See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317830226

Experimental Study of UHPC Repair for Corrosion-Damaged Steel Girder Ends

Article  in  Journal of Bridge Engineering · August 2017

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001067

CITATIONS READS
29 1,095

4 authors, including:

Kevin Zmetra Arash E. Zaghi

Rao Research and Consulting at FHWA Turner Fairbank Highway Research Center University of Connecticut
9 PUBLICATIONS   59 CITATIONS    74 PUBLICATIONS   712 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kay Wille
University of Connecticut
60 PUBLICATIONS   2,902 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of a Rational Design Method for Shear Keys at In-Span Hinges in Multi-Frame Highway Bridges View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Arash E. Zaghi on 06 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Experimental Study of UHPC Repair for Corrosion-Damaged
Steel Girder Ends
Kevin M. Zmetra, Ph.D.1; Kevin F. McMullen, S.M.ASCE2; Arash E. Zaghi, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE3; and
Kay Wille, Ph.D.4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: Corrosion of girder ends is a prevalent problem that significantly reduces the bearing capacity of bridges. Current repair
methods are expensive and difficult to implement. A novel repair method was developed for steel girder ends with corrosion damage
using ultrahigh-performance concrete (UHPC) to encase the corrosion. For this repair, UHPC panels were attached to girders with shear
studs welded to the web and flange surrounding the corroded area. This allowed shear and bearing forces to transfer from the girder to
the UHPC panels. The UHPC panels provided a new load path, thereby increasing the bearing capacity of the girder. Half-scale experi-
ments were conducted on undamaged, damaged, and repaired rolled steel girder specimens. The test results were used to (1) determine
the decrease in bearing capacity attributable to section loss, (2) demonstrate the ability of the UHPC repair to restore lost girder capacity,
and (3) investigate the constructability of the repair method. The experimental results show that the UHPC repair was easily implemented
and succeeded in restoring bearing capacity lost as a result of corrosion damage. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001067. © 2017
American Society of Civil Engineers.

Introduction girder supports at abutments and piers, as shown in Fig. 1 (Kayser

and Nowak 1989; Usukura et al. 2013; Van de Lindt and Pei 2006).
The United States currently maintains 66,749 structurally deficient Purdue University completed an extensive investigation on the
bridges. Most of these bridges have exceeded their 50-year design performance of expansion joints. Common problems cited with
life. The ASCE estimates it would cost approximately $76 billion to expansion-joint systems were water leakage and deterioration at
repair all of the structurally deficient bridges (ASCE 2014). This bridge bearings (Chang and Lee 2001).
overwhelmingly high estimate is, in part, a result of the current cost Corrosion of steel girder ends reduces the bearing and shear
of repair methods. New, innovative, cost-effective repair solutions capacity of the member. Several research projects have been
are necessary to improve the structural integrity and service life of conducted on the performance of steel girders with corrosion
existing bridges (Zmetra et al. 2015). damage. Liu et al. (2011) studied the effect of corrosion height
Corrosion damage is the cause of approximately 15% of the and thickness on the shear capacity of steel I-girders near bridge
structurally deficient bridges maintained in the United States. Koch supports. The results showed that the height of corrosion had a
et al. (2002) estimate that the United States spends $273 billion on more significant impact on the capacity of the girder compared to
corrosion maintenance annually, $8.3 billion of which goes to repair the length of corrosion. Ahn et al. (2013a) performed large-scale
and replacement of highway bridges. Structural steel corrodes when experiments and extensive analytical studies on the performance
exposed to oxygen and moisture. The extent of corrosion is depend- of plate girders with simulated corrosion damage. The study
ent on time, temperature, humidity, exposure, and the presence of determined that the shear capacity of the plate girders drastically
chemicals (Albrecht and Hall 2003). The chief accelerator of corro- decreased when the corrosion pattern intersected the tension
sion damage in transportation infrastructure systems is deicer chem- field in the girder’s end panel. Yamaguchi and Akagi (2013)
icals used to control ice and snow on roadways in cold-climate completed more analytical studies of the effect of corrosion dam-
regions (Shi et al. 2009). age on the load-carrying capacity of I-girders. They found that
Extensive corrosion of bridge girders is most commonly found the reduction in load-carrying capacity was more detrimental if
directly beneath deck expansion joints, which are located above the corroded region had a free boundary. Khurram et al. (2014a, b)
investigated the performance of plate girders with corrosion-
damaged webs and bearing stiffeners. Experimental tests and
1
Project Engineer, PSI, Inc., 13873 Park Center Road, Suite 315, finite-element analysis (FEA) were completed to determine the
Herndon, VA 20171. E-mail: kevin.zmetra@psiusa.com loss in bearing capacity. The results indicated that a 50% reduc-
2 tion of the bottom section of the web decreased the bearing
Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ.
of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269. E-mail: kevin.mcmullen@uconn.edu capacity by 39%.
3
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Current repair methods for corrosion damage of steel girder ends
Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 (corresponding author). E-mail: are expensive and difficult to implement. The Federal Highway
zaghi@engr.uconn.edu Administration (FHWA) and several state departments of transpor-
4
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
tation (DOTs) have developed standard procedures to repair cor-
Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269. E-mail: kwille@engr.uconn.edu
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 12, 2016; approved on
roded steel girder ends: (1) jacking the structure to relieve the load
February 22, 2017; published online on May 18, 2017. Discussion period from the bearing, (2) cutting out the corroded section of steel, (3)
open until October 18, 2017; separate discussions must be submitted for welding a new steel section into place, and (4) lowering the span
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Bridge Engineering, and remove the jacking equipment (Fig. 2) (FLDOT 2011; Rossow
© ASCE, ISSN 1084-0702. 2003; Wipf et al. 2003; WisDOT 2015). The conventional repair

© ASCE 04017037-1 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 1. Typical corrosion damage of steel girder end located beneath

expansion joint at the bearing (image by Michael Culmo)

