The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts

and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official

policy of the Department of Transportation.

The metric units reported are those used in common practice by the persons interviewed.

They have not been converted to pure SI units because in some cases, the level of precision

implied would have been changed.

The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or

manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the

document.

The publication of this document was sponsored by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration

under contract number DTFH61-99-C00005. awarded to American Trade Initiatives, Inc. Any

opinions, options, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of

the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Government, the authors’ parent

institutions, or American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 

FHWA-PL-01-018

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. 

4. Title and Subtitle 

Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies in Europe and Japan 

5. Report Date 

March 2001

6. Performing Organization Code 

7. Author(s) Krishna Verma, Karl Frank, William Wright, Ronald Medlock, 

Bill McEleney, Pat Loftus, Bob Kase, Hardy Campbell, Alex Wilson, John 

Fisher, Kathleen Lineham, Milo Cress, Ralph Anderson, Arun Shirole, 

Dennis Mertz, Jerry Uttrachi, Randy Sathre, Jim Hamilton

8. Performing Organization Report No. 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 

American Trade Initiatives 

P.O. Box 8228 

Alexandria, VA 22306-8228

10. Work Unit No.(TRAIS) 

11. Contract or Grant No. 

DTFH61-99-C-0005 

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 

Office of International Programs 

Office of Policy 

Federal Highway Administration 

U.S. Department of Transportation

13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

14. Sponsoring Agency Code 

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA COTR: Donald W. Symmes, Office of International Programs 

16. Abstract

The objective of this scanning tour was to conduct a broad overview of newly developed manufacturing 

techniques that are in use abroad for steel bridge fabrication and erection. The trip focused on the role of steel 

production, design, innovation, and fabrication in modern steel fabrication facilities in Japan, Italy, Germany, 

and the United Kingdom. The team also shared information on U.S. practice, initiatives, and research activities 

in these areas. 

As a result of the review, the team identified six high-priority areas on which the U.S. industry should focus: 

computer aided drawing and computer aided manufacturing; automated recording of inspection, welding 

variables, and geometric measurements for quality control and virtual assembly; high-performance steels and 

coatings; cutting and joining steel components, members, and structures; certification and contracting of steel 

fabrication and erection; and design innovation. 

Within each of these areas, the team made recommendations for further research, pilot studies, and 

modifications to existing procedures that will further modernize structural steel fabrication facilities in the 

United States. 

17. Key Words

Computer aided drawing, computer aided 

manufacturing, high-performance steel, 

numerically controlled, weathering steel, robotic 

welding, computer integrated manufacturing. 

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public 

from the 

Office of International Programs 

FHWA-HPIP, Room 3325 

US Dept. of Transportation 

Washington, DC 20590 

international@fhwa.dot.gov 

www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages 

64

22. Price 

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized 
blank
i

Steel Bridge Fabrication

Technologies in

Europe and Japan

Prepared by the study tour team

and

American Trade Initiatives, Inc.

&

Avalon Integrated Services, Inc.

for the

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

March 2001

Krishna Verma

FHWA

Karl Frank

University of Texas, Austin

William Wright

FHWA

Ronald Medlock

Texas DOT

Bill McEleney

NSBA

Pat Loftus

High Steel Structures, Inc.

Ralph Anderson

Illinois DOT

Arun Shirole

NSBA

Dennis Mertz

University of Delaware

Jerry Uttrachi

ESAB

Randy Sathre

PDM Bridge

Jim Hamilton

Utah Pacific Bridge

Bob Kase

High Steel Structures, Inc.

Hardy Campbell

American Welding Society

Alex Wilson

Bethlehem Lukens Plate

John Fisher

Lehigh University

Kathleen Linehan

FHWA

Milo Cress

FHWA
ii

FHWA INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY

EXCHANGE PROGRAMS

The FHWA’s international programs focus on meeting the growing demands of its

partners at the Federal, State, and local levels for access to information on state-ofthe-art technology and the best practices used worldwide. While the FHWA is

considered a world leader in highway transportation, the domestic highway

community is very interested in the advanced technologies being developed by

other countries, as well as innovative organizational and financing techniques used

by the FHWA’s international counterparts.

INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SCANNING PROGRAM

The International Technology Scanning Program accesses and evaluates foreign

technologies and innovations that could significantly benefit U.S. highway

transportation systems. Access to foreign innovations is strengthened by U.S.

participation in the technical committees of international highway organizations

and through bilateral technical exchange agreements with selected nations. The

program has undertaken cooperatives with the American Association of State

Highway Transportation Officials and its Select Committee on International

Activities, and the Transportation Research Board’s National Highway Research

Cooperative Program (Panel 20-36), the private sector, and academia.

Priority topic areas are jointly determined by the FHWA and its partners. Teams of

specialists in the specific areas of expertise being investigated are formed and sent

to countries where significant advances and innovations have been made in

technology, management practices, organizational structure, program delivery, and

financing. Teams usually include Federal and State highway officials, private sector

and industry association representatives, as well as members of the academic

community.

The FHWA has organized more than 40 of these reviews and disseminated results

nationwide. Topics have encompassed pavements, bridge construction and

maintenance, contracting, intermodal transport, organizational management,

winter road maintenance, safety, intelligent transportation systems, planning, and

policy. Findings are recommended for follow-up with further research and pilot or

demonstration projects to verify adaptability to the United States. Information

about the scan findings and results of pilot programs are then disseminated

nationally to State and local highway transportation officials and the private sector

for implementation.

This program has resulted in significant improvements and savings in road

program technologies and practices throughout the United States, particularly in

the areas of structures, pavements, safety, and winter road maintenance. Joint

research and technology-sharing projects have also been launched with

international counterparts, further conserving resources and advancing the state

of the art.

For a complete list of International Technology Scanning topics, and to order free

copies of the reports, please see the last page of this publication.

Website: www.international.fhwa.dot.gov

Email: international@fhwa.dot.gov
iii

FHWA INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE REPORTS

Infrastructure

Geotechnical Engineering Practices in Canada and Europe

Geotechnology—Soil Nailing

International Contract Administration Techniques for Quality EnhancementCATQEST

Pavements

European Asphalt Technology

European Concrete Technology

South African Pavement Technology

Highway/Commercial Vehicle Interaction

Recycled Materials in European Highway Environments

Bridges

European Bridge Structures

Asian Bridge Structures

Bridge Maintenance Coatings

European Practices for Bridge Scour and Stream Instability Countermeasures

Advanced Composites in Bridges in Europe and Japan

Durability of Segmental and Cable Stayed Bridges in Europe

Planning and Environment

European Intermodal Programs: Planning, Policy and Technology

National Travel Surveys

Recycled Materials in European Highway Environments

Safety

Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety in England, Germany and the Netherlands

Speed Management and Enforcement Technology: Europe & Australia

Safety Management Practices in Japan, Australia, and New Zealand

Road Safety Audits—Final Report

Road Safety Audits—Case Studies

Innovative Traffic Control Technology & Practice in Europe

Commercial Vehicle Safety Technology & Practice in Europe

Methods and Procedures to Reduce Motorist Delays in European Work Zones

Operations

Advanced Transportation Technology

European Traffic Monitoring

Traffic Management and Traveler Information Systems

European Winter Service Technology

Snowbreak Forest Book – Highway Snowstorm Countermeasure Manual

(Translated from Japanese)

Policy & Information

Emerging Models for Delivering Transportation Programs and Services

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information from Abroad—Handbook

Acquiring Highway Transportation Information from Abroad—Final Report

International Guide to Highway Transportation Information

Also available on the internet

Only on the internet at www.international.fhwa.dot.gov
iv

CONTENTS

OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................... vi

Purpose ........................................................................................................................... vii

Sponsoring Organizations ........................................................................................... viii

Team Members .............................................................................................................. viii

ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS ................................................................................ 1

Japan ................................................................................................................................. 1

Italy ................................................................................................................................... 8

Germany ........................................................................................................................... 9

United Kingdom ............................................................................................................ 10

SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS .................................................................................... 13

High-Priority Topics ...................................................................................................... 13

CAD/CAM .............................................................................................................. 13

Automated Recording ............................................................................................ 13

High-Performance Steel (HPS) and Coatings ....................................................... 13

Cutting and Joining................................................................................................. 13

Certification and Contracting ................................................................................ 14

Design Innovation ................................................................................................... 14

Lower Priority Topics .................................................................................................... 14

CAD/CAM .................................................................................................................... 14

Automated Recording ................................................................................................... 15

Fabricated Elements – Virtual Assembly ............................................................... 15

Nondestructive Inspection ..................................................................................... 16

High-Performance Steels and Coatings ...................................................................... 17

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 17

Steel Quality and Properties................................................................................... 17

Steel Processing........................................................................................................ 18

Weathering Steel ...................................................................................................... 18

Coating Systems ...................................................................................................... 19

Longitudinally Profiled (LP) (Tapered) Plates ...................................................... 19
v

Cutting and Joining ....................................................................................................... 19

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 19

Automation .............................................................................................................. 20

Weld Processes ......................................................................................................... 21

Weld Details and Grinding ..................................................................................... 24

Certification and Contracting ...................................................................................... 25

Bridge Design ................................................................................................................. 25

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 25

Japan......................................................................................................................... 26

Italy ........................................................................................................................... 27

Germany................................................................................................................... 27

United Kingdom...................................................................................................... 28

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................... 29

APPENDIX A: Amplifying Questions .............................................................................. 30

APPENDIX B: Workshop Agendas ................................................................................... 36

APPENDIX C: List of Documents ..................................................................................... 41

APPENDIX D: Itinerary ..................................................................................................... 45

APPENDIX E: Biographic Sketches .................................................................................. 46

APPENDIX F: Technology Panel....................................................................................... 51

APPENDIX G: NKK High Speed Rotating Arc Welding ................................................ 53
blank
vii

OVERVIEW

The focus of the trip was on the role

that steel production, design,

innovation, and fabrication have in

modern steel fabrication facilities in

Japan, Italy, Germany, and the United

Kingdom.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the scanning tour was to conduct a broad overview of newly

developed manufacturing techniques that are in use abroad for steel bridge

fabrication and erection, as there is a need to further modernize structural steel

fabrication facilities in the United States. The focus of the trip was on the role that

steel production, design, innovation, and fabrication have in modern steel

fabrication facilities in Japan, Italy, Germany, and the United Kingdom. In addition,

the team shared information on U.S. practice, initiatives, and research activities to

promote innovative steel bridge fabrication; erection techniques and highperformance steel production; and schemes to retrofit older steel structures.

The team’s review concentrated on the following general topics:

• Computer aided drawing (CAD)

and computer aided

manufacturing (CAM).

• Automated recording of

inspection, welding variables, and

geometric measurements for

quality control and virtual

assembly.

• High-performance steels and

coatings.

• Cutting and joining steel

components, members, and

structures.

• Certification and contracting of steel fabrication and erection.

• Design innovation.

These topics are discussed in detail in a separate section of this report.

Recommendations are provided for the findings in each of these topic areas as

candidates for implementation into U.S. practice, and for further study and

development.

Before the trip, the team developed a list of amplifying questions and submitted it

to the organizations that were visited in each country. The list of questions served

to define the focus of the scanning tour, provided the basis for discussions, as well

as elicited responses from many of the organizations that were visited. The list of

questions is provided in appendix A.

In addition to the discussions held during the tour, the team participated in two

workshops. One was held in Osaka and was organized by Prof. Chitoshi Miki, Tokyo

Institute of Technology, and Mr. Kazuhiro Nishikawa, Japan Public Works Research

Institute, Ministry of Construction. The program for this workshop is listed in

appendix B.
OVERVIEW

viii

A second workshop was held at The Welding Institute (TWI), in Cambridge, UK,

and was organized by Drs. John Harrison and Stephen Maddox. The program also is

listed in appendix B.

Appendix C contains a list of the documents provided before or during the tour

that which were reviewed for the preparation of this report. Appendix D is the

itinerary for the scanning tour.

SPONSORING ORGANIZATIONS

The scanning review was conducted under the auspices of the Federal Highway

Administration’s (FHWA) Office of International Programs. The National Steel

Bridge Alliance (NSBA) and the American Iron and Steel Institute provided input

during the initial planning stages.

TEAM MEMBERS

The team members and the agencies and organizations they represented are listed

below.

NAME REPRESENTING ORGANIZATION

Krishna K. Verma (Chair) FHWA FHWA, Washington, DC

Ralph E. Anderson AASHTO Illinois DOT

Hardy Campbell AWS American Welding Society

Milo Cress FHWA FHWA, Lincoln, NE

John W. Fisher (Reporter) Lehigh University Lehigh University

Karl H. Frank (Reporter) University of Texas University of Texas, Austin

James Hamilton NSBA Utah Pacific Bridge

Robert Kase NSBA High Steel Structures

Kathleen Linehan FHWA FHWA, Washington, DC

Pat Loftus NSBA High Steel Structures

William McEleney NSBA National Steel Bridge Alliance, RI

Ronald Medlock AASHTO Texas DOT

Dennis Mertz AISI University of Delaware

Randy Sathre NSBA PDM Bridge, Wausau, WI

Arun Shirole NSBA National Steel Bridge Alliance, RI

Jerry Uttrachi AWS ESAB

Alexander D. Wilson AISI Bethlehem Steel Corp.

William J. Wright FHWA FHWA, McLean, VA

Appendix E provides biographical information on the team members, and Appendix

F lists their contact information.

Appendix G contains a diagram of high speed rotating arc welding.
1

ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

Background information on the organizations visited and a summary of their

operations is provided below in this section. Details of the relevant information

learned during the meetings and specific recommendations of the scanning team

are provided in the section on findings.

