 Functional classification 4.19 3 6 Structure length 4.46 5 5 ADTT 3.85 4 5 Highway system 4.00 2.5 4 STRAHNET highway designation 3.19 1.5 3 Total project cost 5.15 4 2 NBIS bridge length 4.42 1 2 Bridge improvement cost 5.08 4 1 Maintenance responsibility 5.58 4 1 Designated level of service 5.00 5 0 Designated national truck network 3.31 n/a 0 Future ADT 3.77 n/a 0 Route signing 4.31 n/a 0 Question: Please estimate a weight (in the form of a percentage) that each variable has on the total time it will take to rebuild a bridge? Read the entire page →
From page 158... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 70 Phase II Appendices Table 12 Tabulation of Responses to Weights of Rebuild Time Factors Factor Average Rating Median Rating Availability of funds to perform the work 12.77 10 ADT 11.96 10 Political interest 11.62 10 Cost of reroute (lost time and operating costs) 11.58 10 Environmental permits or conditions 11.42 10 Emergency route designation 9.81 10 Social Factors (e.g. Read the entire page →
From page 159... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 71 Phase II Appendices Traffic characteristics would rarely play a role in rebuild time. Response 5 Rebuild time increases if detours are short 3 miles or less Rebuild time is inversely proportional to ADT Human and $$ resources are available to solve the traffic and structure wrt to ADT and classification $$$ is directly related to ADT Response 6 Case by case decision Response 7 No established rules. Read the entire page →
From page 160... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 72 Phase II Appendices Don't know Response 14 No rules in NM for rebuild time Response 15 Traffic volumes linked to revenue for toll roads. Rev loss will push for faster rebuild time. Read the entire page →
From page 161... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 73 Phase II Appendices Response 22 To date we have not developed any relationships between traffic characteristics and rebuilding time. Response 23 The more traffic the more political pressure you get to build quickly Response 24 Traffic characteristics are not significant criteria in predicting rebuild time. Read the entire page →
From page 162... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 74 Phase II Appendices Response 3 Primarily it is the level of impact the loss has on ADT User costs and disruption of emergency services are key factors Response 4 Used almost always in AZ due to long detours on most highways Response 5 ADT and functional classification Capacity and LOS of alt. routes Funds Capacity of contractors Environmental permit delays Traffic flow delays and LOS, public reaction Response 6 ADT and loss of revenue Response 7 Political pressure and traffic characteristics determine if accelerated construction is warranted. Read the entire page →
From page 163... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 75 Phase II Appendices Each project is a case by case. High ADT and political pressure, length and inconvenience of detour, environmental limitations, and public input can drive accelerated construction. Read the entire page →
From page 164... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 76 Phase II Appendices If bridge was totally out of service, that in itself would encourage accelerated construction. Response 20 High ADT, no available detour to accommodate the traffic, interstate route Response 21 Applicability of bridge design for rapid construction techniques No reasonable location for temporary bridge Temporary bridge too expensive Environmental permits will take too long to secure relative to temp. Read the entire page →
From page 165... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 77 Phase II Appendices • Combining type "A" and "B" Example demolition and site prep while preparing design and bidding for the bridge construction. • Partnership with designers, suppliers, contractors and the department to cut through most formality. Read the entire page →
From page 166... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 78 Phase II Appendices Response 6 FHWA Fed Emergency funds are usually 100% above obligation but rebuild must be done within 6 months of event Response 7 Procurement laws/rules can impact design and construction selection Response 8 Political demands fast rebuild time unless there is a reasonable detour nearby. Response 9 Higher ADT draws higher staff priority but Fed Regs and Environmental considerations make no such distinction with respect to ADT/use. Read the entire page →
From page 167... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 79 Phase II Appendices Whether a temporary bridge is viable (if so a pressure for a replacement bridge my be substantially reduced) Response 15 Funds for contractor incentives, physical location (site difficulties and access) Read the entire page →
From page 168... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 80 Phase II Appendices Scour-Related Bridge Failure Databases State DOT officials were contacted by telephone during June – July 2005 to ascertain the status and availability of a historical record of scour failures at bridges. These conversations focused on quantifying the historical performance and the designed performance of bridges with regard to scour failure. Read the entire page →
From page 169... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 81 Phase II Appendices 160,831 (the number of bridges over water from the 25-state record) , this reveals that about 77 bridges per year fail due to scour in the US. Read the entire page →
From page 170... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 82 Phase II Appendices The following summarizes the questions that were asked of each transportation official: 1. Do you have a database recording scour-related bridge failures (i.e. Read the entire page →
From page 171... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 83 Phase II Appendices improvements (riprap and dikes) on local road bridges. Read the entire page →
From page 172... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 84 Phase II Appendices by e-mail to Bill Wolford who handles "scour evaluations" and might have better estimates. Read the entire page →
From page 173... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 85 Phase II Appendices Mike Fazio, State Hydraulic Engineer, Utah DOT: Mike recalled that 3 county-owned bridges failed in Jan 2005, which they estimate was due to a 125-yr flood event. He then e-mailed a more detailed list of these failures. Read the entire page →
From page 174... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 86 Phase II Appendices David Chang, State Hydraulic Engineer, North Carolina DOT: David thinks a database is available. He asked David Beard to call us about the data, but no one responded. Read the entire page →
From page 175... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 87 Phase II Appendices working on the rest of Colorado Interstates and NHS highways to locate any more over probably the next 3-4 years. Attached are photos of some of these problems. Read the entire page →
From page 176... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 88 Phase II Appendices Jim Camp, State Maintenance Engineer, Arizona DOT: No database is available. Jim recollects over the last 15 years that a few bridges each year need some work because they wash out. Read the entire page →
From page 177... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 89 Phase II Appendices Prakash Dave, State Bridge Engineer, Maryland DOT: A database is available, but it is large and needs to be queried for scour-related failures to limit the results. He later said that they could not find any recorded failure that was attributed to scour. Read the entire page →
From page 178... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 90 Phase II Appendices he is not confident that this reflects a state-wide off-line number of failures. He stated that Missouri experienced two 500-yr flood events in his tenure, and he does not know off-hand how many state bridges over water that they currently monitor. Read the entire page →
From page 179... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 91 Phase II Appendices Other Scour-Related Information State officials were also asked to respond to the following questions: 1. How has the number of bridges (over water) Read the entire page →
From page 180... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 92 Phase II Appendices owned bridges. Eric does not think their counties will heed any scour guidelines in the foreseeable future. Read the entire page →
