# Presentation: 861685

##    FHWA    Long-Term Bridge Performance Program

**Hamid Ghasemi, Ph.D.**
- Program Manager
- Long-Term Bridge Performance Program
- Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center
- Federal Highway Administration
- McLean, Virginia

- “A Flagship Initiative”

## Outline

- Highlights
- Vision
- Methodology
- Focus Group Meetings
- Pilot Study
- Conclusions

##   Designated in the “SAFETEA-LU” surface transportation  
   authorization legislation (August 2005)

  Anticipated to be a long-term research effort to improve  
   our knowledge of bridge performance

  Funding was authorized through FY-2009

-    authorization legislation (August 2005)
-   Anticipated to be a long-term research effort to improve
-    our knowledge of bridge performance
**  ****Funding **was authorized **through FY-2009**

- Long-Term Bridge Performance Program
- (LTBP Program)

##   Outreach (i.e., Conferences, Workshops, Meetings)
  Draft Framework (U. of Delaware)
  Workshop in January 2007 (Las Vegas, NV)

Participants: FHWA, AASHTO, Other Government Institutions, Academia, Industry, International Bridge Experts
Short-Term and Long-Term Goals
Specific Data to be Collected
Sample Bridges to Test, Evaluate and Monitor

-   Draft Framework (U. of Delaware)
-   Workshop in January 2007 (Las Vegas, NV)
- Participants: FHWA, AASHTO, Other Government Institutions, Academia, Industry, International Bridge Experts
- Short-Term and Long-Term Goals
- Specific Data to be Collected
- Sample Bridges to Test, Evaluate and Monitor

- LTBP Program Activities
- (January 2006 – Present)

##   FHWA Bridge Management Information      
   Systems Laboratory

Synthesis Report on Bridge Performance
Sampling Methodology
Data Gaps
Deterioration Model

-    Systems Laboratory
- Synthesis Report on Bridge Performance
- Sampling Methodology
- Data Gaps
- Deterioration Model

- LTBP Program Activities
- (January 2006 – Present)

##   July 2007 (Solicitation)

  April 2008 (Contract Was Awarded to CAIT/Rutgers 			                                                          University)

  May 2008 – Present (Developmental Phase)

-   April 2008 (Contract Was Awarded to CAIT/Rutgers 			                                                          University)
-   May 2008 – Present (Developmental Phase)

- LTBP Program Activities
- (January 2006 – Present)

**Notes:**
Formed the basis

**Friday, May 2, 2008**
**	****“****Acting Federal Highway Administrator Jim Ray” **
**	**FHWA Launches *Flagship* Initiative to Collect Nationwide Data on Highway Bridges - A 20-year research effort to collect data on bridges nationwide will lead to better investment decisions on bridges

## Objective

**Notes:**
The LTBP prgram will help address many challenges that was discussed earlier by collecting and documenting quantitative performance data based on field measurement.  The subsequent mining of the data will provide a better understanding of bridge performance and will help fostering the next generation of bridge management.

## LTBP program is not intended to become a repository of vast amounts of bridge data without consideration of the value of the data in assessing bridge performance

**LTBP program ****is not intended**** to become a repository of vast amounts of bridge data ****without**** ****consideration**** of the value of the data in assessing bridge performance**

## Anticipated Impacts of the LTBP Program

-  Advances in deterioration and predictive models
-  Effective use of Life-Cycle Cost Analysis
-  Improved inspection/condition information thru NDE and SHM
-  Support improved design standards
-  Improved maintenance practices
-  Help foster the next generation of bridge and asset management systems

## Approach

- Detailed inspection, *periodic* objective evaluation and  monitoring (from a representative sample of bridges, excluding       long-span bridges)
- Forensic autopsies of decommissioned bridges
- Accelerated Testing

## Slide 12

## Primary Tasks and Responsibilities

## Methodology

- Systems Approach
- Top-Down/Heuristic Approach

##  Systems Approach

- Collect scientific quality performance data from the nation’s highway bridges, as representing critical node-points of the highway transportation network.
- The data and information to be collected is expected to advance our knowledge of how our highway transportation, together with its linkages to other infrastructures, performs as a complex multi-domain system, governed by dynamic interactions between human, natural and engineering systems and elements.