JAPAN

In Japan, the team visited four bridge fabrication shops. In the greater Osaka area,

the team visited Matsuo Bridge Company and the Yokogawa Bridge Corporation,

met with corporate and plant personnel, and toured the fabrication facilities. The

team then visited the NKK Bridge Works, in Tsu, and Kawada Industries, Inc., in

Marugame, on the island of Shikoku.

The team traveled from Tsu to Nagoya to visit the second Tomei Highway project of

Japan Highway Public Corporation, specifically, the Inabe River Bridge on-site

field welding and nondestructive inspection.

Following the site tours, a one-day workshop was organized by Prof. Miki and Mr.

Nishikawa. The workshop was convened at the U.S. Consulate in Osaka.

Matsuo Bridge Company, Ltd., is one of Japan’s leading fabricators (in the top 10)

and erectors of steel structures for bridges and steel-framed buildings. The

company was established in 1925 and has plants in Sakai (Osaka), Chiba, and

Shanghai, China. The Sakai plant was constructed in 1963 and occupies a land area

of 86,000 m2

. Production capacity is 3000 metric tons per month. Its 225-m-long and

51-m-wide wharf allows it to erect blocks up to 7000 metric tons, which can be

shipped directly from the wharf. The plant is qualified to construct major bridges in

Japan and is ISO 9001 certified. Matsuo has fabricated components for several

bridges for the Honshu-Shikoku Bridge Authority (HSBA), and for numerous

projects in North and South America, Asia, and the Middle East.

In general, the fabrication practice at the Sakai plant was similar to that of many

larger operations in the United States. Numerically controlled (NC) marking and

cutting was carried out with gas and plasma arc cutting machines. Flux-core arc

welding (FCAW) is the dominant process (65 to 70 percent), followed by solid wire

gas metal arc welding (GMAW) (100 percent), CO2 (20 percent), and submerged arc

welding (SAW) (10 percent).

The following were observed during the visit:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM technology.

• NC plasma cutting and marking machines.

• Flange panel fabrication line — automatic tack and final CO2

 welding

correcting angular distortion of ribs and flange (figure 1).

• Demonstration of automatic-scanning ultrasonic testing machine.

• Demonstration of 3-D measuring system for virtual assembly.

• Preassembly of steel piers for Ishimaru Bridge, with thick bent plates.

• Double-bevel groove welds with root grinding machine (figure 2).
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

2

• Fabricated components and

preassembled sections.

The Yokogawa Bridge Corporation is one of

Japan’s top five fabricators and erectors of

steel structures for bridges, steel-framed

buildings, and communication towers. The

company was established in 1907 and has

plants in Sakai (Osaka) and Chiba. The

Osaka plant was established in 1964 and

occupies a land area of 113,830 m2.

Production capacity is 5000 metric tons per

month. Its wharf is 130 m long and 30 m

wide and contained the 2000-ton, 115.1-m

segment for the North Kyushu Airport

Connection Bridge (figure 3).

The plant is qualified to construct major

bridges in Japan. It has the AISC Level III

certification for major bridges in the United

States and ISO 9001 certification. The plant

has fabricated components for several

bridges owned by HSBA and for bridges in

North and Central America, Asia, and the

Middle East.

In general, the fabrication practice at the

Sakai plant was similar to many larger

operations in the United States. NC

marking and cutting was with 2.5-kW and

6-kW laser cutting machines, as well as gas

and plasma arc cutting. FCAW is the

dominant process (74 percent), followed by

SAW (11 percent), solid wire GMAW (10

percent), and shielded arc metal welding

(SMAW) (4.6 percent).

The following were observed during the

visit:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM

technology.

• NC laser and plasma cutting and

marking machines.

• Cranes with lifting magnets to move

multiple flange plates (figure 4).

• Automated flange and web panel

fabrication with NC machines and

robots.

Figure 1. Flange panel fabrication line at Sakai plant

of Matsuo Bridge Co., Ltd., in Japan.

Figure 2. Double-bevel groove welds with root

grinding machine at Sakai plant.

Figure 3. Yokogawa Bridge Corp.’s Osaka plant

wharf containing the 2000-ton, 115.1-m segment for

North Kyushu Airport Connection Bridge in Japan.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

3

• Assembled components of plate and

box girder segments.

• Box unit being measured for virtual

erection check (figure 5).

• Preassembly of 2000-ton segment of

North Kyushu Airport connection

bridge and field weld preparation

(figures 3 and 6).

The NKK Corporation was founded in 1912

as Japan’s first seamless pipe manufacturer

and is Japan’s second largest producer of

steel. The Tsu Works was founded in 1969

as the Tsu Shipyard. In 1970, steel structure

production was added, and in 1975 a large

oil-production platform was fabricated. The

first HSBA bridge order was obtained in

1977, and the Tsu Laboratories was

established in 1976. The total Tsu Works

plant occupies a land area of 1,820,000 m2.

The steel structures division is the most

modern fabrication facility and is among

Japan’s top five fabricators of steel bridges.

Production capacity is 4000 metric tons per

month. Two large wharves are available for

assembly and barge loading.

The plant, which is ISO 9002 certified, is

qualified to construct major bridges in

Japan and elsewhere in Asia, Europe, North

and South America, and the Middle East.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s the

facilities were renovated for automated

bridge production lines with laser cutting

and welding robots, using automated lines

with CAD/CAM systems (see appendix C).

Three parallel buildings house the

operation. In the first, all plate stock is

cleaned and cut using gas, laser, or plasma

cutting. Six-kW lasers are used for plates

up to 25 mm, and 3-kW lasers are used for

plates up to 14 mm. These NC-controlled

units provide precision cuts and long

periods of operation.

The plate product then moves to the two

assembly shops, which provide various

assembly lines of nine computer-integrated facilities, including 29 articulated

Figure 4. Cranes with lifting magnets move multiple

flange plates at Yokogawa plant.

Figure 5. Box unit is measured for virtual erection

check at Yokogawa plant.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

4

welding robots equipped with the NKK

high-speed, high-current rotating arc

welding system (see appendix G) with arc

sensor seam tracking control.

The following were observed during the

visit:

• Structural laboratory with fatigue test

of welded pipe joint for bridges.

• Demonstration of automated wave

record type ultrasonic inspection

system.

• Demonstration of surface stress

measurements, using a magnetic

anisotropy sensor.

• Demonstration of a robot with highspeed rotating arc welding (figure 7).

• Seaside (1 km) exposure test of a

partial, full-scale, seaside weathering

steel bridge with small-scale plate

samples (figure 8).

• Parallel NC 3-kW CO2

 gas laser cutting

lines: one for large members (flanges,

webs, transverse ribs) and one for small

members (gusset plates, splice plates,

stiffeners) (figure 9).

• NC plasma cutting machine.

• Transverse (orthotropic deck) rib

assembly line (figure 10).

Figure 6. Preassembly of North Kyushu Airport

Connection Bridge.

Figure 7. Robot demonstrating high-speed rotating

arc welding at NKK Corp.’s Tsu Works plant in Japan.

Figure 8. Seaside exposure test by Tsu Works of a partial, full-scale seaside weathering steel bridge

with small-scale plate samples.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

5

• Fully automatic drilling line.

• Chamfering line for holes in splice plates, gusset plates, and stiffeners.

• I-section girder line (flanges, web, and stiffeners).

• Box girder web and flange panel assembly line (figure 11).

• 300-m × 60-m × 2-m experimental model of the mega-float structure.

The Japan Highway Public Corporation was founded in 1956 to administer

nationwide toll roads. The New Meishin Expressway is one of the ring-roads

around large cities, such as Nagoya. Japan Highway Public Corporation arranged

for a visit to the Inabe River Bridge site, where construction of twin, box-steel

continuous spans is under way through a joint venture of Ishikawajima-Harima

Heavy Industries Company (IHI) and Hitachi Zosen Corporation. Segmental box

segments were being field welded, on site, by the joint venture. The 100-mm flange

groove welds were made by single-groove, automatic, 100-percent CO2

 GMAW. No

preheating was used, as long as the base metal temperature exceeded 5° C. Both

Figure 9. Parallel NC 3-kW CO2 gas laser cutting lines at Tsu Works: one for cutting large members, one

for cutting small members.

Figure 10. Transverse (orthotropic deck) rib assembly line at Tsu Works.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

6

manual and automatic ultrasonic testing were used to evaluate the finished

product.

The following were observed during the site visit:

• Demonstration of the automated ultrasonic test equipment on a calibrated

test sample.

• Demonstration of the automated equipment used to make the flange and

web groove welds.

• Fabricated box sections stored on site (figure 12).

Kawada Industries, Inc., was founded in 1922 as Kawada Ironworks. The Shikoku

plant was established in 1973, and it occupies a land area of 264,863 m2. Kawada is

among the top five fabricators of steel bridges. Production capacity is 7000 metric

tons per month. Its wharf is 400 m long and is capable of supporting 3000 metric

tons.

The plant is qualified to construct major bridges in Japan and has ISO 9001

certification (steel bridge design, development, fabrication, and temporary

Figure 11. Box girder web and flange panel assembly line at Tsu Works.

Figure 12. Fabricated box sections stored on site at Inabe River Bridge in Japan.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

7

erection). The plant has fabricated components for several bridges owned by HSBA

and for bridges in Asia and the Middle East.

In general, the fabrication practice at the Shikoku plant was similar to several

larger operations in the United States. NC marking and cutting was observed with

laser, plasma, and gas computer-numerically controlled (CNC) machines. Flux-core

gas shielded and metal core gas shielded welding were used in 90 percent of the

work. Submerged arc welding was used for the balance of the work. Welding was

carried out with multiple-electrode welding machines for units for closed- and

open-rib orthotropic deck panels. Plate and box girder web panels had stiffeners

and gusset plates welded on with CNC welding robots, which also are used in other

operations.

It was noted that about one-third of the Shikoku plant production involved bridge

structures. The other two thirds included building applications.

The following were observed during the

plant visit:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM

technology.

• NC laser and gas cutting and

marking machines.

• Automated web panel fabrication

with NC welding robots (figure 13).

• 20-electrode GMAW welding

machine for open and closed rib

welding to orthotropic deck plates

(figure 14).

• NC drilling machines.

• Preassembled units for field

welding.

• Fabricated orthotropic deck sections

(figure 15).

The scanning review of Japan concluded

with a one-day workshop (see appendix B)

on Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies.

The Japanese participants included

representatives from all of the

organizations that the team visited, as well

as other attendees from universities and

steel producers. The workshop, organized

by Prof. C. Miki and Mr. K. Nishikawa,

provided an opportunity to hear further

responses to many of the amplifying

questions.

Figure 13. Automated web panel fabrication with NC

welding robots at Shikoku plant of Kawada

Industries, Inc., in Japan.

Figure 14. 20-electrode GMAW welding machine for

open and closed rib welding to orthotropic deck

plates at Shikoku plant.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

8

ITALY

In Italy the scan team visited the fabrication facilities of the Cimolai companies in

the area of Pordenone. The Cimolai Group originated from the company formed by

Armando Cimolai in 1947. Four factories are in the region; the one in Pordenone

occupies a land area of 55,000 m2

. A second factory, at Polcenigo (10 km from

Pordenone), occupies a land area of 130,000 m2 . A third, at Piano (6 km from

Pordenone), occupies an area of 140,000 m2

. A fourth, at San Quirino (7 km from

Pordenone), occupies an area of 35,000 m2. These plants’ production capacity

exceeds 3500 metric tons per month. The company is one of Italy’s top fabricators

and erectors of steel structures for bridges, buildings, shelters for aircraft and

munitions, and towers for electricity and communication. The company has

fabricated and erected major highway and railway bridges in Italy, France, the UK,

and the Middle East.

In general, the fabrication practice at the Cimolai plants was similar to many

operations in the United States. Like many Japanese companies, Cimolai plays a

more active role in field erection than do many U.S. fabricators. NC flame and

plasma cutting machines were in use. Current use of FCAW and metal core GMAW

welding with tandem, twin arc, and automatic welding machines accounted for

about 30 percent of weld applications. This use was projected to increase as SMAW

decreased.

The following were observed during the plant tours:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM technology.

• NC gas and plasma cutting machines.

• NC robotic welding.

• Automated handling and assembly of welded beam members by machines

designed and built by Cimolai (figure 16).

• NC drilling machines.

• Fabricated components (figure 17).

Figure 15. Fabricated orthotropic deck sections at Shikoku plant.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

9

GERMANY

In Berlin the scan team visited the Federal

Institute for Materials Research and

Testing (BAM); a fabrication shop, Krupp

Stahlbau Berlin; two bridge sites; and

Potsdam Square, the new center of Berlin.

BAM originated in 1870 when the Prussian

Ministry of Commerce, Trade, and Public

Works formed a Mechanical and Technical

Research Institute. In 1954, the Federal

Republic of Germany took over

responsibility from Berlin and established

BAM to function as the national chemical

and materials technology institute. The

team visited Department VII – Safety of

Structures. Briefings were provided by

BAM, Krupp Stahlbau Berlin, and HRA.

The team viewed the following in

experimental facilities:

• Tests on old, riveted truss-girder

bridge members under cyclic loading

(figure 18).

• High-speed testing of structural

members.

• Welding of loaded structural

members.

Krupp Stahlbau Berlin, GmbH, is one of

Germany’s medium-sized fabricators of

steel structures for bridges and steelframed buildings. The plant occupies an

area of 43,000 m2

 and employs 220 people.

Krupp Stahlbau Berlin produces about

10,000 metric tons per year, with annual

revenues of about DM90 million (US$4.5

million).

The plant is qualified to fabricate and

construct highway and railroad bridges in

Germany. The company has fabricated and

erected many bridges and buildings in the

Berlin area, including the Havel River

Railroad Bridge. NC flame and plasma

cutting machines were in use. Current use

of solid wire GMAW accounted for 85

Figure 16. Automated handling and assembly of

welded beam members by machines designed and

built by Cimolai in Italy.

