Research, Development, and Technology

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

6300 Georgetown Pike 

McLean, VA 22101-2296

Long-Term Bridge Performance 

(LTBP) Program 

Protocols, Version 1 

JANUARY 2016 

PUBLICATION NO. FHWA-HRT-16-007

i

FOREWORD

This study was conducted as part of the Federal Highway Administration’s Long-Term Bridge 

Performance (LTBP) Program. The LTBP Program is a long-term research effort, authorized by 

the U.S. Congress under SAFETEA-LU, the “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users,” to collect high-quality bridge data from a 

representative sample of highway bridges nationwide that will help the bridge community to 

better understand bridge performance. The products from this program will be a suite of datadriven tools, including predictive and forecasting models that will enhance the ability of bridge 

owners to optimize their management of bridges.

In order to ensure that LTBP Program data are collected in a consistent manner over the duration 

of the program, data collection protocols are being developed for use by LTBP researchers. This 

report presents 51 protocols that will be used throughout the LTBP Program for data collection, 

mining of bridge legacy data, visual inspection, sampling and testing of concrete materials, and 

nondestructive evaluation of bridges, as well as data management and storage. Future versions 

will present additional protocols that will be implemented in the LTBP Program studies as well 

as any modifications deemed necessary to the 51 protocols herein. This report will be of interest 

to practitioners, researchers, and decision makers involved with the research, design, 

construction, inspection, maintenance, and management of bridges.

Jorge E. Pagán-Ortiz

Director, Office of Infrastructure

 Research and Development

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation 

in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of 

the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, 

specification, or regulation.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or 

manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the 

objective of the document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve 

Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards 

and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its 

information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to 

ensure continuous quality improvement.

Photos courtesy Rutgers Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation. Cover upper right © Nenad Gucunski; all others 

© Drew Noel Photography.
ii
iii 

TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 

1. Report No.

FHWA-HRT-16-007

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

4. Title and Subtitle

Long-Term Bridge Performance Program Protocols, 

Version 1

5. Report Date

January 2016

6. Performing Organization Code:

7. Author(s)

John M. Hooks—J. M. Hooks & Associates

Jeff Weidner—Intelligent Infrastructure Systems

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

The Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation

100 Brett Road

Piscataway, NJ 08854-8058

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-07-R-00136

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Office of Infrastructure Research and Development

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

Federal Highway Administration

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, VA 22101-2296

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

HRDI-50

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA Contacts: Susan Lane, HRDI-50 and Yamayra Rodriguez-Otero, HRDI-50

16. Abstract

The Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program is a long-term research effort to collect scientific 

performance data from a representative sample of bridges in the United States. Data will be collected for inservice bridges using a variety of techniques. These data will be supplemented with legacy data from design 

plans, design and construction specifications, as-built plans and construction records, inspection and maintenance 

records, weather records, and traffic data. To maintain consistency in the manner in which data are collected and 

stored, a set of protocols has been developed. These protocols provide guidance on what kinds of information to 

obtain from existing bridge records and how each field testing activity is to be conducted; how to identify and 

classify the defects and how to measure their extent; and how to document the location and severity of the defect 

in the bridge element being evaluated. The protocols also specify the accuracy to which defect measurements are 

to be recorded. This report presents protocols for the collection and mining of legacy data, site preparation, visual 

inspection, sampling and testing of materials, nondestructive evaluation, and data storage and management. 

Future versions of this report will include additional protocols covering other activities, data collection methods, 

and analysis and reporting protocols for the LTBP Program.

17. Key Words

Bridge, bridge inspection, Long-Term Bridge 

Performance Program, LTBP, testing protocols, 

data collection 

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available through the 

National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 

22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

331

22. Price

N/A

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

SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS 

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol 

LENGTH

in inches 25.4 millimeters mm 

ft feet 0.305 meters m 

yd yards 0.914 meters m 

mi miles 1.61 kilometers km 

AREA 

in2square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2

ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m

2

yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m

2

ac acres 0.405 hectares ha

mi2square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2

VOLUME 

fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL 

gal gallons 3.785 liters L 

ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m

3 

yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m

3 

NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3

MASS 

oz ounces 28.35 grams g

lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg

T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or "metric ton") Mg (or "t") 

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) 

o

F Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 Celsius oC 

or (F-32)/1.8 

ILLUMINATION 

fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx

fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS 

lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N 

lbf/in2poundforce per square inch 6.89 kilopascals kPa 

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS 

Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol 

LENGTH

mm millimeters 0.039 inches in 

m meters 3.28 feet ft 

m meters 1.09 yards yd 

km kilometers 0.621 miles mi 

AREA 

mm2square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2 

m

2

square meters 10.764 square feet ft2 

m

2

square meters 1.195 square yards yd2 

ha hectares 2.47 acres ac

km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2 

VOLUME 

mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz 

L liters 0.264 gallons gal 

m

3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3 

m

3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3 

MASS 

g grams 0.035 ounces oz

kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb

Mg (or "t") megagrams (or "metric ton") 1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T 

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)

oC Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit o

F 

ILLUMINATION 

lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc 

cd/m2candela/m

2

0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS 

N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf 

kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per square inch lbf/in2

*SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380. 

(Revised March 2003)
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1

CHAPTER 2. ORGANIZATION AND DESIGNATIONS OF THE LTBP PROGRAM 

PROTOCOLS ............................................................................................................................... 3

PREVISIT PROTOCOLS (PRE) .............................................................................................................. 4

Sampling and Selection (SS)................................................................................................................. 4

Existing Documentation (ED) ............................................................................................................... 4

Equipment (EQ) .................................................................................................................................... 4

Preliminary Planning and Logistics (PL) .............................................................................................. 5

FIELD VISIT PROTOCOLS (FLD)......................................................................................................... 5

Onsite Pretest Activities (OP) .............................................................................................................. 5

Field Data Collection (DC) ................................................................................................................... 5

Data Storage (DS) ................................................................................................................................. 5

POSTVISIT PROTOCOLS (PST) ............................................................................................................ 6

Data Reduction and Processing (DR) ................................................................................................... 6

Data Interpretation (DI) ........................................................................................................................ 6

Archiving and Reporting (AR) ............................................................................................................. 6

PROTOCOL NAMING CONVENTION ................................................................................................. 6

CHAPTER 3. HOW TO USE THE LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOLS ................................. 7

CHAPTER 4. LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOL CONTENT ................................................... 9

PROTOCOL SECTIONS ......................................................................................................................... 9

TYPICAL LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOL DATA COLLECTION TABLE ...................................... 10

DATA IMPORT ..................................................................................................................................... 11

CHAPTER 5. PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLICATION PLAN .................... 13

SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 15

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 17

LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOLS ............................................................................................ 19
vi

LIST OF PROTOCOLS 

Previsit Protocols (PRE) 

Existing Documentation (ED) 

Bridge Documentation Protocols (BD) 

PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction 

PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records 

PRE-ED-BD-003, Bridge Design and Construction Cost Data 

PRE-ED-BD-004, Bridge Site Conditions 

PRE-ED-BD-005, Bridge Inspection Records 

PRE-ED-BD-006, Bridge Maintenance Records and Cost Data 

PRE-ED-BD-007, Calculation of Bridge Ratings 

Legacy Data Mining Protocols (LD) 

 PRE-ED-LD-001, Legacy Data Mining for Untreated Bridge Decks 

Preliminary Planning and Logistics (PL) 

Logistics Protocols (LO) 

PRE-PL-LO-001, Reference Bridge Testing 

PRE-PL-LO-002, Cluster Bridge Testing 

PRE-PL-LO-003, Traffic Control, Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (MPT), and Permits 

PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan 

PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications 

PRE-PL-LO-006, Power and Network Requirements 

PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan 

Field Visit Protocols (FLD) 

Onsite Pretest Activities (OP) 

Site Preparedness Protocols (SP) 

FLD-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation 

Spatial Context Protocols (SC) 

FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks 
vii

FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System

FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements

Field Data Collection (DC)

Photography Protocols (PH)

FLD-DC-PH-001, Photography Equipment Requirements

FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes

FLD-DC-PH-003, Image Naming

Material Sampling Protocols (MS)

FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks

FLD-DC-MS-002, Compressive Strength and Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Concrete 

Cores

FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration (Permeability)

FLD-DC-MS-004, Sampling and Testing for Chloride Profiles

Nondestructive Evaluation Protocols (NDE)

FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks

FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-005, Linear Polarization Resistance Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-006, Dye Penetrant Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-007, Ultrasonic Surface Wave Testing—Concrete

FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue CrackingVisual Inspection—Steel 

Elements (VIS)

Visual Inspection—Steel Elements Protocols (VIS)

FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration

FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion

FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss

FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage
viii

Visual Inspection—Concrete Elements Protocols (VIC)

FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration

FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment

FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination

FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination

FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking

FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion

FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack

Visual Inspection—Bearings Protocols (VIB)

FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings

FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings

Visual Inspection—Joints Protocols (VIJ)

FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs

FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints

Data Storage (DS)

Local Storage Protocols (LS)

FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local

Remote Storage Protocols (RS)

FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote
ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Illustration. LTBP Program Protocols Hierarchy............................................................ 3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Sample LTBP Program Protocol Data Collection Table................................................ 10

Table 2. LTBP Program Protocol Data Collection Table Key. .................................................... 11

Table 3. Index of Version 1 LTBP Program Protocols................................................................. 13
x

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

ABC Accelerated bridge construction

ABET Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

ASR Alkali-silica reaction 

ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials

BIRM Bridge Inspectors Reference Manual

BLOB Binary large object

CIP Cast-in-place 

CSE Copper sulfate electrode

DEF Delayed ettringite formation 

DMI Distance measuring instrument 

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

HCP Half-cell potential

HDR High-dynamic range 

IE Impact echo

LPR Linear polarization resistance 

LTBP Long-Term Bridge Performance 

MPT Maintenance and Protection of Traffic

NBIS National Bridge Inspection Standards

NDE Nondestructive evaluation

NICET National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PPE Personal protection equipment 

SSD Saturated-surface-dry

TSA Thaumasite sulfate attack 

USW Ultrasonic surface wave 

UT Ultrasonic testing

w/c Water-cement (ratio)

Units of measure used in this report:

dB Decibels

Hz Hertz 

kips 1,000 lb

kΩ/inch Kilo-Ohm per inch

psi Pounds per square inch

ksi Kips per square inch

ns Nanosecond

μA/cm2 MicroAmps per centimeter square

mA MilliAmp

mV MilliVolt

pcf Pounds per cubic ft

USD U.S. dollar

V Volt 
1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

The Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program is a long-term research effort, during 

which a large amount of data on bridge condition and bridge performance will be collected for 

different groups of bridges across the United States. The activities of the LTBP Program will 

concentrate on the types of bridges most heavily represented in the U.S. bridge population.

Although the population of U.S. bridges is diverse, there are a few common bridge types that 

predominate and are likely to do so in the future. For example, multigirder bridges of steel, 

concrete, or prestressed concrete represent the most common bridge types, and focusing on their 

performance enables the LTBP Program to make the largest impact in the near- and mid-terms. 

The specific data to be collected will support experiments designed to study various issues 

related to bridge performance for these common bridge types. Depending on the specific 

experiment, data will be collected using a combination of document review, detailed visual 

inspection, sampling and testing of materials, nondestructive evaluation (NDE) testing, finite 

element modeling, structural testing, and long-term monitoring. These data collection efforts are 

designed to allow a series of guiding questions to be answered from existing documentation, if 

possible, and from field data collection efforts if necessary. 

At the program level, guiding questions were developed via consultations with key program 

stakeholders who helped identify several high-priority bridge performance issues.(1) The LTBP 

Program aims to address these guiding questions. However, on a per-bridge level, additional, 

more specific, guiding questions will be developed prior to data collection considering what is 

learned during the previsit activities. 

To maximize the quality and usefulness of the data, it is imperative that evaluations, data 

collection, testing, and reporting be implemented in a consistent manner regardless of where, 

when, and by whom they are conducted. To meet this need, the data collection processes, the 

units of measure, and the level of accuracy should be as consistent as possible. Therefore, a set of 

protocols that support the objectives of the LTBP Program have been developed. These protocols 

provide a set of step-by-step instructions governing all aspects of data collection, including 

planning, designing experiments, gathering bridge documentation from State transportation 

departments, extracting data, visual inspection, material testing, NDE testing, live load testing, 

instrumentation, logistics, safety, data reduction and processing, data interpretation, reporting 

results, data storage, archiving, and importing into the LTBP Program Bridge Portal. 

The LTBP Program protocols are for research purposes and intended primarily for use within the 

LTBP Program. The protocols have the following attributes:

 Quantitative in nature and avoid vague statements that may permit multiple 

interpretations.

 Mandatory language without unnecessary commentary that may cause confusion.

 Integrated through a robust structure that permits cross-referencing to avoid repetition.

 Reference existing and proven standards without repeating content, which would likely 

result in conflicts over time as the existing standards are updated.

3

CHAPTER 2. ORGANIZATION AND DESIGNATIONS OF THE LTBP PROGRAM 

PROTOCOLS

The LTBP Program protocols are organized into a hierarchy based on the chronology of a data 

collection effort for a single bridge: before a field visit, during a field visit, and after a field visit. 

This simple chronology was selected to make finding the required protocols intuitive for end 

users. The first three levels of the proposed hierarchy are shown in figure 1.

Figure 1. Illustration. LTBP Program Protocol Hierarchy.

The individual protocols that fall under each of the third-level groups are not shown for brevity. 

Following are brief descriptions of the primary and secondary levels and the kinds of protocols 

contained in the various groups. 
4

This first version of the LTBP Protocols report includes some or all of the protocols intended for 

some of the groups shown in figure 1. Subsequent versions of the report will include protocols 

added, moved, or deleted to meet the needs of the LTBP Program.

PREVISIT PROTOCOLS (PRE)

The PRE protocols focus on preparations and actions that occur prior to collecting data at the 

bridge. This group includes protocols that provide guidance on bridge selection; obtaining 

existing bridge documentation from State departments of transportation and extracting the data;

and preliminary planning and logistics for facilitating a safe and successful field data collection 

effort. The PRE protocols, such as those for traffic safety and personal safety equipment, are 

typical across multiple types of data collection. In other cases, information that varies between 

protocols, but is a common requirement, is collated in the previsit protocols. An example would 

be any personnel certification or experience requirements collected into a single protocol to 

facilitate updates in the future.

Sampling and Selection (SS)

The FHWA team is responsible for bridge selection and sampling, so these protocols are 

included as information resources for the persons responsible for data collection. This permits 

the team to understand the full process and ensures that, should the program expand and more 

bridges need to be selected, the knowledge is preserved, and the methods used for bridge 

selection can be repeated exactly.

Existing Documentation (ED)

The ED protocols address the information to be collected from bridge owners, dating back to the 

design and construction of the bridge, including data related to inspections, maintenance, and 

cost (when available). The ED protocol group also includes protocols detailing the execution of 

legacy data mining for specific performance issues—that is, identifying how the data can be used 

both before and after field testing to draw conclusions about a structure’s performance and the 

factors that have influenced it. Field data collection will not occur for all bridges selected for 

participation in the LTBP Program, and data collection efforts will stop after legacy data mining 

is completed. 

Equipment (EQ)

The EQ protocols cover equipment related to structural testing. Generally speaking, the EQ 

protocols include sensors and data acquisition systems, which are described in an overview 

protocol. There are specific protocols related to each type of structural testing, including truck 

testing, long-term monitoring, and vibration testing. The primary sensor types are described 

based on the measurement they are designed to collect, as opposed to specific sensor brands or 

types. The information in the EQ protocols is general in nature, and the information is not 

specific to brand or manufacturer. 
5

Preliminary Planning and Logistics (PL)

The protocols in this group cover all aspects of preparation for a field data collection effort, from 

personnel safety to the processes for maintenance and protection of traffic and site-specific 

requirements. The PL protocols address equipment-related issues such as sensor calibration and 

maintenance requirements. For each data collection type, a general test planning protocol is 

included that covers test-specific requirements, general field requirements, and heuristic-based 

advice needed to achieve successful field data collection. Protocols providing guidance on 

developing and using representative models are also included. 

FIELD VISIT PROTOCOLS (FLD)

The FLD protocols focus on the collection of research-quality data in a consistent manner to 

facilitate comparative analysis across structures and with time. While the protocols in this report 

address collecting both data and metadata for visual inspection, material testing, NDE testing, 

logistics and safety, and data storage, future versions of the LTBP Program’s protocols report 

will cover live load testing, short- and long-term monitoring, weigh-in-motion techniques, 

instrumentation, and importing the data into the LTBP Bridge Portal. 

Onsite Pretest Activities (OP)

This group of protocols provides guidance on segmenting, identifying, and labeling the various 

elements of a bridge so that the recorded findings of the field assessment and testing activities 

may be tied to specific elements and locations on the bridge. A convention for creating unique 

alphanumeric element identifiers for the various parts of the bridge is prescribed. In order to 

allow for the precise size and location of findings, a 2- by 2-ft grid with a defined origin is 

defined on the deck surface and local origins are described for the common elements of the 

bridge, such as girders, pier caps, and abutments.

Field Data Collection (DC)

The DC protocols make up the main portion of the protocols and cover data collection at the 

bridge. Methods of data collection included in this report are visual inspection, material 

sampling, and manual NDE testing. These protocols provide clear, step-by-step instructions for 

data collection, and comprehensive references for all standards cited in the protocols. The DC 

protocol group also includes protocols for documenting weather and traffic information during 

actual data collection, image capture (both still photography and videos), and names of the 

evaluators.

Data Storage (DS)

The DS protocols address the proper storage of raw data immediately after collection to ensure 

no repeat field efforts are required and that no data are lost. The critical timeframe covered by 

these data storage protocols spans between data collection and uploading to the LTBP Bridge 

Portal. The DS protocols also make provisions for loss of data by storing a second copy of the 

data at a remote location.
6

POSTVISIT PROTOCOLS (PST)

Protocols in the PST group focus on actions taken after the data are collected at the bridge and 

how the collected data are used to draw conclusions. These protocols include immediate data 

reduction, data validation, data interpretation, fusion and visualization of disparate of data, 

reporting data, and archiving integrated data into the LTBP Bridge Portal. PST protocols will be 

published in a later version of this report.

Data Reduction and Processing (DR)

Raw data, particularly quantitative data from structural testing or NDE, generally require error 

screening, postprocessing, and data reduction. Analogous protocols for material sampling and 

visual inspection are included as well. Consistency between data reduction and processing 

methods is critical to ensure comparisons of information from different modalities of data 

collection are reliable.

Data Interpretation (DI)

Data can be interpreted in many ways, including directly, comparatively, and through a model. 

The DI protocols identify the data interpretation methods and provide the steps to be taken to 

evaluate and interpret the data and metadata. The DI protocols also identify the relationships 

between data interpretation methods. 

Archiving and Reporting (AR)

The AR group of protocols focuses on consistency in reporting results as well as formatting data 

and metadata for inclusion in the Bridge Portal. Future protocols will address archiving the data 

and metadata.

PROTOCOL NAMING CONVENTION

The following LTBP Program protocol naming convention was adopted to allow easy 

identification and future expansion:

XXX-YY-ZZ[Z]-###

where:

XXX = Stage of data collection (PRE, FLD, or PST).

YY = Subcategory under the stage describing the research activity or focus (e.g., ED = Existing 

Documentation).

ZZ[Z] = Identifier to distinguish further between data collection methods; note some protocols 

may have a third letter identifier.

### = Number assigned sequentially from 001 to 999.
7

CHAPTER 3. HOW TO USE THE LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOLS

The LTBP Program protocols are written to be implemented by various end users. The typical 

use case coincides with the simple chronology of the protocol hierarchy, beginning with the 

previsit activities; followed by the field assessment, testing, and data collection; and finally the 

postvisit data management. As an example, consider the following use case:

The person responsible for planning and logistics uses the PRE protocols to ensure that all 

requisite data from the bridge owner have been collected. From this data, the user extracts the 

critical physical attributes of the structure and conceptualizes what the onsite situation will be. If 

possible, the user will conduct a brief site visit to address any logistical concerns he or she may 

have based on documentation. Based on the site visit, the user will create a schedule for onsite 

data collection, encompassing the design of any structural testing, the intended distribution of 

material sampling locations, and the logistics required to conduct these investigative activities, as 

well as visual inspection and NDE in a timely, safe, and efficient fashion. These planning 

activities are some of the most important tasks in the LTBP Program, and without exception, are 

a task that requires clear, concise guidance from the protocols, as well as experienced, 

knowledgeable staff who can interpret and apply the protocols properly in many situations.

The field data collection effort is completed by as many users as required to amass the 

appropriate skillsets. The users perform various data collection tasks as described by the field 

data collection protocols. The person (or persons) responsible for data collection needs the 

required certifications described in the previsit protocols and a working knowledge of the types 

of data collection efforts they are leading. The protocols provide a uniform set of guidelines, 

decisions, and consistent references to other resources to guide the personnel performing data 

collection. These activities are overseen by the person who designed the data collection effort, 

who remains responsible for ensuring the protocols are enacted properly and the data are 

appropriately stored. 

The final step of the process involves processing, interpreting, reporting, and archiving the 

collected data. Note that while the protocols will provide information and guidance in a clear and 

repeatable manner, this portion of the process has an element of creativity to it. To some extent, 

this is true for all phases of a data collection effort, which is why identifying appropriate 

personnel is critical.

9

CHAPTER 4. LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOL CONTENT

PROTOCOL SECTIONS

Each of the LTBP Program protocols is organized into the following sections to provide 

information related to the data collection method being described: 

Data Collected: Includes the bridge characteristic, condition, or defect about which data are to 

be collected, if applicable.

Onsite Equipment and Personnel Requirements: Lists equipment to be used in the data 

collection. The requirements also include references to safety and personnel qualification 

requirements.

Methodology: Describes how tests are to be conducted for the purposes of the LTBP Program, 

with references to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials 

(AASHTO) and/or the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications, as 

appropriate. The methodology also gives a detailed description of how to take measurements of 

defects.

Data Collection Table: Guides what data and how the data have to be reported, with a key 

defining fields and colors. See Row Color Key for further details.

Criteria for Data Validation: Provides methods for determining if the data being collected are 

valid; this can vary based on the type of data being collected and the method of data collection.

Commentary/Background: Includes the following, as appropriate:

 A brief discussion of the purpose of the protocol.

 A brief description of the process leading to the condition being evaluated.

 The principle behind the data collection.

 Supplementary notes explaining the data collection process.

 Definitions of some terms or processes.

 Other general notes.

References: Refers to certain overarching protocols to keep data collection consistent and may 

also include references to external sources, such as AASHTO, ASTM, or FHWA standards. 