From page 181... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 93 Phase II Appendices Jim Camp, State Bridge Maintenance, New Mexico DOT: Jim estimated that there has been a 5% increase in the number of bridges over water in last 14 years. They have been designing for scour since 1991 or 1992. Read the entire page →
From page 182... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 94 Phase II Appendices listed as "other" as in other bridge authorities (NYS Thruway etc.) or non-DOT state agencies (NYS Dept. Read the entire page →
From page 183... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 95 Phase II Appendices Terry Leatherwood, State Maintenance Engineer, Tennessee DOT: Mr. Leatherwood wrote the following in an e-mail. Read the entire page →
From page 184... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 96 Phase II Appendices Our current hydraulic design procedures are available on-line at the following URL: http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/Chief_Engineer/assistant_engineer_design/structures/th mall.pdf You may want to especially read Memorandum 08 starting on page 49. All System bridges are checked for the 100 yr. Read the entire page →
From page 185... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 97 Phase II Appendices bridges and culverts on local, low ADT routes. Under this program, the local owner hires an engineering firm to design the bridge and provide construction inspection. Read the entire page →
From page 186... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 98 Phase II Appendices These contracts shall include a provision that such city, county or metropolitan government is solely responsible for all maintenance of the completed work. No such contract shall be valid in the absence of such maintenance provision. Read the entire page →
From page 187... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 99 Phase II Appendices Management-Related Information Sate officials were asked the following questions: 1. What criteria do you use to identify a bridge over water with an unknown foundation as scour-critical or at-risk, and what methods did you use to evaluate these criteria? Read the entire page →
From page 188... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 100 Phase II Appendices exceeds the "critical water mark" assigned to that bridge. To select the critical water mark, they perform an H&H study of the underlying waterway, which usually entails monitoring after any event greater than the 25-yr flood. Read the entire page →
From page 189... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 101 Phase II Appendices period. However, the main coding decision for Item 113 was based upon the 100 year return frequency. Read the entire page →
From page 190... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 102 Phase II Appendices recommendations. We have no legal authority to "make" the local bridge owner comply with our recommendations. Read the entire page →
From page 191... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 103 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX D ANNUAL PROBABILITY OF SCOUR FAILURE AND MINIMUM PERFORMANCE LEVELS There are two changes that are designed to make the original HYRISK method more applicable to managing bridges with unknown foundations. Read the entire page →
From page 192... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 104 Phase II Appendices analysis yields about 60,511 failures per year (i.e. the sum of the probabilities of failure for all 356,373 bridges) Read the entire page →
From page 193... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 105 Phase II Appendices (0.000206/0.1698) , which effectively reduces the total number of scour failures per year to about 73 per year. Read the entire page →
From page 194... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 106 Phase II Appendices Original HYRISK Assumptions Probability of Failure 2005 Bridge Population Number of Failures Remote Slight Occasional Frequent Remote Slight Occasional Frequent Total Remote Slight Occasional Frequent TOTAL 0 1 1 1 1 0 15 185 209 61 470 0 15 185 209 61 470 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 115 119 31 272 1 6 115 119 31 271 2 0.4573 0.4831 0.628 0.7255 2 100 1116 1289 255 2762 2 45.73 539.1396 809.492 185.0025 1579.364 3 0.2483 0.2673 0.3983 0.4951 3 281 2869 3138 268 6559 3 69.7723 766.8837 1249.8654 132.6868 2219.208 4 0.1266 0.1373 0.2277 0.2977 4 1326 12668 10720 649 25367 4 167.8716 1739.316 2440.944 193.2073 4541.339 5 0.00522 0.00648 0.0314 0.05744 5 2286 22088 18083 689 43151 5 11.93292 143.1302 567.8062 39.57616 762.4455 6 or U 0.18745 0.2023 0.313 0.3964 6 8264 71173 26799 776 107018 6 1549.087 14398.3 8388.087 307.6064 24643.08 7 0.18745 0.2023 0.313 0.3964 7 14574 88828 15754 439 119602 7 2731.896 17969.9 4931.002 174.0196 25806.82 8 0.00312 0.00368 0.0144 0.02784 8 8046 31874 3973 83 43984 8 25.10352 117.2963 57.2112 2.31072 201.9218 9 0.00208 0.00216 0.0036 0.006 9 3909 2927 378 15 7238 9 8.13072 6.32232 1.3608 0.09 15.90384 TOTAL 38807 233843 80462 3266 356378 TOTAL 4630.524 35980.29 18773.7686 1126.499 60511.08 0.169795 Direct Scaling Assumptions (scaling = actual P(f) Read the entire page →
From page 195... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 107 Phase II Appendices 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Scour Vulnerability A n n u a l P r o b a b i l i t y o f F a i l u r e 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 R e t u r n P e r i o d , 1 / P a ( y e a r s ) Frequent Occasional Slight Remote R2 Rasdfasdfsdf Series12 Series13 Overtopping Frequency: Figure 8 Final annual probability of failure estimates Read the entire page →
From page 196... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 108 Phase II Appendices Minimum Performance Levels The scour guidelines also include minimum performance levels (MPL) for bridges with unknown foundations. Read the entire page →
From page 197... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 109 Phase II Appendices Figure 9 shows these MPLs within the context of Figure 8 according to NBI item 26 – functional classification. In other words, any bridge that has a probability of failure below the corresponding MPL line in Figure 9 meets the MPL. Read the entire page →
From page 198... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 110 Phase II Appendices 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Scour Vulnerability A n n u a l P r o b a b i l i t y o f F a i l u r e 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 R e t u r n P e r i o d , 1 / P a ( y e a r s ) R2 01,02,11,12,14 16 06,07,17 08 09,19 RasdfasdfsdfMPL for NBI item 26: Figure 9 Minimum performance levels for each functional classification Read the entire page →
From page 199... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 111 Phase II Appendices 0.000001 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Scour Vulnerability A n n u a l P r o b a b i l i t y o f F a i l u r e 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 R e t u r n P e r i o d , 1 / P a ( y e a r s ) Frequent Occasional Slight Remote R2 01,02,11,12,14 16 06,07,17 08 09,19 Rasdfasdfsdf Series12 Series13 Overtopping Frequency: MPL for NBI item 26: Figure 10 Annual probability of failure and minimum peformance levels Read the entire page →
From page 200... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 112 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX E NON-DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION Introduction It is anticipated that guidelines for managing bridges with unknown foundations will likely include some investigation of the foundation to eliminate as much uncertainty as possible. Read the entire page →
From page 201... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 113 Phase II Appendices to have more limited applications. These more limited NDE methods are also discussed herein and include the Sonic Echo/Impulse Response (SE/IR) Read the entire page →
From page 202... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 114 Phase II Appendices Sonic Echo/Impulse Response (SE/IR) Test In the Sonic Echo/Impulse Response test (see Figure 11) Read the entire page →
From page 203... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 115 Phase II Appendices Bending Wave (BW) Test The Bending Wave (BW) Read the entire page →