Figure 17. Fabricated components at Cimolai factory.

Figure 18. Tests on old, riveted truss-girder bridge

members under cyclic loading by BAM in Germany.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

10

percent of the welding; the balance was

SAW.

The following were observed during the

plant tour:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM

technology.

• NC gas and plasma cutting machines.

• NC robotic welding (figure 19).

• NC drilling machines.

• Fabricated components and assemblies

(figure 20).

In addition, the team visited the Havel

River Bridge, which was preassembled on

site because transport capabilities limited

the shipment size of components. The top flange was fabricated from three 50-mm

plates in a layer, as shown in figure 21.

The team also made a site visit to the Humboldthafen Rail Bridge, which crosses

the River Spree and connects to the Lehrter Station, in Berlin. Figure 22 shows the

large-cast steel bearing connections and the tubular support structure, with cast

steel nodes.

UNITED KINGDOM

In the UK, the team visited the fabrication facilities of Fairfield-Mabey at

Chepstow, Wales. The company dates from its founding in 1849, when it built the

Wye Railway Bridge in Chepstow. The plant occupies a land area of 170,000 m2

 and

its production capacity is 2500 metric tons per month. Fairfield-Mabey leads the

Figure 19. NC robotic welding at Krupp Stahlbau

Berlin plant.

Figure 20. Fabricated components and assemblies at Krupp Stahlbau Berlin plant.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

11

UK, with about 80 percent of the current bridge market. The company fabricates

and erects steel structures for highway and railway bridges, offshore modules,

bridge-maintenance gantries, and steel-framed buildings. It has fabricated and

erected major highway and railway bridges in England, the Middle East, and

Central and South America.

The fabrication practice at the Chepstow Plant is focused on steel plate fabricated

products, and steel bridges remain its core market. As was observed elsewhere on

the tour, the company plays a more active role in field erection than do many U.S.

fabricators. CAD/CAM modeling and CNC cutting and welding machinery were in

extensive use. Current use of GMAW and FCAW accounted for about 50 percent of

the shop work, and SAW for the balance of shop work. It was noted that design/

Figure 21. Havel River Bridge in Germany, fabricated from three 50-mm plates in a layer, was

preassembled on site.

Figure 22. Large-cast steel bearing connections and tubular support structure, with cast steel nodes, of

the Humboldthafen Rail Bridge in Germany.
ORGANIZATIONS AND SITE VISITS

12

build was growing in the UK and that

Fairfield-Mabey workers were often on

more than one team.

The following were observed during the

plant tour:

• Implementation of CAD/CAM

technology.

• NC gas and plasma cutting machines

(figure 23).

• NC robotic welding.

• Automated handling and assembly of

welded beam members.

• NC drilling machines.

• Fabricated components (figure 24).

• Video of Chepstow plant operations.

The Welding Institute (TWI), at Abington,

was founded in 1946 and is one of the

world’s largest independent research and

technology organizations, with branches

and associates worldwide. It is involved

with all aspects of materials joining and

related technologies. TWI has played a

major role in the development of designand material-selection specifications in the

UK Bridge Rules (BS5400), for avoiding

fatigue and fracture in steel bridges. A UKU.S. Workshop on Innovation in Steel

Bridge Construction was organized by J.

Harrison, M. Ogle, and S. Maddox (see

appendix B). The workshop provided an

opportunity to review the amplifying

questions from the perspectives of

designers, fabricators, and owners, as well as hear of the TWI work on laser

welding and cutting and other high-energy welding systems.

Figure 23. NC gas and plasma cutting machines at

Fairfield-Mabey’s fabrication plant in Chepstow,

Wales.

Figure 24. Fabricated components at Chepstow

plant.
13

SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

On the basis of the scan review of steel bridge fabrication in Japan, Italy, Germany,

and the UK, the team identified the following top priority implementation topics in

six areas of focus.

HIGH-PRIORITY TOPICS

CAD/CAM

• Establish a task group of owners and fabricators, possibly through the

AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration, to develop a documentation

standard.

• Promote development of a computer integrated manufacturing (CIM)

software package.

• Conduct a pilot project on digital fabrication shop documents in lieu of shop

drawings.

• Develop a storage protocol for achieving as-built documents.

Automated Recording

• Evaluate existing measurement technologies.

• Explore feasibility of digital geometric measurements on fabricated

components for virtual assembly in lieu of preassembly.

• Carry out a pilot project, working closely with owners to ensure their

confidence in the virtual approach.

High-Performance Steel (HPS) and Coatings

• Study applicability of “seaside” weathering steels for U.S. marine

environments.

• Promote the use of a 50-ksi, low-carbon HPS for improved weldability and

toughness.

Cutting and Joining

• Develop a workshop on gas-shielded welding and new methods of welding

for shop and field fabrication for fabricators and owners.

• Work with FHWA and State departments of transportation (DOTs), with

American Welding Society (AWS) Bridge Code support, to gain acceptance

for gas-shielded welding as a preapproved welding process.

• Explore using the high-speed rotating arc technique with enhanced tracking

for fillet welding.

• Promote the use of ultrasonic inspection, with record producing capability,

in lieu of radiography.

• Modify welding-procedure qualification requirements to allow unlimited

life, provided an alternative, demonstrated quality program is in place.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

14

Certification and Contracting

• Set up a task group, possibly through AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge

Collaboration, to develop a Qualification Program for fabricators, which

allows them to be responsible for quality.

• Explore incorporating appropriate parts of ISO 9001 in the AISC

Certification Program.

• Explore incentives to enable a fabricator to accept responsibility for both

fabrication and erection, to achieve optimum cost and delivery.

Design Innovation

• Reexamine the design practice, FHWA directives, and AASHTO

specifications related to two lines of support and fracture-critical members

in view of modern materials, joining, and quality control developments.

• Support national programs, such as the AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge

Collaboration, to develop standard design details.

LOWER PRIORITY TOPICS

• Evaluate the European paint practice of applying the final coat of paint in

the field after erection.

• Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tapered plate for use in girder flanges.

• Conduct a pilot project, working closely with owners to ensure their

confidence in the virtual approach.

CAD/CAM

All of the fabricators that the team visited had CAD and CAM software. These

systems also included three-dimensional (3-D) bridge modeling that can be used to

verify assembly/field erection location and elevation checks. The software was

purchased from a variety of vendors or developed in house. None of the software

was completely integrated, so the results of one package were manually input into

the next. In most of the shops, the data are generated by hand from design

drawings. The generation of a digital representation of the structure is crucial to a

modern fabrication shop. The information is used to verify the geometry input and

simultaneously produces manufacturing NC data. The CNC code can be sent

directly to the applicable machine using a local area network. No detail drawings

are required in this modern fabrication shop. Large size drawings were rarely

made. Sketches are produced on a small format, 8.5 by 11 in, and are generally

produced for the shop along with a cutting schedule. This is often in the form of a

traveler following the work through the shop.

The U.S. practice is evolving along similar lines. Fully integrated systems are

planned, and cooperative development among fabricators was discussed.

Fairfield-Mabey uses a 3-D solid model as the source information for all CNC

programs for cutting, drilling, and marking operations. All the data are

electronically transferred among packages. The only manual intervention is to
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

15

apply allowances for predicted longitudinal

welding shrinkage to webs and flanges, which is

done by the application of a factor, rather than by

redrafting.

As shown in figure 25, the software used by most

of the fabricators had the ability to perform a

virtual assembly of pieces. This virtual assembly

was used to check for dimension errors and

interference of pieces in the assembled structure.

The programs were often running on personal

computer platforms, and modified versions of

AutoCAD were used in two shops. Procedures to

document changes that occurred during the

production of the fabrication documents have to

be carefully considered. Tracking of these

changes is important. In Fairfield-Mabey only one set of design drawings is allowed

on the premises. All changes are documented on the drawings and placed in a

single binder with a copy to the designer or owner. Any necessary approval is

recorded in the same binder. The transfer of information from the fabricator to the

owner or engineer is via fax or Internet.

Shop detail drawings are not needed in the modern automated shop. Shop

drawings no longer need to be available nor need to be reviewed by the owner. In

many of the shops that the team visited, the submittal and approval of shop

drawings had been eliminated. This process of submittal and approval can take

from 4 to 6 weeks up to 6 months in the United States. The elimination of shop

drawing submittal and approval by the owner speeds up the job and reduces costs.

The cost to produce the drawings and review them is eliminated. Shop drawings

offer little benefit to the shop, even though they are required by owners. In U.S.

shops that have a strong record, owners may be willing to eliminate this

requirement, if other forms of quality assurance are in place. The job must still be

represented numerically in order to program the NC equipment. Elimination of the

generation and the approval of shop drawings could provide a significant savings

reduction in fabrication of the steel and also speed up the fabrication process. This

step requires the owner’s trust and confidence in the fabricator’s ability to perform

the job. In Japan this process entails a prebid selection of qualified shops,

something that also should be undertaken on a trial basis in the United States.

One of the highest priority goals of U.S., European, and Japanese fabricators is

development of a CIM software package. The software would provide assembly

data, based on 3-D modeling and section dimensions, taking into account shrinkage

and distortion from welding and cutting.

AUTOMATED RECORDING

Fabricated Elements – Virtual Assembly

Automated recording of fabrication was employed to a limited extent by some of

the fabricators visited. Various geometric-measurement systems were used by the

Figure 25. CAD of girder bridge and cross

frames used by Fairfield-Mabey.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

16

fabricators to determine the conformance of

the geometry, as illustrated in figure 5. A

range from simple digital surveying

equipment to the more sophisticated CATS

system was employed to measure the

structure and compare it with the geometry

generated in the computer drawing and

manufacturing system. As shown in figure

26, this system allowed the position of

various critical locations on the

subassembly to be located. These systems

allow a virtual assembly of the components.

The virtual assembly provides a complete

geometric record of the completed

structure and readily identifies tolerance

questions.

The shop assembly of the fabricated pieces

can be eliminated by using these sophisticated measuring systems, which results in

a considerable savings in cost and time. Some shops used standard digital

surveying equipment to perform the measurements. The measured dimensions

were checked against the CAD files. Laser equipment available in the United

States can easily perform these measurements, and implementation of existing U.S.

technology to perform the geometric checks of large fabricated elements should be

pursued.

Nondestructive Inspection

Automated and digitally recorded ultrasonic inspection was used in the shop and

field inspection of welds. All of the Japanese fabricators had automated ultrasonic

inspection in their shops. The units consisted of three shear wave transducers

controlled by the scanner. The data were recorded and provided a permanent

record of the inspection results. A typical

setup is shown in figure 27. A laptop

computer is used to control the scanning

and record the data.

This technology is used in other industries

in the United States, but has not yet found

its way into bridge fabrication. The

equipment in Japan was often U.S.

equipment. The use of this modern method

of ultrasonic inspection needs to be

evaluated for use in bridge fabrication. It

was interesting to note that, in the UK, only

ultrasonic inspection was used, while in

Germany only radiographic inspection was

accepted. Only a portion of the weld was

inspected by ultrasonic equipment, with

Figure 26. Targets for CATS geometry checking

system at Yokogawa Bridge Corp. in Japan.

Figure 27. Automated ultrasonic inspection

equipment used in Japan.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

17

100 percent inspection by radiography. It should be pointed out, however, that in

the UK, the proportion of ultrasonic testing varied with the criticality of the

feature. For example, transverse butt welds in tension flanges of primary

structural members are always 100-percent tested, while testing of longitudinal

butts may be as low as 10 percent.

One fabricator employed continuous monitoring and recording of welding

variables. The improved accuracy and detailed record of the welding process serves

as an effective means of quality assurance, in lieu of an owner’s representative

witnessing tests.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE STEELS AND COATINGS

Introduction

The steels used for bridges around the world are governed either by individual

country specifications or by the new Eurocode. The yield strength levels are very

similar to those used in the United States, and 50 ksi (345 MPa) is the most

common strength grade. All of the countries have a steel grade in the 65 to 70 ksi

(450 to 480 MPa) yield strength range, and report growing interest in their use.

Thermo-mechanical controlled processing (TMCP) is used by all countries for

higher strength levels and is aggressively used in Japan for improving weldability.

The improved weldability is the result of the low carbon and carbon equivalence of

these steels. Quench and temper (Q/T) processing is used for steels from 70 to 100

ksi (480 to 680 MPa) yield strength, although steels greater than 70 ksi (480 MPa)

are rarely used. Weathering steel is used in all countries visited, and there are

initiatives to increase its use. Japan has developed two new, higher-alloy “seaside”

weathering steels for areas close to the coast. Zinc-rich primers are commonly used

in all the countries for painted bridges. Aluminum metallizing is often used instead

of primer in the UK. The major findings are described in the following sections.

Steel Quality and Properties

The quality of bridge steel is excellent in all the countries that the team visited.

Thin plates were used extensively in Japan, with about 80 percent of the plate for

bridges having a thickness less than 14 mm. The primary structure form in Japan is

a rectangular steel box comprised of thin plate elements with multiple stiffeners.

The thin plates can be laser cut. Laser cutting requires plates that are very flat,

and it reduces residual stresses. There were no claims of special “laser-cutting”

steel, although steel makers are evaluating this idea. In most of Europe, thicker

plates are more common, and no laser cutting was seen in any of the shops. In

Germany, the maximum plate thickness is limited to 60 mm; thicker plates are

permitted, but only by special agreement with the road or railway agency involved.

Figures 21 and 28 show a flange built of three thin plates for a railroad bridge

girder in Germany. Thicker plates, 75 to 100 mm, are not used as much as they are

in the United States.