method requires extensive manual labor. Jacking of the superstruc-

ture is required to provide a stress-free condition for implementa-
tion of the repair. Jacking often constitutes a large percentage of the
project cost. For a bearing replacement project on the Putnam
Bridge in Connecticut, 50% of the project cost was attributable to
jacking (Close and Miller 2011). Fig. 2(b) shows the extent of the
rigorous jacking systems needed to raise and lower superstructures
during repair. Jacking towers are indicated with an arrow. Surface
preparation is required before removing corroded steel and welding
new steel. Preparation requires lead abatement if the existing sur-
face has lead-based paint.
Few research projects have been completed on new repair meth-
ods for corrosion of steel girder ends. Ahn et al. (2013b) and
Miyashita et al. (2015) completed extensive experimental and ana-
lytical studies on the application and performance of carbon-fiber-
reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheets. CFRP sheets are lightweight,
durable, and high strength. CFRP sheets can be applied over local-
ized corrosion at steel girder ends to recover bearing and shear
capacities. The load-carrying capacity of the CFRP-repaired cor-
roded girder was found to surpass that of an undamaged girder
(Miyashita et al. 2015). Ogami et al. (2015) developed a repair
method for plate girder ends where studs and rebar were attached to
the girder, and the corroded area was enveloped in resin. Axial com-
pression tests were conducted on the girder ends to measure bearing
capacity. Applying the resin repair to corroded girder ends was able
to improve the bearing capacity of the specimen.
New, cost-effective rehabilitation designs are necessary to
make corrosion-repair projects more viable for bridge owners.
New techniques must be structurally effective, durable, and easy
to implement. Repairs should minimize interruptions to traffic,
increase work zone safety, and reduce construction costs. The Fig. 2. Conventional repair technique for corrosion damage to steel
authors conducted research at the University of Connecticut girder ends (images by Arash Zaghi): (a) girder end repair; (b) extensive
(UConn) focused on developing a novel repair method for steel jacking system
girder ends with significant section loss as a result of corrosion.
The rehabilitation technique used UHPC to encase corroded
steel bridge girder ends. UHPC provides improved tensile Methodology
strength, high early strength, good workability, and supreme du-
rability, which make it an ideal repair material over conventional History of Encased Composite Girders
concrete. The repair was applied to a half-scale rolled steel
girder with simulated corrosion damage. It was shown that the Previous research was performed on a similar composite girder sys-
bearing capacity of the corroded girder can be recovered using tem where concrete was placed on the web of steel girders in
this repair method. This paper details the design and results of between the top and bottom flange. The concept of concrete-
three half-scale experimental bending tests conducted on rolled encased steel beams was originally proposed by Elnashai et al.
steel girders to evaluate the performance of the proposed repair (1991) as a novel beam-column design for buildings. A small cage
method. of rebar was welded to the interior section of the girder and was

© ASCE 04017037-2 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 filled with concrete. Nakamura and colleagues extended this idea to Design of the Study
bridge plate girders and concentrated on the beam’s performance in
Experimental tests were performed on half-scale rolled steel bridge
shear and bending (Nakamura et al. 2002; Nakamura and Narita
girders under various conditions to (1) determine the loss in bearing
2003). Rebar was welded between the flanges and stiffeners. capacity associated with severe corrosion of girder ends, (2) demon-
Stiffeners were installed at the center bearing to resist shear and strate the ability of the repair technique to restore the capacity of the
hogging moments. A full-web-height concrete panel was cast girder, and (3) investigate the constructability of the UHPC repair
between the flanges and stiffeners to improve the bending and shear technique. Three different girder conditions were studied: (1) an
strength of the girder. Hyashi et al. (2003) noted that this composite undamaged girder as a baseline, (2) a damaged girder with a typical
beam method could be used to rehabilitate steel girders that have level of section loss associated with corrosion, and (3) a repaired
experienced deformations from buckling. He et al. (2012a, b) girder with the same level of corrosion damage retrofitted with the
extended this method to encase a steel girder with an offset, corru-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

UHPC repair. Corrosion damage was implemented at the bearing to

gated web with concrete on only one side to improve the shear isolate the effect on bearing capacity. Corrosion was simulated by
strength of the girder. reducing the cross section of the middle region of the bottom flange
and the lower portion of the web. The UHPC panels were mechani-
cally attached to the repaired girder with shear studs welded on the
Advantages of UHPC Material web and bottom flange. The UHPC was reinforced with steel fibers
In this study, a series of structural experiments was conducted to that were added to the mix during casting. Each test was meticu-
evaluate the effectiveness and applicability of the repair of corroded lously instrumented to record force, strain, and displacement data at
girder ends by UHPC encasement. UHPC material was chosen as multiple locations along the girder. The performance and capacity
the desired repair material over conventional concrete because of each girder were compared to evaluate the effectiveness of the
of the unique material benefits that it provided to the repair design. proposed repair.
The UHPC mix used in this project has been widely used and tested
by the FHWA in several research projects (Graybeal 2014; Russell Design of Experiments
and Graybeal 2013; Yaun and Graybeal 2014), and these studies
document many of the advantages of UHPC compared with con-
ventional concrete specific to the current application. The UHPC Half-Scale Test Setup
ready-mix Ductal JS-1212 (LafargeHolcim, Jona, Switzerland) The experimental test setup, test specimens, and repair method
used for this research project may significantly reduce onsite com- were designed and developed using a finite-element model
plications and inconsistencies with the constructability and per- (FEM) created in LS-DYNA 971, a general-purpose finite-element
formance of the repair, as follows: (1) The flowability of UHPC program. An initial FEM was created by replicating the analytical
may allow the repair to be poured or pumped to encase complex results obtained by Nakamura and Narita (2003) to ensure the
geometries with no concerns of clogging when used with tightly model was able to capture the composite properties, loading tech-
spaced shear studs. (2) The high early strength of UHPC would niques, and other parameters of the test. The test model was
allow for reduced lane closures and construction delays. Ductal JS- designed to be force controlled with similar properties and con-
1212 can achieve a compressive strength of 82.7 MPa (12 ksi) after straints as the Nakamura model. A force-controlled test system
12 h of curing. (3) UHPC has proven durability when exposed to was imperative to guarantee the loads applied were within
moisture, freeze–thaw conditions, and abrasion. It has a very low the physical limitations of the UConn Structures Laboratory.
permeability and water-absorption capacity, which is approxi- Reaction forces and moments from the model were monitored to
mately 10 and 60 times less than that of high-performance concrete guarantee the load frame was properly sized, the floor bolts were
and normal-strength concrete, respectively (Abbas et al. 2016). The not overstressed, the forces applied were lower than the capacity
impervious nature of UHPC would prevent the repair panel or the of the dynamic load ram, and each girder had a similar mode of
base steel material of the girder from corroding further in the future. failure. A drawing of the test setup including the specimen, load
(4) The crack resistance of UHPC resulting from its high tensile frame, and hydraulic load ram is shown in Fig. 3. A photo of the
strength and ductility eliminates the need for the addition of rein- complete setup is shown in Fig. 4, where arrows show (1) the load
forcing bars. (5) Studies performed on the fatigue resistance of cell, (2) the undamaged girder test specimen with instrumenta-
UHPC and UHPC shear connectors demonstrated the improved re- tion, (3) the hydraulic load ram, and (4) the load frame. The full
sistance compared with conventional concrete (Classen et al. 2016; test setup design and all FEM results were described in detail by
Feldmann et al. 2011; Grünberg et al. 2008; Shaheen and Shrive Zaghi et al. (2015) and Zmetra (2015).
2008). The superior characteristics of UHPC may justify the added
costs of the material. Geometry of Specimens
The small volume of UHPC needed for the repair only intro- The test specimens were designed to be half-scale models of a typical
duces a small additional dead load to the girder, which is car- bridge design to stay within the physical force limitations of the test
ried directly into the bearing without affecting shear and flex- setup. The specimens were scaled down from girders on a structurally
ural demands on the girders. Compared with the conventional deficient bridge in Waterford, Connecticut (ConnDOT 1955). The
repair, the UHPC repair may be applied to the in situ condition bridge design contains W36  160 rolled steel girders. All three
of the bridge without the need for jacking of the superstructure girder specimens tested were W21  55. Both of these girder sizes
to remove portions of the corroded web and flange. The repair have a web slenderness ratio (D/tw) of 55.5. The web slenderness ra-
may be installed to provide a secondary load path to service tio is critical for scaling because it directly affects the web-buckling
live-load demands while the remaining steel section continues capacity of the girder. The desired failure mode was web buckling at
to carry in situ stresses. In addition, UHPC’s low permeability the bearing as opposed to yielding, local buckling, or lateral torsional
and corrosion resistance would prevent the need for further buckling of the girder. This failure mode is typical for bridges with
repairs. end corrosion. The capacity of each girder specimen was found using

