Recently developed corrosion-resistant reinforcing structural design guidelines were used to design, construct, and assess a reinforced concrete bridge deck with high-strength ASTM A1035 CS steel bars. The bridge replacement is located along the North Scenic Highway over the Wolf Creek in Bland County, Virginia. The bridge deck design used the higher yield stress available from ASTM A1035 CS steel to replace No. 5 bars with No. 4 bars that saved 23% by weight of steel in the deck and reduced reinforcement bar congestion, especially near the traffic barrier-bridge deck splice. The material cost savings was also 23% compared to a standard Virginia Department of Transportation bridge deck since the bars were bid as a cost per unit weight. The Wolf Creek Bridge deck surface (i.e., cracks, slope, and surface profile) was documented using an automated computer vision system assembled with off-the-shelf cameras that accurately surveyed the bridge deck in less than 10 minutes, providing a high resolution 3D digital state model before and after the bridge was opened to traffic. The bridge deck is in excellent condition after 2 months in service, with only one crack of 0.004 in observed near a construction joint. The study concluded that concrete bridge decks can be designed with No. 4 bars and constructed considering the structural benefits of gradually yielding, high-strength ASTM A1035 CS reinforcement bars with satisfactory in-service performance and some cost savings.

This research program develops and validates structural design guidelines and details for concrete bridge decks with corrosion-resistant reinforcing (CRR) bars. A two-phase experimental program was conducted where a control test set consistent with a typical Virginia Department of Transportation bridge deck design using Grade 60 steel (ASTM A615, fy = 60 ksi) and epoxy-coated reinforcing steel was compared to deck slab specimens where Grade 60 is replaced with CRR bars. The experimental program was designed to evaluate how flexural performance at service and ultimate limit states are affected by a one-to-one replacement of Grade 60 with CRR bars, a reduction of concrete clear cover, and a reduction in rebar size. Structural analysis models were developed using Response 2000 in order to predict the CRR bridge deck moment-curvature and the moment-crack width relationships. Experimental trends proved to be consistent with the analytical results demonstrating the viability of Response 2000 as a design tool for reinforced concrete with high-strength and nonmetallic rebar without a defined yield plateau. For reduced bar size and clear cover (2.00 in instead 2.50 in), ASTM A1035 and UNS S32304 specimens proved to have similar deformability ratios and crack widths that comply with current AASHTO requirements, with as much as 36% less steel.

" TRB's second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) Report S2-R06A-RR-1: Nondestructive Testing to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration identifies nondestructive testing technologies for detecting and characterizing common forms of deterioration in concrete bridge decks.The report also documents the validation of promising technologies, and grades and ranks the technologies based on results of the validations.The main product of this project will be an electronic repository for practitioners, known as the NDToolbox, which will provide information regarding recommended technologies for the detection of a particular deterioration. " -- publisher's description.

Captures Current Developments in Bridge Design and MaintenanceRecent research in bridge design and maintenance has focused on the serviceability problems of older bridges with aging joints. The favored solution of integral construction and design has produced bridges with fewer joints and bearings that require less maintenance and deliver increased

This book is a comprehensive reference for the evaluation, testing, selection, and examination of relevant design criteria and alternatives for bridge decks, which appear in the AASHTO/LRFD design specifications. Important challenges to civil engineers, such as life cycle cost analysis, and constructability, particularly as related to maintaining traffic during deck replacement, are discussed. The authors discuss why the use of standard bridge deck designs is not always possible on bridge rehabilitation projects. This practical reference will aid busy engineers in dealing with the major changes that will mandate much greater attention to deck selection and design in the future. For example, most future bridge projects will involve rehabilitation or replacement--which makes traffic maintenance a major issue--and life cycle cost analysis is quickly becoming mandatory in the U.S. This guide is intended to be used throughout the development of any construction project involving bridges. About the Authors Neal H. Bettigole, P.E., was director of the Exodermic Bridge Deck Institute, which he founded in 1985. Rita Robison was a freelance ditor/writer who worked as both an associate and a senior editor for Civil Engineering magazine.

The objective of this research was to assess the condition of four decommissioned bridge decks treated with waterproofing membranes and asphalt overlays following the completion of their service lives. Large samples were cut from each of the bridge decks immediately prior to demolition and taken to the Brigham Young University Highway Materials Laboratory, where extensive sampling and testing was performed. Methods used to evaluate the condition of the bridge deck samples included visual inspection, hammer sounding, Schmidt rebound hammer testing, resistivity testing, half-cell potential testing, linear polarization testing, cover depth measurement, and chloride concentration measurement. The samples were removed from four concrete bridge decks along the Interstate 15 corridor in Provo, Utah. One bridge deck was constructed in 1937, two were constructed in 1964, and one was constructed in 1984. Each of the bridge decks was constructed using conventional cast-in-place methods. With the exception of the 1984 bridge deck, which had epoxy-coated rebar, all of the bridge decks were reinforced with black bar. A waterproofing membrane was installed on each of the bridge decks in 1984, meaning each waterproofing membrane had been in service for 26 or 27 years at the time of sampling. With the exception of one of the bridges, which was in good condition after 26 years of service, each of the bridge decks sampled had successfully served for at least 46 years. Aside from asphalt maintenance, no rehabilitation was needed on any of the bridge decks following installation of the waterproofing membranes. Without the application of the waterproofing membranes, the chloride concentrations in the bridge decks likely would have been much higher. Additional exposure to chloride ions from deicing salts would have quickly increased the chloride concentration in the concrete above critical levels, which would have led to significant corrosion and bridge deck deterioration, prematurely. While the application of membranes as a bridge deck maintenance procedure has mostly been replaced by the use of epoxy-based polymer overlays, many bridge decks protected with membrane systems are still in service today. The research findings suggest that application of waterproofing membranes and asphalt overlays in a timely manner, before the accumulation of excessive amounts of chlorides within a deck, can be an effective approach for concrete bridge deck preservation.