In Japan, most of the plates are delivered from the mill in a blasted and primed

condition when they are specified for use in painted structures. The primers are

different, depending on the topcoat system specified for the final structure.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

18

Weathering steel plates are delivered in

the blasted condition with mill scale

removed. The surface quality of all plates

was observed to be excellent. In Europe,

steels are delivered without blasting.

All countries specify toughness for bridge

steels. For most service conditions, 20 ftlb@10F to 20 ft-lb@-40F are typical

requirements. This is similar to the

toughness requirements used in the United

States.

Japan and the UK aggressively control

carbon equivalent of steels to facilitate zero

preheat welding. Whenever possible, Japan

uses TMCP for this purpose. Welding

processes and consumables also are

selected to make this possible. The elimination of preheat is crucial if automatic

and robotic welding are used.

Steel Processing

Most of the bridge steel provided in all countries is hot rolled; some is normalized

for yield strength between 35 and 50 ksi (240 and 345 MPa). Japan leads the use of

TMCP for production of 50 to 70 ksi (345 to 480 MPa) steel, when no preheat

welding is required. TMCP is also being used in some cases in Europe. The direct

Q/T process is sometimes used for this purpose in Japan. The Q/T process is used

in all countries for steels with strength greater than 70 ksi (480 MPa). The U.S.-

grade HPS-70W has superior toughness properties and tighter chemistry controls

than the European steels and is equivalent to the Japanese versions. In most of the

countries, steel is referred to by its minimum tensile strength, whereas in the

United States, steel is identified by its yield strength.

Weathering Steel

All countries recognize the economic benefit of using weathering steel. Owners’

policies vary about when and under what conditions this steel can be used. In Italy,

up to 90 percent of the bridges are weathering steel, and Japan uses it for about 14

percent of bridges. In the UK, typical usage is about 10 percent, but existing

restrictions are expected to be relaxed, which may increase proportions in the

future. Germany had a moratorium on weathering steel use that has recently been

rescinded.

Japan is currently implementing higher alloyed “seaside” weathering steels for use

in marine environments. Three grades are in use: a 3-percent nickel version; a 1.5-

percent nickel, 0.3-percent Molybdenum version; and a 1-percent copper, 1-percent

nickel version. These new steels provide enhanced corrosion performance for

seaside locations, and test samples are shown in figure 29. The extensive coastal

regions of Japan provide a large market for improved-performance steels.

Figure 28. Multiple plate top flange for railroad

bridge girder in Germany.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

19

Figure 30. Mill-coated steel plate used in Japan.

Japan also has developed “weathering primers”

that are applied to prevent initial staining

problems and, possibly, enhance the formation

of a stable rust patina. It is unclear what

advantage these primers offer; they have not

been used extensively and are under

evaluation. No other country is currently using

or evaluating similar primers.

Coating Systems

Painting is still in use in all countries, but the

systems vary significantly. In Japan, six-coat

systems are used over seawater locations. In

Europe, three-coat systems are more common.

Most practices start with a zinc-rich primer. In

the UK, metallizing is used, in many cases, in

place of the primer coat. Metallizing eliminates the volatile organic compound

(VOC) from paints and may provide a more robust primer. Epoxy and urethane

paints are applied over the metallized

coating.

In Japan, the plate is received from the mill

in a blasted and primed condition (see

figure 30). All other coats are applied in the

shop. In Europe, the practice is to blast,

prime, and epoxy coat in the shop and apply

a urethane topcoat in the field. The fieldapplied topcoat eliminates the need to

touch up damage that occurs during

shipping and handling.

Longitudinally Profiled (LP) (Tapered) Plates

Plates have been rolled with variable

thickness along their length for use in

girder flanges. In Japan, 16 bridges have been built with tapered flanges in the

negative moment area over the piers (total of 2500 tons). LP plates also have been

used in limited quantities in Europe. The use of these plates is not increasing

because of questionable economics. The economics of tapered plates is dependent

on the cost of production versus the reduction in weight and the number of splices

in a girder. The variation in thickness is normally 10 to 20 percent of the thickest

part.

CUTTING AND JOINING

Introduction

The type of cross section of the bridge dictated the processes used in the shops

visited. In Japan, the majority of the bridges appear to be closed steel boxes with

orthotropic steel decks. Relatively thin plates, less than 15 mm thick, were used for

Figure 29. Weathering steel and primer

corrosion test samples in Japan.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

20

most of the construction. Much of the plate was less than 25 mm thick, with

multiple longitudinal and transverse stiffeners. Thin plate structures also were

used in Germany and Italy. The maximum plate thickness for bridges in Germany is

40 mm.

Thick flanges were made by fillet welding together multiple thinner plates. Laser

cutters were used by two of the fabricators to cut plates up to 16 mm thick. The

laser cutters were typically used to cut detail pieces such as stiffeners. Often, the

more complex cuts were made on the laser cutter with a multiple-torch machine,

used to strip out the stiffeners. Similar techniques are used in the United States,

using plasma and oxygen-fuel cutting. Large cutting tables, which could

accommodate a number of plates, were used. The single-head laser or conventional

cutting torch were computer controlled. Underwater plasma cutting was used in

England to reduce distortion. Most of the plants had a marking head on the cutting

equipment, which allowed the same machine to do the marking and cutting. The

short shipping lengths in Japan restricted the shop length to 15 m or less.

Consequently, many repetitive pieces and operations were required, which

benefitted from automation.

Automation

The degree of automation varied among the

shops. All shops used NC equipment and

some form of robotic welding. Automated,

robotic welding was used for stiffeners in

Japan, and a typical operation is shown in

figure 31. FCAW-G (gas shielding) or

GMAW welding were used almost

exclusively to produce these automated

welds. These welding processes do not

require separate handling of the flux, which

reduces the complexity of the equipment,

and provide a visible arc source that

enhances tracking. A new, rapidly rotating

arc was used by NKK to provide an

electrical feedback to correct the robotic

tracking. The robots did all the welding,

including the wrapping of the weld of the

end of the stiffener.

Automated straightening lines were used to straighten girder webs after welding

the stiffeners. This straightening was done by cold bending, which is normally not

used in the United States, as fabrication practice differs and automated equipment

is not often available. Heat straightening also was employed, but to a much lesser

degree than in the United States. A web straightening setup is shown in figure 32.

The hydraulic rams apply force to the plates through a set of heads that bear on

each side of the stiffener.

The widespread use of orthotropic steel decks in Japan and, to some extent, in

Europe allowed the fabricators to develop and maintain automated (machine and

Figure 31. Robotic welding of girder web stiffener in

Japan.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

21

robot) deck lines. The automated welding of

the longitudinal stiffeners to the deck

plate, using multi-head welders, is shown in

figure 33. The Japanese employed

trapezoid-shaped stiffeners, while the

Italians used triangular stiffeners. The cold

bending of the stiffeners was performed by

subcontractors.

Weld Processes

The welding processes used in the shops

were very different from current U.S.

practice. In the United States, SAW is used

exclusively by many bridge fabricators. In

many of the shops that the team visited,

SAW was the least used process. Table 1

breaks down the reported use of various welding processes both in the shop and

field. Most of the automated welding was done using solid or metal cored GMAW

Figure 32. Web straightening press at NKK in Japan.

Location Welding

Process

Matsuo Yokogawa NKK Kawada Japan

Highway

Fairfield

Mabey

Cimolai Krupp

Shop

GMAW 20% solid

1.2-mm

wire

10.2% 1.2-

mm solid

wire

80% all solid

wire ~ 1/2-

high speed

rotary arc

with robots80% Ar, 20%

CO2

50% solid

core

20% metal

cored

NA 30% all 1.2-

mm solid

wire

80% all solid wire, 1.2-mm,

one two arc robot using up

to 385 amps on 1.2-mm

wire. Semi-automatic

welders using high

deposition GMAW at 500

ipm wfs with 1.2-mm wire

use both argon helium, and

CO2 shielding gas

50% solid

wire, 1.2-mm

flux-cored;

metal cored

on robot

FCAW 65% flux

cored, 1.5-

mm wire

74.3% 1.4-

mm flux

cored wire

60% fluxcored, 1.2-

mm wire

30% flux

cored

NA NA NA NA

SAW 10% fused

flux,

exclusively

10% SM570-

fused flux,

lowerstrength

bonded flux

10.9% fused NA NA 70% 15% 50%

flux,

exclusively

SMAW 5% 7% NA NA NA NA NA 4.6%

Electro-slag/

gas

NA NA EGW used for

web welds,

ESW used for

buildings

NA NA NA NA NA

GMAW automatic

used for

webs

automatic

used for

flanges

automatic

used for

webs

automatic

used for

webs

automatic

used for

webs

NA semi-automatic, for heavy,

tubular weldments

used for

webs

Field

SAW deck plates

w/ceramic

backing

deck plates

w/ceramic

backing

deck plates

w/ceramic

backing

deck plates

w/ceramic

backing

NA deck plates w/ceramic

backing

deck and

upper flanges

deck plates

w/ceramic

backing

ESW/EGW EGW used

for web

splices

NA EGW used

for web

splices

EGW used NA NA NA NA

for web

splices

Table 1.

EGW=Electrogas welding.

ESW=Electroslag welding.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

22

or FCAW-G welding. This type of welding does

not require separate flux-handling equipment

and minimizes slag cleaning. In Japan, 80 to 90

percent of the shop welds are made using

these processes, with similar percentages in

Germany. The percentage of use in Italy and

the UK was less, but still in marked contrast

to U.S. fabrication practice.

High deposition rates were used with 1.2- and

1.4-mm wire, both flux and metal cored wires.

Manual welding at fast wire feeds was used in

Germany. Most of the fillet welding observed

was single-pass welds done automatically.

Butt welds were generally made with either

track welders or large welding gantries.

In the field, GMAW was used for vertical

welds. In Japan, fully automated GMAW

vertical web splice welds, as shown in

figure 34, were used in the field. In

addition, electrogas welding was also used

in the field for full-penetration vertical web

welds. Electroslag welding was not used for

bridge construction.

Field welding was much more prevalent

than in the United States. The Japanese

welded the complete box sections together

in the field (figure 35). This was on a bridge

that was being erected by launching, which

allows the welding to be done on land

without the need for temporary shoring of

the structure. Field welding also was very

prevalent in Germany. All of the floor

beams of a twin-girder railroad bridge

(figure 36) were field welded to the girders.

The floor beams were stubbed out from the

girders and then joined to the center

section by field welding both the web and

flanges.

Preheating of plates was not evident in

most of the fabricating shops. In the UK

and Japan, the plates are ordered to a low

carbon equivalence. Such steels, welded

with semiautomatic or automatic processes

(e.g., GMAW, SAW) eliminate the need for

preheat. The elimination of preheat

Figure 33. Automated multiple robots at NKK in

Japan.

Figure 34. Automated GMAW vertical web welding

setup in Japan.

Figure 35. Welding of complete box sections

together in the field in Japan.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

23

facilitated automatic welding and decreased

fabrication costs. The U.S. Bridge Welding Code,

AWS D1.5, contains an appendix that details how

to determine the preheat temperature or the need

to preheat that accounts for the level of hydrogen

of the consumables, carbon equivalence of the

steel, the thickness of the plate, and the restraint.

These provisions are seldom used in the United

States. The TMCP steel plate used in Japan eliminates preheat.

Ceramic backing strips were used both in the field and in the shop in Japan. The

ceramic backing strips allow the welding of one-sided butt splices. This type of

joint eliminates the need to turn the plate and back gouge the root of weld followed

by welding of the root. This is a particular advantage for field welds. All of the

Japanese fabricators used ceramic backing to field weld the deck plates of box

girders in the field. These were used with

both SMAW and GMAW welding processes.

Automated beam lines were used in Japan,

the UK, and Italy to fabricate beam sections.

Very few, if any, rolled sections were evident

in any of the shops visited. Most of the

fabrication was plate-type work, with

smaller beam sections produced by the

fabricator on a beam line. An automated

beam welder is shown in figure 37. SMAW is

used to make the web to flange welds.

Figure 38 shows a small beam section in

production at a beam welder. These size

sections would typically be rolled shapes in

the United States.

Figure 36. Floor beam field welds in German

railroad bridge.

Figure 37. Automated beam welder in Italy.

Figure 38. Small beam section produced in beam

line in Italy.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

24

Weld Details and Grinding

The scan tour encountered various means of

handling the intersection of welds. In Japan,

many of the bridges were fabricated without

cope holes. The welds were allowed to intersect.

Use of this detail is based on research by

Professor Miki (see appendix C). The photo in

figure 39 shows a typical weld intersection on a

deck section. Cope holes would be used in the

United States to prevent the intersection of the

welds and eliminate the lack of penetration

that results from the intersection.

In some locations cope holes were used, as

shown in figure 40. The welds were wrapped

around the end of the stiffener welds to seal

the connection, which is not the practice in the

United States. The U.S. practice is to stop the weld

short of the cope to prevent the undercut of the

cope when the weld is wrapped.

The grinding of edges was done in all the

Japanese fabrication plants. Specialized

equipment was used to grind the edges, as

illustrated in figures 41 and 42. In one shop,

robots were used for grinding. Mr. Shoji Tamai, of

Yokogawa Bridge Corp., explained that the

purpose of exterior grinding is to enhance the

corrosion performance of paints. Radius edge

grinding is often requested by clients and, for this,

specialized equipment is used. For interior

grinding, Yokogawa Bridge applies a 1-mm cut,

using a manual tool.

Figure 39. Typical weld intersection on deck section

in Japan.

Figure 40. Wrapping of welds at cope at Kawada

Industries in Japan.