Unless it is necessary for LTBP Program research purposes, the protocols for visual, hands-on 

evaluation of bridge elements are consistent with the bridge inspection guidance in the latest 

version of FHWA’s Bridge Inspector Reference Manual (BIRM) dated 2012. Unless otherwise 

defined in the text of the protocols, the bridge terminology used in the LTBP Program protocols 

for visual inspection is consistent with the definitions in the glossary to BIRM 2012. 
10

TYPICAL LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOL DATA COLLECTION TABLE

Each LTBP Program protocol contains a table describing the manner in which data are to be 

collected. Table 1 illustrates the format of the LTBP Program data collection tables. Table 2 

defines the types of information contained in each column and the colors of each row.

Table 1. Sample LTBP Program Protocol Data Collection Table.

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Location of defect: unique 

element identifier Text

Record the unique element 

identifier of the element being 

evaluated for defects (for 

example, deck, abutment A, 

girder 2B, etc.)

Blue

9 Location of defect: element Text

Describe the location of the 

defect on the bridge element 

(e.g., span number, lane 

number, shoulder, substructure 

unit, backwall of abutment, web 

of prestressed concrete girder, 

etc.)

Blue

10 Type of defect Predefined 

list

Crack

Spall

Delaminations

Other (specify in the 

comments)

Blue

11 Defect location 1 Number 1 in. For example: x-coordinate of a 

point on the defect Yellow

12 Defect location 2 Number 1 in. For example: y-coordinate of a 

point on the defect Yellow

13 Defect measurement 1 Number 0.5 in. For example: length of the 

defect Yellow

14 Defect measurement 1 Number 0.1 in. For example: width of the 

defect Yellow

15 Defect measurement 1 Number 0.1 in. For example: depth of the 

defect Yellow

16 Defect photos BLOB

If defects are present, 

document typical defects with 

photos and/or sketches

Yellow

17 Comments Text Orange
11

Table 2. LTBP Program Protocol Data Collection Table Key.

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data or list of items in a predefined list

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

In table 1, the green items serve to identify the bridge being evaluated, the protocol being 

followed, the person(s) conducting the tests and collecting the data, and the date of the

evaluation (or data collection). The items shaded in blue provide information on the element of 

the bridge where the test is being performed and/or the distinct defect being measured and 

recorded. The items shaded in yellow are the data items being collected for each element/defect 

listed. During a typical assessment, on a bridge with multiples of the same element (such as a 

bridge with six girders), data items in yellow will be recorded in sequence and then the sequence 

repeated for each individual element or distinct defect until all elements have been evaluated 

under the relevant protocol. The orange row provides space for any relevant comments the 

researchers deem necessary to support the data being collected.

DATA IMPORT

While each research team investigating LTBP Program bridges may use different tools to collect 

the data (such as collecting the data manually or via computer), all teams must provide data for 

import to the LTBP Program Bridge Portal in an identical format.

13

CHAPTER 5. PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLICATION PLAN

The LTBP protocols are intended to be living documents, growing as the program progresses. 

The framework hierarchy presented allows for this growth. The publication of the protocols will 

be in stages. Though the exact frequency of issuing additional versions is not yet established, the 

LTBP Program will issue periodic updates, which will include additional protocols and changes 

to previously published protocols. When possible, between major releases, additions and changes 

will be posted on the LTBP Web site. 

The first publication covers the following subject areas (table 3):

 Bridge documentation.

 Legacy data mining.

 Planning and logistics.

 Onsite pretest activities.

 Spatial context.

 Photography.

 Material sampling.

 Nondestructive evaluation.

 Visual inspection.

 Data storage.

Table 3. Index of Version 1 LTBP Program Protocols.

Primary 

Group

Secondary 

Group Tertiary Group # Protocol Name

PRE

ED (Existing 

Documentation)

BD (Bridge 

Documentation)

001 Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design 

and Construction

002 Bridge Construction Records

003 Bridge Design and Construction Cost Data

004 Bridge Site Conditions 

005 Bridge Inspection Records

006 Bridge Maintenance Records and Cost 

Data

007 Calculations of Bridge Ratings

LD (Legacy 

Data Mining) 001 Legacy Data Mining for Untreated Bridge Decks

PL (Preliminary 

Planning and

Logistics)

LO (Logistics)

001 Reference Bridge Testing

002 Cluster Bridge Testing

003 Traffic Control, Maintenance and Protection 

of Traffic (MPT), and Permits

004 Personal Health and Safety Plan 

005 Personnel Qualifications

006 Power and Network Requirements

007 Communication and Coordination Plan
14

Primary 

Group

Secondary 

Group Tertiary Group # Protocol Name

FLD

OP (Onsite

Pretest 

Activities)

SP (Site 

Preparedness)

001 Site Preparation

SC (Spatial

Context)

001 Data Collection Grid and Coordinate 

System for Bridge Decks

002 Structure Segmentation and Element 

Identification System

003 Determination of Local Origins for 

Elements

DC (Field Data 

Collection)

PH

(Photography)

001 Photography Equipment Requirements

002 Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes

003 Image Naming

MS (Material 

Sampling)

001 Wet Coring of Concrete Decks

002 Compressive Strength and Static and 

Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Concrete Cores

003 Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion 

Penetration (Permeability)

004 Sampling and Testing for Chloride Profiles

NDE

(Nondestructive 

Evaluation)

001 Electrical Resistivity Testing

002 Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for 

Bridge Decks

003 Half-Cell Potential Testing

004 Impact Echo Testing

005 Linear Polarization Resistance Testing

006 Dye Penetrant Testing

007 Ultrasonic Surface Wave Testing—

Concrete

008 Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking

VIS (Visual 

Inspection—

Steel Elements)

001 Steel Superstructure Deterioration

002 Steel Superstructure—Corrosion

003 Steel Superstructure—Section Loss

004

Steel Superstructure—Cracking, 

Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage

VIC (Visual 

Inspection—

Concrete Bridge 

Elements)

001 Concrete Deterioration

002 Concrete Substructure Condition 

Assessment

003 Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination

004 Concrete Superstructure and 

Substructure—Spalls and Delamination

005 Concrete—Cracking

006 Concrete—Abrasion

007 Concrete—Sulfate Attack

VIB (Visual 

Inspection—

Bearings)

001 Elastomeric Bearings

002 Rocker Bearings

VIJ (Visual 

Inspection—

Joints)

001 Drainage System on Bridge Decks and 

Approach Slabs

002 Expansion Joints

DS (Data 

Storage)

LS (Local

Storage) 001 Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local

RS (Remote 

Storage) 001

Data, Document, and Image Storage—

Remote
15

Future versions of this report will cover the following topics, but may not be limited to these 

additions: 

 Finite element modeling.

 Automated NDE.

 Instrumentation (sensors).

 Data acquisition systems.

 Structural testing.

 Structural monitoring.

 Data reduction, processing, and analysis. 

SUMMARY

The bridges studied in the LTBP Program will undergo an initial round of evaluation, testing, 

and material characterization to establish baseline knowledge of the bridges’ condition and 

behavior. Over time, these bridges will be reevaluated and retested, and the changes in values of 

the data collected will be used to document and analyze various aspects of the performance of 

bridges. 

The overarching goal of the protocols is to ensure LTBP data are collected using scientifically 

sound methods that are applied uniformly regardless of when, where, or by whom the data are 

collected and then to ensure that the data collected are reduced and accessible within the LTBP 

Program Bridge Portal where it can be confidently used by LTBP Program researchers and 

others for years to come to better understand bridge performance. Given this, the protocols are 

more than a document that provides instructions for implementing various data collection 

techniques in a consistent manner. The LTBP Program protocols represent a comprehensive and 

continuous documentation of the entire LTBP Program, from selecting a structure, through onsite 

data collection, and ultimately answering the guiding questions associated with the top 

performance issues identified by the stakeholders.

This report includes the first version of the LTBP Program protocols for documentation of legacy 

data, onsite pretest activities, visual inspection, sampling and testing of concrete materials, 

nondestructive testing of bridge elements, and data storage. As the program proceeds, additional 

protocols will be developed to cover other activities necessary for data collection, management, 

processing, and analysis. Also, as the LTBP Program goes forward, experience may lead to

improvements in the way the protocols are written and applied. Proper care will be taken to 

ensure that future changes in the protocols do not invalidate data collected using previous 

versions.
16
17

REFERENCES

1. FHWA, Long-Term Bridge Performance High Priority Bridge Performance Issues, 

Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HRT-14-052, Washington, DC, 2014.

19 

LTBP PROGRAM PROTOCOLS

21 

PREVISIT PROTOCOLS (PRE) 

EXISTING DOCUMENTATION (ED) 

BRIDGE DOCUMENTATION (BD) 

LEGACY DATA MINING (LD) 

PRELIMINARY PLANNING AND LOGISTICS (PL) 

LOGISTICS (LO) 
BRIDGE DOCUMENTATION PROTOCOLS (BD) 

PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction 

PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records 

PRE-ED-BD-003, Bridge Design and Construction Cost Data 

PRE-ED-BD-004, Bridge Site Conditions 

PRE-ED-BD-005, Bridge Inspection Records 

PRE-ED-BD-006, Bridge Maintenance Records and Cost Data 

PRE-ED-BD-007, Calculation of Bridge Ratings 
1 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR 

BRIDGE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Bridge design and construction parameters and specifications.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the appropriate branches and personnel from State departments of transportation to 

obtain all of the following, if available, for each bridge in the Long-Term Bridge Performance 

(LTBP) Program:

3.1.1 Original bridge design plans.

3.1.2 Shop drawings.

3.1.3 As-built plans.

3.1.4 Any State design specifications, current at the time of the design of the bridge, which applied to 

the bridge.

3.1.5 Any material and/or construction specifications, current at the time of construction, which applied 

to the bridge.

3.1.6 Special provisions.

3.1.7 Foundation design report.

3.1.8 Soils report.

3.1.9 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Bridge Design 

Specification governing at the time of design.

3.1.10 AASHTO Bridge Construction Specification governing at the time of construction.

3.2 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the LTBP Bridge Portal.
2 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

3.3 Extract the following types of data from the documents obtained in section 3.1. If appropriate, use 

the unique element identifiers (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element 

Identification System) to identify the specific element(s) to which the data apply.

3.3.1 General structure details (data collection table items 8–33).

3.3.2 Approach slab details (data collection table items 34–40).

3.3.3 Approach span details (data collection table items 41–46).

3.3.4 Span details (data collection table items 47–54).

3.3.5 Deck drainage details (data collection table items 55–58).

3.3.6 Deck details (data collection table items 59–115).

3.3.7 General girder details (data collection table items 116–133).

3.3.8 Steel girder details (data collection table items 134–164).

3.3.9 Concrete girder details (data collection table items 165–200).

3.3.10 Pretensioned concrete girder details (data collection table items 201–213).

3.3.11 Posttensioned concrete girder details (data collection table items 214–232).

3.3.12 Bearing details (data collection table items 233–236).

3.3.13 Joint and railing details (data collection table items 237–243).

3.3.14 Abutment, pier, and wingwall concrete and reinforcement details (data collection table items

244–327).

3.3.15 Substructure footing concrete and reinforcement details (data collection table items 328–353).

3.3.16 Abutment, pier, and wingwall, foundation details (data collection table items 354–388).

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP 

Bridge Portal.
3 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number, 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date data collection 

completed Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

GENERAL STRUCTURE DETAILS Pink

8 Year design completed Text Exact year yyyy Green

9 Year construction started Text Exact year yyyy Green

10 Year construction finished Text Exact year yyyy Green

11 Year open to traffic Text Exact year yyyy Green

12 Year of bridge widening Text Exact year yyyy; “0000” if none Green

13 Year of deck replacement Text Exact year yyyy; “0000” if none Green

14 AASHTO bridge design spec 

for year designed Text Green

15 AASHTO bridge construction 

spec for year constructed Text yyyy; Year construction began Green

16 Total length of bridge Number 0.1 ft Green

17 Total width of bridge Number 0.1 ft Green

18 Skew angle Number 0.1 degree Green

19 Degree of curvature Number 0.1 degree Green

20 Is bridge part of twin spans?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Green

21 Is bridge fracture critical?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Green

22 Number of spans Number Green

23 Type of foundation Predefined 

list

Pile or drilled shaft 

foundation

Spread footing

Unknown foundation

Green

24 Original bridge design plans BLOB Green

25 Shop drawings BLOB Green

26 As-built plans BLOB Green

27 State design specifications BLOB In effect at the time of 

bridge design Green

28

State materials specifications

BLOB

In effect at the time of 

bridge design and 

construction

Green

29 State construction 

specifications BLOB In effect at the time of bridge construction Green
4 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

30

Special provisions for the 

design or construction of the 

bridge

BLOB Green

31 Foundation design report BLOB Green

32 Soils report BLOB Green

33 Comments Text Orange

APPROACH SLAB DETAILS Pink

34 Abutment unique element 

identifier Text

Provide data in rows 35–40 

for slabs at abutments AA 

and AB

Blue

35 Span number at abutment Text Span 1 for abutment A; 

span N for abutment B Yellow

36 Approach slab type, materials, 

and dimensions Text Yellow

37 Method of connection of 

approach slab to structure Text Yellow

38 Approach slab overlay, type Text Yellow

39

Does approach slab width 

match bridge width (lanes and

shoulders)?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

40 Comments Text Orange

APPROACH SPAN DETAILS Pink

41 Abutment unique element 

identifier Text Abutment A or abutment B Blue

42 Total number of approach 

spans

Number

Total number of approach 

spans at abutment A or 

abutment B

Yellow

43 Span number Text e.g., span 1, span 2, etc. Blue

44 Type of superstructure Text

e.g., rolled steel beam, 

AASHTO prestressed 

beam, etc.

Yellow

45 Length of approach span Number

Number and lengths of 

approach spans of the type 

noted

Yellow

46 Comments Text Orange

SPAN DETAILS Pink

47 Span unique element 

identifier Text Provide data in rows 48–54 for each individual span Blue

48 Span length Number 0.1 ft Yellow

49 Straight span Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

50 Simple span Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

51 Continuous span Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

52 End span Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

53 Fracture critical span Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

54 Comments Text Orange
5 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

DECK DRAINAGE DETAILS Pink

55 Span unique element 

identifier Text Provide data in rows 56–58 for each drain in each span Blue

56 Deck drain (scupper) size—

length, width Number 0.1 ft Length, width Yellow

57 Deck drain (scupper) location

(x,y)

Number 0.1 ft Coordinates of drain center Yellow

58 Comments Text Orange

DECK DETAILS Pink

59 Span unique element 

identifier Text

Provide data from rows 60–

114 for span 1 only; 

confirm in comments that 

data from all other spans 

are the same

Blue

60 Deck material Predefined 

list

Concrete

Timber

Steel grid

Yellow

61 Wearing surface type Text If applicable Yellow

62 Wearing surface, date of 

application Text Month and year

mm/yyyy, if applicable Yellow

63 Wearing surface thickness Number 0.25 in. If applicable Yellow

64 State deck concrete mix 

designation Text e.g., VAA4 Yellow

65 Concrete deck mix design

type

Predefined 

list

Performance-based

Amounts specified

Hybrid

Yellow

66 Concrete deck—cement type Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

67 Concrete deck—cement 

quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

68 Fly ash type Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

69 Fly ash quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

70 Silica fume quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

71 Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

72 Fine aggregate quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

73

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in. Yellow

74 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

75 Water quantity Number 1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

76 Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

77 Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

78

High-range water-reducing 

(Superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

79 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

80 Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

81 Shrinkage reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

82 Specified deck water-cement Number 0.01 Yellow
6 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

(w/c) ratio

83 Specified deck air content Number 0.5 % Yellow

84 Specified deck unit weight Number 1 pcf Yellow

85 Type of deck aggregate, sizes 

and gradation Text Yellow

86 Specified deck 28-day design 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

87 Actual deck 28-day design 

strength (by cylinder breaks) Number 50 psi Yellow

88 Deck thickness Number 0.25 in. Yellow

89 Specified deck top clear cover Number 0.25 in. Yellow

90 Specified deck bottom clear 

cover

Number 0.25 in. Yellow

91 Deck reinforcement spec Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

92 Deck reinforcement grade Text e.g., grade 60 Yellow

93 Top reinforcement mat Predefined 

list

Mild black steel

Mild steel epoxy coated

Stainless steel

MMFX

Galvanized

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

94 Bottom reinforcement mat Predefined 

list

Mild black steel

Mild steel epoxy coated

Stainless steel

MMFX

Galvanized

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

95

Is top layer of top mat of 

reinforcement transverse or 

longitudinal?

Predefined 

list Transverse or Longitudinal Yellow

96 Top longitudinal bar size Predefined 

list #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, or #9 Yellow

97 Top longitudinal bar spacing Number 0.25 in. Yellow

98 Top transverse top bar size Predefined 

list #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, or #9 Yellow

99 Top transverse top bar 

spacing Number 0.25 in. Yellow

100 Bottom longitudinal bar size Predefined 

list #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, or #9 Yellow

101 Bottom longitudinal bar 

spacing Number 0.25 in. Yellow

102 Bottom transverse bar size Predefined 

list #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, or #9 Yellow

103

Bottom transverse bar 

spacing Number 0.25 in. Yellow

104 Truss bars used Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

105 Truss bar size Predefined 

list #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, or #9 Yellow

106 Average truss bar spacing Number 0.25 in. Enter 0 if unused Yellow

107

Direction of transverse 

reinforcement in middle of 

skewed bridge

Predefined 

list

Parallel to skew

Perpendicular to girder Yellow

108 Direction of transverse Predefined Parallel to skew Yellow
7 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

reinforcement near end of 

skewed bridge 

list Fanned with origin in acute 

corner

Fanned with origin in 

obtuse corner

109 Roadway slope type Predefined 

list

Transverse single slope

Transverse crowned Yellow

110 Minimum transverse deck 

slope Number 0.1 % Yellow

111 Stay-in-place forms Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

112 Type of stay-in-place forms Text e.g., timber, metal, precast 

concrete subdeck panel Yellow

113 Coating on stay-in-place 

forms e.g., galvanizing Yellow

114 Composite deck Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

115 Comments Text Orange

GENERAL GIRDER DETAILS Pink

116 Do all girders have the same 

general details? Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 117–133 for 

one typical girder.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 117–133 for one 

typical girder plus data 

for each girder with 

differing data.

Green

117 Girder unique element 

identifier(s) Text Blue

118 Type of shear studs Text Yellow

119 Shear stud spacing Number 0.25 in. Yellow

120 End diaphragm type Predefined 

list

K or X frame

Single channel, Box, or Ibeam

Solid cast concrete

Yellow

121 Intermediate diaphragm type Predefined 

list

K or X frame

Single channel, Box, or Ibeam

Solid cast concrete

Yellow

122 Girder material Predefined 

list

Steel

Reinforced concrete

Prestressed concrete

Yellow

123 Average intermediate 

diaphragm spacing Number 1 ft “0” if none Yellow

124 Girder type Predefined 

list

Standard rolled beam 

(steel)

AASHTO/PCI shape 

(prestressed concrete)

Custom section

Variable size section

Curved

Straight

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

125 Number of girders Number Yellow

126 Girder spacing Number 0.1 ft Distance between 

centerlines of the webs Yellow

127 Maximum girder depth Number 0.1 ft Yellow
8 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

128 Maximum girder depth

location Number 0.1 ft Yellow

129 Average deck haunch Number 0.1 in. Yellow

130 Design value for camber at 

mid-span

Number 0.1 in.

Beam weight and all dead 

load; check design plans or 

shop drawings

Yellow

131 Actual value for camber at 

midspan Number 0.1 in. Check as-built plans or construction notes Yellow

132 Variable depth or prismatic 

girder

Predefined 

list

Variable depth or prismatic 

girder Yellow

133 Comments Text Orange

STEEL GIRDER DETAILS Pink

134 Do all steel girders have the 

same details? Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 135–151 for 

one typical girder.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 135–151 for one 

typical girder plus data 

for each girder with 

differing data.

Green

135 Girder unique element 

identifier(s) Text Blue

136 AASHTO/ASTM designation 

for steel in girder Text e.g., ASTM A36 Yellow

137 Steel yield strength Number 1 ksi Yellow

138 Steel composition Text

Type and percentage of 

constituent 

materials/elements

Yellow

139 Steel toughness Number 1 ft-lb Charpy V-notch toughness, 

ASTM E23 Yellow

140 Steel girder type Predefined 

list

Rolled section

Rolled section with bottom 

cover plate

Rolled section with top 

cover plate

Rolled section with top and 

bottom cover plates

Welded plate section

Combination

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

141 Steel girder unit weight Number 1 lb/lf Yellow

142 Intermediate vertical stiffeners Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

143 Longitudinal stiffeners Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

144 Coating type/corrosion 

protection system

Predefined 

list

Weathering steel

Coating overtop of 

weathering steel at 

girder ends

Inorganic zinc primer

Organic zinc primer

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

145 Coats of paint Number Exact 

number Yellow

146 Thickness of primer Number 1 mil Yellow
9 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

147 Thickness of second coat Number 1 Yellow

148 Thickness of third coat Number 1 Yellow

149 Year coated Text Exact year yyyy Yellow

150 Color of topcoat Text Yellow

151 Comments Text Orange

SECONDARY STEEL MEMBER DETAILS Pink

152 End diaphragms Text

Indicate substructure unit: 

abutment A, abutment B, or 

pier P_

Blue

153 Description of location of 

centerline of diaphragm Text

For abutments: over 

centerline of abutment 

bearings;

For continuous spans at 

pier P_: over centerline of 

pier bearings;

for simple spans at pier P_: 

over centerline of pier 

bearings for span _

Yellow

154 Diaphragm member size Text e.g., “C15x33.9”” Yellow

155

Dimensions of vertical bearing 

stiffener/diaphragm to web 

connector

Number 0.0625 in. Record length, width, and 

thickness Yellow

156

Intermediate diaphragm(s)—

description of location along 

girder

e.g., “spaced at 20’, typical 

4 bays” Blue

157 Diaphragm member size Text e.g., “3 L4x3x3/8, 1 

L5x5x3” Yellow

158

Dimensions of vertical bearing 

stiffener/diaphragm to web 

connector

Number 0.0625 in. Record length, width, and 

thickness Yellow

159

Additional intermediate 

vertical stiffener(s)—

description of location along 

girder location

Text

e.g., “spaced at 4’, 

alternate on each side of 

web”

Blue

160 Dimensions of vertical 

stiffener Number 0.0625 in. Record length, width, and thickness Yellow

161

Horizontal stiffener—

description of position on 

girder

Text e.g., “1’ from top flange” Blue

162 Dimensions of horizontal 

stiffener Number 0.0625 in. Record length, width, and thickness Yellow

163 Fatigue details Predefined 

list

None

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

A

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

B

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

C

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

D

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

E

AASHTO Fatigue Category 

F or above

Yellow

164 Comments Text Orange
10 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

CONCRETE GIRDER DETAILS Pink

165 Do all concrete girders have 

the same details? Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 166–200 for 

one typical girder.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 166–200 for one 

typical girder plus data 

for each girder with 

differing data.