From page 204... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 116 Phase II Appendices Ultraseismic (US) Test The Ultraseismic test (see Figure 13) Read the entire page →
From page 205... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 117 Phase II Appendices Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves (SASW) Test The Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves (SASW) Read the entire page →
From page 206... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 118 Phase II Appendices Parallel Seismic (PS) Test The Parallel Seismic (PS) Read the entire page →
From page 207... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 119 Phase II Appendices Induction Field (IF) Test The Induction Field (IF) Read the entire page →
From page 208... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 120 Phase II Appendices Borehole Radar (BHR) The Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) Read the entire page →
From page 209... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 121 Phase II Appendices Crosshole Tomography The Crosshole Tomography (CT) method (see Figure 18) Read the entire page →
From page 210... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 122 Phase II Appendices Selection of NDE Methods for Unknown Bridge Foundation Depths The research showed that the borehole-based Parallel Seismic method was both the most accurate and most applicable NDE method for the determination of the depth of unknown bridge foundations for bridge scour safety evaluation purposes. This suggests that it would be valuable to initially perform at least one Parallel Seismic test for each bridge to check the accuracy of depth predictions from any other less costly surface methods that may also be applicable for a given foundation type of the bridge being tested. Read the entire page →
From page 211... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 123 Phase II Appendices Table 15 Effectiveness of NDT Methods Ability to Identify Foundation Parameters Sonic Echo (SE) /Impulse Response (IR) Read the entire page →
From page 212... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 124 Phase II Appendices Ability to Identify Foundation Parameters Sonic Echo (SE) /Impulse Response (IR) Read the entire page →
From page 213... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 125 Phase II Appendices NDE Conclusions The NCHRP 21-5 and 21-5(2) research resulted in greatly improved understanding of the applicability and accuracy of such NDE methods using sonic, ultrasonic, seismic, magnetic and electromagnetic techniques. Read the entire page →
From page 214... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 126 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX F SCOUR MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES Table 16 lists the Department of Transportation officials in six States who were invited to participate in a case study of the proposed scour guidelines. Read the entire page →
From page 215... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 127 Phase II Appendices reconnaissance methods, and Tennessee requested the NDE literature review from this report in order to estimate this cost. Read the entire page →
From page 216... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 128 Phase II Appendices Bridge #__ Example Page 1 Respondent Information Name E-mail Address Job Title Phone Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 217... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 129 Phase II Appendices Example Page 2 Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 218... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 130 Phase II Appendices Table 1 Cost of Bridge Construction Example Page 3 Bridge Superstructure Type Total Cost ($/ft2) Reinforced concrete flat slab; simple span $50-65* Read the entire page →
From page 219... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 131 Phase II Appendices Case Study Evaluations and Responses After each state completed and returned the surveys, the "Scour Risk Management Guidelines" were applied to each case study. Then a one to two-page summary was written to explain how the guidelines selected a pertinent management plan. Read the entire page →
From page 220... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 132 Phase II Appendices California Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 221... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 133 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 222... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 134 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. Route 1 over the North Arm of Newport Bay Bridge 55-0614 in Newport Beach, CA was constructed in 1982 and supports an urban principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 223... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 135 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 224... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 136 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge, which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 225... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 137 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. State Route 76 over San Luis Rey River Bridge 57-0043Z in San Diego County, CA was constructed in 1925 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 226... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 138 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $2,800,000. Read the entire page →
From page 227... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 139 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 228... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 140 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 229... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 141 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. State Route 78 over San Felipe Creek Bridge 57-0096 in San Diego County, CA was constructed in 1948 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 230... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 142 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $100,000. Read the entire page →
From page 231... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 143 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 232... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 144 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 233... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 145 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. State Route 41 NB over the North Fork of Kings River Bridge 45-0019R in Kings County, CA was constructed in 1959 and reconstructed in 2000 and supports a rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 234... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 146 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 235... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 147 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 236... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 148 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. State Route 43 over Kings River Bridge 45-0063 in Kings County, CA was constructed in 1954 and reconstructed in 1985 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 237... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 149 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $100,000. Read the entire page →
From page 238... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 150 Phase II Appendices easily discovered and an assumption should not be necessary for this type of foundation. In other words, continue as if the foundation is known. Read the entire page →
From page 239... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 151 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 240... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 152 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 241... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 153 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. Interstate 5 over San Juan Creek Bridge 55-0228 in San Clemente, CA was constructed in 1958 and reconstructed in 1996 and supports an urban interstate. Read the entire page →
From page 242... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 154 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 243... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 155 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 244... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 156 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. State Route 76 over Pala Creek Bridge 57-0072 in San Diego County, CA was constructed in 1938 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 245... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 157 Phase II Appendices 2. Evaluate scour using FHWA HEC-18 manual. Read the entire page →