Figure 41. Edge grinding equipment in Japan. Figure 42. Ground edge, as used in Japan.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

25

CERTIFICATION AND CONTRACTING

All of the fabricators visited were certified in accordance with ISO 9001. The

clients accept this accreditation and do not have the expense of their own

inspectors in the shops. No owners or third-party inspectors were evident in any of

the shops. Numerous inspections were being performed, and evidence of prior

inspections was noted on some pieces. A similar type of certification by U.S.

fabricators could lead to an increase in quality and a reduction in cost.

In most of the countries, the contract with the fabricator includes both fabrication

and erection of the structure. This type of contract eliminates the conflict between

the fabricator and erector, concerning fit-up and paint damage. This allows the

fabricator to choose whether shop assembly is required and determine the most

efficient method of erection. Often, the erector is a subcontractor to the fabricator.

This method of contracting should be tried in the United States.

Design-build-finance-operate and transfer projects are favored in the UK. Partial

payment for material and progress typically are included in contracts for large

projects in both Japan and Germany.

BRIDGE DESIGN

Introduction

Although design was not a focal point of the scan, the trends and innovations in

steel bridge design were noted and compiled. Differences between design in the

United States and around the world exist not so much from technology or

innovation, but from differences in the local bridge-construction culture and

practice.

Perhaps the most significant design-related observation of the scan team was the

rest of the industrialized world’s more liberal view of the importance of

redundancy. Two-girder bridges, as well as other structure types considered

nonredundant and fracture critical in the United States, are not discouraged and,

in fact, are used extensively as safe and cost-effective bridge designs. Kawada

Industries cited redundancy studies it performed to demonstrate adequate

redundancy of its two-girder systems with widely spaced, mid-depth cross beams.

No special design, fabrication, or inspection requirements for such bridges were

apparent. The U.S. design philosophy for nonredundant bridges should be

reconsidered, based upon these observations and improvements in steel toughness.

Twin-girder railroad bridges are common in Germany. The single-cell box girder,

commonly used for elevated roadways in urban areas of Japan, would be classified

as fracture critical in the United States, but has provided excellent performance.

Some other design innovations were observed. Corrugated steel webs were noted

on a composite girder bridge with concrete flanges and corrugated steel web, but

not on steel bridges. Tubular steel members were seen on one monumental bridge

under construction in Berlin, where the steel tubes formed the compression

members of an arch. This bridge, at the railroad station in Berlin, included unique

cast joints to enhance connection of the tubular elements (figures 23 and 43). The
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

26

material usage on this bridge was in sharp

contrast to U.S. design practice. Concretefilled steel tubes also were proposed for a

bullet-train bridge.

The culture of steel-bridge design around

the world is very different from that in the

United States, which results in many

differences in bridge design. In Japan and

Europe, innovation appears to be the

primary motivation, with cost-effectiveness

secondary. The absence of innovation in the

United States should be noted and

contemplated. Foreign innovation does not

necessarily suggest that U.S. practitioners

should move in the same direction, but it

demonstrates what is possible, if costeffectiveness can also be achieved, for the

U.S. bridge market. Consider the following design observations in the countries

visited by the scan tour:

Japan

As discussed previously, steel bridges in Japan are substantially more costly than

steel building fabrication. The ratio approaches 3 in Japan, whereas the ratio in the

United States is between 1.2 and 1.5, depending on the type of structure. Thus,

many practices in Japan are technically interesting, but warrant much more

investigation, especially with regard to cost-effectiveness, before proposing their

implementation in the United States. The observed design practices that differ

from U.S. practice and the cultural reasons for these practices include:

• Short field sections because of highly restrictive over-the-road shipping

dimension restrictions.

• Cross sections of relatively thin plates with welded multiple stiffeners (both

transverse and longitudinal) made possible by a high degree of automation.

• Use of closed box sections alone (no tub girders), because of lateral-torsional

buckling experience encountered three decades ago.

• Field welding for field splices to avoid the multiple, unsightly bolted splices

necessitated by short field sections.

• Use of noncomposite concrete decks (now being replaced in new design with

composite decks), because of concrete durability problems in the past.

In Japan, the team observed an interesting design alternative to the intermediate

cross-frame diaphragms in wide use in U.S. girder bridges. Shallow (approximately

1/4 depth), widely spaced cross beams connected to full-depth transverse

connection plates with a moment connection perform as our cross frames, because

of frame action, as illustrated in figure 44. Perhaps this detail could replace U.S.

cross frames, which steel fabricators indicate are many times more costly.

Figure 43. Unique cast joints at a railroad station in

Berlin.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

27

As of 1999, the Japanese bridge

design specification does not

include a fatigue limit state,

although implementation of

fatigue specification provisions

is anticipated. It is unclear how

fatigue is prevented with the

multiple stiffened webs,

orthotropic steel decks, and

other complex welded sections

used for bridges. Evidently, the

design stress levels are

maintained low enough to

minimize the formation of

fatigue cracking. Lack of

fatigue design provisions result

in the use of many low fatigue

resistant details, which

increases the risk of fatigue cracking in the future. Special fatigue provisions are

used by some of the tollway authorities.

Italy

In Italy, one interesting practice that could find cost-effective application in the

United States is a simplified approach to camber. Where possible, the camber is put

into the girder at the bolted field splices (i.e., slightly kinked field splices), with

the girder field sections essentially straight between the splices.

Also, in the fabrication shops of Cimolai, the team gained insight into bolted-splice

design practice. Apparently, the Europeans (the team saw bridge components

destined for different European countries) design for the net section alone,

replacing boltholes with thicker plates. Closed web stiffeners were used on some

Italian girders, as illustrated in figure 45. These closed stiffeners provide torsional,

as well as displacement, restraint, thereby

increasing the buckling capacity of the

plate or reducing the size of the stiffener.

Corrosion may be a problem when this type

of stiffener is used on an external surface

such as a girder web.

Germany

The limited time in Germany revealed one

unique design practice of using multiple,

edge welded plates (up to 40 mm thick)

instead of thicker plates (see figures 21 and

28). This is apparently a holdover from

earlier concerns about uniform properties

in thicker, single plates.

Figure 44. Shallow cross-beam diaphragms

observed in Japan.

Figure 45. Closed web stiffener used in Italy.
SUMMARY OF SCAN FINDINGS

28

The use of heavy tubular members resulted in developing large steel castings that

were capable of connecting the multiple members that framed into the joints. This

application drew upon technology being applied in large, offshore structures.

United Kingdom

The steel industry in the UK rolls relatively short plates, which results in more

welded shop splices than is typical in the United States, where longer as-rolled

plates are available. This requires more butt welds and has resulted in more

automation of the process in the UK than is in use in the United States. Steelproducer rolling practice has impacted fabrication practice in the UK.

Interestingly, elastomeric pads, which are gaining more widespread use for steel

bridges in the United States, are not in use on steel bridges in the UK. The U.S.

experience with steel bridges that have elastomeric pads could be of interest to UK

designers and owners, with regard to more cost-effective bearings for steel bridges.
29

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The team wishes to thank the hosting organizations and their staffs in Japan, Italy,

Germany, and the United Kingdom for their hospitality and for sharing their time

and experience with the team members.

In Japan, Professor Chitoshi Miki of the Tokyo Institute of Technology and Mr.

Kazuhiro Nishikawa of the Public Works Research Institute provided input on the

visit, joined the team on the tour, and were responsible for organizing the

workshop in Osaka.

In addition, the scanning team acknowledges the cooperation and assistance

provided by Mr. Tetsuzo Mohri, Mr. Isamu Miyaki, Mr. Koji Yamaguchi, Mr. Ryohei

Iwata, Mr. Shinji Takaba, Mr. Kazuo Ohata, and Mr. Eric Beyer of the Matsuo Bridge

Company, Ltd.; Mr. Tsunehiro Sasaki, Mr. Hiroshi Suzuki, Mr. Kousou Zenihiro, Mr.

Shoji Tamai, Mr. Hirohito Kaji, Mr. Yoshihiko Mine, Mr. Suguru Kenjo, and Mr.

Shigeo Murata of the Yokogawa Bridge Corporation; Mr. Takao Miyamura, Mr.

Shigeru Ogaya, Mr. Tadashi Fujioka, Dr. Osamu Yamamoto, Mr. Masaharu Honda,

Mr. Toru Watabiki, Mr. Atsunori Kawabata, Dr. Hisashi Ito, Mr. Naohiro Tamaoki,

Mr. Koji Yamada, and Mr. Kiyoharu Takahata of the NKK Corporation; Mr.

Kazuyuki Mizuguchi and Mr. Makoto Nakasu of the Japan Highway Public

Corporation; Dr. Akio Kasuga of Sumitomo Construction Company, Ltd.; Mr. Minoru

Sawada of the IBI, East JV; and Mr. Tadaki Kawada, Dr. Kunikatsu Nomura, Dr.

Shigeru Echigo, Mr. S. Morikawa, Mr. Kazumori Takada, Mr. Toshio Omura, Mr.

Hidenori Kondou, Mr. Shogo Kataoka, Mr. Syunhei Uchida, Mr. Toshihiro Masui, Mr.

Fumitaka Machida, Mr. Tsutomu Shimura, Mr. Wataru Fugimoto, Mr. Masaharu

Yoshimura, Mr. Makoto Yuda, Mr. Takashi Onaaru, Mr. Sean Johnstone, and Mr.

Martin Densmore of Kawada Industries, Inc.

In Italy, the team acknowledges Dr. Luigi Cimolai and the entire Cimolai Family,

Mr. Stefano Piovan, Mr. Antonio Polita, and Mr. Roberto Bassi of Construzioni

Cimolai Armando S.P.A.

In Germany, Dr. Klaus Brandes of the Federal Institute for Materials Research and

Testing (BAM) assisted with the visit to Berlin. Thanks are due Mr. Juergen Hertor,

Ms. Rosemarie Helmerich, and Dr. Wolfgang Florian of BAM; Prof. Dr. Joachim

Lindner, Technical University, Berlin; Dr. Thomas Klaehne, HRA Engineers; Mr.

Gerd Wilhelm, DB Project, Knoten, Berlin; and Mr. Thomas Gregull and Mr. Frank

Moeller, Krupp Stahlbau, Berlin.

In the UK, the team acknowledges the assistance of Dr. Peter Lloyd, Mr. Geoffrey

Booth, and Mr. David Bicknell, Fairfield-Mabey Ltd.; Dr. John Harrison, Dr.

Stephen Maddox, Dr. Richard Dolby, Dr. Martin Ogle, and Dr. Owen Gorton of The

Welding Institute (TWI); Mr. Alan Hayward, Cass Hayward, and Partners; Mr. Bill

Ramsey, British Steel; Mr. Harold Dewsnap, Kvaerner Cleveland Bridge Ltd.; and

Mr. Sibdas Chakrabarti, Highways Agency, London.
30

APPENDIX A: AMPLIFYING QUESTIONS

I. Application of Innovative Structural Shapes and Bridge Configurations

1. What new, cross-sectional shapes and overall geometry have you used in

bridges?

2. Is there a preference for open or closed shapes? Why?

3. Please respond to the following questions in terms of

(1) cost-effectiveness,

(2) good or bad performance,

(3) any special design criteria required:

(a) Have you constructed any bridges using corrugated steel webs?

(b) Have tubular members been used in truss or girder elements?

(c) Are single box bridges used?

(d) Have any modular steel bridges been developed?

(e) Are steel piers used as much now as in the past?

(f) Are steel bridges used with integral pier caps?

(g) Are there innovative bridge decks?

(h) Where are orthotropic steel decks used?

(i) Have any steel bridge configurations been developed to enhance

fatigue resistance to minimize the need for designs controlled by fatigue

factors?

(j) Have innovative, seismic-resistant steel bridges been developed?

4. Do standardized steel bridges exist?

(a) What type and span?

(b) Are typical bridge design details standardized in your region? By whom?

5. What innovations have you made in the construction of short-span (<40 m) to

medium-span (<80 m) steel bridges? What is your experience with costs and

trends?

6. Has prestressing been used in the construction of steel bridges?

(a) Has it been cost-effective and does it provide good performance?

(b) Are there special design criteria?

7. How do rolled “I” shapes compare with welded plate girders?

8. What is the trend in the use of bracing and diaphragms?

(a) What standards exist?
APPENDIX A

31

(b) Are removable diaphragms used?

9. Are steel castings used for connections?

(a) What materials are used?

(b) What specifications have been developed?

II. Applications of New Materials

1. How are higher-strength steels (485 MPa to 800 MPa yield strength) being

used?

(a) What are the future trends for these steels?

(b) Are all of the higher-strength steels produced as TMCP or is Q/T

material also used?

(c) What toughness, sampling frequency, and locations are used?

2. Are tapered (thickness) plates used very often?

(a) Are there thickness-tolerance specifications?

(b) What is the availability of such plates?

(c) What is their relative cost?

3. How much weathering steel is being used versus painted steel?

(a) Are there any special fabrication requirements?

(b) Are there any improvements being made to basic weathering?

(c) What do you see as the future use of weathering steels?

(d) Are special joints and details used?

(e) Is staining a problem? How do you manage it?

4. What is the maximum thickness of plate used in steel bridges?

(a) Are there differences for pedestrian, vehicular, and railroad bridges?

(b) Are there standard codes?

(c) What is the basis for the criteria that are used?

(d) Is toughness considered when determining thickness limits?

5. What are the actual levels of P and S used in bridges? Is calcium treatment

used or specified on all bridge steels? To what extent is vacuum degassing

used?

6. What organization(s) is responsible for writing the specifications for bridge

steel?

(a) Are steels certified to more than one specification? Is this required by

the owner? Does this practice cause fabrication problems?
32

APPENDIX A

(b) What substitutions are allowed for steels specified in contract

documents?