Green

166 Girder unique element 

identifier(s) Text Blue

167 W/C ratio (spec) Number 0.01 Yellow

168 Air content (spec) Number 0.1 % Yellow

169 Unit weight (spec) Number 1 pcf Yellow

170 Mix design Predefined 

list

Performance-based

Amounts specified

Hybrid

Yellow

171 Cement type

Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

172 Cement quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

173 Fly ash type

Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

174 Fly ash quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

175 Silica fume quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

176 Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

177 Fine aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

178

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in Yellow

179 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

180 Water quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

181 Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

182 Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

183

High-range water-reducing 

(superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

184 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

185 Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

186 Shrinkage reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

187 Design compressive strength 

at detensioning/ tensioning Number 50 psi Yellow

188 Design compressive strength 

at 28 days Number 50 psi Yellow

189 Girder design strength (spec) Number 50 psi Yellow

190 Mild steel reinforcement—

Spec Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

191 Mild steel reinforcement—

Grade Text e.g., grade 60 Yellow

192 Mild steel reinforcement—

Yield strength Number 50 psi Yellow
11 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

193 Mild steel stirrups—Spec Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

194 Mild steel stirrups—Grade Text e.g., grade 60 Yellow

195 Mild steel stirrups—Yield 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

196 Prestressing steel 

reinforcement—Type

Text Yellow

197 Prestressing steel 

reinforcement—Spec

Text e.g., ASTM A705 Yellow

198 Prestressing steel 

reinforcement—Yield strength Number 50 ksi Yellow

199

Prestressing steel 

reinforcement—Ultimate 

strength

Number 50 ksi Yellow

200 Comments Text Orange

PRETENSIONED CONCRETE GIRDER DETAILS Pink

201

Do all pretensioned concrete 

girders have the same 

details?

Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 202–213 for 

one typical girder.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 202–213 for one 

typical girder plus data 

for each girder with 

differing data.

Green

202 Girder unique element 

identifier Text Blue

203 Number of strands per tendon Number 1 Yellow

204 Strand pattern Text Yellow

205 Debonded strands Text Yellow

206 Length of debonding Number 1 in. Yellow

207 Location of tendons in crosssection BLOB Elevation and crosssectional views Yellow

208 Number of harped strands Number 1 Yellow

209 Point of harp Text Yellow

210 Prestress force after losses Number 1 kips Yellow

211 Confinement reinforcement in 

bottom flange Text Yellow

212 Number of stirrups, location, 

and spacing Text Yellow

213 Comments Text Orange

POSTTENSIONED CONCRETE GIRDER DETAILS Pink

214

Do all posttensioned concrete 

girders have the same 

details?

Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 215–232 for 

one typical girder.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 215–232for one 

typical girder plus data 

for each girder with 

differing data.

Green

215 Girder unique element 

identifier Text Blue

216 Numberofstrands pertendon Number Yellow

217 Strand pattern Predefined 

list Straight or draped Yellow

218 Number of external tendons Number Yellow
12 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

219 Number of internal tendons Number Yellow

220 Location of tendons in 

cross-section BLOB Elevation and crosssectional views Yellow

221 Prestress force after losses Number 1 kips Yellow

222 Confinement reinforcement in 

bottom flange Text Yellow

223 Number of stirrups, location, 

and spacing Text Yellow

224 Grout type Text Yellow

225 Grout manufacturer Text Yellow

226 Grout amount Text Yellow

227 Grout mix design Text Yellow

228 Grout constituent material 

types Text Yellow

229 Duct type Text Yellow

230 Duct manufacturer Text Yellow

231 General girder type Predefined 

list

AASHTO standard type 

pretensioned concrete Igirder (1 through 6)

Adjacent pretensioned 

concrete box girder

Spread pretensioned 

concrete box girder

Cast-in-place 

posttensioned concrete 

box girder

AASHTO/PCI standard 

pretensioned concrete 

bulb-tee girder

Pretensioned concrete 

decked bulb-tee girder 

(deck is precast onto the 

precast pretensioned 

girder)

State standard section 

pretensioned concrete 

girder (example: 

Washington State bulbtee, Florida bulb-tee,

Texas U-Beam)

Reinforced concrete voided 

slab

Reinforced concrete solid 

slab

Reinforced concrete Tbeam

Segmental concrete girder

Concrete spliced girder

Other or combination

(specify in comments)

Yellow

232 Comments Text Orange

BEARING DETAILS Pink

233 Do all bearings have the 

same general details? Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

following data for one 

typical bearing.

No. If no, provide the 

Green
13 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

following data for one 

typical bearing plus data 

for each bearing with 

differing data.

234 Bearing unique element 

identifier Text Blue

235 Bearing type

Predefined 

list

Sliding plate: Lubricated 

steel

Sliding plate: Lead between 

steel plates

Sliding plate: Bronze 

bearing plates

Sliding plate: Selflubricating bronze 

bearings

Sliding plate:

Polytetrafluoroethylene

on stainless steel plates

Roller bearing

Rocker bearing (no pin)

Pinned rocker bearing

Moveable elastomeric 

bearing w/ plain 

neoprene pad

Moveable elastomeric 

bearing w/ laminated 

neoprene pad

Moveable neoprene pot 

bearing

Moveable spherical pot 

bearing

Fixed neoprene pot bearing 

(no movement allowed)

Moveable disc bearing

Fixed disc bearing

Isolation bearing

Semi-integral abutment

Integral abutment

Other (specify in 

comments)

Yellow

236 Comments Text Orange

JOINT AND RAILING DETAILS Pink

237 Do all joints have the same 

general details? Text

Yes. If yes, provide the 

data in rows 238–243 for 

one typical joint.

No. If no, provide the data 

in rows 238–243for one 

typical joint plus data for 

each joint with differing 

data.

Green

238 Joint unique element identifier Text Blue

239 Expansion joint type and 

material

Predefined 

list

Jointless

Strip seal expansion joint

Pourable joint seal

Compression joint seal 

(neoprene in a 

honeycomb)

Cellular seal (solid-cell 

Yellow
14 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

foam)

Modular (hollow neoprene 

blocks connected with 

steel)

Plan seal

Sheet seal

Asphaltic expansion joint

Finger plate joint

Sliding plate joint

Open expansion joint

Other (specify in 

comments)

240 Barrier type Text

e.g., standard Jersey 

shape, Texas shape for 

trucks

Yellow

241 Barrier material Predefined 

list

Concrete

Steel

Other (specify in 

Comments)

Yellow

242 Deck-to-barrier connection Predefined 

list

Reinforcement

Grouted mechanical 

connection

Through bolts

Other (specify in 

comments)

Unknown

Yellow

243 Comments Text Orange

ABUTMENT WALLS—CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT DETAILS Pink

244 Clear cover Number 0.25 in. Yellow

245 Reinforcement specification Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

246 Reinforcement grade Text e.g., 60 Yellow

247 Confinement reinforcement Text Type, alignment, spacing Yellow

248 Substructure mix designs Predefined

list

Performance based

Amounts specified

Hybrid

Yellow

249 Cement type

Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

250 Cement quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

251 Fly ash type

Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

252 Fly ash quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

253 Silica fume quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

254 Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

255 Fine aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

256

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in Yellow

257 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

258 Water quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

259 Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

260 Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow
15 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

261

High-range water-reducing 

(superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

262 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

263 Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd

3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

264 Shrinkage reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

265 W/C ratio (spec) Number 0.01 Yellow

266 Air content (spec) Number 0.1 % Yellow

267 Unit weight (spec) Number 1 pcf Yellow

268 Admixtures used Text Yellow

269 Aggregate types and sizes Text Gradation Yellow

270 (Design) 28-day concrete 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

271 Comments Text Orange

PIER COLUMNS AND PIER CAPS—CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT DETAILS Pink

272

Are the pier concrete and 

reinforcement details identical 

to the abutment walls?

Predefined 

list

Yes. If yes, note this in the 

comments in row 299, 

and do not fill in rows 

272–298.

No. If no, fill in the details in 

rows 272–298 for a 

typical pier.

Blue

273 Clear cover Number 0.25 in. Yellow

274 Reinforcement specification Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

275 Reinforcement grade Text e.g., 60 Yellow

276 Confinement reinforcement Text Type, alignment, spacing Yellow

277 Substructure mix designs

Predefined 

list

Performance based

Amounts specified

Hybrid

Yellow

278 Cement type

Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

279 Cement quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

280 Fly ash type

Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

281 Fly ash quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

282 Silica fume quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

283 Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

284 Fine aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

285

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in Yellow

286 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

287 Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

288 Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

289

High-range water-reducing 

(superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

290 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow
16 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

291 Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

292 Shrinkage reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

293 W/C ratio (spec) Number 0.01 Yellow

294 Air content (spec) Number 0.1 % Yellow

295 Unit weight (spec) Number 1 pcf Yellow

296 Admixtures used Text Yellow

297 Aggregate types and sizes Text Gradation Yellow

298 (Design) 28-day concrete 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

299 Comments Text Orange

WINGWALLS—CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT DETAILS Pink

300

Are the wingwall concrete and 

reinforcement details identical 

to the abutment walls?

Predefined 

list

Yes. If yes, note this in the 

comments in row 327 

and do not fill in rows 

300–326.

No. If no, fill in the details in 

rows 300–326 for a 

typical wingwall.

Blue

301 Clear cover Number 0.25 in. Yellow

302 Reinforcement specification Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

303 Reinforcement grade Text e.g., 60 Yellow

304 Confinement reinforcement Text Type, alignment, spacing Yellow

305 Substructure mix designs Predefined 

list

Performance-based,

Amounts specified, or 

Hybrid

Yellow

306 Cement type

Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

307 Cement quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

308 Fly ash type

Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

309 Fly ash quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

310 Silica fume quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

311 Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

312 Fine aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

313

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in. Yellow

314 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

315 Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

316 Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

317

High-range water-reducing 

(superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

318 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

319 Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

320 Shrinkage reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow
17 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

321 W/C ratio (spec) Number 0.01 Yellow

322 Air content (spec) Number 0.1 % Yellow

323 Unit weight (spec) Number 1 pcf Yellow

324 Admixtures used Text Yellow

325 Aggregate types and sizes Text Gradation Yellow

326 (Design) 28-day concrete 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

327 Comments Text Orange

SUBSTRUCTURE FOOTINGS—CONCRETE AND REINFORCEMENT DETAILS Pink

328 Clear cover Number 0.25 in. Yellow

329 Reinforcement specification Text e.g., ASTM A466 Yellow

330 Substructure mix designs Predefined 

list

Performance based

Amounts specified

Hybrid

Yellow

331 Cement type

Predefined 

list I, II, III, IV, or V Yellow

332 Cement quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

333 Fly ash type

Predefined 

list Type C or Type F Yellow

334 Fly ash quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

335 Silica fume quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

336

Ground granulated blast 

furnace slag quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

337 Fine aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

338

Maximum size of coarse 

aggregate allowed by the 

State

Number 0.25 in Yellow

339 Coarse aggregate quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

340 Water quantity Number 0.1 lb/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

341

Air entrainment admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

342

Water-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

343

High-range water-reducing 

(superplasticizer) admixture 

quantity

Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3Amount for the mix design Yellow

344 Retarder admixture quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

345

Corrosion inhibitor admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

346

Shrinkage-reducing admixture 

quantity Number 0.1 fl oz/yd3

Amount for the mix design Yellow

347 W/C ratio (spec) Number 0.01 Yellow

348 Air content (spec) Number 0.1 % Yellow

349 Unit weight (spec) Number 1 pcf Yellow

350 Admixtures used Text Yellow

351 Aggregate types and sizes Text Gradation Yellow

352 (Design) 28-day concrete 

strength Number 50 psi Yellow

353 Comments Text Orange

ABUTMENT, PIER, WINGWALL, AND FOUNDATION DETAILS Pink

354 Abutment unique element 

identifier Text e.g., abutment A Blue
18 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

355 Precast abutment Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

356 Abutment stem dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

357

Abutment backwall 

dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

358 Abutment footing dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

359 Type of abutment foundation Predefined 

list

Pile foundation

Drilled shaft

Spread footing

Other

Unknown foundation

Yellow

360 Type of pile/drilled shaft Predefined 

list

Prestressed concrete pile

Reinforced concrete pile

Steel H-pile

Steel cylindrical pile

Timber pile

Drilled shaft with selfconsolidating concrete

Drilled shaft with 

conventional concrete

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

Yellow

361 Friction or bearing pile Predefined 

list

Friction

Bearing

Combination 

friction/bearing pile

No piles

Unknown foundation

Yellow

362 Pile dimensions Number 1 in. Yellow

363

Number of straight pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

364

Number of battered pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

365 Comments Text Orange

366 Pier unique element identifier Text e.g., pier P1 Blue

367 Pier column shape Predefined 

list

Solid wall

Circular column

Square column

Yellow

368 Pier column dimensions Number 1 in.

Solid wall—length, height, 

thickness

Circular column—height, 

diameter

Square column—height, 

width

Yellow

369 Type of abutment foundation Predefined 

list

Pile foundation

Drilled shaft

Spread footing

Other

Unknown foundation

Yellow

370 Pier footing dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

371 Pier/pile cap dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

372 Type of pile/drilled shaft Predefined 

list

Prestressed concrete pile

Reinforced concrete pile

Steel H-pile

Steel cylindrical pile

Timber pile

Drilled shaft with selfYellow
19 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

consolidating concrete

Drilled shaft with 

conventional concrete

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

373 Friction or bearing pile Predefined 

list

Friction

Bearing

Combination 

friction/bearing pile

No piles

Unknown foundation

Yellow

374 Pile dimensions Number 1 in. Yellow

375 Number of straight pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

376 Number of battered pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

377 Number of piles Yellow

378 Comments Text Orange

379 Wingwall unique element 

identifier Text e.g., Wingwall A Right Blue

380 Wingwall dimensions Yellow

381 Type of wingwall foundation Predefined 

list

Pile foundation

Drilled shaft

Spread footing

Other

Unknown foundation

Yellow

382 Wingwall footing dimensions Number 1 in. Length, width, depth Yellow

383 Type of pile/drilled shaft Predefined 

list

Prestressed concrete pile

Reinforced concrete pile

Steel H-pile

Steel cylindrical pile

Timber pile

Drilled shaft with selfconsolidating concrete

Drilled shaft with 

conventional concrete

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

Yellow

384 Friction or bearing pile Predefined 

list

Friction

Bearing

Combination 

friction/bearing pile

No piles

Unknown foundation

Yellow

385 Pile dimensions Number 1 in. Yellow

386 Number of straight pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

387 Number of battered pile 

rows/number of piles per row Text Yellow

388 Comments Text Orange
20 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Data extracted from bridge documents should be checked by second (independent) person.

5.2 Where feasible, data will be validated using standard error checking within the Bridge Portal.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting documents, images, information, and data about 

the design and construction of each bridge included in FHWA’s LTBP Program. This includes 

documents, images, information, and data accessible either from the owner or other public 

information sources, without a visit to the bridge site. Specifically, this protocol focuses on 

obtaining plans, specifications, and other documents that help define the structural and material 

characteristics of the bridge at the time it was put into service, and extracting key data items from 

these documents.

6.2 This information is to be used to do the following:

6.2.1 Define the structural and material characteristics of the bridge at the time it was designed, 

constructed, and put into service.

6.2.2 Conduct legacy data mining (PRE-ED-LO-001, Legacy Data Mining for Untreated Bridge Deck).

6.3 When obtaining documents, such as State materials specifications in effect at the time the bridge 

was designed and constructed; foundation reports; soils report; etc., obtain a PDF version if 

possible.

6.4 For identifying the location of longitudinal and vertical stiffeners on the webs of steel girders:

6.4.1 Specify the element number of the girder to which the stiffener is attached, and indicate near 

face (NF), for the face of the web that is nearest to the local girder origin, or far face (FF), for the 

web face that is farthest from the local girder origin.

6.4.2 Measure and record the x-distance from the local girder origin to the nearest point on the 

stiffener.
21 PRE-ED-BD-001

January 2016

6.5 Concrete design mix types are defined as follows:

6.5.1 Performance based: The owner specifies end results that must be met by the concrete, such as 28-

day compressive strength and percent air entrainment. The construction contractor is responsible 

for designing a mix that produces the desired end results. 

6.5.2 Amounts specified: The owner specifies the types and amounts of all ingredients that are used in 

the concrete mix.

6.5.3 Hybrid: The owner specifies the types and amounts of some ingredients that are used in the

concrete mix and also specifies end results that must be met by the concrete, such as 28-day 

compressive strength.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

FHWA-PD-96-001, Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of 

the Nation's Bridges, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 1995.

1 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION RECORDS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Data and information related to the original construction of the structure, including details as well 

as material specifications and shop drawings.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the bridge owner to identify and obtain construction records, shop drawings, State

material specifications, and other details for the following:

3.1.1 Bridge as a whole (data collection table items 8–10).

3.1.2 Reinforced concrete and prestressed concrete girders (data collection table items 11–19).

3.1.3 Steel girders (data collection table items 20–27).

3.1.4 Deck (data collection table items 28–38).

3.1.5 Substructure: abutments, piers, wingwalls, and footings (data collection table items 39–89).

3.2 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

3.3 Extract the following information from the documents from section 3.1:

3.3.1 Construction type.

3.3.2 Contract type.

3.3.3 Actual concrete strengths, curing times, and curing methods for reinforced concrete and 

prestressed concrete bridge members.

3.3.4 Coating and welding information for steel bridge members.

3.3.5 Pile driving information (if applicable).

3.4 Ambient temperatures and wind speeds during construction (if available).
2 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

3.5 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.5.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.5.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.6 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP 

Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number, 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

WHOLE BRIDGE Pink

8 Type of construction Predefined 

list Text

Select all that apply:

 Conventional 

construction.

 Accelerated bridge 

construction (ABC) using 

bridge slide.

 ABC using self-propelled 

modular transporters.

 ABC using geosynthetic 

reinforced soil 

walls/abutments.

Yellow

9 Type of contract Predefined 

list Text

Select all that apply:

 Design-bid-build.

 Design-build.

 Public-private 

partnership.

 Construction 

manager/general 

contractor (CM/GC).

Yellow

10 Construction documents BLOB

Upload all documents 

supplying information on 

construction of the bridge

Yellow

REINFORCED CONCRETE AND PRESTRESSED CONCRETE GIRDERS Pink

11

State concrete 

specification used for 

girder concrete

Text

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge

Yellow

12 Girder curing type

Predefined 

list

Ambient air

Steam Yellow
3 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

High temperature

Moist cure

Unknown

13 Girder curing time Number 0.25 hours Time from first curing 

application to end of curing Yellow

14

Ambient air temperature 

at placement of girder 

concrete

Number 1 oF Yellow

15

Ambient wind speed at 

placement of girder 

concrete

Number 2 mph Yellow

16

Actual girder concrete 

compressive strength at 

28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

17

For pretensioned 

girders, actual concrete 

compressive strength at 

detensioning

Number 50 psi Yellow

18

For pretensioned 

girders, age at 

detensioning

Number 1 hours Yellow

19 Comments Text Orange

STEEL GIRDERS Pink

20 Type of welding used Predefined 

list

Shielded metal arc welding

Submerged arc welding

Flux core arc welding

Gas metal arc welding

Narrow gap improved 

electroslag welding

Unknown welding

No welding

Yellow

21 Location of welding Predefined 

list

Shop

Bridge site

Unknown

No welding

Yellow

22 Protective system used Predefined 

list

Select all that apply:

 One-coat paint/coating 

system.

 Two-coat paint/coating 

system.

 Three-coat paint/coating 

system.

 Galvanized.

 Weathering steel.

 Unknown.

Yellow

23

Location of 

paint/coating system 

application

Predefined 

list

Select all that apply:

 Shop.

 Field.

 No paint used.

 Unknown.

Yellow

24 Type of primer Predefined 

list

Organic zinc

Inorganic zinc

Other

No primer used

Unknown

Yellow

25 Type of paint/coating for 

second coat Text Yellow

26 Type of paint/coating for 

third coat Text Yellow
4 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

27 Comments Text Orange

SPECIFIC DECK INFORMATION Pink

28 Type of deck 

construction List

Cast-in-place concrete

Precast concrete partialdepth panels

Precast concrete full-depth 

panels

Pretopped girder with 

precast concrete deck

Yellow

29 Sequence of deck 

pours

BLOB

Upload document, diagram, 

or write the sequence used 

for cast-in-place concrete 

decks.

Yellow

30

State concrete 

specification used for 

deck

Text

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge

Yellow

31 Deck curing type

Predefined 

list

Select all that apply:

 Ambient air.

 Steam.

 High temperature.

 Moist cure.

 Curing compound.

 Sprinkler with burlap.

 Plastic sheets.

 Wet burlap.

 Unknown.

Yellow

32 Deck curing time Number 3 hours Time from first curing 

application to end of curing Yellow

33

Ambient air temperature 

at placement of deck 

concrete

Number 1 oF Yellow

34

Ambient wind speed at 

placement of deck 

concrete

Number 2 mph Yellow

35

Actual deck concrete 

compressive strength at 

28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

36 Type of formwork used 

for deck

Predefined 

list

Removable plywood forms

Stay-in-place wood forms

Stay-in-place metal forms

Prestressed concrete 

subdeck panels

None

Yellow

37

Type of sealer applied 

at time of deck 

construction

Predefined 

list

None

Silane

Siloxane

Other

Unknown

Yellow

38 Comments Text Orange

ABUTMENTS Pink

39 Abutment unique 

element identifier Text Blue

40 Pile placement method Predefined 

list

Driven pile

Jetted pile

Excavated drilled shaft

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

Yellow
5 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

41 Pile driving data—

maximum blow count

Number 1 Yellow

42 Pile driving data—

minimum blow count Number 1 Yellow

43 Pile driving data—

average blow count Number 1 Yellow

44 Pile driving data—

maximum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

45 Pile driving data—

minimum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

46 Pile driving data—

average cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

47

State concrete 

specification used for 

abutment

Text Yellow

48 Abutment curing type

Predefined 

list

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge

Yellow

49 Abutment curing time Number 3 hours

Select all that apply:

 Ambient air.

 Steam.

 High temperature.

 Moist cure.

 Curing compound.

 Sprinkler with burlap.

 Plastic sheets.

 Wet burlap.

 Unknown.

Yellow

50 Ambient air temperature 

at placement Number 1 oF Yellow

51

Actual abutment 

concrete compressive 

strength at 28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

52 Comments Text Orange

PIERS Pink

53 Pier unique element 

identifier Text Blue

54 Pile placement method

Predefined 

list

Driven pile

Jetted pile

Excavated drilled shaft

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

Yellow

55 Pile driving data—

maximum blow count Number 1 Yellow

56 Pile driving data—

minimum blow count Number 1 Yellow

57 Pile driving data—

average blow count Number 1 Yellow

58 Pile driving data—

maximum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

59 Pile driving data—

minimum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

60 Pile driving data—

average cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

61

State concrete 

specification used for 

pier

Text

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge.

Yellow

62 Pier curing type Predefined 

list Select all that apply: Yellow
6 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

 Ambient air.

 Steam.

 High temperature.

 Moist cure.