© ASCE 04017037-3 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 3. Half-scale experiment setup

The girders were tested over a 3.66-m (12-ft) span supported by

a pair of roller bearings. This span was chosen to accommodate the
1.22  1.22 m (4  4 ft) spacing of the anchor bolt clusters on the
strong-floor. The total length of the girders was 4.27 m (14 ft) to
allow for extension beyond the bearings.
The girder end closer to the applied load was referred to as the
studied end, as shown in Fig. 3. Bearing stiffeners were excluded
from the studied end to reduce the overall bearing capacity of the
undamaged girder and to ensure the girder failed as a result of web
buckling under a smaller load to stay within the force constraints of
the UConn Structures Laboratory. The preliminary FEM indicated
that the UHPC repair restored the capacity of the damaged girder
even without bearing stiffeners. Web stiffeners were installed under
the hydraulic load ram and at the nonstudied bearing to reduce the
probability of failure at locations other than the studied end.
The extent of typical section loss for a corroded steel bridge
girder was collected from an inspection report for a structurally
deficient bridge in Hartford, Connecticut (ConnDOT 1962;
Kristoff 2011). The typical length of corrosion noted in the inspec-
tion report for damaged girders was 1.07 m (3.5 ft), or approxi-
mately 90% of the depth of the girder. The depth of section loss
from rust penetration was 6.35 mm (1/4 in.) on a web with a thick-
ness of 9.53 mm (3/8 in.), corresponding to 67% section loss.
Corrosion damage was simulated on the damaged and repaired
girders by reducing the cross-sectional area of the girder at the bot-
tom of the web and on the bottom flange nearest the web. A uniform
section loss was chosen for the simulated corrosion to simplify the
machining of the reduced section and construction of the FEMs
used to validate the experimental results. Although corrosion pat-
terns are typically nonuniform, a uniform section loss was deter-
mined to be acceptable for the repair proof-of-concept study. The
web section was reduced by 70% (1 – Twd/Tw) of the web thickness
over a length of 482.6 mm (19 in.) and a height of 95.25 mm (3.75
in.), as shown in Fig. 5. The flange section was reduced by 44% (1 –
Tfd/Tf) of the flange thickness over the same length and a width of
Fig. 4. Complete experiment setup for the undamaged girder 53.98 mm (2.125 in.) on each flange. The thickness was removed
from the girder end using a computer numerical control (CNC) mill-
the FEMs. FEMs of the complete test specimens for the undamaged, ing machine. To facilitate the accuracy of steel thickness removal,
damaged, and repaired girders were built and refined to verify the a tee section 610 mm (24 in.) long and 305 mm (12 in.) high was
mode of failure for each design. cut from the end of the girder and then welded back after the

© ASCE 04017037-4 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 5. Detail of the reduced steel section, shear stud arrangement, and UHPC panel for the repaired girder

Fig. 6. (a) Uniform section loss applied to the girders; (b) welded stud arrangement on the repaired girder; (c) UHPC repair panel

thickness was removed. Fig. 6(a) shows the final reduced tee sec- (Nelson Fastener Systems, Elyria, Ohio) using a stud-welding gun
tion before it was reinstalled on the girder, and Fig. 6(b) shows per standard practice.
the dimensions of the tee section for the repaired girder after it A detailed drawing of the shear stud layout and the dimensions
was reinstalled. of the UHPC panels is shown in Fig. 5. The dimensions of the tee
section cut out of the girder to facilitate machining of the section
Repair Method loss and welding of the studs were slightly smaller than the dimen-
sions of the UHPC panel to ensure the welds were completely
The preliminary FEM investigated the performance of several dif- encased.
ferent repair geometries for the UHPC panel and shear stud layout. The headed shear studs were 9.53 mm (3/8 in.) in diameter and
The goal of the FEMs was to design a repair to recover the full bear- 31.75 mm (1.25 in.) in length and were welded in a 50.8-mm (2-in.)
ing capacity of a baseline, undamaged girder. Typically, bridge grid on both the web and flange with a 12.7-mm (1/2-in.) clear
girders are designed to have ductile failure modes and avoid frac- cover. The studs were staggered on opposite sides of the web to pre-
ture critical failure modes. Because the end-bearing capacity does vent heat damage as a result of welding and stud tear-off during
not affect the shear and flexural demand on the girder, the bearing loading. The studs were half-scale equivalents of the shear studs
capacity may be fully restored by the UHPC repair without altering used in typical bridge design with a diameter of 19.05 mm (3/4 in.)
the desired failure mode. The results from the FEM found that a and a length of 63.5 mm (2.5 in.). The final stud arrangement on the
half-height UHPC repair had the lowest rehabilitated capacity while repaired girder before encasement in UHPC is shown in Fig. 6(b).
still restoring the full bearing capacity of the girder. Therefore, this Mineral oil was applied to the web and flange of the girder to ensure
repair detail was chosen as a conservative measure to validate the that the concrete only bonded to the shear studs to simulate a deter-
versatility of the repair method. The half-height repair required iorated, painted steel surface.
shear studs to be welded on both the web and bottom flange of the The concrete repair panels were 635 mm (25 in.) long and 330
girder to achieve proper load transfer. Before the bottom tee section mm (13 in.) tall to cover the entire length of the reduced section and
was welded back onto the repaired girder, a professional contractor to accommodate four rows of shear studs on the web above the
installed Nelson Stud Welding H4L Headed Concrete Anchors reduced section. The thickness of the panels varied over the height.