7. Who is responsible for encouraging new steel development?

8. Have advanced composite materials been used in conjunction with structural

steel to construct bridges?

9. Is undermatched weld metal used for design and fabrication?

(a) How is it being used?

(b) What is the range of applications?

10. What use is made of stainless and clad steels in bridge structures?

11. What new steels are used for pins, bolts, and bearings?

III. Techniques for Cutting and Joining Steel Members (shop/field and field erection

techniques)

1. What recent innovations have been developed in the areas of welding

consumables, equipment, and processes?

(a) Are high-energy welding processes (i.e., electron beam, laser, or other) in

common use?

(b) Are high deposition rates used?

(c) Is electroslag or electrogas welding used? What are the requirements?

What thicknesses?

(d) Are multiwire, sub-arc systems being used? How many wires? What type

of power?

(e) Is solid wire Mig/Mag weld permitted?

1. Is short circuiting welding permitted? Under what conditions?

2. Is pulsed-arc Mig welding permitted? Under what conditions?

(f) What other processes are used?

(g) Is flux-core self shielded, flux-core gas shielded, or metal core welding

used?

(h) What percentage of welds are made by these different processes?

(i) What is your planned future use?

2. What cutting systems are in common use?

(a) What is used in the field?

(b) Do you weld directly on the cut surface?

(c) Are thermal cut holes used with or without further treatment?
APPENDIX A

33

3. Is automated handling of materials for assembling member elements being

used in the shop? In the field?

4. Are there in-process distortion controls?

(a) How does material variability influence this process?

(b) How is welding distortion predicted?

(c) What dimensional checks are used?

(d) How is drilling accounted for?

5. What cambering and heat-straightening techniques are used?

(a) Is the process automated?

(b) Where are the control points?

6. Are in-process NDT testing and monitoring techniques being used to assess

weld quality?

(a) How often?

(b) What statistical principles are applied?

7. What are the fit-up requirements for preassembly and construction?

(a) Are shop fit-up requirements imposed by owners?

(b) Is this a partial or full fit-up?

(c) What does the fabricator do in the shop to ensure compliance?

(d) Are computerized preassembly methods permitted?

(e) What procedures are used to ensure success?

(f) What has been your experience with this method?

(g) Are special criteria applied to horizontally curved girders?

8. Is field welding used to any extent?

(a) To what extent is the process automated?

(b) How are consumables stored on site?

(c) What processes are used?

9. How are weld procedures and personnel qualified?

(a) Are statistical methods employed?

(b) Are welders who are qualified for other applications (i.e., pressure

vessels, ships) accepted for bridge work without additional qualification?

10. How are weld acceptance procedures applied?

(a) Are fitness for service criteria allowed?
34

APPENDIX A

(b) Who is responsible for Quality Control (QC)/Quality Assurance (QA) of

the fabrication and erection?

(c) Who develops the standard?

11. What role does automation play in the assembly and welding of orthotropic

steel decks?

12. What are the size and length limitations or restrictions in fabrication? Is

this controlled by transportation or construction limitations?

13. Are structural adhesives being used to join steel components?

14. Have electrodes maintained compatibility with base metal weldability?

15. What procedures are used for plate and shape bending?

(a) What thickness and radius criteria are applied for cold bending?

(b) Do fracture toughness requirements impact these procedures?

(c) What role does the type of steel play?

16. What kind of pre- and post-welding treatments are used? What role do

ceramics, metal spacers, back-gouging, peening, or other “improvements”

have in these treatments?

17. What percentage of field splices are bolted? What percentage are welded?

(a) If bolted splices are used, are special treatments or sealants required for

corrosion protection?

(b) Are these treatments specified or used at the discretion of the

fabricator?

18. Are there special installation requirements for anchor bolts?

IV. Automated Recording Procedures for Shop and Field Inspection

1. Is automated, ultrasonic scanning of groove welds performed in the shop?

Would it be possible to see this demonstrated during our site visit?

2. How is the integrity of the inspection records maintained?

3. Who is responsible for the database input?

4. Are automated inspection procedures used in the field? How often?

5. How are fillet welds inspected?

V. Integrated CAD/CAM Procedures and Robotic Fabrication

1. How are design drawings translated into shop drawings?

2. Are electronic design documents used in the bidding process? Are they used

for fabrication?

3. How are shop drawings approved?

(a) Are they electronically submitted? If so, how is the approval given?
APPENDIX A

35

(b) How are shop-generated machine codes checked?

4. How are robots monitored? How often?

5. What are the requirements for qualification of operators of robotic and

automated machinery?

6. What types of automated field erection are used?

7. What has been your experience regarding the measurements used to monitor

the transition from old methods to automated, computer-integrated

manufacturing in terms of:

(a) direct and indirect labor ratios.

(b) man-hours per ton.

(c) efficiency improvements.

(d) cost differentials.

(e) capital differentials.

8. What direct labor cost increases or decreases occur as a result of automation?

VI. Additional Topics of Interest

1. Are there committees established to identify, review, and promote

technological advances at different government or authority levels (i.e.,

regional or national)?

2. Is heat straightening used to assist repair of damaged bridge members?

3. What bearings are being used?

(a) Are comparable bearings used for steel and concrete bridges?

(b) Are they fabricated in the shop or by specialty manufacturers?

(c) What controls the type selection?

(d) What do you see as trends for the future?

4. How closely do design engineers work with fabricators/erectors/inspectors

prior to fabrication and erection?

5. What part of the design/fabrication/construction process has the potential for

most improvement?

6. What measures are being taken to make steel bridges more competitive?

7. What percentage of your budget is invested in research and development?

What government incentives are provided?
36

APPENDIX B: Workshop Agendas

JAPAN-U.S. WORKSHOP

“STEEL BRIDGE FABRICATION TECHNOLOGIES”

10:00-12:00 Moderator: Prof. C. Miki

Design of steel bridges in Japan Mr. Nishikawa, PWRI

New structural forms of bridges, using Prof. Nakamura,

concrete-filled girders Tokai University

Innovations in bridge fabrication procedure Mr. Takahata, NKK

Computerized assembly and testing systems Mr. Hosoya, Mr. Tamai, and

Dr. Kozakura, Yokogawa Bridge

Recent welding materials for bridge structures Mr. Kasai, Kobe Steels

Dr. Honnma, Nittetu Welding

Mr. Tukamoto, Sumikin Welding

New technology in weathering steel Mr. Watanabe and Dr. Honnma

12:00-13:00 Lunch

13:00-15:00 Moderator: Mr. Krishna Verma

Recommendations from the Williamsburg Prof. John Fisher

Bridge tests

Cross-frames for steel bridges Mr. R. Kase

High-performance steel research in the Mr. A. Wilson

United States

Narrow-gap improved electroslag welding Mr. K. Verma

Evaluation of welding qualification require- Prof. K. Frank

ments

15:30-17:30 Moderator: Mr. K. Nishikawa

Design and fabrication of orthotropic steel Dr. Ohashi and Prof. Miki

bridge decks

High-efficiency welding procedures and fatigue Mr. Machida and Dr. Etigo

strength improvement detail of simplified

orthotropic steel decks

New welding technology for field joints of Mr. H. Hirano

bridge sections

Quality control of field welded joints of heavy Mr. Mizukuti, Mr. Murawama,

section girder flange Prof. Miki

Weld detail of field joints in two-girder bridge Mr. Yabe and Prof. Miki

of weathering steel
APPENDIX B

37

Japanese Participants

Coordinators

Chitoshi Miki, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Kazuhiro Nishikawa, Public Works Research Institute, Ministry of Construction

Advisor

Yushi Fukumoto, Fukuyama University

From Universities

Atusi Ishikawa, Professor, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Kengo Anami, Research Associate, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Eiichi Sasaki, Research Associate, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Shunichi Nakamura, Tokai University

Eiki Yamaguchi, Kyushu Institute of Technology

Tetsuya Yamasawa, Tokyo Metropolitan University

From Public Corporations

Kazuyiki Mizuguchi, Japan Highway Public Corporation

Akira Murayama, Japan Highway Public Corporation

Harukazu Ohashi, Honshu-Shikoku Bridge Authority

From Fabricators

Tomohide Hosoya, Yokogawa Bridge

Shoji Tamai, Yokogawa Bridge

Yoshitaka Kozahura, Yokogawa Bridge

Hiroyuki Hirano, Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries

Fumitaka Machida, Kawada Industries

Kiyoharo Takahata, NKK

Shinji Takaba, Matsuo Bridge

Kazuo Ohata, Matsuo Bridge

From Steel Makers

Takashi Kusunoki, Nippon Steel

Motohiro Okushima, Nippon Steel

Koji Honma, Nippon Steel

Shigeo Ohayama, Nippon Steel

Kazuyuki Matsui, NKK

Shozo Nakamura, Kawasaki Steel

Yuichi Watanabe, Sumitomo Metal Industries

Kengo Abe, Kobe Steel

Noboru Kasai, Kobe Steel

Secretariat

Bridge Engineering Laboratory

Tokyo Institute of Technology

TEL:+81 3 5734 2596, FAX:+81 3 5734 3578

Email: miki@cv.titech.ac.jp; kengo@cv.titech.ac.jp
38

APPENDIX B

American Participants

Panel Chairman

Krishna Verma, Federal Highway Administration

From Federal Highway Administration Offices

Milo Cress, Nebraska

Kathleen Linehan, Washington, DC

Bill Wright, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

From Universities

John Fisher, Lehigh University

Karl Frank, University of Texas at Austin

Dennis Mertz, University of Delaware

From Professional Associations

Hardy Campbell, American Welding Society

Bill McEleney, National Steel Bridge Alliance

Arun Shirole, National Steel Bridge Alliance

From State Departments of Transportation

Ralph Anderson, Illinois

Ronnie Medlock, Texas

From the Steel Industry

Jim Hamilton, Utah Pacific Bridge

Bob Kase, High Steel Structures

Pat Loftus, High Steel Structures

Randy Sathre, PDM Bridge

Jerry Uttrachi, ESAB

Alex Wilson, Bethlehem Lukens Plate

Coordinators

John Almborg, American Trade Initiatives

John O’Neill, American Trade Initatives

George Yamamoto, CalTrans
APPENDIX B

39

WORKSHOP ON INNOVATION IN STEEL BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION

TWI, GRANTA PARK, ABINGTON, CAMBRIDGE

FRIDAY, 4TH JUNE 1999

FINAL PROGRAMME

09:00-09:30 COFFEE

09:30-09:35 WELCOME

09:35-10:20 DESIGN

Small to Medium Bridges – Presentation from Cass Hayward – 15 minutes

Long Span Bridges – Presentation from Mott Macdonald – 15 minutes

Discussion

10:20-11:10 MATERIALS

Steels – Presentation from British Steel – 15 minutes

New Toughness Requirements – Presentation from TWI – 10 minutes

Discussion

11:10-11:30 COFFEE

11:30-13:00 FABRICATION

Bridge Construction – Presentation from Kvaerner Cleveland Bridge – 15 minutes

CAD/CAM Robotics – Presentation from Fairfield-Mabey – 10 minutes

Discussion

New Joining Methods – Presentation from TWI – 15 minutes

Discussion

13:00-14:00 LUNCH

14:00-15:00 LABORATORY VISIT

15:00-15:30 PRESENTATIONS BY U.S. GROUP

High Performance Steels – Alex Wilson

Orthotropic Deck Test – John Fisher

ESW Narrow Gap – Krishna Verma

15:30-16:00 TEA

16:00-16:30 INSPECTION OF FABRICATION

New Quality Standards – Presentation from TWI – 15 minutes

Discussion
40

APPENDIX B

16:00-17:00 FINAL DISCUSSION

17:00 RETURN TO CAMBRIDGE

19:30 or 20:00 DINNER AT PETERHOUSE COLLEGE

ATTENDANCE LIST

John O’Neill ATI

Krishna Verma FHWA

Ralph Anderson Illinois DOT

Hardy Campbell AWS

Milo Cress FHWA

John Fisher Lehigh University

Karl Frank University of Texas

Jim Hamilton Utah Pacific Bridge

Bob Kase High Steel Structures

Kathleen Linehan FHWA

Pat Loftus High Steel Structures

Ronnie Medlock Texas DOT

Dennis Mertz University of Delaware

Bill McEleney NSBA

Randy Sathre PDM Bridge

Arun Shirole NSBA

Jerry Uttrachi ESAB

Alex Wilson Bethlehem Lukens Plate

William Wright FHWA

Chris Davis Mott Macdonald

Howard Dewsnap Kvaerner Cleveland Bridge

Sibdas Chakrabati Department of Transport

Geoff Booth Fairfield Mabey

Alan Hayward Cass, Hayward, & Partners

Bill Ramsey British Steel

Martin Ogle TWI

Stephen Maddox TWI

Owen Gorton TWI

John Harrison TWI
41

APPENDIX C: List of Documents

JAPAN

Matsuo Bridge Co., Ltd., Sakai Plant

• Brochure on 70th Anniversary, 1996

• Information on Sakai and Chiba Works

• Yumeshima-Maishima Movable Floating Bridge

• Response to Amplifying Questions

Yokogawa Bridge Corporation Osaka Plant

• Brochure on Yokogawa Bridge, 1997

• Brochure on Osaka Factory

• Brochure on Prefabricated Steel Plate Power Slab

• Computed Assembling Test System (CATS)

• North Kyushu Airport Connection Bridge Section

• Response to Amplifying Questions

NKK Bridge Engineering, Tsu Works

• Brochure on NKK Bridge Engineering

• Tsu Laboratories

• Tsu Works Layout and Details of Facilities

• Laser Cutting Line

• Plasma Cutting Equipment

• Transverse Rib Assembly Line

• Automatic Drilling Line

• Chamfering Line

• I-Section Girder Line

• Box Girder Panel Assembly Line

• Tsu Works Laser Cutting Line and Robot Assembly Line

• New-BristLan (New Bridge and Steel Structure Lofting Language)

• Takaku, Tatsumasa, Fujimura, Ken and Ogaya, Shigeru, Bridge Factory

Innovations Structural Engineering International, IABSE 1/94

• Fujimura, K., Ogaya, S., Takahata, K., Kuwamura, T., Sugitani, Y., and Kanjo,

Y., Bridge Factory Innovations at Tsu Works, Laser Cutting and Robotic

Assembly Lines, NKK Tech. Review No. 67, 1993.