From page 246... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 158 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 247... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 159 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 248... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 160 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. State Route 145 over Cottonwood Creek Bridge 41-0025 in Medera County, CA was constructed in 1953 and supports an urban principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 249... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 161 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 250... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 162 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 251... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 163 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. State Route 128 over Russian River Bridge 20-0038 in Sonoma County, CA was constructed in 1932 and reconstructed in 1972 and supports a rural minor arterial road. Read the entire page →
From page 252... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 164 Phase II Appendices 3. If scour analysis indicates that countermeasures are warranted, countermeasures should be designed using FHWA HEC-23 manual – or consider replacing or closing the bridge. Read the entire page →
From page 253... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 165 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Luis Avila E-mail Address Luis_Avila@dot.ca.gov Job Title Transportation Engineer Phone (916) 227-8030 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 254... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 166 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 255... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 167 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. State Route 149 over Clear Creek Bridge 12-0073 in Butte County, CA was constructed in 1951 and reconstructed in 1975 and supports a rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 256... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 168 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Steve Ng inserted comments into the management summary document, for convenience. His first comment appears in the second paragraph of the "Develop a Bridge Closure Plan" section of the summary. Read the entire page →
From page 257... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 169 Phase II Appendices Florida Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Richard C Semple E-mail Address Richard.semple@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structures Management Coordinator Phone 813-744-6050 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 258... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 170 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 259... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 171 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. US Highway 41 over Fahka Union Canal Bridge 030146 in Collier County, FL was constructed in 1969. Read the entire page →
From page 260... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 172 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Richard C Semple E-mail Address Richard.semple@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structures Management Coordinator Phone 813-744-6050 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 261... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 173 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 262... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 174 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. State Route 78 over Indian Prairie Canal Bridge 050018 in Glades County, FL was constructed in 1960 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 263... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 175 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Richard C Semple E-mail Address Richard.semple@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structures Management Coordinator Phone 813-744-6050 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 264... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 176 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 265... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 177 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. State Route 80 over Orange River Bridge 120160 in Fort Myers, FL was constructed in 1990 and supports an urban principal arterial road. Read the entire page →
From page 266... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 178 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Richard C Semple E-mail Address Richard.semple@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structures Management Coordinator Phone 813-744-6050 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 267... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 179 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 268... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 180 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. State Route 80 EB over Bedman Creek Bridge 120165 in Lee County, FL was constructed in 2006 and supports a rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 269... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 181 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Richard C Semple E-mail Address Richard.semple@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structures Management Coordinator Phone 813-744-6050 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 270... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 182 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 271... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 183 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. State Road 37 over N Fork Alafia River Bridge 160063 in Mulberry, FL was constructed in 1951 and supports an urban minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 272... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 184 Phase II Appendices 2. Evaluate scour using FHWA HEC-18 manual. Read the entire page →
From page 273... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 185 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Manuel H Luna, EIT E-mail Address manuel.luna@dot.state.fl.us Job Title: Project Coordinator Phone(813) Read the entire page →
From page 274... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 186 Phase II Appendices National Bridge Inventory (NBI) Data Please provide the following information for the bridge. Read the entire page →
From page 275... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 187 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 276... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 188 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. I-75 NB over Little Manatee River Bridge 100352 in Hillsborough County, FL was constructed in 1981 and supports a rural interstate. Read the entire page →
From page 277... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 189 Phase II Appendices 2. Evaluate scour using FHWA HEC-18 manual. Read the entire page →
From page 278... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 190 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Manuel H Luna, EIT E-mail Address manuel.luna@dot.state.fl.us Job Title : Project Coordinator Phone(813) Read the entire page →
From page 279... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 191 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 280... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 192 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. US 301 over Hillsborough River Bridge 100434 in Hillsborough County, FL was constructed in 1985 and supports an rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 281... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 193 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Manuel H Luna, EIT E-mail Address manuel.luna@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structure Project Coordinator Phone (813) Read the entire page →
From page 282... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 194 Phase II Appendices National Bridge Inventory (NBI) Data Please provide the following information for the bridge. Read the entire page →