© ASCE 04017037-5 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 The top of the panels had a thickness of 44.5 mm (1.75 in.). The load cells that were manufactured at SUNY Buffalo (Reinhorn and
thickness at the bottom of the panels extended the entire width Bracci 1992). The load cells had axial, shear, and moment capaci-
of the exposed flange. The concrete thickness dimensions were cho- ties of 62,224 kN (500 kip), 6445 kN (100 kip), and 656.5 kN·m
sen to provide sufficient cover for the studs installed on the flange, (500 kip/in.), respectively. The maximum error of the load cells was
to fully encase the bottom flange, and to reduce the volume of con- 0.3% of the maximum axial capacity. The pressure of the hydraulic
crete. A bevel was formed at the thickness change to avoid stress fluid in the load ram was monitored with a 68.9-MPa (10-ksi)
concentrations in the concrete. The completed concrete panel on the capacity Omega (Norwalk, Connecticut) pressure transducer. The
repaired girder is shown in Fig. 6(c). force values presented in this paper are measured from the load cell
As noted earlier, the concrete used was a commercially available at the studied end bearing.
proprietary mix, Ductal JS-1212. The mix is a low-porosity, Twenty displacement potentiometers were used to measure ver-
cement-based, ultrahigh-performance fiber-reinforced concrete. tical displacement, lateral displacement, and global shear deforma-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Casting began by slowly mixing premix powder with ice and water. tion. Both rod- and spring-type Novotechnik (Ostfildern, Germany)
Three admixtures were added, Premia 150 (a plasticizer), Optima potentiometers were used. The rod-type potentiometers had either a
100 (a water reducer), and Turbocast 650 A (an accelerator), all 152-mm (6-in.) or 304-mm (12-in.) measuring capacity, and the
manufactured by CHRYSO (Issy les Moulineaux, France). The spring type had a 50.8-mm (2-in.) measuring capacity. Vertical dis-
UHPC turned over after approximately 25 min of mixing. A steel placements were measured at four different locations. All vertical
fiber ratio of 2% by volume was added to the UHPC and mixed for displacements referenced in this paper for stiffness calculations,
an additional 3 min to ensure the fibers were evenly dispersed. load-versus-displacement graphs, and maximum girder displace-
Molds were created out of dense insulation foam board using a ments were measured between the bottom flange of the specimens
CNC machine to form the geometry of the repair panel. The molds and the floor. Lateral displacements along the height of the web
was attached to each side of the beam. The specimen was tested 4 were measured with four rod potentiometers to capture out-of-plane
days after casting when the UHPC achieved a compressive strength web displacements. The rotation of the bearing at the studied end
of 110 MPa (16 ksi). was measured with two spring potentiometers. A shear box was cre-
ated on both sides of the girder to measure the global shear displace-
ment of the end panel using a transformation matrix converting the
Test Procedure
measured displacements to global deformations (Zaghi et al. 2015;
A point load was applied at approximately 2/9th of the girder span Zmetra 2015). Each shear box used five rod potentiometers.
from the studied end, 812.8 mm (32 in.) from the centerline of the Twenty-six strain gauges were attached to each of the girder
studied end bearing. A 2,446-kN (550-kip) Enerpac (Milwaukee, specimens. Ten Omega 6-mm (0.236-in.) uniaxial strain gauges
Wisconsin) hydraulic load ram attached to the load frame was used were installed to measure vertical strain on both sides of the web, as
to apply the load. The load ram was positioned to simulate a truck shown in Fig. 7(a). Eight Tokyo Sokki Kenkyujo Co. (Tokyo)
wheel load applied near the end of a girder. Concentrated loads 5-mm (0.197-in.) uniaxial strain gauges were positioned longitudi-
applied near the girder end maximize the bearing load on a girder. nally along the bottom surface of the bottom flange to measure flex-
By positioning the load closer and removing bearing stiffeners from ural strain, as shown in Fig. 7(b). Two strain gauge rosettes were
the studied end, web buckling was restricted to this location. placed on each side of the web to measure local shear strains in the
Loading and unloading cycles of increasing magnitude were web [indicated with an arrow in Fig. 7(a)].
applied to each girder during testing. The prefailure loading proto- Ten additional strain gauges were added to the repaired girder.
col was based on the applied force from the load ram. The postfai- Two Omega 6-mm (0.236-in.) uniaxial strain gauges were placed
lure loading protocol was based on the vertical displacement on the outer, top two shear studs to measure axial strain and capture
between the bottom flange of the specimen with respect to the floor. the load transfer between the studs and UHPC. Four Omega 30-mm
(1.18-in.) strain gauges were placed on each of the concrete panels:
one to measure strain at the centerline of the bearing and three to
Instrumentation
form a strain gauge rosette to measure shear strain on the concrete
Each of the three test girders was instrumented with several mea- surface. The strain gauge layout on the surface of the UHPC panel
surement devices to record force, displacement, and strain data. is shown in Fig. 7(c).
Two load cells were placed beneath the end bearings to measure Before testing, a whitewash of lime was applied to the studied
axial, shear, and moment reactions. The load cells were designed, end of each girder to aid in the identification of damage patterns on
manufactured, and calibrated by the authors, modeling the design of the steel.

Fig. 7. Strain gauge layout: (a) web of the steel girders; (b) bottom flange of the steel girders; (c) UHPC panels

© ASCE 04017037-6 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 8. Final condition of the left and right side of the specimens: (a) undamaged girder; (b) damaged girder; (c) repaired girder

Experimental Results Flexural damage lines developed in the web beneath the load ram,
and horizontal shear damage lines became visible in the web near
the bearing at the studied end. Two vertical compression fields
Undamaged Girder
developed beneath the load ram and above the bearing. The flex-
The first damage patterns formed on the undamaged girder under ural damage was caused by high bending stresses in the steel at
a bearing reaction force of 623 kN (140 kip) at the studied end. the point of loading. The shear damage was caused by shear

© ASCE 04017037-7 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 deformations within the bearing column of the steel girder. The varied from 0.387 m« /kN (1.72 m« /kip) at the bearing to 1.70 m« /
undamaged girder failed from web buckling at a bearing force of kN (7.57 m« /kip) beneath the load ram.
801 kN (180 kip) and a vertical displacement of 7.57 mm (0.298
in.). Failure occurred suddenly over the entire height of the web at
Damaged Girder
the bearing. The web exhibited out-of-plane deformation, and a yield
line formed on the end of the girder web. The yield line, indicated Unlike the undamaged girder, the damaged girder experienced no
with an arrow in Fig. 8(a), extended from the bottom flange at the visible damage prior to failure. The damaged girder failed suddenly
middle of the end panel to approximately the center of the web at a bearing force of 191 kN (43 kip) and a vertical displacement of
where buckling occurred. Two plastic hinges formed in the bottom 1.96 mm (0.077 in.). Localized buckling occurred in the reduced
flange as a result of load redistribution after failure. The approximate section of the web. The increased slenderness of the web caused by
location of the plastic hinges is shown in Fig. 8(a). The postfailure the section loss restricted failure to the reduced section. The full sec-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