 Curing compound.

 Sprinkler with burlap.

 Plastic sheets.

 Wet burlap.

 Unknown.

63 Pier curing time Number 3 hours Time from first curing 

application to end of curing.

Yellow

64 Ambient air temperature 

at placement Number 1 oF Yellow

65

Actual pier concrete 

compressive strength at 

28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

66 Comments Text Orange

WINGWALLS Pink

67 Wingwall unique 

element identifier Blue

68 Pile placement method Predefined 

list

Driven pile

Jetted pile

Excavated drilled shaft

No piles/drilled shafts

Unknown foundation

Yellow

69

Pile driving data—

maximum blow count Number 1 Yellow

70 Pile driving data—

minimum blow count Number 1 Yellow

71 Pile driving data—

average blow count Number 1 Yellow

72 Pile driving data—

maximum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

73 Pile driving data—

minimum cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

74 Pile driving data—

average cutoff length Number 1 Yellow

75

State concrete 

specification used for 

wingwall

Text Yellow

76 Wingwall curing type Predefined 

list

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge

Yellow

77 Wingwall curing time Number 3 hours

Select all that apply:

 Ambient air.

 Steam.

 High temperature.

 Moist cure.

 Curing compound.

 Sprinkler with burlap.

 Plastic sheets.

 Wet burlap.

 Unknown.

Yellow

78

Ambient air temperature 

at placement of 

wingwall

Number 1 oF Yellow

79 Ambient wind speed at 

placement of wingwall Number 2 mph Yellow
7 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

80

Actual wingwall 

concrete compressive 

strength at 28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

81 Comments Text Orange

FOOTINGS Pink

82 Footing unique element 

identifier Blue

83

State concrete 

specification used for 

footing

Text Yellow

84 Footing curing type Predefined 

list

Name and year of State 

material specification used 

for the bridge.

Yellow

85 Footing curing time Number 3 hours

Select all that apply:

 Ambient air.

 Steam.

 High temperature.

 Moist cure.

 Curing compound.

 Sprinkler with burlap.

 Plastic sheets.

 Wet burlap.

 Unknown.

Yellow

86

Ambient air temperature 

at placement of 

abutment

Number 1 oF Yellow

87 Ambient wind speed at 

placement of footing Number 2 mph Yellow

88

Actual footing concrete 

compressive strength at 

28 days

Number 50 psi Yellow

89 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Data extracted from bridge documents should be checked by a second (independent) person.

5.2 Where feasible, data will be validated using standard error checking within the Bridge Portal.
8 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting data that define the conditions under which the 

structure was built, details of the placement and curing of concrete elements, details of welding 

and coating systems for steel bridge members, and results of tests that were conducted on the 

materials during and immediately after construction.

6.2 A drilled shaft is a high load capacity foundation unit that consists of a cylindrical drilled hole, a 

steel reinforcement cage and cast-in-place concrete that takes the place of multiple driven or castin-place piles.

6.3 After placement and finishing, concrete hardens and develops its final properties through a 

process called hydration, which occurs when water and portland cement are mixed. In order for 

concrete to develop the desired properties, a satisfactory moisture content and temperature in the 

concrete is necessary. Curing is a general term for the method used to maintain that moisture 

content and temperature during hydration. Depending on the concrete member being cured, there 

may be more than one method of curing that can be used:

6.3.1 Ambient air – In this method, the temperature and level of humidity in the surrounding air 

maintain the proper curing conditions.

6.3.2 High temperature – This involves subjecting concrete to higher temperatures to accelerate the 

hydration process, resulting in faster development of strength. Concrete cannot be subjected to 

dry heat to accelerate the hydration process as the presence of moisture is also an essential 

requisite. Therefore, subjecting the concrete to higher temperature and maintaining the required 

wetness can be achieved by subjecting the concrete to steam curing.

6.3.3 Moist cure – This can be achieved with water by immersing the element, ponding water on the 

top of a horizontal or by spraying water on the surface of a horizontal or vertical surface.

6.3.4 Curing compounds – These are materials that are applied to the fresh concrete and which provide 

a membrane that retards or reduces evaporation of moisture from the concrete.

6.3.5 Plastic sheets or impervious papers – These are two materials that can be applied to seal in the 

moisture in the concrete while hydration proceeds. This type of curing generally does not require 

periodic additions of water.

6.3.6 Wet burlap curing – This maintains the proper moisture content by preventing evaporation of the 

water in the concrete. It also provides some cooling through evaporation of the water in the 

burlap, which is helpful in hot weather. Wet burlap curing is often augmented by sprinkling water 

on the burlap to maintain a continuous level of moisture in the burlap.

6.4 Coatings for protection of structural steel from corrosion are applied in two different settings:

6.4.1 Shop-applied coatings – Applied at the steel fabrication plant where surface preparation can be 

done in an enclosed environment and where temperature and humidity can be controlled, and the 

ergonomics of applying the coating can be optimized.

6.4.2 Field-applied coatings – Applied to the steel member, usually at the construction site; compared 

to shop-applied coatings, a lesser degree of control over the environment, temperature, humidity,

and ergonomics is normal.

6.5 Developing the strength of concrete is a function of not only time but also that of temperature. 
9 PRE-ED-BD-002

January 2016

When concrete is subjected to higher temperatures, it accelerates the hydration process, resulting 

in faster development of strength. Concrete cannot be subjected to dry heat to accelerate the 

hydration process as the presence of moisture is also an essential requisite. Therefore, subjecting 

the concrete to a higher temperature and maintaining the required wetness can be achieved by 

subjecting the concrete to steam curing.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration,

Washington, DC, 2012.

7.2.2 State materials specifications for State and year that bridge was constructed.

1 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

BRIDGE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION COST DATA

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Cost data related to the design and construction of the bridge.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the bridge owner to identify and obtain cost data for the design and construction of the 

bridge.

3.2 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

3.3 Extract the following cost information from bridge design and construction documents:

3.3.1 Bridge design cost, including costs by contract personnel and in-house staff (data collection table 

items 9–11).

3.3.2 Costs for the deck, including concrete materials, forming, finishing (including tining or 

grooving), and curing. Regarding reinforcing steel costs, the cost per pound is desired. This 

includes fastening clips, wires, separators, chairs, and other materials used in maintaining the 

reinforcement in place. The costs for deck sealers are applied during the initial construction of the 

bridge (data collection table items 12–29).

3.3.3 Costs for deck joints (data collection table items 30–38).

3.3.4 Cost of bearings (data collection table items 39–51).

3.3.5 Costs for concrete superstructure items – This includes girder fabrication, transportation, and 

erection costs, plus diaphragms, approach slabs, median barriers, and parapets (data collection 

table items 52–65).

3.3.6 Costs for steel superstructure items – This includes girder fabrication, transportation, and erection 

costs, plus connections, welding, stiffeners, and cross-frames. Costs for corrosion protection 

systems for steel superstructure members (shop applied or field applied) (data collection table

items 66–81).

3.3.7 Costs of concrete substructure items (data collection table items 82–93).

3.3.8 Costs of steel foundation items (data collection table items 94–97).
2 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

3.3.9 Costs of timber foundation members (data collection table items 98–100).

3.3.10 Total bid price for construction of the bridge (data collection table items 101–102).

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., 

Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text

Item 8, structure 

number; from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for 

the bridge; e.g., Route 

15 SB over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Date of bid opening Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

BRIDGE DESIGN Pink

9 Design by State staff Number 1 USD Yellow

10 Design by contract 

personnel Number 1 USD Yellow

11 Comments Text Orange

DECK ITEMS Pink

12 Bridge deck grooving Number 1 USD/yd2 Cost of sawcut grooving Yellow

13 Bridge deck tining Number 1 USD/yd2

Yellow

14

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge deck—

Conventional concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

15

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge deck—Highperformance concreteNumber 1 USD/yd3Yellow

16

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge deck—

Lightweight concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

17 Reinforcing steel—

Uncoated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

18 Reinforcing steel—

Epoxy coated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow
3 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

19 Reinforcing steel—

Galvanized Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

20 Reinforcing steel—

Stainless steel Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

21 Waterproofing Number 1 USD/yd2

Yellow

22 Welded wire fabric—

Uncoated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

23 Welded wire fabric—

Epoxy coated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

24

Depth of precast 

pretensioned concrete 

deck panel

Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Precast pretensioned

concrete deck panel Number 1 USD/yd2

Yellow

26 Grout for precast 

concrete deck panel Number 1 USD/yd3

Yellow

27 Bridge deck curing 

compound Number 1 USD/gal Yellow

28

Bridge deck sealer 

applied at time of 

construction

Number 1 USD/gal Yellow

29 Comments Text Orange

JOINTS Pink

30 Width of expansion joint Number 1 in. Yellow

31 Elastomeric expansion 

joint Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

32 Preformed elastomeric 

joint sealer Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

33

Steel reinforced 

elastomeric expansion 

joint

Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

34 Strip seal expansion 

joint Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

35 Strip seal gland Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

36 Asphaltic plug 

expansion joint Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

37 Modular expansion joint 

system Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

38 Comments Text Orange

BEARINGS Pink

39 Sliding plate bearing Number 1 USD Yellow

40 Rocker bearing Number 1 USD Yellow

41 Roller bearing Number 1 USD Yellow

42 Rack and pinion 

(geared) bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

43 Pot bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

44 Spherical bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

45 Disc bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

46 Seismic isolation 

bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

47 Plain elastomeric 

(neoprene) bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

48 Laminated elastomeric 

(neoprene) bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow

49 Elastomeric bearing Number 1 USD/ea. Yellow
4 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

with polytetrafluoroethylene sliding surface

50 Hardness of elastomeric 

(neoprene) bearing Number 1

Durometers Yellow

51 Comments Text Orange

CONCRETE SUPERSTRUCTURE ITEMS Pink

52 Concrete for approach 

slab Number 1 USD/yd3

Yellow

53 Concrete for median 

barrier Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

54 Concrete for parapet Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

55 Precast pretensioned 

concrete I-girder type

Predefined 

list

AASHTO Type I

AASHTO Type II

AASHTO Type III

AASHTO Type IV

AASHTO Type V

AASHTO Type VI

Yellow

56

Precast pretensioned 

concrete I-girder type

cost

Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

57 Bulb-tee pretensioned 

concrete girder type

Predefined 

list

AASHTO/PCI BT-54

AASHTO/PCI BT-63

AASHTO/PCI BT-72

Yellow

58 Bulb-tee pretensioned 

concrete girder Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

59

Deck bulb-tee 

pretensioned concrete 

girder type

Number

AASHTO/PCI Deck 

BT-35

AASHTO/PCI Deck 

BT-53

AASHTO/PCI Deck 

BT-65

Yellow

60

Deck bulb-tee 

pretensioned concrete 

girder

Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

61 Precast pretensioned 

concrete box beam type

Predefined 

list

AASHTO Type BI-36

AASHTO Type BI-48

AASHTO Type BII-36

AASHTO Type BII-48

AASHTO Type BIII-36

AASHTO Type BIII-48

AASHTO Type BIV-36

AASHTO Type BIV-48

Yellow

62 Precast pretensioned 

concrete box beam cost Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

63

Cast-in-place 

posttensioned concrete 

box girder

Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

64

Transportation and 

erection costs for 

precast concrete 

beams/girders

Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

65 Comments Text

Dimensions of the castin-place posttensioned 

concrete box section

Orange
5 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE ITEMS Pink

66 Fabrication of structural 

steel Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

67

Transportation and 

erection of structural 

steel beams/girders

Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

68 Structural steel rolled 

beam grade

Predefined 

list

ASTM A709 Grade 36

ASTM A709 Grade 50

ASTM A709 Grade 50W

Yellow

69

Structural steel rolled 

beam—cost per linear 

foot

Number 1 USD/lin ft Yellow

70 Structural steel plate 

girder grade

Predefined 

list

ASTM A709 Grade 36

ASTM A709 Grade 50

ASTM A709 Grade 50W

ASTM A709 Grade 

HPS50W

ASTM A709 Grade 

HPS70W

Yellow

71 Structural steel plate 

girder Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

72 Surface preparation for 

coating structural steel Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

73 Shop-applied primer Number 1

USD/

lin ft

First coat in a three-coat 

paint/protective system. Yellow

74 Shop-applied 

intermediate coat Number 1

USD/

lin ft

Second coat in a threecoat paint/protective 

system.

Yellow

75 Shop-applied top coat Number 1

USD/

lin ft

Third coat in a threecoat paint/protective 

system.

Yellow

76 Field-applied primer Number 1

USD/

lin ft

First coat in a three-coat 

paint/protective system. Yellow

77 Field-applied 

intermediate coat Number 1

USD/

lin ft

Second coat in a threecoat paint/protective 

system.

Yellow

78 Field-applied top coat Number 1

USD/

lin ft

Third coat in a threecoat paint/protective 

system.

Yellow

79 Galvanized coating Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

80

Surface area of steel 

being coated that 

applies to the costs 

above.

Number 1 ft2Yellow

81 Comments Text Orange

CONCRETE SUBSTRUCTURE ITEMS Pink

82

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge abutments—

Standard concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

83

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge piers—

Standard concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

84

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge wingwall—

Standard concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

85

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge pier cap—

Standard concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow
6 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

86

Diameter of precast 

reinforced concrete 

piles

Number 1 in. Yellow

87 Precast reinforced 

concrete piles Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

88

Diameter of precast 

prestressed 

(pretensioned) concrete 

piles

Number 1 in. Yellow

89

Precast prestressed 

(pretensioned) concrete 

piles

Number 1 v Yellow

90

Cast-in-place concrete 

for bridge footing—

Standard concrete

Number 1 USD/yd3Yellow

91 Reinforcing Steel—

Uncoated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

92 Reinforcing Steel—

Epoxy coated Number 1 USD/lb Yellow

93 Comments Text Orange

STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE ITEMS Pink

94 Steel sheet piling Number 1 USD/ft2

Yellow

95 Breadth of steel H-piles Number 1 in. Not the length in the 

ground Yellow

96 Steel H-piles Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

97 Comments Text Orange

OTHER BRIDGE ITEMS Pink

98 Untreated timber piles Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

99 Treated timber piles Number 1

USD/

lin ft Yellow

100 Comments Text Orange

TOTAL BID FOR BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING FEE) Pink

101 Total construction of 

bridge Number 1 USD Yellow

102 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item.

Field Name Data field name.

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file.

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded.

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded.

Field Description Commentary on the data.

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied.

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used).

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified.

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified.

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered.
7 PRE-ED-BD-003

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Data extracted from bridge documents should be checked by a second (independent) person.

5.2 Where feasible, data will be validated using standard error checking within the Bridge Portal.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting data to document the costs of designing and 

constructing the bridge. These cost data are used in life-cycle cost analysis of bridges. Please note 

that other types of cost data are gathered in PRE-ED-BD-006, Bridge Maintenance Records and 

Cost Data.

6.2 States’ cost data are typically in the form of unit costs, such as cost per square foot, cost per 

gallon, or cost per each item. Therefore, the LTBP Program will store unit cost data.

6.3 Bridge deck designers usually try to minimize water accumulation by establishing a cross slope 

with drainage channels and by deck surface texturing. Two methods of producing texturing are:

6.3.1 Tining – The deck is dragged transversely with a metal rake while the concrete is still plastic. 

Although this method can produce grooves deep enough for a high-friction surface, the grooves 

are not uniform and are limited in depth.

6.3.2 Grooving – A better method of getting maximum deck drainage is to saw grooves into the 

pavement transversely, or perpendicular to the direction of traffic, after the concrete has cured. 

Bridge deck grooving is achieved by diamond saw blades that are ganged, or arranged at spaced 

intervals, on a shaft. Grooving can begin after deck concrete has cured to the minimum required 

compressive strength. Grooving is usually done perpendicular to the centerline to within about 1 

foot of the gutter, curb, or parapet lines.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 PRE-ED-BD-006, Bridge Maintenance Records and Cost Data.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.4 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 PRE-ED-BD-004

January 2016

BRIDGE SITE CONDITIONS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Data related to the typical environmental, anti-icing, and traffic conditions at the bridge site.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the bridge owner to obtain values for average daily traffic (ADT), average daily truck 

traffic (ADTT), and amount and type of anti-icing agent, (data collection table items 8–15), 

beginning with the year construction of the bridge was completed and for each subsequent year 

that data are available.

3.2 Obtain marine environment, weather, and water flow data, beginning with the year construction 

of the bridge was completed and for each subsequent year that data are available:

3.2.1 Calculate the straight line distance from the centerline of the bridge to the nearest body of 

saltwater (miles) (data collection table item 16).

3.2.2 Obtain water flow data using publicly available Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) flood maps and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) historic 

flood data (data collection table items 18–26).

3.3 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the LTBP Bridge Portal.

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.
2 PRE-ED-BD-004

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., 

Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text

Item 8, structure 

number; from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for 

the bridge; e.g., Route 

15 SB over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

TRAFFIC DATA Pink

8

Year ADT, ADTT, and 

WIM data were recorded Text yyyy Blue

9 ADT Number 100 Vehicles/day Yellow

10 ADTT Number 100 Vehicles/day Yellow

11 Comments Text

If WIM data is provided, 

provide the source of 

the WIM data

Orange

ANTI-ICING PRACTICES AND MARINE ENVIRONMENT Pink

12

Automated anti-icing 

system in use at bridge 

site

Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

13 Description of anti-icing 

system Text Manufacturer, model name and number Yellow

14 Type of anti-icing agent Text

Indicate “None” or 

specify name of the 

anti-icing agent

Yellow

15

Quantity of anti-icing 

agent per year applied to 

the bridge

Number 1 lbs See section 6.2. Yellow

16 Distance from bridge 

centerline to saltwater Number 1 mi

Straight line distance to 

the nearest body of 

saltwater

Yellow

17 Comments Text Orange

WATERWAY FLOW DATA (FOR BRIDGES CROSSING WATERWAYS) Pink

18 FEMA flood plain 

designation Text Yellow

19

FEMA base flood 

elevation at the location 

of the bridge site

Number 1 ft Yellow

20 100-year design flood 

velocity Number 1 ft3

/sec Yellow

21 Maximum known flow 

velocity Number 1 ft3

/sec Yellow
3 PRE-ED-BD-004

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

22 Historical flood events at 

the structure location Text

Record how many 100-

year-or-greater flood 

events have occurred 

at the bridge site and 

the years those events 

occurred. Also, record 

the crest height if 

known.

Yellow

23 Year recorded Text Year yyyy Blue

24 Average flow velocity Number 1 ft3

/sec Yellow

25 Peak flow velocity Number 1 ft3

/sec Yellow

26 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Where feasible, data will be validated using standard error checking within the Bridge Portal.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting data that help characterize the environmental, antiicing, and traffic conditions at the bridge. This information is used to evaluate the relative impact 

of these factors on the performance of the bridge and subsequently account for these factors in the 

development of deterioration models.

6.2 Historic weather data on temperature, humidity, rainfall, snowfall, solar radiation, and wind speed 

will be collected under a protocol to be developed at a future date.

6.3 If the quantity of anti-icing agent per year applied to the bridge (data collection table item 16) is 

not available, then take the following steps:

6.3.1 Estimate the amount of anti-icing agent per year used over the route that the bridge carries.

6.3.2 Use the amount calculated in section 6.3.1, and prorate it for the length of the bridge.
4 PRE-ED-BD-004

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): http://www.noaa.gov/

7.2.2 Modern Era-Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA): 

http://gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/research/merra/intro.php

7.2.3 Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA): http://www.fema.gov/
1 PRE-ED-BD-005

January 2016

BRIDGE INSPECTION RECORDS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-005

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Inspection information, metadata, data, documents, and images collected by the owner’s 

inspection staff or owner’s consultant inspection forces during the current and past biennial 

National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) bridge inspections and any other inspections 

performed.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1.1 Equipment:

2.1.2 Computer.

2.1.3 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the bridge owner to obtain the required inspection information (data collection table

items 9–13).

NOTE—All current and past National Bridge Inspection (NBI) data and all current and past 

AASHTO element level data will be obtained through separate processes.

3.2 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the LTBP Bridge Portal.

3.3 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.3.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.3.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.4 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., 

Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text

Item 8, structure 

number; from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green
2 PRE-ED-BD-005

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for 

the bridge; e.g., 

Route 15 SB over

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Month and year of 

inspection Text Month and year

mm/yyyy, repeat for 

each year inspection 

information is 

collected

Blue

9

Copy of the periodic 

inspection report BLOB

Electronic or scanned 

copy of full inspection 

report

Yellow

10

Inspection conducted by

State personnel or a 

consultant

Predefined 

list

State inspector

Consultant inspector Yellow

11 Person(s) conducting 

inspection Text Name(s) and affiliations Yellow

12

Copies of sketches, 

photographs, and other 

figures

BLOB

Electronic or scanned 

copy of each sketch, 

photograph or other 

figure not included in 

the inspection report

Yellow

13 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting records and data compiled by the owner during 

biennial NBIS inspections, as well as other periodic inspections. 
3 PRE-ED-BD-005

January 2016

The information in the owner’s inspection files is an excellent resource for understanding the 

history of the bridge before beginning LTBP field data collection.

6.2 In accordance with the NBIS, every bridge (on public highways) must be inspected at least every 

2 years. Inventory and inspection data collected during these inspections is reported to FHWA 

and stored in the NBI database. In addition to the required data for the NBI database, most State 

bridge owners keep detailed records of the inspection findings—details of deficiencies, 

photographs, and other information documenting the condition of the bridge and all of its 

elements.

6.3 During the biennial inspections, for bridges other than culverts, NBIS inspectors record NBI 

condition ratings for NBI items 58 (deck), 59 (superstructure), and 60 (substructure). These 

ratings are included in the inspection reports. These data will also be collected for all LTBP 

bridges under a separate process.

6.4 During the biennial inspections, depending on the owner’s policies, inspectors may also estimate 

and record element level condition state data in accordance with reference 7.2.3 or 7.2.4 below. 

These data will be collected for all LTBP bridges under a separate process.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA, National Bridge Inspection Standards, 2009 Final Rule, Federal Register, Volume 74, 

Number 246, Pages 68377-68379, Washington, DC, 2009.

7.2.2 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

7.2.3 AASHTO, AASHTO Guide for Commonly Recognized Structural Elements, 1st Edition with 

2002 and 2010 Revisions, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 

Washington, DC, 2010.\

7.2.4 AASHTO, Manual for Bridge Element Inspection, 1st Edition with 2015 Interim Revisions, 

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 2013.

1 PRE-ED-BD-006

January 2016

BRIDGE MAINTENANCE RECORDS AND COST DATA

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-006

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Information and data related to maintenance actions for the bridge and their costs.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate maintenance actions on the deck.

3.2 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) to locate and document maintenance actions by unique element 

identifier.

3.3 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element of the superstructure and substructure. 

3.4 Work with the bridge owner to obtain information and cost data for each maintenance action for 

the bridge since 1960 or the year the bridge was opened to traffic, whichever is later (data 

collection table items 8–21). For treatments that involve several operations with different 

materials (e.g., patching deck, followed by sealing), report each action separately if possible.