From page 283... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 195 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 284... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 196 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. I-275 NB over Tampa Bay Bridge 150107 in Pinellas County, FL was constructed in 1959 and supports an urban interstate. Read the entire page →
From page 285... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 197 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Manuel H Luna, EIT E-mail Address manuel.luna@dot.state.fl.us Job Title Structure Project Coordinator Phone : (813) Read the entire page →
From page 286... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 198 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 287... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 199 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. US 41 SB over Little Manatee River Bridge 100039 in Ruskin, FL was constructed in 1971 and supports a rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 288... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 200 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Manuel H Luna, EIT E-mail Address manuel.luna@dot.state.fl.us Job Title: Project Coordinator Phone(813) Read the entire page →
From page 289... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 201 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 290... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 202 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. State Route 60 over Hillsborough River Bridge 100100 in Tampa, FL was constructed in 1913 and supports an urban principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 291... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 203 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Richard Semple commented on the first five management summaries, which we submitted. He said: I've reviewed the first five case studies, since those are the ones I submitted. Read the entire page →
From page 292... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 204 Phase II Appendices 2. According to our scour consultant, Hisham Sunna, he said the following: "Although the Parallel Seismic method is very reliable for determining pile embedments, it is a costly method and one of the most field labor-intensive." Do you recommend any other method besides Parallel Seismic method to make an unknown foundation bridge known? Read the entire page →
From page 293... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 205 Phase II Appendices New York Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 294... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 206 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 295... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 207 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. County Road 1 over South Branch of Van Campen Creek Bridge 3330270 in Friendship, NY (Allegany County) Read the entire page →
From page 296... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 208 Phase II Appendices 2. Evaluate scour using FHWA HEC-18 manual. Read the entire page →
From page 297... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 209 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 298... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 210 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 299... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 211 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. Warren Farm Road over Wiccopee Creek Bridge 2268710 in East Fishkill, NY (Dutchess County) Read the entire page →
From page 300... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 212 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 301... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 213 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 302... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 214 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. Arbutus Road over Fishing Brook Bridge 2268950 in Newcomb, NY (Essex County) Read the entire page →
From page 303... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 215 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 304... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 216 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 305... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 217 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. Route 23 over Hudson River ("Rip Van Winkle Bridge") Read the entire page →
From page 306... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 218 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 307... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 219 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 308... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 220 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. Rockway Turnpike over Mott Creek Bridge 3300120 in Hempstead, NY (Nassau County) Read the entire page →
From page 309... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 221 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 310... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 222 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 311... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 223 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. Pearl Street over Mill River Bridge 3330150 in Hempstead, NY was constructed in 1930 and supports an urban collector class road. Read the entire page →
From page 312... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 224 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $45,000. Read the entire page →
From page 313... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 225 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 314... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 226 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 315... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 227 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. Interstate 90 over Hudson River ("Patroon Island Bridge") Read the entire page →
From page 316... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 228 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 317... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 229 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 318... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 230 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. Peace Bridge over Niagara River Bridge 5516290 in Buffalo, NY (Erie County) Read the entire page →
From page 319... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 231 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 320... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 232 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 321... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 233 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. Route 42 over Shingle Kill Bridge 1024960 in Deer Park, NY (Orange County) Read the entire page →
From page 322... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 234 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Bob Burnett E-mail Address bburnett@dot.state.ny.us Job Title Director, Geotech. Read the entire page →
From page 323... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 235 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 324... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 236 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. County Road 155 over East Branch Cheningo Creek Bridge 3312460 in Cuyler, NY was constructed in 1983 and supports a rural local class road. Read the entire page →
From page 325... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 237 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $20,000. Read the entire page →
From page 326... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 238 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Robert Burnett, the acting director of the NY geotechnical engineering bureau, was the first to comment on the management summaries. He said: The recommendation to investigate the foundation, preferably using parallel seismic, followed by a scour analysis and possibly countermeasures came out far too frequently for the very diverse group of examples that we sent. Read the entire page →
From page 327... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 239 Phase II Appendices management plan than these two high-priority bridges. He then suggests that the remaining life and the associated economics of the bridge should have changed these assessments. Read the entire page →