displacement-controlled cycles continued to increase the out-of- tion of web remained relatively undeformed, with minimal
plane displacements of the web. The progression of web deforma- observed damage. A yield line formed at the bottom of the girder
tion is shown in Fig. 9. and extended to the end of the web exactly at the transition point
The stiffness of the undamaged girder system was 112 kN/mm from the reduced section to the full section. The yield line is indi-
(640 kip/in.), as shown in Fig. 10(a). The rate of change of global cated by an arrow in Fig. 8(b). A single plastic hinge formed in the
shear deformation calculated from the shear box with respect to bottom flange of the girder at the end of the reduced section, as
bearing force was 4.31 mm/mm/kN (19.1 in./in./kip). The rate of shown in Fig. 8(b). After failure, the displacement controlled load-
change of local shear strain from the strain gauge rosette with ing protocol continued to increase the horizontal deformation of the
respect to bearing force was 3.19 m« /kN (14.2 m« /kip). The maxi- reduced section of the web. The web began to rupture at the transi-
mum axial strain in the web before failure was 4,470 m« at a load of tion point between the reduced and full sections of the web. The
623 kN (180 kip). The bearing strain was taken to be the average of progression of the web deformation of the damaged girder is shown
the strain in the steel on the right and left side of the web. Fig. 11(a) in Fig. 12.
shows the distribution of bearing strain along the height of the The stiffness of the damaged girder system was 100 kN/mm
web as loading progressed to failure. The rate of change of flex- (573 kip/in.), as shown in Fig. 10(b). The rate of change of global
ural strain of the bottom flange with respect to bearing force shear deformation calculated from the shear box with respect to

Fig. 9. Failure progression of the undamaged girder based on the vertical displacement at the load ram: (a) 0 mm (0 in.); (b) 6.35 mm (0.25 in.);
(c) 19.1 mm (0.75 in.); (d) 31.8 mm (1.25 in.)

Fig. 10. Studied end-bearing load versus displacement between the bottom flange of the girder and the floor: (a) undamaged girder; (b) damaged
girder; (c) repaired girder

© ASCE 04017037-8 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 11. Distribution of axial bearing strain on the steel girder along the height of the web: (a) undamaged girder; (b) damaged girder; (c) repaired
girder

Fig. 12. Failure progression of the damaged girder based on the vertical displacement at the load ram: (a) 0 mm (0 in.); (b) 12.7 mm (0.50 in.);
(c) 25.4 mm (1.00 in.); (d) 38.1 mm (1.50 in.)

bearing force was 6.79 mm/mm/kN (30.2 in./in./kip). The rate of cold joint formed during casting when a small amount of concrete
change of local shear strain from the strain gauge rosette with leaked from the right panel to the left panel before the left panel was
respect to bearing force was 3.43 m« /kN (15.3 m« /kip). The maxi- cast. A cold joint crack developed under a bearing force of 783 kN
mum axial strain in the web was 1,785 m« at a load of 191 kN (176 kip). The final crack patterns on both panels are shown in Fig.
(43 kip) before localized web buckling occurred. The axial strain 8(c); the crack patterns were outlined to make them more distin-
distribution along the height of the web is shown in Fig. 11(b). The guishable, but it should be noted all final cracks were fine cracks in
rate of change of flexural strain of the bottom flange with respect to the UHPC panel and were not regarded as significant damage.
bearing force varied from 0.499 m« /kN (2.22 m« /kip) at the bearing The UHPC repair prevented the girder from failing as a result
to 1.63 m« /kN (7.24 m« /kip) beneath the load ram. of web buckling at the bearing. Flexural damage lines formed
beneath the load ram at a bearing force of 783 kN (176 kip). The
Repaired Girder flexural damage in the web is circled in Fig. 8(c). The maximum
bearing force of the repaired girder was 1,023 kN (230 kip).
During the curing process for the repaired girder, a small number of Under this load, extensive flexural yielding occurred in the steel
hairline temperature and shrinkage cracks formed in the concrete beneath the load ram, and loading was halted. The maximum verti-
panel. The first loading cracks to develop were vertical cracks at the cal displacement of the repaired girder was 14.86 mm (0.585 in.).
top of the panels and vertical cracks at the bearing. These cracks No significant out-of-plane movement was recorded. The ultimate
began at a load of 156 kN (35 kip). The cracks at the top of the pan- strength of the concrete panel was not achieved because of yielding
els formed as the panels rotated about the bearing. Small displace- of the girder.
ments induced tension in the concrete as a result of the rotation. The stiffness of the repaired girder system was 118 kN/mm
Cracks formed by the vertical compression field at the bearing (674 kip/in.), as shown in Fig. 10(c). The rate of change of global
became visible at a load of 254 kN (57 kip). Shear cracks began shear deformation calculated from the shear box with respect to
forming at the bottom of the panel at a load of 307 kN (69 kip). The bearing force was 1.6 mm/mm/kN (7.1 in./in./kip). The rate of
shear cracks extended into the bevel of the concrete repair and pro- change of local shear strain from the strain gauge rosette with
gressed into the center of the panels as the applied load increased. A respect to bearing force was 1.77 m« /kN (7.9 m« /kip). The