3.4.1 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the LTBP Bridge Portal.

3.5 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.5.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.5.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.6 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.
2 PRE-ED-BD-006

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Element type Text e.g.; abutment, pier, etc. Blue

9 Unique element identifier Text

If the entire element type is not 

impacted, list the unique 

element identifier(s) of 

elements impacted; P1C1 

(column 1 of pier 1)

Blue

10 Year maintenance action 

completed Text Exact year yyyy Yellow

11 Type of maintenance action Predefined 

list

Clean the deck

Seal cracks

Seal the full deck

Patch deck

Apply overlay to deck

Remove debris from deck 

drainage system

Paint girders and/or crossframes

Clean bearing

Other (specify)

Yellow

12

Narrative and photographic 

description of element 

condition

Text Yellow

13

Describe any preparation of 

element prior to 

maintenance action

Text e.g., clean, blast clean, patch 

deck, remove existing paint, Yellow

14

Materials and quantities 

used in the maintenance 

action

Text

Generic material types and 

brand names if known; 

quantities used if known

Yellow

15 Material specifications Text If available Yellow

16 Quantity of maintenance 

action accomplished Text 1 Varies e.g., deck area sealed in square feet Yellow

17 Cost of maintenance action Number 1 USD Yellow

18 Cost basis Text Specify cost basis; e.g., total 

cost, unit cost per square foot Yellow

19 Maintenance of traffic 

(MOT) included in cost?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

20 Work done by State 

personnel or a contractor

Predefined 

list

State personnel

Contractor Yellow

21 Comments Text Orange
3 PRE-ED-BD-006

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting data on the actions taken by the owner to maintain 

the bridge and its elements during the life of the bridge.

6.2 These data are used to do the following:

6.2.1 Document the actions that the owner took to maintain the elements of the bridge after the bridge 

was put into service.

6.2.2 Evaluate the causes of declining performance of the bridge and develop deterioration models.

6.2.3 Document the costs of maintaining the bridge and the elements of the bridge after the bridge was 

put into service.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.2 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.4 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

1 PRE-ED-BD-007

January 2016

CALCULATION OF BRIDGE RATINGS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-BD-007

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Information and data related to load ratings of the bridge.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Computer.

2.1.2 Scanner.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Work with the bridge owner to obtain bridge rating information for the year in which the bridge is 

first load rated and for each subsequent year ratings were calculated (data collection table

items 8–18).

3.2 If the bridge information exists only in paper form, scan that information into an electronic format 

so it can be stored in the LTBP Bridge Portal.

3.3 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.3.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.3.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.4 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP 

Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Text Title of the protocol Green
2 PRE-ED-BD-007

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Month and year of ratings Text Exact month 

and year

mm/yyyy; month and year 

that ratings were calculated Blue

9

Rating calculated by 

consultant, State, or local

Predefined 

list

Consultant

State agency

Local agency

Yellow

10 Person(s) rating the 

bridge Text Name(s) and affiliations Yellow

11

Method used to 

determine operating 

rating 

Predefined 

list

Load factor rating

Allowable stress rating

Load and resistance factor 

rating

Load testing

No rating analysis performed

Yellow

12 Calculated operating 

rating Numeric 0.1 T 1T = 2,000 lbs Yellow

13 Method used to 

determine inventory rating

Predefined 

list

Load factor rating

Allowable stress rating

Load and resistance factor 

rating

Load testing

No rating analysis performed

Yellow

14 Calculated inventory 

rating Numeric 0.1 T 1T = 2,000 lbs Yellow

15 Rating vehicle used Text Yellow

16

Was the bridge posted, or 

continued to be posted, 

as a result of these 

ratings/load testing?

Predefined 

list

Yes

No

Continued Posting

Yellow

17 Posted load Numeric 1 ton(s)

Posted load capacity, if any, 

due to these load ratings or 

load testing

Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
3 PRE-ED-BD-007

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for collecting data on calculations performed by the bridge 

owner to determine the load rating of the bridge.

6.2 The operating rating is the maximum permissible live load to which a bridge may be subjected for 

the load configuration used in the rating.

6.3 The inventory rating is that load, including loads in multiple lanes that can safely use the bridge 

for an indefinite period of time.

6.4 See the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation, 2nd Edition (2010) for descriptions of the 

following:

6.4.1 The load factor rating method.

6.4.2 The allowable stress rating method.

6.4.3 The load and resistance factor rating method.

6.4.4 Load testing procedures.

6.4.5 Rating vehicle for load tests.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.2 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: 

7.2.1 AASHTO, AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation, 2nd Edition, Washington, DC, 2010.

7.2.2 FHWA-PD-96-001, Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of 

the Nation’s Bridges, Federal Highway Administration Office of Engineering, Washington, DC, 

1995.

7.2.3 FHWA Memorandum, Bridge Load Ratings for the National Bridge Inventory, Federal Highway

Administration Office of Infrastructure, Washington, DC, October 30, 2006.

LEGACY DATA MINING PROTOCOLS (LD)

PRE-ED-LD-001, Legacy Data Mining for Untreated Bridge Decks

1 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

LEGACY DATA MINING FOR UNTREATED BRIDGE DECKS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-ED-LD-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Analyzed quantitative data and other descriptive information gathered from the analysis of legacy 

data for the bridge. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: Computer.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Calculate the following parameters from the data obtained from the Bridge Documentation 

Protocols (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction; 

PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records):

3.1.1 Moment of inertia of noncomposite section.

3.1.2 Moment of inertia of composite section (if applicable).

3.1.3 Stiffness of superstructure.

3.1.4 Load distribution factor.

3.1.5 If data is available on the temperature, the relative humidity, and the wind speed at deck level at 

the time the deck was poured, use these data to estimate of the rate of evaporation. 

3.2 Perform the following analyses using the National Bridge Inventory (NBI) Condition Ratings for 

the bridge, the data obtained from the Bridge Documentation Protocols (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans 

and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction; PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction 

Records; PRE-ED-BD-004, Bridge Site Conditions; PRE-ED-BD-005, Bridge Inspection 

Records) for the bridge, and the parameters calculated in section 3.1 above, to see if there is any 

correlation between them and the following:

3.2.1 Time to NBI ratings for decks:

3.2.1.1 Age when the deck first reached NBI rating 8.

NOTE—For States using the NBI translator to calculate NBI ratings, it will be necessary to

estimate the age when the deck reaches a rating of 8.

3.2.1.2 Age when deck first reached NBI rating 7.

3.2.1.3 Age when deck first reached NBI rating 6.

3.2.1.4 Age when deck first reached NBI rating 5.

3.2.1.5 Age when deck first reached NBI rating 4.

3.2.1.6 Age when deck first reached NBI rating 3.
2 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

3.2.2 Time between NBI ratings for decks:

3.2.2.1 NBI rating 8 to NBI rating 7.

3.2.2.2 NBI rating 7 to NBI rating 6.

3.2.2.3 NBI rating 6 to NBI rating 5.

3.2.2.4 NBI rating 5 to NBI rating 4.

3.2.2.5 NBI rating 4 to NBI rating 3.

3.3 If possible, determine any correlation between the NBI rating of the deck and the following:

3.3.1 Crack density of deck.

3.3.2 Age and the following deck types:

3.3.2.1 Monolithic cast-in-place.

3.3.2.2 Precast subdeck panels with concrete topping.

3.3.2.3 Precast full-depth deck panels.

3.3.3 Moment of inertia of composite section.

3.3.4 Age, girder type, and girder material.

3.3.5 Age and permeability of deck.

3.3.6 Age and water-to-cement (w/c) materials ratio of deck.

3.3.7 Age and presence of the following supplementary cementitious materials in deck:

3.3.7.1 Fly ash.

3.3.7.2 Silica fume.

3.3.7.3 Slag.

3.3.7.4 Metakaolin.

3.3.8 Cement content.

3.3.9 Type of cement:

3.3.9.1 Type I.

3.3.9.2 Type II.

3.3.9.3 Type III.

3.3.9.4 Type IV (if applicable).

3.3.9.5 Type V (if applicable).

3.3.10 Water content with and without use of a superplasticizer.

3.3.11 Volume of paste per cubic yard (cement content plus water content).

3.3.12 Coarse aggregate type.

3.3.13 Percentage of air entrainment:

3.3.13.1 Specified.

3.3.13.2 Actual.

3.3.14 Concrete compressive strength at the following ages:

3.3.14.1 1 day

3.3.14.2 28 days

3.3.15 Size and spacing of reinforcing bars in top mat.
3 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

3.3.16 Size and spacing of reinforcing bars in bottom mat.

3.3.17 Grade and the following types of reinforcing bars in top mat:

3.3.17.1 Black bars.

3.3.17.2 Epoxy-coated bars.

3.3.17.3 Stainless steel bars.

3.3.17.4 Stainless-clad bars.

3.3.17.5 Grade 40 yield strength bars.

3.3.17.6 Grade 60 yield strength bars.

3.3.18 Grade and the following types of reinforcing bars in bottom mat:

3.3.18.1 Black bars.

3.3.18.2 Epoxy coated bars.

3.3.18.3 Stainless steel bars.

3.3.18.4 Stainless-clad bars.

3.3.18.5 Grade 40 yield strength bars.

3.3.18.6 Grade 60 yield strength bars.

3.3.19 The following weather factors at time of deck construction:

3.3.19.1 Season when constructed.

3.3.19.2 Mean ambient temperature.

3.3.19.3 Wind speed.

3.3.19.4 Estimate of evaporation rate.

3.3.20 The following age groups and changes in materials specifications (and cement changes, including 

fineness of cement):

3.3.20.1 1970–1975.

3.3.20.2 1975–1980.

3.3.20.3 1980–1985.

3.3.20.4 1985–1990.

3.3.20.5 1990–1995.

3.3.20.6 1995–2000.

3.3.20.7 2000–2005.

3.3.20.8 2005–2010.

3.3.21 Deck placement technique used by the contractor, such as the following:

3.3.21.1 Bucket.

3.3.21.2 Pumping.

3.3.22 Deck finishing technique used by the contractor, such as the following:

3.3.22.1 Manual with hand-held vibrators.

3.3.22.2 Roller screeds.

3.3.22.3 Vibrating screeds.

3.3.22.4 Tining.

3.3.22.5 Sawcut grooving.

3.3.23 Slump, including:
4 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

3.3.23.1 Specified slump.

3.3.23.2 Actual measured slump.

3.3.24 The curing method used by the contractor, including:

3.3.24.1 Sprinkler and burlap.

3.3.24.2 Fogging.

3.3.24.3 Curing compound.

3.3.24.4 Wet burlap.

3.3.24.5 Plastic sheets.

3.3.25 Length of curing period.

3.3.26 Time of initiation of wet curing.

3.3.27 Age and clear cover of top mat of reinforcement in deck.

3.3.28 Girder spacing.

3.3.29 Girder type, material, and spacing.

3.3.30 Girder end condition:

3.3.30.1 Fixed.

3.3.30.2 Allows translation only.

3.3.30.3 Allows rotation only.

3.3.31 Integral or semi-integral abutments.

3.3.32 Superstructure stiffness.

3.3.33 Span length.

3.3.34 Average daily truck traffic.

3.3.35 Amount and type of anti-icing agent applied to the deck at each of the following intervals:

3.3.35.1 Week.

3.3.35.2 Month.

3.3.35.3 Winter season.

3.3.36 Slope of deck surface:

3.3.36.1 Longitudinal slope.

3.3.36.2 Cross slope.

3.3.37 Number and spacing of deck joints (if any).

3.3.38 The type of deck joints.

3.3.39 The condition of deck joints, including water tightness.

3.3.40 Number of scuppers.

3.3.41 Condition of scuppers.

3.3.42 Locations of scuppers.

3.3.43 The frequency of the following maintenance/preservation activities:

3.3.43.1 Bridge washing.

3.3.43.2 Cleaning joints.

3.3.43.3 Cleaning scuppers.
5 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

3.4 Write a summary report describing the analyses and findings from sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, and

upload it into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

3.5 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.5.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.5.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.6 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

2 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

3

Contractor or agency 

performing the legacy data 

mining

Text

Name of contractor, 

university, State agency, or 

Federal agency performing 

the legacy data mining.

Green

4

Personnel performing 

legacy data mining Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

5

Title of legacy data mining 

report Text

e.g., Legacy Data Mining 

Report for Untreated Bridge 

Decks—LTBP Mid-Atlantic 

Cluster

Green

6

Date legacy data mining 

completed Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

7

Clusters and/or corridors 

covered by the legacy data 

mining report

Text e.g., LTBP Mid-Atlantic 

Cluster Yellow

8 Legacy data mining report BLOB Microsoft® Word file Yellow

9 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
6 PRE-ED-LD-001

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on using legacy data for an LTBP bridge to evaluate 

performance of an untreated bridge deck using structural characteristics, material properties, 

construction practices, and its condition over time as expressed by the NBI rating.

6.2 Legacy data includes data from NBI inspections and from documents obtained from the bridge 

owner about the bridge characteristics, bridge construction practices, the material properties of 

the bridge and the bridge deck, as well as the condition of the bridge deck.

6.3 Data about bridges available and accessible without a site visit to the bridge are used to evaluate 

deterioration trends and answer key performance questions on a large set of bridges. These data 

are collected using the Bridge Documentation protocols.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.2 PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-003, Bridge Design and Construction Cost Data.

7.1.4 PRE-ED-BD-004, Bridge Site Conditions.

7.1.5 PRE-ED-BD-005, Bridge Inspection Records.

7.1.6 PRE-ED-BD-006, Bridge Maintenance Records and Cost Data.

7.1.7 PRE-ED-BD-007, Calculation of Bridge Ratings.

7.1.8 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.9 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.10 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.
LOGISTICS PROTOCOLS (LO)

PRE-PL-LO-001, Reference Bridge Testing

PRE-PL-LO-002, Cluster Bridge Testing

PRE-PL-LO-003, Traffic Control, Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (MPT), and 

Permits

PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan

PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications

PRE-PL-LO-006, Power and Network Requirements

PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan

1 PRE-PL-LO-001

January 2016

REFERENCE BRIDGE TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a list of all the standard tests to be conducted on bridges designated 

as reference bridges.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Conduct the following visual inspection tests and procedures on reference bridges, unless 

otherwise directed by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA):

3.1.1 FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration. 

3.1.2 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

3.1.3 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

3.1.4 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage.

3.1.5 FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration.

3.1.6 FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment.

3.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

3.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

3.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

3.1.10 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

3.1.11 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

3.1.12 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

3.1.13 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

3.1.14 FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs.

3.1.15 FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints.

3.2 Conduct the following manual and/or automated, nondestructive evaluation (NDE) tests on 

reference bridges, unless otherwise directed by FHWA:

3.2.1 FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing.
2 PRE-PL-LO-001

January 2016

3.2.2 FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks.

3.2.3 FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing.

3.2.4 FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing.

3.2.5 FLD-DC-NDE-007, Ultrasonic Surface Wave Testing—Concrete.

3.3 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks. Obtain concrete cores from one span of the 

bridge deck in the following numbers and locations, unless otherwise directed by FHWA:

3.3.1 The results of the visual inspection of the deck and NDE testing (if available) should be 

considered in the location of cores. Cores should be taken from sound concrete that is determined 

to be free of cracks, delaminations, and spalls.

3.3.2 Obtain one 4-inch diameter core in each lane and in each shoulder on the untreated bridge decks 

of reference bridges.

3.3.3 Obtain one 2.5-inch core in each lane and in each shoulder on the untreated bridge decks of 

reference bridges.

3.3.4 Transverse location of cores should be:

3.3.4.1 Shoulders – between 2 and 4 ft from the face of the curb or parapet or from the edge of the deck if 

there is no curb or parapet.

3.3.4.2 Travel lanes – between the wheel paths.

3.3.5 The location of cores should be spaced longitudinally in order to cover different sections of the 

span selected for coring.

3.4 Conduct the following material and physical sampling procedures and tests on the cores obtained 

under section 3.3:

3.4.1 FLD-DC-MS-002, Compressive Strength and Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Concrete 

Cores.

3.4.2 FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration (Permeability).

3.4.3 FLD-DC-MS-004, Sampling and Testing for Chloride Profiles.

3.5 Reference bridges will typically be instrumented for live load testing and long-term monitoring. 

Protocols governing these types of testing will be developed.

3.6 Conduct other/optional tests, where applicable and as specified by the owner agency and/or 

FHWA.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None. 

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.
3 PRE-PL-LO-001

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for developing a plan for evaluating and testing reference 

bridges.

6.2 A “reference bridge” is the bridge within each cluster that is representative of the cluster as a 

whole. It will undergo periodic evaluation and testing using a detailed visual inspection protocol 

supplemented with material testing and advanced evaluation methods utilizing NDE tools.

Collecting additional concrete cores after the initial round of material testing should be governed 

by the following:

6.2.1 Unless otherwise directed by FHWA, no cores will be taken for the purposes of testing strength, 

modulus of elasticity, or permeability. These properties of mature concrete are not expected to 

vary significantly with age.

6.2.2 Unless otherwise directed by FHWA, obtaining cores and sampling for chloride profile testing is 

to be repeated every 5 years.

6.3 Additional tests may be added for a particular reference bridge. Given that each bridge is 

different, a specific test plan may be developed for a specific reference bridge. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration. 

7.1.2 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

7.1.10 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

7.1.11 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

7.1.12 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

7.1.13 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

7.1.14 FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs.

7.1.15 FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints.

7.1.16 FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing.

7.1.17 FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks.
4 PRE-PL-LO-001

January 2016

7.1.18 FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing.

7.1.19 FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing.

7.1.20 FLD-DC-NDE-007, Ultrasonic Surface Wave Testing—Concrete.

7.1.21 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

7.1.22 FLD-DC-MS-002, Compressive Strength and Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of Concrete 

Cores.

7.1.23 FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration (Permeability).

7.1.24 FLD-DC-MS-004, Sampling and Testing for Chloride Profiles.

7.2 External: None.
1 PRE-PL-LO-002

January 2016

CLUSTER BRIDGE TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a list of all the standard tests to be conducted on bridges designated 

as cluster bridges.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Conduct the following visual inspection tests and procedures on cluster bridges, unless otherwise 

directed by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA):

3.1.1 FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration. 

3.1.2 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

3.1.3 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

3.1.4 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage.

3.1.5 FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration.

3.1.6 FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment.

3.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

3.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

3.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

3.1.10 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

3.1.11 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

3.1.12 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

3.1.13 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

3.1.14 FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs.

3.1.15 FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints.

3.2 Conduct the following manual and/or automated nondestructive evaluation (NDE) tests on cluster 

bridges, unless otherwise directed by FHWA:

3.2.1 FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing.

3.2.2 FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks.
2 PRE-PL-LO-002

January 2016

3.2.3 FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing.

3.3 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks. Obtain one 2.5-inch diameter core in each 

lane and in each shoulder on the untreated bridge decks of cluster bridges from one span of the 

bridge deck in the following locations, unless otherwise directed by FHWA:

3.3.1 The results of the deck visual inspection and NDE testing (if available) should be considered in 

the location of cores. Cores should be taken from sound concrete that is determined to be free of 

cracks, delaminations, and spalls.

3.3.2 Transverse location of cores should be:

3.3.2.1 Shoulders – between 2 and 4 feet from the face of the curb or parapet or from the edge of the 

deck if there is no curb or parapet.

3.3.2.2 Travel lanes – between the wheel paths.

3.3.3 The location of cores should be spaced longitudinally in order to cover different sections of the 

span selected for coring.

3.4 Conduct the material and physical sampling procedures and tests in FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance 

of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration (Permeability), on the cores obtained under section 3.3.

3.5 Cluster bridges will not typically be instrumented or monitored during the term of the LTBP 

Program.

3.6 Conduct other/optional tests, where applicable and as specified by the owner agency and/or 

FHWA.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for developing a plan for evaluating and testing cluster bridges.

6.1.1 A “cluster bridge” is a bridge that is one of a designated subset of the bridges within a specific 

type that meet a predefined set of NBI data (e.g., age range, design load, simple/continuous span 

type, maximum span length, etc.). The designated subset of bridges may be entirely within the 

boundaries of a certain State or may be situated along a multi-State corridor. Unless otherwise 

directed by FHWA, cores will be taken for the purpose of permeability testing only during the 

initial round of material testing. Permeability of the mature concrete is not expected to vary 

significantly with age.

6.2 Additional tests may be added for a particular cluster bridge. Given that each bridge is different, a 

specific test plan may be developed for a specific cluster bridge. 
3 PRE-PL-LO-002

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration. 

7.1.2 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

7.1.10 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

7.1.11 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

7.1.12 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

7.1.13 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

7.1.14 FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs.

7.1.15 FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints.

7.1.16 FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing.

7.1.17 FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks.

7.1.18 FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing.

7.1.19 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

7.1.20 FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration (Permeability).

7.2 External: None.

1 PRE-PL-LO-003

January 2016

TRAFFIC CONTROL, MAINTENANCE AND

PROTECTION OF TRAFFIC (MPT), AND PERMITS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 A traffic control and maintenance and protection of traffic (MPT) plan approved by a State 

department of transportation and any State-issued access permits for onsite bridge data collection 

for the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Establish contact with responsible parties within bridge owner organization and Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA): 

3.1.1 The primary contact with the bridge owner is the LTBP State Coordinator. This person facilitates 

the LTBP project and associated operations within their State. The State Coordinator determines 

the appropriate personnel for coordinating the field effort (PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and 

Coordination Plan).

3.1.2 The primary local contact within FHWA is the FHWA Division Bridge Engineer for the State 

where the bridge is located. 

3.1.3 With the LTBP State Coordinator’s assistance, contact the traffic control coordinator within the 

district or region where the bridge is located. 

3.2 Work with FHWA LTBP staff and/or other LTBP contractors to obtain the bridge plans and latest 

inspection report for the bridge being evaluated. The bridge file developed by LTBP with the 

bridge owner provides the base material required to develop the traffic control plan 

(PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction).

3.3 Responsibility:

3.3.1 Determine who is responsible for traffic control in four aspects:

3.3.1.1 Design of MPT plan.

3.3.1.2 Financial responsibility for MPT plan.

3.3.1.3 Approval of MPT plan.

3.3.1.4 Implementation of MPT plan.
2 PRE-PL-LO-003

January 2016

3.3.2 If the bridge owner is responsible for all traffic control responsibilities, then do the following:

3.3.2.1 Obtain a copy of the approved MPT plan for the bridge, and make sure all LTBP contractor 

personnel understand the plan, the timeframe LTBP contractor personnel are allowed on the 

bridge, and any areas of safety concern.

3.3.2.2 Apply for and obtain any State-required access permits for LTBP contractor personnel to evaluate 

the bridge.

3.3.2.3 Develop a Personal Health and Safety Plan for the bridge, following PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal 

Health and Safety Plan, and any State-specific requirements and guidelines.