From page 328... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 240 Phase II Appendices work schedule of at-risk bridges. The States are ultimately free to rank the work orders for at-risk bridges with unknown foundations as they see fit. Read the entire page →
From page 329... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 241 Phase II Appendices Assessment for every bridge over water and the FHWA now requires an individual Plan of Action for each bridge which is coded 0, 1, 2, 3, 7, or U for Item 113. Read the entire page →
From page 330... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 242 Phase II Appendices North Carolina Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Mohammed Mulla E-mail Address mmulla@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer Manager Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 331... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 243 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 332... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 244 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. State Road 12 over Oregon Inlet ("Hubert C Read the entire page →
From page 333... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 245 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Mohammed Mulla E-mail Address mmulla@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer Manager Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 334... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 246 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 335... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 247 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. US Highway 13 over Tar River Bridge 1470038 in Greenville, NC was constructed in 1955 and supports an urban principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 336... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 248 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Mohammed Mulla E-mail Address mmulla@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer Manager Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 337... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 249 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 338... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 250 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. State Road 1001 over Yadkin River Bridge 670091 in Forsyth County, NC was constructed in 1979 and supports a rural minor collector class road. Read the entire page →
From page 339... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 251 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $800,000. Read the entire page →
From page 340... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 252 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Mohammed Mulla E-mail Address mmulla@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer Manager Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 341... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 253 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 342... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 254 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. Pearl Street over Mill River Bridge 450113 in Cleveland County, NC was constructed in 1959 and supports a rural local class road. Read the entire page →
From page 343... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 255 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 344... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 256 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 345... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 257 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 346... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 258 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. State Road 1334 over Upper Goose Creek Bridge 130115 in Beaufort County, NC was constructed in 1976. Read the entire page →
From page 347... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 259 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 348... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 260 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 349... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 261 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. State Road 1518 over Runyon Creek Bridge 120101 in Beaufort County, NC was constructed in 1964. Read the entire page →
From page 350... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 262 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 351... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 263 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 352... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 264 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. State Road 2030 over an Unnamed Creek Bridge 510042 in Cumberland County, NC was constructed in 1969. Read the entire page →
From page 353... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 265 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 354... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 266 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 355... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 267 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. State Road 1314 over Boyleston Creek Bridge 890008 in Henderson County, NC was constructed in 1986 and supports a rural local class road. Read the entire page →
From page 356... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 268 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 357... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 269 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 358... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 270 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 359... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 271 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. US 321 NBC over Crosden's Creek Bridge 710032 in Gaston County, NC was constructed in 1931 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 360... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 272 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $150,000. Read the entire page →
From page 361... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 273 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Scott Webb E-mail Address swebb@dot.state.nc.us Job Title Transportation Engineer III Phone 919-250-4088 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 362... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 274 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 363... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 275 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. State Road 1102 over Aberdeen Creek Bridge 1250013 in Moore County, NC was constructed in 1941. Read the entire page →
From page 364... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 276 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Mohammed Mulla, an assistant state geotechnical engineer, responded to the bridge evaluation as follows: I generally agree with the concept being utilized. It does help in making a decision to be able to quantify variables as opposed to just mentally ranking the variables due to perceptions of their importance. Read the entire page →
From page 365... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 277 Phase II Appendices Tennessee Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 366... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 278 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 367... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 279 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. Maidie Thompson Road over Running Reelfoot Bayou Bridge 480A0430001 in Lake County, TN is two lanes wide with five spans, timber stringers, and timber bents. Read the entire page →
From page 368... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 280 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 369... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 281 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 370... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 282 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. Bedwell Road over Cove Branch Bridge 040A1360001 in Bledsoe County, TN has one span and one lane with steel Ibeams and grating deck, and is supported by stacked pre-cast concrete block abutments. Read the entire page →
