Next Article in Journal
Cooperating to Compete in the Global Air Cargo Industry: The Case of the DHL Express and Lufthansa Cargo A.G. Joint Venture Airline ‘AeroLogic’
Previous Article in Journal
Innovative Method for Automatic Shape Generation and 3D Printing of Reduced-Scale Models of Ultra-Thin Concrete Shells
Article Menu
Issue 1 (March) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Infrastructures 2018, 3(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures3010006

Structural Performances of Bridge Types in the U.S. National Bridge Inventory

Cincinnati, OH 45231, USA
Received: 5 December 2017 / Revised: 5 February 2018 / Accepted: 1 March 2018 / Published: 4 March 2018
  |  
PDF [9917 KB, uploaded 4 March 2018]
  |  

Abstract

This paper demonstrates a comprehensive national network-level analysis to determine the relative deteriorations and operational structural performances of the various types of bridge structural design and/or construction. The study analyzes the entire database of the U.S. National Bridge Inventory for the year 2013 and considers bridge counts along with bridge deck areas that provide more significant results. Analysis of the proportional distribution of structural deficiency reveals issues of deterioration. Considering the structural deficiency, service life cycle and deterioration trends of bridge types over time, the multi-criteria equivalent structural performances incorporate the condition, durability, longevity, rate and pattern performances. The results provide support for more sustainable engineering and management decisions. Stringer/multi beam or girder (type 02) bridges are the most common bridge type, 40.75% by counts and 61.88% by areas. The structural performance of type 02 bridges seems comparable to the average of all bridges, yet they have lower durability and longevity performances, revealing a relative service life cycle vulnerability. The lowest structural performances are orthotropic (type 08) and segmental box girder (type 21) bridges; while their condition performances are rather high, their durability, longevity, rate and pattern performances are essentially low. The slight improvement of structural performance from 2006 to 2013 for most bridge types is not significant over seven years. Also, certain bridge types worsened. View Full-Text
Keywords: bridges; bridge construction; bridge design; deterioration; life cycles; performance characteristics; evaluation; structural behavior bridges; bridge construction; bridge design; deterioration; life cycles; performance characteristics; evaluation; structural behavior
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Farhey, D.N. Structural Performances of Bridge Types in the U.S. National Bridge Inventory. Infrastructures 2018, 3, 6.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Infrastructures EISSN 2412-3811 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top