3.3.2.4 Procure and/or supply any safety equipment required by the Personal Health and Safety Plan to 

all onsite LTBP contractor personnel.

3.3.3 If the LTBP contractor is responsible for all traffic control responsibilities, then do the following:

3.3.3.1 If the State has any preapproved contractors to perform maintenance of traffic, identify one of 

those contractors to perform the steps that follow. If not, then perform the steps that follow alone.

3.3.3.2 The field coordinator designs an MPT plan that follows the latest version of the Manual on 

Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and any State-specific requirements and guidelines. 

Submit it to the bridge owner for approval. If the bridge owner provides comments and/or rejects 

the MPT plan, then revise and resubmit the MPT, continuing the revisions and resubmissions

process until the MPT plan is approved.

3.3.3.3 Review the MPT plan with all LTBP contractor onsite personnel so they understand the plan, the 

window of time LTBP contractor personnel are allowed on the bridge, and any areas of safety 

concern.

3.3.3.4 Apply for and obtain any State-required access permits for LTBP contractor personnel to evaluate 

the bridge.

3.3.3.5 Develop a Personal Health and Safety Plan for the bridge, following PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal 

Health and Safety Plan, and any State-specific requirements and guidelines.

3.3.3.6 Procure and/or supply any safety equipment required by the Personal Health and Safety Plan to 

all onsite LTBP contractor personnel. 

3.4 Clearly establish communication requirements for traffic control as part of the entire field 

communication plan (PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan), including a list 

of emergency contacts. These requirements includes establishing and maintaining communication 

with local law enforcement and emergency responders throughout traffic interruption.

3.5 Ensuring all requirements are met before field work:

3.5.1 Any permits that are required onsite should be available but protected from exposure or damage. 

3.5.2 Ensure all required personnel or organizations have been notified of the impending traffic 

interruption and field work according to the communication plan. 

3.5.3 Check the traffic control to verify that the plan has been implemented as designed and that onsite 

staff are safe while in the closure area. 

3.6 Maintaining records: 

3.6.1 Maintain records, including the MPT plan, permits, photo documentation, and logs of any issues

or accidents that may arise during the field work.

3.6.2 Take photographs using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes, and 

create a photo log.
3 PRE-PL-LO-003

January 2016

3.7 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.7.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.7.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.8 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Approved MPT plan BLOB NA Attachment Blue

9 Permit BLOB NA

Approved State-issued access 

permit for evaluation of the 

bridge

Yellow

10 Other Permit BLOB NA

Second approved State-issued 

permit for evaluation of the 

bridge (if applicable)

Yellow

11 Comments Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.
4 PRE-PL-LO-003

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for establishing a safe, efficient traffic control and MPT plan for 

any onsite data collection for the LTBP Program. 

6.2 Ideally, the bridge owner will provide traffic control during field work at bridges, but if that is not 

possible, an MPT plan must be developed. The LTBP Program is a nationwide program, and 

requirements vary significantly from State to State. 

6.3 Each State has specific and often different requirements for traffic control procedures included in 

its design standards and State traffic control device manual. These requirements may include 

permitting requirements, lead times, communication chains, inclusion of State or local law 

enforcement, or many other logistical specifics. Establish requirements via the traffic control 

coordinator. Requirements for State-specific traffic control above and beyond the FHWA 

MUTCD are provided on the FHWA MUTCD Web site. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan.

7.1.4 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition 

with Revisions 1 and 2 Incorporated, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 2012.

7.2.2 State-specific requirements and/or guidelines for maintenance and protection of traffic: 

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/.
1 PRE-PL-LO-004

January 2016

PERSONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides guidance for developing a personal health and safety plan for onsite 

protection of staff.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Develop a bridge-specific personal health and safety plan that follows both Occupational Safety 

and Health Administration and bridge owner requirements and contains the following 

components as a minimum.

3.2 Emergency contact information and call chain: List of people to contact and the order in which to 

contact them in case of an emergency or unexpected changes to the operational plan. 

(PRE-PL-LO-007 Communication and Coordination Plan).

3.3 Site specific hazards and concerns: Any site concerns particular to the bridge, such as water, 

poison ivy, proximity to heavy traffic, or potential animal threats. 

3.4 Work zone safety: Develop a work zone safety plan according to PRE-PL-LO-003, Traffic 

Control, Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (MPT), and Permits; the current version of 

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD); and any State transportation department 

guidance. 

3.5 General personal protection equipment (PPE) requirements: Standard list of minimum personal

protection equipment that each onsite staff person should have on their person while on the bridge 

site. This includes but is not limited to the following:

3.5.1 Safety glasses.

3.5.2 Hardhat.

3.5.3 Class 3 safety vest.

3.5.4 Gloves.

3.5.5 Long pants.

3.5.6 Closed toe shoes/steel toe boots.

3.5.7 Ear plugs.
2 PRE-PL-LO-004

January 2016

3.6 Other required onsite safety equipment: Minimum safety equipment at the site level; for example,

a first aid kit. 

3.7 Task specific safety equipment: Any equipment that is specific to the site or a particular task. 

This includes but is not limited to the following:

3.7.1 Fall protection (harness).

3.7.2 Face shield (grinding).

3.7.3 Dust mask (grinding).

3.7.4 Personal flotation devices (if working on, over, or near water).

3.8 General well-being equipment and recommendations: Instructions for keeping the team healthy 

and functional onsite. This includes but is not limited to the following:

3.8.1 Sunscreen.

3.8.2 Access to a restroom.

3.8.3 Drinking water and food.

3.9 Onsite personnel daily signin sheet: A daily log of who was onsite and when during each day. 

The log is signed during the morning safety meeting at the start of the work day.

3.10 Distribute the safety plan to the entire onsite team prior to commencement of field activities.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 Provides guidance on developing a plan for health and safety on a bridge. This plan covers 

personal safety, including PPE, work zone safety, and first aid preparation.

6.2 Additional guidance can be found in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Work Zone 

Operations Best Practices Guidebook. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-003, Traffic Control, Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (MPT), and Permits.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan.

7.2 External:
3 PRE-PL-LO-004

January 2016

7.2.1 FWHA-HOP-13-012, Work Zone Operations Best Practices Guidebook, Federal Highway 

Administration, Washington, DC, 2013.

7.2.2 FHWA, Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition 

with Revisions 1 and 2 Incorporated, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 2012.

7.2.3 Occupational Safety and Health Administration Web site, https://www.osha.gov/.

1 PRE-PL-LO-005

January 2016

PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-005

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a list of qualifications for personnel for field work and postvisit data 

usage.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Table 1 lists the general qualifications for all personnel working onsite at any bridge as part of the 

Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program. Additional, more stringent requirements are 

provided for personnel acting as assessment technique team leaders and for other staff members.

Table 1. Personnel Qualifications.

POSITION REQUIREMENTS

ALL ONSITE STAFF INCLUDING TEAM LEADERS

LTBP protocol training for relevant data collection tasks (specific to 

type of data collection to be performed)

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 10-hour Road 

Construction Safety Certification

Fall Protection Training (for access trucks, etc.)

VISUAL INSPECTION TEAM LEADER

National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS)

Team leaders must be one of the following (adopted from Metrics for 

the Oversight of the National Bridge Inspection Program)

 Professional engineer.

 Five years of bridge inspection experience.

 National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies 

(NICET) Level III or IV Bridge Safety Inspector Certification.

 Bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Accreditation Board 

for Engineering and Technology (ABET)-accredited college or 

university; a passing score on the Fundamentals of 

Engineering Exam; and 2 years of bridge inspection 

experience.

 Associate’s degree in engineering from an ABET-accredited 

college or university and 4 years of bridge inspection 

experience.

In addition, team leaders must have the following training:

 Successful completion of Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA)-approved comprehensive bridge inspection training.

 Completion of periodic bridge inspection refresher training 

according to NBIS.
2 PRE-PL-LO-005

January 2016

POSITION REQUIREMENTS

NDE TEAM LEADER RABITTM bridge deck inspection tool training (operators)

MATERIAL SAMPLING

American Concrete Institute, Concrete Laboratory Testing 

Technician—Level 1

American Concrete Institute, Concrete Field Testing Technician—

Grade 1

3.2 Submit a list of staff qualifications to FHWA prior to commencing field work.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 NICET is a division of the National Society for Professional Engineers with a mission promoting 

excellence in engineering technologies through certification and related services. Within this 

mission, NICET provides four levels of Bridge Safety Inspection Certification. 

6.2 ABET is the entity that ensures quality of engineering and related science and technology 

education programs. If an institution is accredited by ABET, one can be confident that certain 

quality standards in education are met. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols: All.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA, National Bridge Inspection Standards, 2009 Final Rule, Federal Register, Volume 74, 

Number 246, Pages 68377–68379, Washington, DC, 2009.

7.2.2 FHWA-HIBS-30-NBIPOT, Metrics for the Oversight of the National Bridge Inspection Program, 

Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 2013.
1 PRE-PL-LO-006

January 2016

POWER AND NETWORK REQUIREMENTS

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-006

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides guidance for developing a plan of action for obtaining power and 

network access at a given bridge site for truck testing, vibration testing, long-term monitoring, 

local data storage, remote data storage, and/or lighting for night fieldwork.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Generator (at least 2 kW, but small and lightweight is preferred). (See section 6.3 for power 

requirements.)

2.1.3 Gas container.

2.1.4 Motor oil.

2.1.5 Funnel.

2.1.6 Wireless modem with paid subscription to an Internet service provider and static IP address.

2.1.7 WiFi hotspot.

2.1.8 Extension cords.

2.1.9 Network cable.

2.1.10 Ethernet connectors, spare Ethernet cable, and crimpers.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Develop a plan for power and network access. The plan should address the following:

3.1.1 Types of equipment used at the bridge.

3.1.2 Nearest electrical power source to the bridge. Use independent power when available onsite. An 

independent power source is required for long-term monitoring. (See section 6.3 for power 

requirements.)

3.1.3 Need for a generator and required attributes for a generator. A generator can serve as a short-term 

power source. It is not recommended for semipermanent installations (more than 30 days). 

3.1.4 Loss of power and battery backups for key equipment.

3.1.5 Cell phone signal strength at the bridge and active service agreement.

3.1.6 Need for a wireless hotspot. Cellular modem (3G or LTE) or a WiFi hotspot can provide 

short-term network connectivity and connectivity in remote locations. 
2 PRE-PL-LO-006

January 2016

It is not recommended for semipermanent installations (more than 30 days). (See section 6.4 for 

external network requirements.)

3.1.7 Spare parts for key pieces of equipment.

3.2 Table 1provides the requirements for power and the network for the assessment methods used on 

a bridge in the LTBP Program.

Table 1. Power and Network Requirements by Technique.

ASSESSMENT METHOD POWER NETWORK

VISUAL INSPECTION None None

NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING None None

MATERIAL SAMPLING None None

TRUCK TESTING Generator None

VIBRATION TESTING Generator None

LONG-TERM MONITORING Independent

Hardwire, 

wireless modem, 

or combination

REMOTE DATA STORAGE Generator Wireless modem

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol describes the elements needed in a plan for power and access at a bridge site.

6.2 The primary function of external network access on a bridge is to ensure the local and remote 

storage and backup of collected data (FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—

Remote).

6.3 Power requirements:

6.3.1 Generators: 

6.3.1.1 For most applications, a portable gasoline generator is needed to provide power. 

6.3.1.2 Even if testing is limited to an application where power may not be required, having a generator 

available is useful. 

6.3.1.3 The generator must be able to provide at least 2,000 W with 2 or more 30-amp circuits and supply 

120 V of power. 
3 PRE-PL-LO-006

January 2016

6.3.1.4 Extension cords, a gas can, funnel, and motor oil are required for use with the generator. 

6.3.1.5 Operate and maintain the generator according to manufacturer specifications, including safety 

requirements and proper ventilation. 

6.3.1.6 Keep tools and sensitive equipment on separate circuits within the generator. 

6.3.1.7 Assign one onsite staff person to maintain the fuel level in the generator throughout the testing. 

6.3.1.8 Loss of power during a test can result in the loss of valuable data, which could cause delays. 

6.3.2 Independent power sources:

6.3.2.1 If an independent power source is not available in advance, then it must be brought to the bridge 

site. Providing an independent power source to a bridge requires coordination between the State, 

the local power company, and the project team. Solar panels and backup batteries may be used as 

a stopgap solution or when it is impossible to route power to the bridge. This stopgap solution is 

not desirable as it requires more maintenance and is subject to vandalism. 

6.3.2.2 Fiber optic systems can be located at remote locations and connected to the bridge via fiber 

without detrimental effects on signal or power. 

6.4 External network requirements:

6.4.1 A cellular modem with an active service plan is adequate for short-term applications. 

6.4.2 A wireless hotspot is adequate when WiFi-ready equipment is used. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.3 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

1 PRE-PL-LO-007

January 2016

COMMUNICATION AND COORDINATION PLAN

LTBP Protocol #: PRE-PL-LO-007

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides guidance for establishing a communication and coordination plan 

prior to any field assessment.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: Computer.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Develop a communication and coordination plan to provide contact information for each bridge 

to be evaluated, prior to any field assessment. 

3.2 The plan should include the following:

3.2.1 The following contact information for all onsite personnel:

3.2.1.1 Full name.

3.2.1.2 Email address.

3.2.1.3 Office phone (if relevant).

3.2.1.4 Cell phone.

3.2.2 The following contact information for the State department of transportation, local Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA) division office, local and/or State police department, FHWA 

Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program contacts, emergency contacts, and other 

personnel: 

3.2.2.1 Name of department or agency.

3.2.2.2 Name of contact person.

3.2.2.3 Office phone—General.

3.2.2.4 Office phone—Direct line.

3.2.2.5 Cell phone (optional).

3.2.3 Contact information for the following unexpected scenarios:

3.2.3.1 Medical emergency.

3.2.3.2 Vehicular incident.

3.2.3.3 Inclement weather.

3.2.3.4 Need for a change to the data collection plan.

3.2.3.5 Communication with traveling public.

3.2.3.6 Unexpected media visits.
2 PRE-PL-LO-007

January 2016

3.2.4 The specifics about when the bridge owner, State or local police, the local FHWA office, and 

FHWA LTBP Program contacts will need to be contacted. 

3.3 Ensure that onsite staff has access to the communication and coordination plan while onsite. 

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on establishing a communication plan to be distributed to all 

onsite personnel. 

6.2 The communication plan provides a comprehensive list of the external parties that need to be 

contacted prior to and during any field work and visits to the bridge site. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols: None.

7.2 External: None.
FIELD VISIT PROTOCOLS (FLD)

ONSITE PRETEST ACTIVITIES (OP)

SITE PREPAREDNESS (SP)

SPATIAL CONTEXT (SC)

FIELD DATA COLLECTION (DC)

PHOTOGRAPHY (PH)

MATERIAL SAMPLING (MS)

NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION (NDE)

VISUAL INSPECTION—STEEL ELEMENTS (VIS)

VISUAL INSPECTION—CONCRETE ELEMENTS (VIC)

VISUAL INSPECTION—BEARINGS (VIB)

VISUAL INSPECTION—JOINTS (VIJ)

DATA STORAGE (DS)

LOCAL STORAGE (LS)

REMOTE STORAGE (RS)

SITE PREPAREDNESS PROTOCOLS (SP)

FLD-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation

1 FLD-OP-SP-001

January 2016

SITE PREPARATION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-OP-SP-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides guidance for site preparation to facilitate onsite data collection 

activities.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.1.3 Hand water sprayer.

2.1.4 Brooms.

2.1.5 Water-soluble paint for marking areas where travel should not occur (if necessary).

2.2 Personnel: 

2.2.1 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Site visit: A site visit to the bridge should precede any visual inspection, nondestructive 

evaluation (NDE), and/or material sampling data collection. A site visit includes the following:

3.1.1 Verifying bridge structure number, girder type, and wearing surface (untreated or treated deck).

3.1.2 Identifying access requirements.

3.1.3 Identifying equipment needed for field data collection.

3.1.4 Identifying staging areas for contractor equipment, parking, and live load trucks for testing.

3.1.5 Determining site-specific concerns to address.

3.1.6 Cleaning the top of the bridge and preparing the structure for data collection. 

3.1.7 Identifying areas for instrumentation (if applicable).

3.1.8 Marking areas for sensors and data acquisition equipment with water-soluble paint. 

3.1.9 Marking any location where equipment cannot travel.

3.2 Cleaning:

3.2.1 Certain NDE techniques require the deck to be clear of any large debris and accumulations of dirt 

and sediment. Underside access requires that any large undergrowth be eliminated if possible. 

3.2.2 Request, through appropriate channels, that the bridge owner provide deck cleaning and 

underbrush trimming before the test. 
2 FLD-OP-SP-001

January 2016

If prior trimming or cleaning is not possible, obtain approval from the bridge owner to clean the 

bridge deck the night before testing (inclusive of traffic control), or leave time for cleaning during 

data collection. 

3.3 Prewetting: Due to the use of water-soluble paint marking the grid on the deck, only prewet the 

deck with a hand sprayer immediately in front of the resistivity test. 

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on the details of a site visit to the bridge before any data 

collection begins.

6.2 Staging areas are areas either on, adjacent, below, or otherwise nearby the bridge designated for 

specific purposes. For a full field data collection effort, staging areas accommodate visual 

inspection, NDE, and material sampling. 

6.3 Identify and clear parking areas with local law enforcement per PRE-PL-LO-007, 

Communication and Coordination Plan. Include parking for personnel transportation, access 

equipment, and equipment transportation in the plan. The parking area provides easy access via 

vehicle to both the underside and topside of the bridge and allows for safe travel on foot to the 

bridge. Parking areas must not infringe upon private property or local businesses without 

permission from the owner.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-007, Communication and Coordination Plan.

7.2 External: None.
SPATIAL CONTEXT PROTOCOLS (SC)

FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks

FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System

FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements

October 2015 1 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

DATA COLLECTION GRID AND 

COORDINATE SYSTEM FOR BRIDGE DECKS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-OP-SC-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Physical layout of a grid for data collection on a bridge deck.

1.2 Location and description of the origin for a rectangular coordinate system.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Temporary (water-soluble) paint.

2.1.3 Measuring wheel.

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Hand compass or other device for measuring angles.

2.1.6 Jig or similar tool for marking the grid nodes.

2.1.7 Temporary marker.

2.1.8 Digital camera.

2.1.9 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Measure and record the bridge skew angle.

3.2 Establish the origin of the rectangular coordinate system at the end of the bridge with the lowest 

mileage point on the linear referencing system of the route that is carried on the bridge. For 

bridges on highways that to do not have a linear referencing system, the origin will be located at 

the most southerly point on the northbound side of a north-south local road or the most westerly 

point on the eastbound side of an east-west local road.

3.2.1 Mark the origin for the coordinate system for bridge decks with water-soluble paint.

3.2.2 The x-axis runs parallel to the centerline of the bridge. The positive direction is determined by the 

route’s linear referencing system. The y-axis runs across the width of the deck. The convention 

used is shown in figures 1 through 5, which shows the general location of the origin for different 

combinations of bridge and traffic patterns. In the case of skewed bridges, the rectangular 

coordinate system is retained, and the skew angle measured and noted with respect to the y-axis.
October 2015 2 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

Figure 1. Illustration. Local coordinate origin for non-skewed bridge with two-way traffic.

Figure 2. Illustration. Local coordinate origin for skewed bridge with two-way traffic—right-hand skew angle.

Figure 3. Illustration. Local coordinate origin for skewed bridge with two-way traffic—left-hand skew angle.
October 2015 3 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

Figure 4. Illustration. Local coordinate origin for non-skewed twin bridges with one-way traffic.

Figure 5. Illustration. Local coordinate origin for non-skewed single bridge with two-way traffic

and a median barrier.
October 2015 4 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

3.3 In accordance with the right-hand rule, the positive z-axis protrudes from the bridge deck towards 

the sky.

3.4 The rectangular coordinate system for the bridge deck is established with an origin (x = 0, y = 0, 

z = 0) matching the intersection of either of the following (figure 6):

3.4.1 The innermost face of a solid bridge parapet or raised curb and the transverse edge of the top of 

the deck.

3.4.2 The outer edge of the bridge deck (beyond an open metal railing) and the transverse edge of the 

top of the deck.

Figure 6. Illustration. Location of the deck local origin on bridges with different types of safety barriers.

3.5 The coordinates of the grid nodes and other points on a deck surface are numeric, corresponding 

to the distance (measured in feet) from the origin. That is, a point described as (2.25, 6.5, 0.0) is a 

location on the top surface of the deck 2.25 ft longitudinally and 6.5 ft transversely from the 

origin.

NOTE—For the sake of simplicity, all points on the top surface of the deck are considered as 

having a z coordinate of 0.0.

3.6 Create a 2- by 2-ft data collection grid.

3.6.1 For all bridges, skewed or not skewed, set the first grid point using a 2-ft offset along the y-axis 

from the coordinate system origin.

3.6.2 Mark the 2- by 2-ft grid on the rest of the top surface of the bridge deck using temporary, watersoluble paint (figure 7).

3.6.3 A jig, or similar apparatus, can be used to standardize the process and quickly mark the grid

(figure 7). 

3.6.3.1 Use the rolling wheel to mark nodes spaced 10 ft apart across the deck in both the longitudinal 

and transverse directions. These markings help properly line up the jig and prevent the 

propagation and accumulation of error as the jig is moved across the bridge. 
October 2015 5 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

3.6.3.2 Align the jig with the coordinate system origin, and mark the 2- by 2-ft nodes with temporary 

paint. 

3.6.3.3 Move the jig forward, realign it with the end of the marked grid, and mark the nodes.

3.6.3.4 Repeat the process to extend the grid across the bridge and to the end of the approach slab.

Figure 7. Photo. Layout of the data collection grid with jig.

3.6.4 A grid similar to the one in figure 8 is replicated on the bridge at the start of each data collection 

cycle. The origin of the grid should always match the origin established at the time of the first 

data collection cycle.

3.7 Take photos of the coordinate system origin and the grid laid out on the deck using 

FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.8 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.8.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.8.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.9 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge 

Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green
October 2015 6 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date grid created Text Exact date Date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Description of the 

location of the grid 

origin

Description of the origin of the 

coordinate system; e.g., on the 

top surface of the deck at the 

junction of the top transverse 

edge of the deck and the 

interior face of the raised curb 

or the parapet

Green

9

Bridge skew angle with 

respect to y-axis Number 1

Degrees 

and 

minutes

If applicable Yellow

10

Photo of bridge deck 

with coordinate system 

origin marked with 

temporary marker

BLOB Yellow

11 Photo of bridge deck 

with grid painted on it BLOB Yellow

12 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measured skew angle to the value obtained using PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and 

Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

5.2 Verify origin is properly located; spot check painted nodes with tape measure to verify 2- by 2-ft 

spacing.