From page 371... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 283 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $40,000. Read the entire page →
From page 372... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 284 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 373... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 285 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 374... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 286 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. State Route 77 over Branch Bridge 09SR0770025 in Carroll County, TN has three spans and two lanes with timber bents and abutments and a pre-cast concrete channel slab. Read the entire page →
From page 375... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 287 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $70,000. Read the entire page →
From page 376... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 288 Phase II Appendices other words, continue as if the foundation is known. Read the entire page →
From page 377... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 289 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 378... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 290 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 379... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 291 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. State Route 225 over Melton Branch Bridge 12SR2250005 in Chester County, TN has one span and two lanes with timber abutments and a pre-cast concrete channel slab. Read the entire page →
From page 380... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 292 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $40,000. Read the entire page →
From page 381... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 293 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 382... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 294 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 383... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 295 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. Coopertown Road over Long Creek Bridge 19019430001 in Davidson County, TN has one span and two lanes with prestressed pre-cast concrete box beams. Read the entire page →
From page 384... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 296 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $40,000. Read the entire page →
From page 385... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 297 Phase II Appendices other words, continue as if the foundation is known. Read the entire page →
From page 386... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 298 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 387... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 299 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 388... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 300 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. Bells Mill Road over Caldwell Creek Bridge 31021320001 in Grundy County, TN has one span and two lanes with steel Ibeams. Read the entire page →
From page 389... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 301 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $40,000. Read the entire page →
From page 390... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 302 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 391... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 303 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 392... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 304 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. Valley View Highway over Owen Spring Creek Bridge 58SR0270007 in Marion County, TN has four spans and two lanes with concrete deck girders. Read the entire page →
From page 393... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 305 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $80,000. Read the entire page →
From page 394... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 306 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 395... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 307 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 396... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 308 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. State Route 233 over Wells Creek Bridge 81S61140007 in Stewart County, TN has six spans and two lanes with prestressed pre-cast concrete box beams. Read the entire page →
From page 397... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 309 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $80,000. Read the entire page →
From page 398... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 310 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 399... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 311 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 400... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 312 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. Old Shelbyville Road over Oakland Branch Bridge 89S42900017 in Warren County, TN has one span and two lanes with steel Ibeams. Read the entire page →
From page 401... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 313 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $40,000. Read the entire page →
From page 402... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 314 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Denise Glasgow E-mail Address Denise.glasgow@state.tn.us Job Title Transportation Associate Phone 615-532-2445 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 403... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 315 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 404... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 316 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. Railroad Street over Middle Creek Bridge 780B0720001 in Sevier County, TN has two spans and two lanes with steel Ibeams. Read the entire page →
From page 405... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 317 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 406... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 318 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Wayne Seger, a Civil engineering manager II, was not able to finish his response to the bridge evaluations. However, the following is his preliminary comments. Read the entire page →
From page 407... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 319 Phase II Appendices Texas Bridges Bridge #1 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 408... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 320 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 409... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 321 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 1. FM 56 over Bosque River Bridge 090180039801026 in Bosque County, TX was constructed in 1950 and supports a rural major collector class road. Read the entire page →
From page 410... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 322 Phase II Appendices necessary for this type of foundation. In other words, continue as if the foundation is known. Read the entire page →
From page 411... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 323 Phase II Appendices Bridge #2 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 412... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 324 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 413... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 325 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 2. State Highway 6 over Fish Creek Bridge 090740004904052 in Falls County, TX was constructed in 1934 and reconstructed in 1958 and supports a rural principal arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 414... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 326 Phase II Appendices Bridge #3 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 415... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 327 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 416... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 328 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 3. I-35W SB over Island Creek Bridge 091100001423285 in Hill County, TX was constructed in 1965 and supports a rural interstate. Read the entire page →