© ASCE 04017037-9 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 maximum axial strain in the web was 930 m« at a peak load of 1,023 By removing 70% of the web thickness and 44% of the flange
kN (230 kip). The bearing strain distribution is shown in Fig. 11(c). thickness, the bearing capacity of the damaged girder was 76% less
The maximum strain occurred 318 mm (12.5 in.) from the bottom than the undamaged girder capacity. Unlike the undamaged girder,
of the web, close to the total height of the concrete panel [330 mm the top portion of the damaged girder remained virtually in plane
(13 in.)]. The rate of change of flexural strain of the bottom flange after buckling occurred, as shown in Fig. 15. The localized failure
with respect to bearing force increased from 0.534 m« /kN (2.33 m« / was contained within the reduced section. The UHPC panels on the
kip) at the bearing to 1.90 m« /kN (8.45 m« /kip) beneath the load repaired girder prevented the web from buckling, as shown in
ram. The rates of change of strain of the shear studs with respect to Fig. 15(c). The repaired girder supported a maximum load of 1,023
bearing force on the repaired girder were 0.25 m« /kN (1.1 m« /kip) kN (230 kip) before excessive flexural yielding occurred beneath
in tension for the stud closest to the bearing (SS1) and 0.79 m« /kN the load ram and loading was halted. Despite the same level of sec-
(3.5 m« /kip) in compression for the stud farthest from the bearing tion loss as the damaged girder, the capacity of the repaired girder
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(SS2), as shown in Fig. 13. The bearing strains of the concrete pan- was over five times greater than that of the damaged specimen. This
els are shown in Fig. 14. Before cracks developed through the strain was also over 28% larger than the undamaged girder. The final con-
gauges on the UHPC panel, the maximum bearing strains of the dition of each girder is shown in Fig. 16.
left and right panels were 115 m« at a load of 1,023 kN (230 kip) The stiffness of each girder specimen was calculated by compar-
and 70 m« at a load of 778 kN (175 kip), respectively. The rate of ing the bearing load at the studied end with the vertical displace-
change of strain of the left and right UHPC panels were 0.085 m« /kN ment between the bottom flange of the girder and the floor beneath
(0.38 m« /kip) and 0.09 m« /kN (0.40 m« /kip), respectively. the hydraulic cylinder. The potentiometer attached to the top flange
of the specimens and the spreader beam yielded stiffness values
consistently smaller than those from the potentiometer attached to
Discussion the specimen’s bottom flange and the floor. The loss in stiffness
may be attributed to the elasticity of the load frame. Fig. 17 shows
The results of the three half-scale experimental tests were compared the comparison of the load-versus-displacement relationships of
to determine the decrease in bearing capacity resulting from section each of the girders. The stiffness values were compared to investi-
loss and to demonstrate the ability of the UHPC repair to restore gate the effects of the reduced section and the UHPC repair on
lost girder capacity. bending performance under live loading. The stiffness of the dam-
aged girder was 10% lower than that of the undamaged girder
because of the reduction in cross-sectional area. The stiffness of the
repaired girder was 5% higher than that of the undamaged girder
because of the addition of the UHPC. Because the difference in
girder stiffness was minor, the reduced section of the steel and the
UHPC repair did not have an appreciable effect on the bending stiff-
ness of the damaged and repaired girders for the given loading.
Global shear strains calculated from the potentiometer shear box
illustrate the difference in force-carrying mechanisms between
the three girder specimens. The load distribution was caused by the
inclusion of the corrosion damage and the concrete repair to the
damaged and repaired girders. The rate of change of the global
shear deformation of the damaged girder with respect to bearing
force was 58% higher than that of the undamaged girder as a result
of the reduction in cross-sectional area. The reduced cross section
increased the shear deformation and lowered the capacity of the
Fig. 13. Load versus strain in the shear studs, SS1 (at the bearing) and damaged girder. The rate of change of the global shear deformation
SS2 (farthest from the bearing) of the repaired girder was 76% smaller than that of the damaged
girder as a result of additional stiffness from the UHPC panels. The
UHPC repair prevented extensive shear deformation of the end
panel.
The localized shear strain recorded by the rosette strain gauges
verified the trends from the potentiometer shear box. The applica-
tion of corrosion damage to the damaged girder increased the rate of
change of the local shear strain with respect to bearing force by 8%
compared with the undamaged girder. The addition of the UHPC
repair decreased the rate of change of the local shear strain with
respect to bearing force by 41% compared with the damaged girder.
At the failure load of the undamaged girder [801 kN (180 kip)], the
shear strain of the repaired girder (1,470 m« ) was 1.7 times smaller
than that of the undamaged girder (2,540 m« ). The decrease in shear
strain between the undamaged and repaired girders indicates that
shear forces were transferred from the web of the girder to the
UHPC repair.
Axial strains were measured along the height of the web to moni-
Fig. 14. Load versus axial bearing strain on the surface of the right
tor the distribution of bearing forces on the web column. The bear-
and left concrete panels
ing strain distribution of the three girder specimens at their

© ASCE 04017037-10 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 15. Final condition of the end cross section after testing: (a) undamaged girder; (b) damaged girder; (c) repaired girder

Fig. 16. Final condition of the girder after testing: (a) undamaged girder; (b) damaged girder; (c) repaired girder

respective failure loads is shown in Fig. 18. The axial strain of the performance of the repair because of the minimal stress carried by
undamaged girder (411 m« ) was approximately 4.3 times smaller the remaining steel section.
than that of the damaged girder (1,785 m« ) at the failure load of the The flexural strains in the bottom flange were recorded to moni-
damaged girder [191 kN (43 kip)]. The axial strain of the repaired tor the effects of the reduced flange thickness and the UHPC repair
girder (252 m« ) was 21 times smaller than that of the undamaged on the bending performance of the girders. Compared with the
girder (4,470 m« ) at the failure load of the undamaged girder undamaged girder, the rate of change in the flexural strain of the
[801 kN (180-kip)]. The bearing strain data were taken to be the av- damaged girder increased by 29% directly beneath the reduced sec-
erage of the strain on the right and left side of the web at the location tion but decreased by 4% beneath the load ram. This variation in
of maximum bearing strain for the damaged and undamaged girders flexural strain resulted from load redistribution around the corroded
(WL11). One reason for the significant difference in axial web area. The rate of change in the flexural strain of the repaired girder
strain between each girder was the location of the strain gauges increased along the bottom flange compared with both the undam-
along the web. The bottom-most strain gauge on the undamaged aged and damaged girders. Compared with the damaged girder, the
girder was placed directly at the location of maximum bending after repair girder flexural strains increased by 5% under the reduced sec-
web buckling occurred, whereas on the damaged girder, the strain tion. The rate of change in the flexural strain of the repaired girder
gauge was between the two points of maximum bending in the web. beneath the load ram increased by 12% compared with the undam-
However, the variation in axial strain between the undamaged aged girder. The increased rate of change in the flexural strain of the
girder and the damaged girder may also have resulted from the repaired girder validates the composite action of the repair method.
lower buckling capacity of the specimen because of the reduced The strain gauges attached to the shear studs and concrete panels
section. The decrease in axial strain between the repaired girder and were used to monitor the composite response of the repaired girder.
the undamaged girder demonstrated the ability of the UHPC repair The compressive forces in the stud away from the bearing may be
to carry bearing loads and relieve a large portion of bearing stress attributed to early twisting of the top flange before the concrete
from the reduced web section. Therefore, the addition of bearing panel was engaged. Because the rate of change in the strain of the
stiffeners to the repaired girder may not have had an impact on the stud farther from the bearing was higher, a significant portion of

© ASCE 04017037-11 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 Summary and Conclusion

A proof-of-concept study was conducted on a novel method to reha-

bilitate girders with corrosion damage by attaching UHPC panels to
the undamaged portion of the girder using shear studs. UHPC was
chosen as the desired repair material for this method because of its
durability, high early strength, low permeability, flowability, and
high tensile strength. These advantages of UHPC provide engineers
with flexibility when designing a repair for complex girder geome-
tries and structures with minimal access. A series of three half-scale
tests was performed on rolled girders in the UConn Structures
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Laboratory: (1) an undamaged girder to determine the baseline