5.3 Tolerances for grid location: actual x and y coordinates of each painted node must be within 

1 inch (0.083 feet) of the theoretical coordinate system values.
October 2015 7 FLD-OP-SC-001

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol describes how a rectangular coordinate system is established at each bridge and a 

2- by 2-ft data collection grid is laid out on the top of the deck before data collection begins. The

coordinate system provides a fixed reference for locating the position of defects observed on the 

top surface of the deck or overlay (if any) and the approach slabs; it also provides a fixed 

reference for locating sampling or testing points where NDE tests will be conducted, cores will be 

obtained, etc. A common coordinate system allows data from all testing methods to be easily tied 

to a location on the bridge and facilitates data fusion and analysis, allowing data from different 

tests to be layered and directly compared.

6.2 The linear referencing system is a system that allows location of any point or feature on a 

highway with respect to a known point. On a highway, the linear referencing system is often 

shown using mile post numbers, which generally increase from south to north or west to east. The 

zero mileage point of the route’s linear referencing system is at the southernmost or the 

westernmost point of the route within the State lines.

6.3 The locations of defects as well as sampling and testing points on other elements of the bridge, 

including the underside of the deck, girders, etc., are identified and documented using the element 

identification system described in FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element 

Identification System, and the local element origins established using FLD-OP-SC-003, 

Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

1 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

STRUCTURE SEGMENTATION 

AND ELEMENT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-OP-SC-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a system for creating a unique identifier for each bridge element 

other than the deck.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Assign a unique identifier to each element of the bridge superstructure and the substructure using 

the system described below. The unique identifier is a combination of alphanumeric characters, 

with the number and sequence of characters depending on the type of element being identified. 

Figure 1 shows an example of the unique identifiers for a two-span continuous bridge with five

lines of girders in each span and diaphragms between the girders at the one-quarter points and 

over the pier.

Figure 1. Illustration. Element identification system—girder example.
2 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

3.2 Spans: The span number is the first character of the identifiers for the elements that comprise the 

superstructure. Spans are numbered sequentially, proceeding from the coordinate system origin 

along the x-axis in the positive direction. The span nearest to the deck origin is span 1; the next 

span proceeding along the x-axis is span 2; and so on until span N, where N is the total number of 

spans in the bridge.

3.3 Girders: The identifier for girders takes the form of “1A,” where:

3.3.1 The first character is the span number.

3.3.2 The second character is a letter, identifying the girder line. “A” is the girder line closest to the 

deck origin; “B” is the next closest, etc.

3.4 Diaphragms: Diaphragms are labeled along each diaphragm line, starting with the diaphragm line 

closest to deck origin. The identifier for diaphragms takes the form of “1Di1AB,” where:

3.4.1 The first character is the span number.

3.4.2 The next component of the identifier is “Di” plus an integer, identifying the diaphragm line 

number. Di1 is the diaphragm line closest to the deck origin; DiN is the diaphragm line in the 

span farthest from the deck origin. 

3.4.3 When the superstructure is continuous over a pier and there is only one diaphragm line at the pier, 

that diaphragm is identified as the Nth diaphragm in the span with the lower number.

3.4.4 The last two characters are letters, identifying the two girders to which the diaphragm is

connected.

3.5 Secondary members: Secondary members are identified and labeled on a case-by-case basis. For 

example, if there is wind bracing between girder A and B along the length of the span, it is

identified using a four-component label in the form of “1AB-WB,” where:

3.5.1 The first character is the span number.

3.5.2 The second and third characters are letters, identifying the two girders to which the secondary 

member is connected.

3.5.3 The last component of the identifier, preceded by a dash, signifies the type of secondary member.

For example, a wind brace (WB) between girders A and B in span 1 is identified as 1AB-WB.

3.6 Girder bays: The identifier for locating defects or instrumentation on the underside of the deck 

between girders takes the form of “1AB,” where:

3.6.1 The first character is the span number.

3.6.2 The second and third characters are letters, identifying the two girders that are the sides of the 

bays.

3.7 Overhangs: The identifier for locating defects or instrumentation occurring on deck overhangs 

outside of the exterior girders takes the form of “1AZ,” where:

3.7.1 The first character is an integer and identifies the span number.

3.7.2 The second character is a letter, identifying the exterior girder closest to the overhang.

3.7.3 The third character is always the letter “Z,” indicating the defect or instrumentation is on an 

overhang. The letter Z has been chosen to denote overhangs because most girder bridges will not 

have more than 25 girder lines.
3 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

3.8 Abutments: The abutment nearest to the deck origin is abutment A; the other abutment is 

abutment B. The deck origin is used to set the orientation of the wingwalls. For abutments, the 

right wingwall is closest to the deck origin, while the left wingwall is farthest from the deck 

origin.

3.9 Piers/pier caps: Piers are numbered sequentially, proceeding from the deck origin along the x-axis 

in the positive direction. The pier nearest to the deck origin is pier 1; the next pier proceeding 

along the x-axis is pier 2; and so on until pier N, where N is the total number of piers in the 

bridge. 

3.10 Pier columns/piles: The identifier for pier columns/piles takes the form of “P1C1,” where:

3.10.1 The first two characters are the identifier for the pier.

3.10.2 The last two characters are the letter “C” and the column number.

3.10.3 The pier column nearest the deck origin is pier column 1. The first pier column located closest to 

the deck origin is identified as “P1C1.” In the case where piles are visible or there are multiple 

rows of pier columns/piles, identification starts at the column/pier nearest the deck origin and 

proceeds along the y-axis until the end of the row. Identification continues to be numbered in this 

manner for each row of columns/piles.

3.11 Joints: Joints are identified by their respective abutment or pier.

3.11.1 The joint at abutment A is joint A, and the joint at abutment B is joint B.

3.11.2 The joint at pier 1 is joint P1; the joint at the next pier proceeding along the x-axis is joint P2, and 

so on until joint PN, where N is the number of piers in the bridge. 

3.12 Bearings: Bearings are identified by a letter, identifying their location on an abutment or pier 

along the y-axis. 

3.12.1 The identifier for bearings at abutments takes the form of “bearing AA,” where:

3.12.1.1 The first character is a letter, identifying the abutment.

3.12.1.2 The second character is a letter, identifying its location along the y-axis. The bearing at abutment 

A nearest to the deck origin is bearing AA; the next bearing proceeding along the y-axis is 

bearing AB, and so on. The bearing at abutment B nearest to the x-axis is bearing BA; the next 

bearing proceeding along the y-axis is bearing BB, and so on.

3.12.2 The identifier for bearings at piers takes the form of “bearing P1A[1],” where the first two 

characters identify the pier number, and the last one or two characters identify its location along 

the y-axis.

3.12.2.1 When two adjacent spans are continuous for dead load, the pier has one bearing line, as shown in 

the example in figure 1. The bearing nearest the x-axis at pier 1 is bearing P1A; the next bearing 

proceeding along the y-axis is bearing P1B; and so on until bearing P1N, where N is the total 

number of bearings on the pier.

3.12.2.2 When two adjacent spans are simply supported, the pier has two bearing lines. When a pier has 

two bearing lines, the bearing numbers at pier 1 have an additional labeling component consisting 

of the integer 1 or 2 at the end of the bearing number. The bearings in the first bearing line (the 

one closest to the deck origin) are bearings P1A1 through P1N1; the bearings in the second 

bearing line at pier 1 are bearings P1A2 through P1N2.
4 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

3.13 The following describes the segmentation of the two-span continuous bridge shown in figure 1 

using the system described above. Items marked with an asterisk (*) are not assigned a unique 

element identifier.

 Span 1

o Deck

 Railings*

 Curb*

 Overlay*

 Top of deck*

 Bottom of deck*

 Bays 1AB 1BC 1CD 1DE

 Overhangs

 Overhang 1AZ

 Overhang 1EZ

o Superstructure

 Girder 1A

 Girder 1B

 Girder 1C

 Girder 1D

 Girder 1E

 Diaphragms

 End diaphragms 1Di1AB, 1Di1BC, 1Di1CD, 1Di1DE

 Intermediate diaphragms 1Di2AB, 1Di2BC, 1Di2CD, 1Di2DE

 Intermediate diaphragms 1Di3AB, 1Di3BC, 1Di3CD, 1Di3DE

 Intermediate diaphragms 1Di4AB, 1Di4BC, 1Di4CD, 1Di4DE

 End diaphragms 1Di5AB, 1Di5BC, 1Di5CD, 1Di5DE

 Secondary Members – None

o Abutment A

 Left wingwall

 Right wingwall

 Joint A

 Bearings

 Bearing AA

 Bearing AB

 Bearing AC 

 Bearing AD 

 Bearing AE

 Bridge pedestal/seat*

 Backwall*

 Stem*

 Footings*

 Piles

o Pier 1 (repeat for total number of piers)

 Joint P1

 Pier cap 

 Bearings

 Bearing P1A

 Bearing P1B

 Bearing P1C 
5 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

 Bearing P1D 

 Bearing P1E

 Pier columns

 Pier Column P1C1

 Pier Column P1C2

 Pier Column P1C3

 Pier Column P1C4

 Footings*

 Piles

 Span 2

o Deck

 Railings*

 Curb*

 Overlay*

 Top of deck*

 Bottom of deck*

 Bays 2AB 2BC 2CD 2DE

 Overhangs

 Overhang 2AZ

 Overhang 2EZ

o Superstructure

 Girder 2A

 Girder 2B

 Girder 2C

 Girder 2D

 Girder 2E

 Diaphragms

 Intermediate diaphragms 2Di1AB, 2Di1BC, 2Di1CD, 2Di1DE

 Intermediate diaphragms 2Di2AB, 2Di2BC, 2Di2CD, 2Di2DE

 Intermediate diaphragms 2Di3AB, 2Di3BC, 2Di3CD, 2Di3DE

 End diaphragms 2Di4AB, 2Di4BC, 2Di4CD, 2Di4DE

 Secondary Members – None

o Abutment B

 Left wingwall

 Right wingwall

 Joint B

 Bearings

 Bearing BA

 Bearing BB

 Bearing BC 

 Bearing BD 

 Bearing BE

 Bridge pedestal/seat*

 Backwall*

 Stem*

 Footings*

 Piles
6 FLD-OP-SC-002

 January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 It is not practical to use the rectangular coordinate system on the top of the deck 

(FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks) as a basis for 

locating, measuring, and documenting defects or placing instrumentation on other elements of the 

bridge, including abutments, wingwalls, pier columns, pier caps, joints, bearings, girders, 

diaphragms, secondary superstructure elements, girder bays, and deck overhangs. For these 

elements, it is more practical to have an identification system that creates a unique identifier for 

each individual element. The identification system assigns each individual element a unique 

identifier consisting of a specific combination of whole numbers and letters. 

6.2 The origin of the rectangular coordinate system for the top of the deck is the starting point for 

numbering and lettering of elements. Refer to FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and 

Coordinate System for Bridge Decks, for a description of the coordinate system and for the 

location of the coordinate system origin.

6.3 Web stiffeners, both vertical and longitudinal, are not assigned a unique element identifier; they 

are considered part of the steel girder element.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.2 External: None.
October 2015 1 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

DETERMINATION OF LOCAL ORIGINS FOR ELEMENTS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-OP-SC-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 This protocol provides guidance for locating local origins for data collection on bridge elements

other than the deck, deck overlay, or approach slabs.

1.2 Descriptions, sketches, and/or photographs of the local element origins.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Temporary marker.

2.1.3 Digital camera.

2.1.4 Pen, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Identify the origin of the rectangular local coordinate system and the data collection grid for the 

deck (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks). 

3.2 Segment the bridge, the superstructure, and substructure into individual elements such as girders, 

abutments, bearings, etc. Identify each element with a unique element identifier 

(FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System).

3.3 Identify a local origin on each individual element to be evaluated; use this point for locating 

defects on the element. There are three directions of the triaxial coordinate system that originate 

at each element local origin:

3.3.1 X – Longitudinal along the bridge.

3.3.2 Y – Transverse to the direction of travel.

3.3.3 Z – Vertical.

3.4 Establish the local element origins as follows:

3.4.1 Girders: Establish the local origin for girders at the end of the girder nearest to the deck origin in 

the “X” direction, as shown in figures 1 through 4.
October 2015 2 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

Figure 1. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on steel I-beam—isometric view.

Figure 2. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on steel I-beam—elevation view.

Figure 3. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on concrete I-beam—isometric 

view.
October 2015 3 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

Figure 4. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on concrete I-beam—

elevation view.

3.4.2 Diaphragms: Establish the local origin for the diaphragms at the point nearest to the deck origin 

in the “Y” direction and at the lowest point possible on the diaphragm in the “Z” direction. When 

locating defects on the diaphragm, ignore the effects of skew on the x-coordinate. 

3.4.3 Secondary members: Establish the local origin for all secondary members following the same 

scheme as the diaphragms. If the members are in plane with the deck, then the y- and xcoordinates of the local origin will be closest to the deck origin as possible. 

3.4.4 Girder bays: Establish the local origin for girder bays (stay-in-place forms, or exposed deck 

undersides) at a point on the underside of the forms or the exposed deck nearest to the deck origin 

in the “X” and “Y” directions. 

3.4.5 Overhangs: Establish the local origin for overhangs at a point on the underside of the nearest to 

the deck origin in the “X” and “Y” directions. 

3.4.6 Abutments: Establish the local origin for abutment A on the top of the abutment cap at the point 

closest to the deck origin in the “X” and “Y” directions (figure 5). Establish the local origin for 

abutment B on the top of the abutment cap at the point farthest from the deck origin in the “X” 

and “Y” directions.

Figure 5. Illustration. Location of local element origin on abutment stem.
October 2015 4 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

3.4.7 Pier caps: Establish the local origin for pier caps at the bottom corner closest to the deck origin in 

the “X” and “Y” directions. Locate defects by using the two directions that are in the plane of 

each face of the pier cap or pier. For example, defects on the top of the pier cap will be located in 

global “X” and “Y” directions, with the “Z” coordinate value remaining constant regardless of 

skew or super elevations. Figures 6 through 9 illustrate the location of the origin on typical pier 

elements.

Figure 6. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on pier cap with square end—

isometric view.

Figure 7. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on pier cap with square end—

plan view.
October 2015 5 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

Figure 8. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on pier cap with rounded end—

isometric view.

Figure 9. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on pier cap with rounded end—

plan view.
October 2015 6 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

3.4.8 Rectangular pier columns: Establish the local origin for rectangular pier columns at the top corner 

of the exposed length of the column closest to the deck origin in all three directions (figure 10).

Figure 10. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on square pier column.

3.4.9 Round pier columns: Establish the local element origin for round columns at the top of the 

exposed length of the column at the intersection of the circumference of the column and a 

tangential line parallel to the transverse direction of the cap. The local origin is defined as (0,0) 

for two dimensions: “z,” vertical on the column face; and “c,” around the circumference of the 

column (figure 11).

Figure 11. Illustration. Location of local element origin and defect coordinates on round pier column.
October 2015 7 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

3.4.10 Treat piles visible above ground the same as columns. 

3.4.11 Joints: Locate the local origin for joints at the end of the joint closest to the deck origin in the “Y” 

direction.

3.4.12 Bearings: Bearings are not described via coordinates and thus do not need a local element origin.

3.4.13 Use a temporary marker to mark typical local origins for each type of element. Take photos of 

each type of local origin using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes, 

and create a photo log.

3.5 Use sketches as needed to document locations of local origins and to supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge 

Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date element local 

origins established Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Element number Text e.g., P1 (pier 1) Blue

9

Portion of the element 

where local origin is 

being established

Text e.g., the concrete pier cap of 

pier P1 Blue

10 Description of local 

origin Text

e.g., bottom corner of the pier 

cap nearest to the local origin 

on the deck in the “X” and “Y” 

directions

Yellow

11 Photo BLOB Picture of local element origin 

identified on the element Yellow

12 Sketch BLOB

Sketch of the element with 

local element origin and 

relevant axis marked

Yellow

13 Comments Text Orange
October 2015 8 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or 

PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 For the elements identified in FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element 

Identification System, it is most efficient for each individual element to have a local origin from 

which measurements to the location of defects can be made. This protocol provides guidance on 

locating that origin and using the local origin to measure the location of defects. 

6.2 The local origin on each individual element has the local coordinates x = 0, y = 0, and z = 0.

6.3 If the theoretical location of the local origin is missing due to loss of section at the local origin’s 

point on the element, use straight edges to estimate its location for measurement to nearby 

defects.

6.4 Many elements will have one or more sets of parallel surfaces to be evaluated. For example:

6.4.1 A pier cap has top and bottom surfaces, two surfaces at opposite ends of the cap as well as the 

two opposite sides of the cap. 

6.4.2 A steel I-girder has the two opposing surfaces of the web as well as the bottom surface of the top 

flange and the top and bottom surfaces of the bottom flange.

6.4.3 A concrete I-girder has the two opposing surfaces of the web as well as the bottom surface of the 

beam and the sloped faces of the beam flanges.

6.5 For each surface of each element being evaluated, the points that describe the location of the 

defect will have two coordinates with variable values; the third coordinate will have a constant 

value that does not account for the effects of skew and/or superelevation. For example: 

6.5.1 For a defect on the end face of the square end pier cap, the y-coordinate will be either 0 for the 

end of the cap nearest the local origin or a value equal to the length of the pier cap for the end of 

the cap farthest from the local origin.

6.5.2 For a defect on the long face of the cap, the x-coordinate will be either 0 for the face of the cap 

nearest the local origin or a value equal to the width of the pier cap for the face of the cap farthest 

from the local origin.
October 2015 9 FLD-OP-SC-003

January 2016

6.5.3 For a defect on the top surface of the cap, the z-coordinate will always be a value equal to the 

depth of the pier cap; for a defect on the underside of the cap, the z-coordinate will always be 0.

6.6 The location of a linear defect (e.g., an individual crack) on an element is documented by 

determining the coordinates of the beginning and ending points of the defect on the element. The 

relevant coordinates—x, y, and/or z—are dependent on the type of element, the surface on which 

the defect is located, and the type of defect being documented. For example:

6.6.1 If the defect being documented is a crack located on the face of the web of a girder, the crack 

location is defined by the x and z coordinates of the beginning and end of the crack, plus a 

constant value for y. In this example, the orientation of the crack would be the angle between a 

straight line from the beginning to the end of the crack and the x-axis.

6.6.2 If the defect being documented is impact damage on the bottom flange of a steel girder, the 

location of the impact damage is defined by the x-coordinates of the beginning and end of the 

affected length of the flange.

6.7 The location of an area defect (such as an irregular spall) is documented by determining the 

coordinates of the four corners of a rectangle bordering the largest dimensions of the defect on the 

element. 

6.8 The location of defects on the surface of a round pier column differs from the location of defects 

on elements or parts of elements that have flat surfaces, such as rectangular pier columns. Unlike 

the rectangular column, it is not practical to project an x-axis and a y-axis on the face of the 

column because it is a continuous arc. Therefore, vertical measurements of defect locations are 

made along the z-axis, and horizontal measurements, “c,” are made on the circumference of the 

round column. For example:

6.8.1 To locate a linear defect (such as a crack) on the face of a round column, measure and record the 

z-coordinates and the circumferential measurement, “c,” at the beginning and end of a crack.

6.8.2 To locate an irregular defect (such as a spall) on the face of a round column, measure and record 

the z-coordinates and the circumferential measurement, “c,” of the four corners of a rectangle 

bordering the largest dimensions of the defect on the column.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

PHOTOGRAPHY PROTOCOLS (PH)

FLD-DC-PH-001, Photography Equipment Requirements

FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes

FLD-DC-PH-003, Image Naming

1 FLD-DC-PH-001

January 2016

PHOTOGRAPHY EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-PH-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides the specifications for photography equipment for onsite 

documentation and data collection.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Digital camera or smartphone with built-in camera, as described below.

2.1.2 Tripod (optional).

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 The equipment used must meet the following specifications, at a minimum:

3.1.1 Resolution: 8 megapixels.

3.1.2 Sensitivity for digital cameras: ISO 100 to ISO 1600 (minimum range).

3.1.3 Flash: built in.

3.1.4 Storage: 4 GB, internal or external.

3.1.5 Timestamping: Required.

3.1.6 Geotagging: Desired.

3.1.7 Video: Capable.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 The assessment team leader will verify the appropriateness of the team’s photo documentation 

equipment.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on the important characteristics of a camera for field 

documentation. Use only digital photography for field documentation.

6.2 Camera Types. There are several families of camera that meet these qualifications.
2 FLD-DC-PH-001

January 2016

6.2.1 “Point and shoot:”

6.2.1.1 Benefits:

 Compact.

 Affordable.

 Easy to operate.

 Expandable memory cards.

 Replaceable batteries.

 Can be dustproof and waterproof, making them versatile for field applications.

6.2.1.2 Drawbacks:

 Small, digital screen as opposed to a viewfinder for framing shots, resulting in focus and 

framing issues.

 Lack of geotagging.

 Poor performance in low light.

 Pixilation when zooming (digital zoom).

 A tendency for photographers to overestimate the quality of their images.

6.2.2 Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) cameras:

6.2.2.1 Benefits:

 Interchangeable lenses, expanding the camera’s capabilities.

 Viewfinder for framing shots, resulting in more high-quality images on the first shot.

 Users can control the camera settings in challenging imaging scenarios even with powerful 

automatic exposure tools.

 Expandable memory cards.

 Replaceable batteries.

6.2.2.2 Drawbacks:

 Price.

 Size.

 Steep learning curve for operation.

6.2.3 Smartphone cameras:

6.2.3.1 Benefits:

 Geotagging.

 Automatic cloud backup.

 Video and still image capabilities.

 Panoramic capabilities.

 High dynamic range (HDR) capabilities.

 Image quality on par with point and shoot cameras.

6.2.3.2 Drawbacks:

 Price.

 Susceptibility to damage.

 Pixilation when zooming.

 Poor performance in low light, depending on smartphone model.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols: None.

7.2 External: None.
1 FLD-DC-PH-002

 January 2016

PHOTOGRAPHING FOR DOCUMENTATION PURPOSES

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-PH-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This is an instructional protocol to provide specifications for photography for onsite 

documentation and data collection. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Digital camera (FLD-DC-PH-001, Photography Equipment Requirements).

2.1.3 Tripod (optional).

2.1.4 Markers (optional).

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Plan and gather photographic documentation following these guidelines:

3.1.1 All personnel in any photographs must be wearing proper safety equipment.

3.1.2 Take photographs using the highest resolution possible.

3.1.3 Document the bridge structure (elevation view and plan view, if possible).

3.1.4 Document any defects found for each bridge element.

3.1.5 Document the surrounding site (waterway or highway underneath the structure).

3.1.6 Document data collection efforts.

3.2 To maximize the value of photos for the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program, use a 

multiscale approach to photography:

3.2.1 Large scale:

3.2.1.1 Work from a large-to-small or a general-to-specific scale. 

3.2.1.2 Approach the bridge in an organized manner, capturing all critical subjects. 

3.2.1.3 Provide global context by capturing traffic signs, lights, lanes, pedestrian travel routes, etc. 

3.2.1.4 Take images in cardinal directions for later reference. 

3.2.1.5 Provide panoramic shots of the entire scene. 

3.2.1.6 Provide point-of-view shots of interest, including overall shots, pedestrian views, driver views, 

and underside shots. 
2 FLD-DC-PH-002

 January 2016

3.2.2 Midrange scale:

3.2.2.1 The midrange scale provides relative context between specific bridge components and the 

structure as a whole. Components or features could be deteriorations or structural elements. 