##  Top-Down/Heuristic Approach

## Strategic Action Plan

**Step 1**
**Defining Bridge Performance**

**Step 2**
**Data to be Collected**

**Step 3**
**Data Management**
**System**

**Step 4**
**Design the Experimental**
**Program**

**Step 5**
**Data Collection**

**Program**
**Outcome**

**Step 6**
**Data Analysis & Modeling**

**Step 7**
**Dissemination**
**of Findings**

## Data QA/QC

- _Data QA/QC_

**Step 1**
**Defining Bridge Performance**

**Step 2**
**Data to be Collected**

**Step 3**
**Data Management**
**System**

**Step 4**
**Design the Experimental**
**Program**

**Step 5**
**Data Collection**

**Program**
**Outcome**

**Step 6**
**Data Analysis & Modeling**

**Step 7**
**Dissemination**
**of Findings**

## ????

- Performance Measure, Category, or Indicators

##   National Survey
Number of bridges needing work
Structural deficiencies and posting
Condition rating, sufficiency rating and health index
Deficiencies and load carrying capacity
Customer satisfaction

- Number of bridges needing work
- Structural deficiencies and posting
- Condition rating, sufficiency rating and health index
- Deficiencies and load carrying capacity
- Customer satisfaction

- Bridge Performance ?

**Notes:**
Let’s talk about bridge performance.

Today, can we really define or measure bridge performance?
Here is how bridge performance is defined by state highway agencies based on a survey taken by the FHWA in early 1990’s......

##  Performance Categories

-  Performance Categories

-  Serviceability
-  Operation
-  Scour and Floods
-  Wind
-  Hurricane
-  Earthquakes
-  Overloads
-  Vessel Collisions
-  Fire
-  Fatigue
-  Terrorism

**All Limit States**

- Which Performance Category is More Critical?

## Slide 23

**Notes:**
Let’s talk about bridge performance.

Today, can we really define or measure bridge performance?
Here is how bridge performance is defined by state highway agencies based on a survey taken by the FHWA in early 1990’s......

## Slide 25

## Challenges in Measuring Bridge Performance

- It is not well defined and understood or documented
- Relies too heavily on expert opinion
- Based on significant assumption or generalization
- Uncertainties
- _Subjectivity _of current condition ratings
- Lack of proper documentation (i.e., records of actions and costs, deferring the action)
- Incomplete data (i.e., cost, maintenance)
- Many hidden deterioration and damage escape visual inspection

**Notes:**

Sufficeincy rating
For example, it is assumed that 
concrete decks are poured using concrete meeting or exceeding specifications, 
that the concrete is properly cured and that the deck concrete remains uncracked 
On a given bridge, one or more of these assumptions may not be true and subsequent evaluation of the performance of reinforcement in the deck may not identify the true causes of any degradation in deck condition

## Strategic Action Plan

**Step 1**
**Defining Bridge Performance**

**Step 2**
**Data to be Collected**

**Step 3**
**Data Management**
**System**

**Step 4**
**Design the Experimental**
**Program**

**Step 5**
**Data Collection**

**Program**
**Outcome**

**Step 6**
**Data Analysis & Modeling**

**Step 7**
**Dissemination**
**of Findings**

## FOCUS GROUP Meetings

-   Focus group meetings across a number of
-    geographically distributed locations initiated
-   Partnering with practitioners in order to get the
-    information and data that is needed to improve the
-    long-term performance of our bridge systems
-   The program cannot be a one size fits all approach,
-    and should not place additional burdens on
-    highway agencies

## FGM and Pilot Study

-  Summer 2009
-  Detailed inspection and
-   Monitoring of 7 bridges
-  Validate protocols and processes
-  Viability of the data infrastructure
-  Efficacy of sensor technology

- John Penrod:
- Pilot Study Program manager

- Draft Roadmap

## Oversight

- Internal Expert Task Group
- External Expert Task Group

## Outreach

- AASHTO Subcommittees on Bridges
- Organized a Workshop at TRB
- Presentation at AASHTO Annual Meeting
- SHRP-2 Initiation
- NIST and NSF
- International community
- Plan for Industry Involvement

##  Conclusions

- A dynamic program
- Not a one-size fit all program
- Not a data-warehouse
- Synergy among the FHWA, stakeholders, industry, academia, international bridge community
- Consider lessons learned from the LTPP
- Successful outreach strategy
- Take advantage of in-house expertise

**Notes:**
Retuning

##  Conclusions

- Be cognizant of program’s limitations

- Data        Information
-                                           Knowledge          Wisdom
-                 Experience

- Decision
- Making

## Web-Site and Contact Information

- _[http://www.tfhrc.gov/ltbp](http://www.tfhrc.gov/ltbp)_
- 	_[ltbp@dot.gov](mailto:ltbp@dot.gov)_

## Thank You !