• High Speed Rotating Arc Welding

• Minimal Maintenance Steel Bridge Exposure Site

• Wave Record Type Ultrasonic Inspection System
42

APPENDIX C

• Mega-Float

• Response to Amplifying Questions

Japan Highway Public Corporation

• General Information Brochure 1998

• Development of Technology for Expressway Bridges 9/98

• Inabe River Bridge Construction of Superstructure and Field Welding

Process for Main Girder

• Kiso & Ibi River Bridges New Meishin Expressway

• Ultrasonic Testing Procedure and Defect Judgment Process

Kawada Industries, Inc.

• Kawada Brochure 1997

• Building a Better Tomorrow

• Kawada Brochure on Shikoku Plant

• Response to Amplifying Questions

Japan-USA Steel Bridge Workshop

• Nakamura, S., New Structural Forms of Bridges Using Concrete Filled Steel

Girders, University of Tokai, 18 pgs.

• Sugitani, Y., Tamaoki, N., Kaujo, Y., Murayama, M., Fujimura, K., and Ogaya,

S., CAD/CAM Welding Robot System in Steel Bridge Panel Fabrication, NKK

Technical Review No. 68 (1993), 12 pgs.

• Takaku, T., Hashimoto, M., Iwaoka, N., Shikata, A., Mori, N., and Takawashi,

M., Integrated CAD/CAM System for Steel Bridges II, New BRISTLAN

SYSTEM, NKK Technical Review No. 71 (1994), 8 pgs.

• Hosoya, T., Tamai, S., and Kozakura, Y., Inspection System for Assembly

Configuration of Steel Arch Bridge Members, Yokogawa Bridge Co., 18 pgs.

• Technical Committee, Welding Consumables Div., The Japan Welding

Engineering Society, Kasai, N., Homma, H., and Tsukamoto, M., Recent

Trends of Welding Consumables for Bridge Construction in Japan, 16 pgs.

• The Kozai Club, Watanabe, Y. and Homma, K., New Technology in Weathering

Steel, 10 pgs.

• Miki, C., and Ohashi, H., Improved Fatigue Details of Orthotropic Steel Deck

and the Recent Study, 20 pgs.

• Machida, F. and Echigo, S., High Efficiency Welding Procedure and Fatigue

Strength Improvement Detail of Simplified Orthotropic Steel Deck, Kawada

Industries, 9 pgs.

• Hirano, H, Summary of Welding Process for Simple Structure Bridges,

Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries, Ltd., 15 pgs.
APPENDIX C

43

• Hirano, H., Murata, S., and Yamanchi, K., Technical Development of Field

Welding for Simple Structure Bridge, Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy

Industries Co. Ltd., 8 pgs.

• Mizuguchi, K., Murayama, A. (JPHC), and Miki, C. (TIT), Quality Control of

Field Welded Joints of Heavy Section Girder Flange, 14 pgs.

• Miki, C., Chidorinosawa River Bridge, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 7 pgs.

• Miki, C., Nishikawa, K., and Konishi, T., Cooperative Research on

Nondestructive Testing Methods for Welding Joints of Steel Bridges, 10 pgs.

• PWRI, The Kozai Club and Japan Association of Steel Bridge Construction,

Cooperative Research on Application of Weathering Steel to Bridge

Structures March 1993 (in Japanese).

ITALY

Costruzioni Cimolai Armando S.P.A.

• Cimolai Brochure on Facilities and Products

• Offshore Structures

• Viaduc de Cheval Blanc, TGV Mediterranean

• Viaduct over Grand Canal Maritime at LeHavre

• Civil Buildings

• Welded Beams and Corrugated Panels

• Welded and Bent Profiles

• Certification from Deutsche Verbund fur Schweisstechnik (1998), Canadian

Welding Bureau (1992), SGSICS – ISO9002, 1999, IQNET Registration ISO

9002.

• Matildi, P., and Matildi, G., Steel Bridge Experiences, Construzioni Cimolai

Armando SPA, 1990.

• Responses to Amplifying Questions

GERMANY

Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing (BAM)

• Profile of BAM

• Brochure on Organization

• Brochure on Buildings and Structures Division VII.2

• Brochure on Special Test Facility for Component Weld Simulation (GAPSI)

• Brochure on Nondestructive Testing

• Brochure on Design for Durability

• Helmerich, R., Brandes, K., and Herter, J., Full Scale Laboratory Fatigue

Tests on Riveted Steel Bridges, Proceedings, IABSE Workshop Lausanne

1997, Vol. 76, IABSE.
44

APPENDIX C

Krupp Stahlbau Berlin

• Drawings on Havel River Bridge at Spandau HRA Beratende Ing. Im

Bauwesen, Berlin

• Drawings on Rail Bridge over Humboldthafen, Lehrter Station in Berlin

UNITED KINGDOM

Fairfield-Mabey Ltd.

• Brochure on Steel Structures (1997)

• Brochure on Plate Girder Automated Line

• Brochure on the Mabey Group

• British Steel Brochure on Nene Bridge, Peterborough

• British Steel Brochure on M5 Widening Overbridges, Rashwood to Catshill

• British Steel Brochure on River Wye Crossing Chepstow

• Erection Information Pack for A564-Derby Southern Bypass, 8/2/99

• Steel Bridge Group; Guidance Notes on Best Practice in Steel Bridge

Construction, The Steel Construction Institute, edited by J.E. Evans and D.C.

Iles, SCI Publication 185, 1998.

• Fairfield-Mabey Video

The Welding Institute (TWI)

• Ogle, M., New Weld Quality Standards in BS5400 parts 6 and 10

• Ramsey, W., A Look Ahead at British Steel

• Brochure on Weldasearch

• EWF Newsletter 7/19/98

• Brochure on TWI, TTS.255.7/95

• Brochure on European Federation for Welding, Joining and Cutting (EWF)

• British Steel Seminar Notes, Corrosion Protection of Steel Bridges into the

Millennium, York Railway Museum, May 18, 1998.

• British Steel, The Welding of Carbon Manganese Higher Yield Structural

Steels, 1/99

• British Steel, Steel Highway Bridges Protection Guide BS SPCS5.97

• British Steel, Bi-Steel Simplifying Composite Construction

• Biddle, A.R., Iles, D.C., and Yandzio, E., Integral Steel Bridges: Design

Guidance, The Steel Construction Institute Publ. No. P163, 1997.

• Iles, D.C., Specification of Structural Steel Work for Bridges: A Model

Appendix 18/1, The Steel Construction Institute, SCI 170, 1996.
45

APPENDIX D: Itinerary

JAPAN

May 24, 1999 Meeting and shop visit with Matsuo Bridge Co., Sakai Plant

May 24, 1999 Meeting and shop visit with Yokogawa Bridge Corp., Osaka Plant

May 25, 1999 Meeting and shop visit with NKK Bridge Co., Tsu Works

May 26, 1999 Meeting with Japan Public Highway Corp. in Nagoya; site visit to

Second Tomei Highway Project, Inabe River Bridge

May 26-27, 1999 Meeting and shop visit with Kawada Industries Corp., Shikoku

Plant at Marugame

May 28, 1999 Japan-U.S. Workshop on Steel Bridge Fabrication Technologies at

U.S. Consulate, Osaka

ITALY

May 30-31, 1999 Team Review Meeting and meetings and shop visits with

Construzioni Cimolai Armando in Pordenone area

GERMANY (BERLIN)

May 30-31, 1999 Meeting at Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing

and laboratory visits. Meeting and shop visit to Krupp Stahlbau

Berlin.

June 2, 1999 Site visits to construction site of the Humboldthafen Bridge, the

Potsdamer Platz, and the Havel River Rail Bridge at Spandau.

UNITED KINGDOM

June 3, 1999 Meetings and shop visit to Fairfield-Mabey Plant at Chepstow

June 4, 1999 UK-U.S. Workshop on Innovation in Steel Bridge Construction at

The Welding Institute, Abington; laboratory tour of TWI

June 5, 1999 Team Review Meeting
46

APPENDIX E: Biographic Sketches

The team consisted of representatives of U.S. Federal and State Governments as

well as academia, the steel fabrication industry, a steel producer, a welding and

cutting product producer, and trade associations. Information about team members

at the time of the scan was provided in the following biographic sketches.

Krishna K. Verma, the Panel Chairman, is a Structural and Welding Engineer

with the Bridge Division of the Federal Highway Administration in Washington,

DC. In this position, he is responsible for policy formulation, with regard to bridge

welding, fabrication, fatigue, fracture, and bridge painting. He is currently serving

as a member of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation

Officials (AASHTO) T-14 Committee on Structural Steel Design, AASHTO-AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code Committee, the TRB Committee on Fabrication and

Inspection of Metal Structures (A2F07), AASHTO NSBA Steel Bridge

Collaboration, and the International Institute of Welding Commission V on Quality

Control and Quality Assurance of Welded Products and Commission XIII on

Fatigue Behavior of Welded Components and Structures. Mr. Verma is a

Registered Professional Engineer in Pennsylvania. He has a Bachelor of Science

Degree in Civil Engineering from Benaras, India; a Master’s Degree in Structures

from the University of Calgary, Canada; and a Master’s Degree in Materials

Engineering from the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute of Troy, New York.

Ralph E. Anderson is the Bureau Chief of Bridges and Structures for the Illinois

Department of Transportation in Springfield, Illinois. He is responsible for

developing, reviewing, and approving all structure plans for the State highway

system. He is also responsible for establishing procedures for the field inspection

of existing bridges. He currently serves on several technical committees of the

Highway Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures of AASHTO. Mr. Anderson is

Chairman of the Technical Committee for Bearings and Expansion Joints and of

the Pontis Bridge Management System. He serves as Vice Chairman of the

Technical Committee for Structural Steel Design. He is a member of the Technical

Committee for Seismic Design of Bridges and the Technical Committee for Bridge

Replacement Surveys and Inspection Standards. Mr. Anderson is a Licensed

Professional Engineer and Structural Engineer in the State of Illinois. He has

served more than 21 years with the Illinois Department of Transportation. He has

a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Illinois in

Urbana, Champaign.

Hardy Campbell III is a Senior Staff Engineer with the American Welding

Society. In this capacity he also serves as Secretary to the D1 Structural Welding

Committee responsible for several structural welding documents, for example the

D1.1 Structural Steel Code and the AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code. He

has extensive experience in the design, construction, and inspection of heavy steel

structures, and frequently acts as a resource for answering questions about the

D1.5 code. He received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering from the

University of Houston in 1976. He is a voting member on the IIW and ASTM steel

committees, and a member of AWS, ASNT, ASM, ASCE, and NACE. In addition, he is

the Chairman of the IIW Subcommission XV-G on Seismic Design and

Construction.
47

APPENDIX E

Milo Cress is the Bridge Engineer for the USDOT Federal Highway

Administration’s Nebraska Division Office. He is responsible for review and

approval of Nebraska Department of Roads’ structures, hydraulics, hydrology,

design, construction, maintenance, policies, and procedures applied to highway

projects using Federal aid funds and the Bridge Safety Inspection and Maintenance

Program in Nebraska for both State and local bridges. Mr. Cress has coordinated

with Federal, State, contractor, and steel-fabricator interests to effectively

implement advanced materials, such as high-performance steel (HPS), highperformance concrete (HPC), and fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP) in Nebraska and

the surrounding States. As part of his duties, he has carried out steel fabrication

(and other materials) plant reviews and construction inspections and actively

participated in full-scale laboratory testing of steel bridge components. He

currently serves on the Advisory Panel for the National Bridge Research

Organization (NABRO) Division of the Mid-America Transportation Center

(MATC), University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Mr. Cress holds a B.S. Degree in Civil

Engineering and a Master’s of Science Degree in River Mechanics from Colorado

State University. He is a member of the ASCE and Lincoln Engineer’s Club. He has

worked for private materials testing companies, the Colorado Department of

Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration.

John W. Fisher has been Professor of Civil Engineering at Lehigh University

since 1969. He was named to the Joseph T. Stuart Chair in Civil Engineering at

Lehigh in July 1988. He has been Director of the Engineering Research Center on

Advanced Technology for Large Structural Systems (ATLSS) since its

establishment by NSF in May 1986. A structural engineer, Dr. Fisher is a specialist

in structural connections; the fatigue and fracture resistance of riveted, bolted, and

welded structures; the behavior and design of composite steel-concrete members;

and the performance of steel bridges. Dr. Fisher is a graduate of Washington

University, St. Louis, Missouri. He received his Master of Science and Doctor of

Philosophy Degrees from Lehigh University. He received an honorary doctorate

degree from the Swiss Federal Institute in Lausanne, Switzerland. He is a member

of the American Institute of Steel Construction Specification Committee and the

American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association Committee 15

on Steel Structures. He also serves on the Executive Committee of the

Transportation Research Board.