From page 417... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 329 Phase II Appendices Bridge #4 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 418... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 330 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 419... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 331 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 4. State Highway 171 over Ash Creek Bridge 091100041802028 in Hill County, TX was constructed in 1940 and reconstructed in 1966 and supports a rural major collector class road. Read the entire page →
From page 420... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 332 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 421... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 333 Phase II Appendices Bridge #5 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 422... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 334 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 423... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 335 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 5. FM 39 over Sanders Creek Bridge 091470064302038 in Limestone County, TX was constructed in 1977 and supports a rural major collector class road. Read the entire page →
From page 424... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 336 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which the survey respondent estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 425... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 337 Phase II Appendices easily discovered and an assumption should not be necessary for this type of foundation. In other words, continue as if the foundation is known. Read the entire page →
From page 426... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 338 Phase II Appendices Bridge #6 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 427... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 339 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 428... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 340 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 6. Big Elm Creek Road over Big Elm Creek Bridge 12SR2250005 in Bell County, TX was constructed in 1986, and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 429... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 341 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 430... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 342 Phase II Appendices Bridge #7 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 431... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 343 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 432... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 344 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 7. County Road 302 over Brazos River Slough Bridge 090740AA0128001 in Falls County, TX was constructed in 1987 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 433... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 345 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 434... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 346 Phase II Appendices Bridge #8 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 435... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 347 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 436... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 348 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 8. County Road 2342 over BR Alligator Creek Bridge 091100AA0878002 in Hill County, TX was constructed in 1987 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 437... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 349 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 438... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 350 Phase II Appendices Bridge #9 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 439... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 351 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 440... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 352 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 9. County Road 190 over Pin Oak Creek Bridge 091470AA0173001 in Limestone County, TX was constructed in 1987 and supports a rural minor arterial road. Read the entire page →
From page 441... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 353 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 442... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 354 Phase II Appendices Bridge #10 The Initial Survey Respondent Information Name Alan Kowalik E-mail Address akowali@dot.state.tx.us Job Title Bridge Inspection Supervisor Phone 512-416-2208 Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 443... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 355 Phase II Appendices Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 444... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 356 Phase II Appendices Scour Management Evaluation 10. County Road 421 over Pin Oak Creek Bridge 091470AA0327001 in Limestone County, TX was constructed in 1987 and supports a rural minor arterial class road. Read the entire page →
From page 445... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 357 Phase II Appendices Are scour countermeasures warranted? Scour countermeasures are considered warranted if the lifetime risk of failure is greater than the estimated cost of scour countermeasures, which we estimated to be about $50,000. Read the entire page →
From page 446... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 358 Phase II Appendices Response to Evaluations Alan Kowalik, a bridge inspection branch manager, completed the bridge surveys for Keith Ramsey but forwarded the task of commenting on the evaluations to Mark McClellan, a bridge scour engineer. Mark McClellan commented via phone that the guidelines appear to be a good first step, but that they would benefit from better indicators of scour vulnerability. Read the entire page →
From page 447... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 359 Phase II Appendices APPENDIX G SCOUR EVALUATION FORMS AND TABLES This appendix collects into one place all of the basic forms and tables that a practitioner will need in order to implement the scour risk management guidelines. Read the entire page →
From page 448... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 360 Phase II Appendices Bridge #_____________ Page 1 Respondent Information Name E-mail Address Job Title Phone Job Description (In what way does your job involve bridge maintenance? Read the entire page →
From page 449... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 361 Phase II Appendices Page 2 Undocumented Assumptions Please provide the following information for the bridge which in not documented in the NBI database. Description User Input Bridge Type (check only one) Read the entire page →
From page 450... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 362 Phase II Appendices Table 1 Cost of Bridge Construction Page 3 Bridge Superstructure Type Total Cost ($/ft2) Reinforced concrete flat slab; simple span $50-65* Read the entire page →
From page 451... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 363 Phase II Appendices Scour Risk Probability Tables Tables 12 – 14 from the main report are reproduced here to help the practitioner estimate the probability of scour failure. Table 18 Overtopping Frequency Waterway Adequacy (NBI Item 71 Code) Read the entire page →
From page 452... ... NCHRP 24-25 Page 364 Phase II Appendices Table 20 Annual Probability of Scour Failure Overtopping Frequency (from Table 18) Scour Vulnerability (from Table 19) Read the entire page →

From page 87...

... NCHRP 24-25 Page i Phase II Appendices TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A Risk-Based Methodologies.....................................................................................1 HYRISK....................................................................................................................................1 HYRISK Countermeasures Economic Calculator ..................................................................6 Probabilistic Assessment/Geotechnical/Geologic Materials ................................................12 Risk-Based Cost-Benefit Assessment/Prioritizing Methods................................................13 Risk-based Design Methods ..................................................................................................14 Evaluation of Epistemic Uncertainty ...................................................................................16 References ..............................................................................................................................17 Appendix B