bearing capacity, (2) a damaged girder with section loss at the bear-
ing to simulate severe corrosion, and (3) a repaired girder with the
same level of section loss and UHPC repair panels. The results of
the three girder tests were compared to determine the ability of the
Fig. 17. Studied end-bearing load versus displacement between the repair technique to restore bearing capacity.
bottom flange and floor of all three girder specimens The undamaged girder failed as a result of web buckling at a
bearing force of 801 kN (180 kip). The damaged girder failed as a
result of localized web bucking under a bearing force of 191 kN
(43 kip) because of the section loss applied to the girder. The
reduced section decreased the stability of the girder under extreme
bearing force. Applying a 70% section loss to the damaged girder
reduced the bearing capacity by 76% compared with the undam-
aged girder.
The repaired girder did not fail at the bearing. Instead, it experi-
enced flexural yielding at the point of loading, supporting a maxi-
mum bearing force of 1,023 kN (230 kip). The UHPC repair method
increased the bearing capacity to over five times the capacity of the
damaged girder.
The composite action of the UHPC repair introduced a second-
ary load path for bearing and shear forces in the steel girder under
bending. A large percentage of the load was carried by the UHPC.
The load was transferred from the steel web to the UHPC panel
through shear studs. Under the failure load of the undamaged girder
[801 kN (180 kip)], the bearing strain within the steel web of the
repaired girder was 21 times smaller than the strain of the undam-
aged girder.
The results presented by the authors in this paper demonstrate
the ability of this UHPC repair to restore the lost bearing capacity
of corroded steel girders; however, future research is needed to
Fig. 18. Distribution of axial strain along the height of the web of the facilitate the implementation of the repair. The authors plan to
three girder specimens at their respective failure loads research the performance of the repair when conventional or
high-strength concrete is used. The nature of specific projects
along with cost constraints may justify the use of conventional or
the load was transferred from the web to the concrete panel away high-strength concrete over UHPC. Additional studies will be
from the bearing. Therefore, shear studs placed away from the bear- conducted on plate girders because this study only addressed
ing contributed to the transfer of forces from the undamaged portion rolled girders; the use of different repair geometries on complex
of the web to the concrete repair panel. girder configurations will also studied. The follow-up research
The bearing strain on the outer surface of the concrete was project will investigate through experimental and analytical stud-
approximately 12% of the maximum axial strain in the steel. The ies different shear stud arrangements, repair geometries, relevant
low concrete strain most likely resulted from shear lag through the corrosion patterns, the effects of bearing stiffeners, and several
entire thickness of the panel. The load transfer from the web to other parameters. Other design concerns will be considered, such
the concrete panel was also limited to the shear studs because the as implementing the repair under dead load without jacking of the
steel surface of the girder was not bonded to the concrete. The rate superstructure, early strength testing of the repair under vibra-
of change of axial strain of both panels was similar, showing that tional loads to investigate the effects of minimal lane closure, and
the load was distributed relatively evenly. The cracking of the pan- the long-term durability of the repair to minimize further mainte-
els indicated the existence of tensile stresses; however, the high ten- nance in the future and fatigue resistance.
sile strength of the UHPC significantly reduced the extent of crack-
ing and prevented cracks from opening further. The use of
conventional concrete in place of UHPC may reduce the capacity of Acknowledgments
the repair because of its low tensile strength. Shear failure of the
panel as a result of low tensile strength may introduce a different This paper presents results from a study funded by the Connecticut
failure mode of the repair. Department of Transportation under Project SPR-2282. The

© ASCE 04017037-12 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 authors thank the Connecticut Department of Transportation, Graybeal, B. (2014). “Design and construction of feld-cast UHPC con-
especially John Henault, Timothy Fields, Richard Van Allen, Leo nections.” FHWA-HRT-14-084, Federal Highway Administration,
Fontaine, Kevin Mahoney, Bao Chuong, Rabih Barakat, Anne- Washington, DC.
Marie McDonnell, Bradley Overturf, and Richard Hanley, and the Grünberg, J., Lohaus, L., Ertel, C., and Wefer, M. (2008). “Multi-axial and
fatigue behavior of ultra-high performance concrete (UHPC).” Proc.,
Department of Homeland Security for their support. The
2nd Int. Symp. on Ultra-High Performance Concrete, Kassel University
significant contribution of Michael Culmo of CME Associates in Press, Kassel, Germany, 485–491.
developing the concept is greatly appreciated. The authors thank He, J., Liu, Y., Chen, A., and Yoda, T. (2012a). “Shear behavior of partially
John Gasparine of Infra-Metals, David Hunt of Berlin Steel, encased composite I-girder with corrugated steel web: Experimental
Joseph D’Agostino of Parsons Brinckerhoff, and Vic Perry, study.” J. Constr. Steel Res., 77, 193–209.
Dominique Corvez, John Ephraim, Gaston Doiron, and Andrew He, J., Liu, Y., Lin, Z., Chen, A., and Yoda, T. (2012b). “Shear behavior of
Ross of Lafarge for their generous donation of materials. The partially encased composite I-girder with corrugated steel web:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