Karl H. Frank is a Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Texas at

Austin. His current research interests are the design and behavior of girder and

box composite steel and concrete bridges, static and fatigue performance of

weldments and bolted connections, and load rating of existing bridges. He authored

much of the AASHTO LRFD Specifications for steel girder bridges. He has been a

professor at The University of Texas at Austin for more than 20 years. Before

coming to the University, he worked at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research

Center of the Federal Highway Administration. He graduated with a Bachelor of

Science Degree from the University of California at Davis and received a Master of

Science and Ph.D. from Lehigh University. He is a registered Engineer in the State

of Texas. Dr. Frank serves on the AASHTO/AISI Steel Bridge Task Force, the TRB

Steel Bridge Committee, and the Committee on Fabrication and Inspection of Steel

Structures. He is also a technical team leader and a researcher in the Materials
48

APPENDIX E

and Fracture effort in SAC research project dealing with the design and behavior

of steel moment frames in earthquakes.

Jim Hamilton is the General Superintendent for Utah Pacific Bridge & Steel. He

is responsible for the entire fabrication process of bridge girders and systems. In

addition, he is responsible for the implementation of new technology and

fabrication methods. He is skilled in all functions of a bridge shop including project

planning, scheduling, fit-up, welding, girder assembly, painting, and safety. His

fabrication career spans 35 years, and he has supervised the fabrication of more

than 450 steel bridge structures.

Bob Kase is Vice President for Engineering, Field Operations, and Technology at

High Steel Structures, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Mr. Kase’s responsibilities include

direction of Quality Control and Quality Assurance functions in fabrication

facilities and field sites, CAD/CAM in engineering and fabrication, field operations,

and technology implementation. He directs engineering R&D functions associated

with new product and material development along with interfacing with U.S.

academia to prepare test samples used to further research in the bridge industry.

He has 31 years of experience in engineering, fabrication, transportation, and

erection of bridges, including suspension, truss, arch, bascule, and cable-stayed

bridges. Mr. Kase is a graduate of Villanova University holding a Bachelor’s and

Master’s Degree in Civil Engineering. He is a Licensed Professional Engineer and

Land Surveyor in Pennsylvania, and a Licensed Professional Engineer in

Massachusetts and Maryland. Mr. Kase currently serves on various AWS, AISI,

AISC, NSBA, FHWA, U.S. Navy, SSPC, and AASHTO Bridge and Technical

Committees and Task Groups.

Kathleen Linehan is a Division Bridge Engineer in the Washington, DC, Division

of the Federal Highway Administration. Ms. Linehan is currently responsible for

oversight of the Federal Aid Bridge program in the city of Washington, DC. Her

work includes providing technical assistance and guidance in bridge design,

construction, and Federal Aid program issues to the DC Department of Public

Works. She has served with the FHWA for 8 years, including time in California,

Colorado, and Texas. Ms. Linehan is a graduate of Marquette University in

Milwaukee, Wisconsin. She is a Licensed Professional Engineer in California and

serves on a technical committee of the AASHTO/National Steel Bridge Alliance

Steel Bridge Collaboration.

Pat Loftus is President of High Steel Structures, Inc., Lancaster, Pennsylvania. He

is responsible for the overall operations, strategic direction, and profitability of the

United States’ largest bridge plate girder fabricator. He is also Chairman of the

Executive Committee of the National Steel Bridge Alliance. As Chair of the NSBA,

he is charged with helping to improve steel bridge market share in the United

States. Mr. Loftus has more than 30 years of experience in steel fabrication

including shipbuilding, pressure vessels, and tunnel systems. His early background

was in Quality Assurance and Welding Engineering. Mr. Loftus holds a Bachelor of

Science Degree from Boston College with a concentration in Industrial

Management. He is an active member of the American Welding Society, and holds

Board of Directors seats with the AISC, American Road and Transportation

Builders Association, and Associated Pennsylvania Constructors.
49

APPENDIX E

Ronnie Medlock is the Steel Bridge Fabrication Director at the Texas

Department of Transportation (TxDOT), in Austin, Texas. He is responsible for

Quality Assurance, including inspection, for all steel bridge members fabricated for

TxDOT, where he has 10 years of experience. Mr. Medlock also serves on various

committees related to steel bridge work, including the following: member,

AASHTO/AWS D1.5 Bridge Welding Code Committee; member, AWS Structural

Welding Code Committee and Chair of the Fabrication Subcommittee; member,

Committee on Fabrication and Inspection of Metal Structures of TRB; Chair, Texas

Steel Quality Council; and co-founder and Chair of Steering Committee, AASHTO/

NBA Steel Bridge Collaboration. Mr. Medlock is a Licensed Engineer in the State

of Texas. He received a Bachelor’s Degree and a Master’s Degree in Structural

Engineering from the University of Texas, Austin.

Dennis Mertz is an Associate Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of

Delaware in Newark, Delaware. His current research emphasis includes innovative

bridge design and construction practices, steel bridge design methodologies and,

most recently, the interaction of technology and culture in the construction of

bridges. Before joining the faculty at the University of Delaware, Dr. Mertz was an

Associate of the bridge design firm of Modjeski and Masters, Inc., of Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania. He is a graduate of Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania,

and holds a Master’s Degree and Doctorate from Lehigh. He is a Licensed

Professional Engineer in Pennsylvania. Professor Mertz is also the founding editor

of the ASCE’s Journal of Bridge Engineering.

Bill McEleney is a Regional Director of Construction Services for the National

Steel Bridge Alliance in Cranston, Rhode Island. He currently represents the steel

bridge fabricating industry on matters of steel bridge fabrication and construction.

His duties include fabricator education and training. Prior to joining NSBA, he

spent 10 years as a Regional Engineer for the American Institute of Steel

Construction performing similar duties. He is graduate of the University of Rhode

Island and holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Civil Engineering. He has served

on ASCE technical committees and various code and standards-writing

organizations.

Randy Sathre is a Maintenance/Facilities Engineer for PDM-Bridge, a division of

Pittsburgh-Des Moines, Inc. His responsibilities include facility planning,

equipment procurement, material flow, and design of special equipment for

fabrication facilities. He also is responsible for research and implementation of

innovative technologies into bridge fabrication facilities. He is a graduate of North

Dakota State University with a Bachelor’s of Science Degree in Mechanical

Engineering.

Arun M. Shirole is the Executive Director of the National Steel Bridge Alliance, a

unified organization for all steel bridge related activities in the United States.

Before assuming this position, he was the Director of Structures Design and

Construction Division and Deputy Chief Engineer for the New York State

Department of Transportation. He received a Bachelor’s Degree in Civil

Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, a Master’s Degree in

Civil Engineering from the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, and a
50

APPENDIX E

Master’s of Business Administration from the University of Minnesota. Mr. Shirole

was also a Transportation Fellow at Harvard University. He has authored 34 papers

and publications in national and international publications. He has been a member

of the AASHTO Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures and Chairman of

AASHTO Committee T-11 on Research. He was Chairman of the Transportation

Research Board Committee on Construction Management and Bridge Management

and currently chairs its subcommittee on Bridge Management. He is a Licensed

Professional Engineer in Minnesota and New York.

Jerry Uttrachi is Vice President of Equipment Marketing at ESAB Welding &

Cutting Products. He has been Manager of the Welding Market Development

Department and Laboratory Manager of the Welding Materials Technology

Department. During his 35-year career, he has been responsible for the

development of automatic welding processes, welding equipment, and welding

materials. Some of his work was reported in papers entitled “Three-Wire

Submerged Arc Welding of Line Pipe,” “A New DC Power System for Submerged

Arc Welding,” “Electroslag Welding Speeds the Making of Ships,” and “Multiple

Electrode Systems for Submerged Arc Welding,” all published in The Welding

Journal. Mr. Uttrachi also published an article in Welding Design & Fabrication

entitled “What Do Robots Need in Welding Equipment.” He holds a number of U.S.

and foreign patents in the welding process and materials areas. Mr. Uttrachi has

Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Mechanical Engineering and a Master of

Science Degree in Engineering Management from New Jersey Institute of

Technology. He is a member of ASME and AWS. In addition, he serves as Chairman

of the AWS Marketing Committee and is a member of a number of other AWS

committees.

Alex Wilson is the Customer Technical Service Manager for Bethlehem Lukens

Plate, a division of the Bethlehem Steel Corporation located in Coatesville,

Pennsylvania. He currently manages the technical support activities to plate steel

customers and end users. He is currently involved with the development of highstrength steels with improved weldability for bridge applications. Mr. Wilson has

been with the Lukens Steel Company for 24 years, since it merged with Bethlehem

Steel. His previous research involved clean steels, fracture mechanics evaluations,

and steel development. Mr. Wilson is a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology and holds Bachelor’s and Master’s of Science Degrees in Metallurgy. He

is Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee of the American

Iron and Steel Institute and Chairman of the Steel Bridge Forum.

William Wright is a research structural engineer for the U.S. Federal Highway

Administration at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center in McLean,

Virginia. He is the manager of the structures testing laboratory and directs

FHWA’s research program in the area of steel structures. Current laboratory

research includes testing of a full-scale curved girder bridge and the fatigue and

fracture testing of HPS girders. The recent emphasis of the steel research program

has been to develop new high-performance steels to enable more efficient

fabrication and design of bridges. Mr. Wright holds Bachelor of Science and Master

of Science Degrees in Structural Engineering from the University of Maryland, in

College Park. He is a Licensed Professional Engineer in Maryland and serves on

several technical committees of the ASCE and the Transportation Research Board.
51

APPENDIX F: Technology Panel

Krishna K. Verma (Team Leader)

FHWA/ HNG-32

Room 3203

400 Seventh St., SW

Washington, DC 20590

tel 202/ 366-4601

fax 202/ 366-3077

email: krishna.verma@fhwa.dot.gov

Kathleen Linehan

FHWA/ HBR-DC

Union Center Plaza, Suite 750

820 First St., NE

Washington DC 20002

tel 202/ 523-0163

fax 202/ 523-0181

email: kathleen.linehan@fhwa.dot.gov

Milo Cress

FHWA/ HBR-NE

100 Centennial Mall, North

Room 220

Lincoln, NE 68508-3851

tel 402/ 437-5977

fax 402/ 437-5146

email: milo.cress@fhwa.dot.gov

Bill Wright

FHWA/ HNR-10

6300 Georgetown Pike

Mclean, VA 22101

tel 703/ 285-2496

fax 703/ 285-2766

email: bill.wright@fhwa.dot.gov

Arun Shirole

Executive Director

National Steel Bridge Alliance

1405 North Lilac Drive, Suite 212

Golden Valley, MN 55422

tel 612/ 591-9099

fax 612/ 591-9499

email: shirole@aiscmail.com

Bill McEleney

National Steel Bridge Alliance

45 Pasture View Lane

Cranston, RI 02921

tel 401/ 943-5660

fax 401/ 943-5660

email: mceleney@aiscmail.com

John Fisher (Reporter)

Director, ATLSS

Lehigh University

117 ATLSS Drive

Bethlehem, PA 18015-4729

tel 610/ 758-3535

fax 610/ 758-5553

email: jwf2@lehigh.edu

Karl Frank (Reporter)

Ferguson Structural Engineering

Laboratory

University of Texas at Austin

10100 Burnet Road, PRC 177

Austin TX 78758

tel 512/ 471-4590

fax 512/ 471-1944

email: kfrank@uts.cc.utexas.edu

Dennis Mertz

Dept. of Civil & Environmental

Engineering

University of Delaware

Newark, DE 19716

tel 302/ 831-2735

fax 302/ 831-3640

email: mertz@ce.udel.edu

Ronald Medlock

Steel Bridge Fabrication Director

Texas DOT, CST/M

125 East 11th Street

Austin, TX 78701-2483

tel 512/ 467-3781

fax 512/ 465-7616

email: rmedloc@mailgw.dot.state.tx.us
52

APPENDIX F

Ralph Anderson

Engineer of Bridges and Structures

Illinois DOT

2300 South Dirksen Parkway

Springfield, IL 62764

tel 217/ 782-2124

fax 217/ 782-7540

email: andersonre@nt.dot.state.il.us

Jerry Uttrachi

Vice President, Equipment Marketing

ESAB

P.O. Box 100545

Florence, SC 29501

tel 843/ 664-4225

fax 843/ 664-5607

email: juttrachi@esab.com

Hardy Campbell

Senior Staff Engineer

American Welding Society

550 NW LeJeune Road

Miami, FL 33126

tel 305/ 443-9353 x 300

fax 305/ 443-5951

email: hardy@aws.org

Alex Wilson

Chairman

AISA Transport. & Infrastructure

Comm.

Bethlehem Lukens Plate

ARC Building

Coatesville, PA 19320

tel 610/ 383-3105

fax 610/ 383-3572

email: A.D.Wilson@blp.bsco.com

Bob Kase

Vice President

Engineering, Field Operations and

Technology

High Steel Structures, Inc.

1770 Hempstead Road

P.O. Box 10008

Lancaster, PA 17605-0008

tel 717/ 390-4240

fax 717/ 293-4061

email: rkase@high.net

Pat Loftus

President

High Steel Structures, Inc.

1770 Hempstead Road

P.O. Box 10008

Lancaster, PA 17605-0008

tel 717/ 293-4060

fax 717/ 399-4102

email: ploftus@high.net

Randy Sathre

Maintenance and Facilities Engineer

PDM Bridge, Wausau

P.O. Box 1044

Wausau, WI 54402-1044

tel 715/ 845-3191

fax 715/ 845-9129

email: rsathre@pdmbridge.com

Jim Hamilton

Superintendent

Utah Pacific Bridge

P.O. Box 516

Pleasant Grove, UT 84062

tel 801/ 785-3557

fax 801/ 785-2146
53

APPENDIX G: NKK High Speed

Rotating Arc Welding
	
	
	




	
 

!

 	
	!"#$%


& ##'())'%)()

*& ##'())'%)#)

	
	
	
+,-.
-

,,,-	
	
	
-,-.
-

/0

	1-'2'3'34

('3)56