assistance of Peter Glaude and Jim Olney from the UConn School Numerical study.” J. Constr. Steel Res., 79, 166–182.
of Engineering machine shop is appreciated. Special thanks go to Hyashi, K., Ono, S., and Nakamura, S. (2003). “Experimental studies on ret-
rofit by partially encased concrete to the steel I-girder subjected to buck-
James Mahoney, Lori Judd, and Carolyn Ward of the Connecticut
ling deformation.” Technical Memorandum 3920, Public Works
Transportation Institute. In addition, the assistance of Manish Roy, Research Institute, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan, 229–236.
Masoud Mehr, Alicia Echevarria, Man Xu, Javier Duluc, Michael Kayser, J. R., and Nowak, A. S. (1989). “Capacity loss due to corrosion
Humphreys, Amanda McBride, Alexandra Hain, Christopher in steel-girder bridges.” J. Struct. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0733
Pawlowski, and Andy Dauphinais during the research project is -9445(1989)115:6(1525), 1525–1537.
appreciated. Khurram, N., Sasaki, E., Katsuchi, H., and Yamada, H. (2014b).
“Experimental and numerical evaluation of bearing capacity of steel
plate girder affected by end panel corrosion.” Int. J. Steel Struct., 14(3),
References 659–676.
Khurram, N., Sasaki, E., Kihira, H., Katsuchi, H., and Yamada, H. (2014a).
Abbas, S., Nehdi, M. L., and Saleem, M. A. (2016). “Ultra-high perform- “Analytical demonstrations to assess residual bearing capacities of steel
ance concrete: Mechanical performance, durability, sustainability, plate girder ends with stiffeners damaged by corrosion.” Struct.
and implementation challenges.” Int. J. Concr. Struct. Mater., 10(3), Infrastruct. Eng., 10(1), 69–79.
271–295. Koch, G. H., Brongers, M. P. H., Thompson, N. G., Virmani, Y. P., and
Ahn, J.-H., Kainuma, S., and Kim, I.-T. (2013a). “Shear failure behaviors of Payer, J. H. (2002). “Corrosion cost and preventive strategies in the
a web panel with local corrosion depending on web boundary condi- United States.” Rep. No. FHWA-RD-01-156, Turner-Fairbank Highway
tions.” Thin Wall. Struct., 73, 302–317. Researh Center, McLean, VA.
Ahn, J.-H., Kainuma, S., Yasuo, F., and Takehiro, I. (2013b). “Repair Kristoff, W. M. (2011). “In-depth inspection of Bridge No. 03399D: I-84
method and residual bearing strength evaluation of a locally corroded over parking lot, Hartford, CT.” Technical Rep., Connecticut Dept. of
plate girder at support.” Eng. Fail. Anal., 33, 398–418. Transportation, Newington, CT.
Albrecht, P., and Hall, T. T., Jr. (2003). “Atmospheric corrosion resist- Liu, C., Miyashita, T., and Nagai, M. (2011). “Analytical study on shear
ance of structural steels.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)0899 capacity of steel I-girders with local corrosion nearby supports.”
-1561(2003)15:1(2), 2–24. Procedia Eng., 14, 2276–2284.
ASCE. (2014). 2013 report card for America’s infrastructure, Reston, VA. LS-DYNA 971 [Computer software]. Livermore Software Technology
Chang, L.-M., and Lee, Y.-J. (2001). “Evaluation and policy for bridge Corporation, Livermore, CA.
deck expansion joints.” FHWA/IN/JTRP-2000/1, Joint Transportation Miyashita, T., et al. (2015). “Repair method for corroded steel girder ends
Research Program, Indiana Dept. of Transportation and Purdue Univ., using CFRP sheet.” Proc., IABSE-JSCE Conf. on Advances in Bridge
West Lafayette, IN. Engineering-III, International Association for Bridge and Structural
Classen, M., Gallwoszus, J., and Stark, A. (2016). “Anchorage of com- Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland, 614–620.
posite dowels in UHPC under fatigue loading.” Struct. Concr., 17(2), Nakamura, S., Momiyama, Y., Hosaka, T., and Homma, K. (2002). “New
183–193. technologies of steel/concrete composite bridges.” J. Constr. Steel Res.,
Close, J., and Miller, P. C. (2011). “Preliminary design report—Putnam 58(1), 99–130.
Bridge, Bridge No. 00417. Project No. 53-175.” Technical Rep., Nakamura, S., and Narita, N. (2003). “Bending and shear strength of par-
Connecticut Dept. of Transportation, Newington, CT. tially encased composite I-girders.” J. Constr. Steel Res., 59(12),
ConnDOT (Connecticut Dept. of Transportation). (1955). “Bridge No. 1435–1453.
00352: Greenwich-Killingly Expressway Rt. 1 over Oil Mill Rd.” Ogami, H., Fujii, K., Yamada, T., and Iwashaki, H. (2015). “Renovation of
Technical Rep., Newington, CT. corroded girder end in plate girder bridge with resin and rebars.”
ConnDOT (Connecticut Dept. of Transportation). (1962). “Bridge No. Implementing innovative ideas in structural engineering and project
03399D: Rt. 84 on ramp over parking lot,” Technical Rep., management, S. Saha, Y. Zhang, S. Yazdani, and A. Singh, eds., ISEC,
Newington, CT. Fargo, ND, 1–6.
Elnashai, A. S., Takanashi, K., Elghazouli, A. Y., and Dowling, P. J. Reinhorn, A. M., and Bracci, J. (1992). “Multi-axis load cell design and con-
(1991). “Experimental behaviour of partially encased composite beam- struction.” Rep. No. NCEER-92-0027, National Center for Earthquake
columns under cyclic and dynamic.” Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., 91(2), Engineering Research, Univ. of New York, Buffalo, NY.
259–272. Rossow, M. (2003). “FHWA bridge maintenance: Superstructure.” Bridge
Feldmann, M., Hechler, O., and Hegger, J., and Rauscher, S. (2011). maintence training reference manual, Continuing Education and
“Fatigue behavior of shear connectors in high performance concrete.” Development Engineering, Stony Point, NY.
Proc., Int. Conf. on Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete Russell, H., and Graybeal, B. A. (2013). “Ultra-high performance concrete:
2008, ASCE, Reston, VA, 310–321. A state-of-the-art report for the bridge community.” Rep. No. FHWA-
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). (2014). “Design and con- HRT-13-060, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA.
struction of field-cast UHPC connections.” FHWA-HRT-14-084, Shaheen, E., and Shrive, N. (2008). Cyclic loading and fracture mechanics
Washington, DC. of ductal concrete, Springer Science & Business Media.
FLDOT (Florida Dept. of Transportation). (2011). “Section 6: Steel beam and Shi, X., Fay, L., Yang, Z., Nguyen, T. A., and Liu, Y. (2009). “Corrosion of
girder repair.” Bridge maintenance and repair handbook, Tallahassee, deicers to metals in transportation infrastructure: Introduction and recent
FL, 78–83. developments.” Corros. Rev., 27(1–2), 23–52.

© ASCE 04017037-13 J. Bridge Eng.

J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1

 Usukura, M., Yamaguchi, T., Suzuki, Y., and Mitsugi, Y. (2013). “Strength Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers
evaluation for a corroded damaged steel girder end considering its collapse (HUSCAP), Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan.
mechanism.” Proc., 13th East Asia-Pacific Conf. on Structural Yaun, J., and Graybeal, B. A. (2014). “Bond behavior of reinforcing
Engineering and Construction (EASEC-13), Hokkaido Univ. Collection of steel in ultra-high performance concrete.” FHWA Publication No.
Scholarly and Academic Papers (HUSCAP), Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan. FHWA-HRT-14-090, Federal Highway Administration, Mclean,
Van de Lindt, J. W., and Pei, S. (2006). “Buckling reliability of deteriorating VA.
steel beam ends.” Electron. J. Struct. Eng., (6), 1–7. Zaghi, A. E., Wille, K., Zmetra, K., and McMullen, K. (2015). “Repair of
Wipf, T. J., Fanous, F. S., Klaiber, F. W., and Eapen, A. S. (2003). steel beam/girder ends with ultra high strength concrete (phase I).” Rep.
“Evaluation of appropriate maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation No. CT-2282-F-15-2, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
methods for Iowa bridges.” Iowa Dept. of Transportation Rep. No. Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
TR-429, Dept. of Civil and Construction Engineering, Iowa State Zmetra, K. (2015). “Repair of corrosion damaged steel bridge girder ends
Univ., Des Moines, IA. by encasement in ultra-high performance concrete.” Ph.D. thesis., Dept.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by UNIV OF CONNECTICUT LIBRARIES on 05/19/17. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

WisDOT (Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation). (2015). “Bridge rehabilita- of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
tion.” Bridge manual, Madison, WI. Zmetra, K., Zaghi, A. E., and Wille, K. (2015). “Rehabilitation of steel
Yamaguchi, E., and Akagi, T. (2013). “Degradation of load-carrying bridge girders with corroded ends using ultra-high performance
capacity of steel I-girder end due to corrosion.” Proc., 13th East Asia- concrete.” Proc., Structures Congress 2015, ASCE, Reston, VA,
Pacific Conf. on Structural Engineering and Construction (EASEC-13). 1411–1422.

© ASCE 04017037-14 J. Bridge Eng.

View publication stats J. Bridge Eng., 2017, 22(8): -1--1