3.2.2.2 Pay careful attention to the background of the image to avoid distracting backgrounds. 

3.2.3 Closeup scale:

3.2.3.1 These images are used to provide intimate details of features or deteriorations. 

3.2.3.2 For closeup photos, carefully focus the image. Closeup focus requires a stable camera and 

adequate lighting.

3.2.3.3 Fill the viewfinder with the subject. 

3.2.3.4 Closeup detail makes any sort of context impossible. Therefore, add external context such as 

scales, arrows, comments, direction of traffic, cardinal direction indicators, and numbers marking 

each feature. 

3.3 Creating a photo log: Create and maintain a photo log throughout the day. 

3.3.1 The log should include the following information:

3.3.1.1 State and bridge number.

3.3.1.2 Bridge element (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge 

Decks; FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System).

3.3.1.3 Date.

3.3.1.4 Image number.

3.3.1.5 Comment or description.

3.3.2 Include the State, bridge number, and date in the photo log file name. 

3.4 Immediately review images, if possible, to verify the quality of the image. 

3.5 Store the photo log and the raw image files according to FLD-DC-PH-003, Image Naming.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 Photography has an important role in documenting field data collection efforts. This protocol 

provides guidance on photography as part of the LTBP Program field data collection effort. 

6.2 Several photography techniques are valuable for LTBP Program documentation photography. 

6.2.1 Depth of field:

6.2.1.1 Depth of field is the amount or area of focus of an object. 
3 FLD-DC-PH-002

 January 2016

6.2.1.2 Depth of field typically decreases with longer focal length lens, larger aperture sizes, and smaller 

camera-to-subject distances. 

6.2.1.3 Small depth of field can make it difficult to ensure the subject matter is entirely in focus. 

6.2.1.4 Blurring the background of an image and highlighting the subject in focus may be a beneficial 

technique. 

6.2.2 Exposure:

6.2.2.1 Most modern cameras determine how much light to allow in (known as metering) based on an 

average of the entire scene captured in the viewfinder or image extents. This can result in 

overexposed or underexposed images. This requires practice and careful checking of images. 

6.2.2.2 Exposure settings can be manually configured or the camera metering can be modified based on 

the situation.

6.2.3 Bracketing:

6.2.3.1 Bracketing limits the effects of exposure issues by capturing the same image three times at 

different exposure levels. 

6.2.3.2 Bracketing is a feature of many modern cameras and can be used to provide backup images. 

6.2.4 Daytime flash. Using a flash during the day may seem counterintuitive to many, but it can be

used to put light into shadowed areas, and to add balance to an exposure. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-001, Photography Equipment Requirements.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-003, Image Naming.

7.2 External: None.

1 FLD-DC-PH-003

January 2016

IMAGE NAMING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-PH-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides guidance and specifications for manually organizing and naming 

images, as well as developing a final photo log, as part of data collection on a Long-Term Bridge 

Performance (LTBP) Program bridge.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Digital camera.

2.1.2 Computer.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Managing image files and the photo log from onsite data collection is the responsibility of the 

team member taking the photos. 

3.2 Organizing and storing images: 

3.2.1 In the absence of an automated (software-based) inspection with an image collection system, set 

up the following folder structure in advance of the site visit to allow for verification and easy 

duplication.

3.2.2 Establish a folder for the bridge on an onsite laptop. Label the folder “XX-#####,” where XX is 

the two-letter State identifier, and ##### refers to the NBI structure number.

3.2.3 Within the bridge folder, create daily folders for each day onsite, labeled, “YYYY-MM-DD.” 

3.2.4 Within each daily folder, create the following subfolders:

3.2.4.1 An assessment technique folder for each assessment performed, labeled according to the tertiary 

two- or three-letter abbreviation used in the protocol naming scheme (e.g., NDE, VIC). 

3.2.4.2 General folders, labeled “Overall,” “Site,” “Traffic,” and “Other.”

3.2.4.3 A folder labeled “Raw.” 

3.3 Raw images: Store all pictures taken in the “Raw” folder.

3.4 Curated images:

3.4.1 Curated images are those images selected and/or edited for inclusion in the curated photo log.

These images are selected based on quality and value (e.g., not blurry, the best of a set of 

duplicates, etc.). The curated photo log will contain only images to be imported into the LTBP 

Bridge Portal. 
2 FLD-DC-PH-003

January 2016

3.4.2 Only curated images are stored in the general and assessment technique folders. Store them in the 

following manner:

3.4.2.1 Copy (do not cut, delete, or move) images to be included in the curated photo log from the daily 

“Raw” folder to the appropriate daily general or assessment technique folder.

3.4.2.2 Rename the curated images from whatever the camera labels them (e.g., IMG_0001.jpg) to the 

format “###.jpg,” where ### is the number of the photo, continuous across all days onsite. Photo 

numbering should not restart each new day. 

3.5 Creating a photo log for curated images:

3.5.1 Create a curated photo log for the curated photos. The curated photo log references the curated 

image numbers and provides a cursory description of image content as outlined in the onsite 

photo log (FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Document Purposes).

3.5.2 Include the following in the image description, where applicable:

3.5.2.1 Element name (e.g., Girder, Bearing, Deck).

3.5.2.2 Element designation (per FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification 

System).

3.5.2.3 Span number (e.g., span 2).

3.6 By setting up the folders this way, the metadata for the image is contained in the file path. When 

imported into the LTBP Bridge Portal, the file path will be included as metadata, and the 

description in the curated photo log will be text-searchable captions. 

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on naming digital image files.

6.2 As an example of the procedure previously listed, consider the hypothetical file path:

C:/Pictures/PA-123456/2015-07-01/ND/007.jpg.

6.2.1 From the file path, the following can be determined:

6.2.1.1 Photo taken at Bridge PA-123456.

6.2.1.2 Photo captured on July 1, 2015.

6.2.1.3 Photo contents are part of nondestructive testing.

6.2.1.4 It is the seventh image on the curated photo log. 

6.2.2 The corresponding photo log entry may be “007 – Image of technician collecting GPR data from 

the deck on span 2 – facing east.” From this description, the element (including designation 

where applicable), the general location, and an understanding of the image contents can be 

obtained. 
3 FLD-DC-PH-003

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 FLD-DC-PH-001, Photography Equipment Requirements.

7.1.2 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

MATERIAL SAMPLING PROTOCOLS (MS)

FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks

FLD-DC-MS-002, Compressive Strength and Static and Dynamic Elastic Moduli of 

Concrete Cores

FLD-DC-MS-003, Resistance of Concrete to Chloride Ion Penetration 

(Permeability)

FLD-DC-MS-004, Sampling and Testing for Chloride Profiles

1 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

WET CORING OF CONCRETE DECKS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-MS-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Concrete heterogeneity and consolidation.

1.2 Reinforcing steel depth, size, and condition.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Concrete pachometer (cover meter).

2.1.3 Permanent marker.

2.1.4 Temporary chalk marker.

2.1.5 Water-cooled core drilling machine (portable or vehicle based) for nominal 4-inch diameter core.

NOTE—Electricity may not be available at the bridge.

2.1.6 Water (for cooling).

2.1.7 Diamond-impregnated coring bit(s) of appropriate diameter.

2.1.8 Wrapping materials.

2.1.9 Approved patching materials.

2.1.10 Hammer.

2.1.11 Chisel or flathead screwdriver.

2.1.12 Core extraction tool.

2.1.13 Three-point caliper.

2.1.14 Digital camera.

2.1.15 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.1.16 Tape measure.

2.1.17 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.18 Push broom or hand broom.

2.1.19 Ground penetrating radar (GPR); if necessary.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Select equipment for coring that meets the requirements of section 2.1 of this protocol. 
2 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

3.2 Site cleaning and preparation:

3.2.1 Clean debris from the deck area(s) using the push broom or hand broom.

3.2.2 Follow PRE-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation.

3.3 Unique core identifier:

3.3.1 Create a unique identifier for each core. The identifier has three components: the two-letter State

code; the NBI structure number; and a sequential number. For example: VA-0102030-1 is the 

first core on a bridge in the Commonwealth of Virginia having an NBI number of 0102030.

3.3.2 The sequential number component of the unique core identifier is determined as follows: core 

number VA-0102030-1 is the core nearest to the deck origin in the x direction; core number 

VA-0102030-2 is the next closest core to the deck origin in the x direction; core number 

VA-0102030-N is the core farthest from the deck origin in the x direction.

3.4 Determining locations and sizes of cores:

3.4.1 For locations, number, and sizes of cores for reference bridges, follow PRE-PL-LO-001, 

Reference Bridge Testing.

3.4.2 For locations, number, and sizes of cores for cluster bridges, follow PRE-PL-LO-002, Cluster 

Bridge Testing.

3.4.3 Consult as-built plans for reinforcing steel (rebar) locations to avoid cores with rebar in them. 

3.4.4 Use the concrete pachometer (cover meter) to confirm the location of the reinforcement and avoid 

cores with rebar in it. Indicate longitudinal and transverse (or skewed) reinforcement in the 

vicinity of the core location. Record the depth of reinforcement detected. If the pachometer 

cannot confirm the reinforcing bar locations, use GPR (if available) to confirm the locations. 

3.4.5 Use the results of visual inspection and NDE testing of the deck (if available) to identify possible 

locations of cores in sound concrete that is determined to be free of cracks, delaminations, and 

spalls.

3.4.6 Use the temporary chalk marker to mark the location of the core on the deck.

3.4.7 Measure the x-coordinates and y-coordinates of the core location using the grid from section 3.3 

of this protocol, and record these values in the data collection table.

3.4.8 Use a permanent marker to clearly mark the top of the core so that physical orientation in relation 

to the deck is known.

3.4.9 Mark the location of each core and the respective unique core identifier on a sketch of the bridge 

deck.

3.5 Obtaining the core(s):

3.5.1 Determine the ideal core length (depth)—this is at least two times the core diameter. Refer to 

sections 7.1 and 7.1.1 of AASHTO T 24-07 (2011), Standard Method of Test for Obtaining and 

Testing Drilled Cores and Sawed Beams of Concrete, for further guidance on permissible core 

lengths.

3.5.2 Mark the intended core length (depth) on the coring bit with a permanent marker. Most concrete 

cores will not break off evenly at the bottom of the cored depth, so add an inch of penetration to 

the desired core length, if possible.

3.5.3 Obtain the core(s) following AASHTO T 24-07 (2011).
3 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

3.6 Extracting samples: 

3.6.1 When the desired depth is reached, stop coring. 

3.6.2 When coring at a location where delaminations exist, the top portion of the concrete core comes 

loose in the core barrel once delamination depth is reached. Stop coring immediately, remove the 

loose top section, retain the loose concrete, and then continue coring. 

3.6.3 Insert a screwdriver, chisel, or other suitable lever instrument into the annular space of the core, 

and gently tap with a hammer. Repeat tapping along different sectors of the core until the bond at 

the bottom of the core is broken. 

3.6.4 Use the core extraction tool to grab the core and pull it out of the hole. 

3.6.5 Using the permanent marker, mark the core with unique labeling. Identify this unique label on the 

sketch of coring locations. 

3.7 Determine and record the core’s diameter and length following AASHTO T 24-07 (2011). Record 

any necessary correction factors from section 7.1.1 of AASHTO T 24-07 (2011).

3.8 Using the three-point caliper, determine (in the data collection table) the length of the core(s) 

following AASHTO T 148-07 (2011), Standard Method of Test for Measuring Length of Drilled 

Concrete Cores.

3.9 Storing samples: 

3.9.1 Within 1 hour of extracting the core, wrap the specimen in four layers: 4-mil polyethylene sheet 

or similar, aluminum foil, 4-mil polyethylene sheet, and duct tape. 

3.9.2 Clearly label the external wrapping with the unique identifier. 

3.9.3 Before wrapping the specimen, note important characteristics, such as maximum aggregate size, 

presence and location of reinforcing steel in the specimen, cracking, and voids. 

3.9.4 To preserve the “as-is” condition of the concrete and prevent net moisture gain or loss, allow the 

cores to air dry only long enough for visible water (from coring) on the core perimeter to 

evaporate. 

3.10 Repairing sample locations: 

3.10.1 Before leaving the site, repair each location where physical sampling resulted in a hole in the 

concrete element. Coordinate with and obtain approval from the bridge owner/agency concerning 

the material used in the repair and the method of repair. 

3.10.2 Repairs to overlays or membranes should be compatible with the base material and approved by 

the owner. 

3.10.3 Allow deck repair materials time to reach adequate strength before reopening deck to traffic.

3.11 Documenting cores: Take photographs of core locations before testing, after locating 

reinforcement, and after coring is completed, using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for 

Documentation Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.12 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.12.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.12.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.
4 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

3.13 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Coring equipment name Text Green

9

Coring equipment 

manufacturer Text Green

10 Coring equipment model 

name and number Text If available Green

11 Equipment comments Text Orange

12 Span number Text Blue

13 Location of core 

(x-, y-coordinates) Number 1 in. Blue

14 Test location description Text

Descriptive location of core 

on the bridge (e.g., slow 

(right) lane, fast lane (left 

lane), right or left shoulder, 

etc.)

Blue

15 Ambient temperature during 

testing – High Number 1 oF Blue

16 Ambient temperature during 

testing – Low Number 1 oF Blue

17 Unique core identifier Text Blue

18 Core length measurement Number 0.05 in. See AASHTO T 148-07 

(2011) Yellow

19 Core diameter Number 0.1 in. Yellow

20 Correction factor used Number 0.1

Obtain correction factor from 

Section 7.1.1 of AASHTO T 

24 – 07 (2011)

Yellow

21 Overlay depth Number 0.1 in. Yellow

22 Depth to reinforcement Number 0.1 in. Yellow

23 Weather during sampling Text e.g., cloudy, sunny, etc. Yellow

24 Core photos BLOB Document core condition 

with photos Yellow
5 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

25 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Where feasible, data will be validated using standard error checking within the Bridge Portal.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to obtain physical samples of concrete materials for subsequent 

laboratory evaluation and testing.

6.2 Physical sampling of the concrete material is often required to evaluate the condition of 

reinforced concrete bridge decks and other conventionally reinforced concrete elements. 

Laboratory assessment and testing determines the fundamental physical properties of the material, 

evaluates construction quality, and identifies evidence of deleterious reactions that may inhibit 

performance. 

6.3 Coring is often the most convenient method of physical sampling. The cores and the exposed 

substrate are visually evaluated, and the cores are transported to the laboratory for closer visual 

evaluation as well as physical and chemical testing. The number, location, size, and depth of 

cores to be sampled are determined as part of a comprehensive evaluation plan for a given 

structure or element.

6.4 Conventional pachometers will not detect stainless steel or other nonferromagnetic elements. In 

such cases, it may be necessary to use GPR or another method to locate such features.

6.5 Pachometer and GPR are used to locate top mat or nearest-to-surface reinforcement easily, but it 

is difficult to identify the lower mat reinforcement location. Take cores to a shallower depth to 

avoid encountering lower mat if avoiding reinforcement is critical. 

Alternatively, probe locations adjacent to the intended core to positively identify reinforcement 

and bracket the core location. However, this method is time- and labor-intensive and increases 

intrusion into the structure.
6 FLD-DC-MS-001

January 2016

6.6 In some cases where reinforcement is taken within the core, particularly where epoxy coating 

inhibits the bond of concrete to reinforcement, the core may break at the plane of reinforcement 

rather than at the bottom of the core during extraction of the core. If breakage occurs at the plane 

of the reinforcement, remove the loose top section and retain, then proceed coring to the desired 

depth. This situation may be unavoidable.

6.7 If interference between tests is avoided and tests are performed on appropriate sections of the 

core, extracted cores can serve for multiple observations and tests. Time between field sampling 

and laboratory testing may influence the outcome of certain tests and should be considered in 

advance.

6.8 Typical materials for repairing core locations are rapid set cementitious repair materials, although 

gel-type polymer mortars may be used. Consult the State department of transportation for a list of 

materials on its approved materials list.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-001, Reference Bridge Testing.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-002, Cluster Bridge Testing.

7.1.3 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.4 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 AASHTO T 24-07 (2011), Standard Method of Test for Obtaining and Testing Drilled Cores and 

Sawed Beams of Concrete, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 

Washington, DC, 2011.

7.2.2 AASHTO T 148-07 (2011), Standard Method of Test for Measuring Length of Drilled Concrete 

Cores, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC, 

2011.

7.2.3 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-MS-002

January 2016

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH AND STATIC AND 

DYNAMIC ELASTIC MODULI OF CONCRETE CORES

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-MS-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Compressive strength and static and dynamic elastic moduli of concrete cores.

2. EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Test specimens.

2.1.3 Compression testing machine meeting the requirements of AASHTO T 22-10 (2011).

2.1.4 Testing apparatus for determining dynamic modulus of elasticity, conforming to the requirements 

of ASTM C215-14.

2.1.5 Compressometer for determining the static modulus of elasticity, conforming to the requirements 

of ASTM C469/C469M-14.

2.1.6 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Test preparation:

3.1.1 A minimum 5-day waiting period between encapsulation of the cores and unwrapping for testing 

of the cores is recommended to minimize moisture gradients. 

3.1.2 Use a 4-inch diameter core that has been properly obtained and prepared for storage using 

FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks. Record the unique core identifier, and note 

any damage to the wrapping. 

3.1.3 Unwrap the core, removing all four layers of wrapping. Compare sample number and other 

descriptive information on the wrapping with the similar data on the unwrapped core. 

3.1.4 Weigh the uncut sample immediately, and record the result. 

3.1.5 Photograph the sample (top, bottom, and sides at four quadrants), and create a photo log 

following FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes. 
2 FLD-DC-MS-002

January 2016

3.2 Core testing:

3.2.1 Conduct dynamic modulus test of the core, and calculate the dynamic Young’s modulus of 

elasticity, all in accordance with ASTM C215, and record the following:

3.2.1.1 Unique core identifier.

3.2.1.2 Diameter.

3.2.1.3 Length.

3.2.1.4 Mass.

3.2.1.5 Description of any defects, including the presence of reinforcement.

3.2.1.6 Mode of vibration.

3.2.1.7 Corresponding resonant frequency.

3.2.1.8 Dynamic Young’s modulus of elasticity.

3.2.1.9 Correction factor.

3.2.2 Using the same core, conduct test for static modulus of elasticity of the core, and calculate the 

static modulus of elasticity, all in accordance with ASTM C469, and record the following:

3.2.2.1 Curing and environmental histories of the core.

3.2.2.2 Age of the core.

3.2.2.3 Unit weight of the concrete.

3.2.2.4 Stress–strain curves.

3.2.2.5 Static modulus of elasticity (chord modulus of elasticity). 

3.2.3 Using the same core, conduct compressive strength test of core in accordance with 

AASHTO T 22-10 (2011), and record the following:

3.2.3.1 Maximum load.

3.2.3.2 Compressive strength.

3.2.3.3 Type of fracture.

3.3 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.3.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.3.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.4 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Descriptive name for the Green
3 FLD-DC-MS-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

testing activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date testing was 

performed Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Sampling site Text

Location of core extraction 

on the bridge (e.g., span 

number, lane number, right 

or left shoulder, etc.)

Blue

9 Unique core identifier Text Blue

DYNAMIC MODULUS OF ELASTICITY Pink

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment 

manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model 

name and number Text If available Green

13 Equipment comments Text Orange

14 Core length Number 0.1 in. Yellow

15 Core diameter Number 0.1 in. Yellow

16 Overlay depth Number 0.1 in. Yellow

17

Description of any 

defects, including the 

presence of 

reinforcement

Text Yellow

18 Mass Number 0.5 kg Yellow

19 Mode of vibration Text Yellow

20 Resonant frequency Number 10 Hz Yellow

21 Dynamic modulus Number 0.05 x 106

psi Yellow

22 Correction factor Number 0.01 Range: 1.00 to 6.34 Yellow

23 Comments Text Orange

STATIC MODULUS OF ELASTICITY Pink

24 Equipment name Text Green

25 Equipment 

manufacturer Text Green

26 Equipment model 

name and number Text If available Green

27 Equipment comments Text Orange

28

Curing and 

environmental history 

of the core

Text Yellow

29 Age of the core Yellow

30 Unit weight of the core Yellow

31 Stress-strain curves BLOB Yellow

32 Static modulus of 

elasticity 0.05 x 106

psi Yellow
4 FLD-DC-MS-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

33 Comments Text Orange

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH Pink

34 Equipment name Text Green

35 Equipment 

manufacturer Text Green

36 Equipment model 

name & number Text If available Green

37 Equipment comments Text Orange

38 Maximum load Number 1 lbs Yellow

39 Compressive strength Number 10 psi Yellow

40 Type of fracture Text Yellow

41 Comments Text Unlimited Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Precision, bias, and repeatability of the individual tests outlined herein are addressed in the 

respective AASHTO and ASTM standards that govern the laboratory tests being conducted.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to obtain physical parameters useful for structural evaluation of 

the concrete bridge members by lab testing of the concrete cores taken by wet coring 

(FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks) of reinforced concrete decks. 

6.2 If the concrete core contains distinguishing features about the quality or condition of the material, 

conduct a visual condition assessment and record details about paste, aggregate type and 

distribution, defects, deleterious reactions, and embedded items.

6.3 For static elastic modulus testing, if the outside diameters of the samples are not 4 inches 

(102 mm), or the lengths are insufficient to fit the elastic modulus jig, adhere two concrete strain 

gages of no less than three times the nominal aggregate size to diametrically opposite faces.
5 FLD-DC-MS-002

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 AASHTO T 22-10 (2011), Standard Method of Test for Compressive Strengths of Cylindrical 

Concrete Specimens, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 

Washington, DC, 2011.

7.2.2 ASTM C215-14, Standard Test Method for Fundamental Transverse, Longitudinal, and Torsional 

Resonant Frequencies of Concrete Specimens, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 

2014.

7.2.3 ASTM C469/C469M-14, Standard Test Method for Static Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson’s 

Ratio of Concrete in Compression, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2014.

1 FLD-DC-MS-003

January 2016

RESISTANCE OF CONCRETE TO CHLORIDE ION

PENETRATION (PERMEABILITY)

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-MS-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Electrical conductance of the concrete, an indication of resistance of the concrete to chloride ion 

penetration. 

2. EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Test specimens.

2.1.3 Applied voltage cell as specified in ASTM C1202-12.

2.1.4 Apparatus specified in Section 6 of ASTM C1202-12.

2.1.5 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Test preparation:

3.1.1 Use a 2.5-inch diameter core that has been properly obtained, prepared, and stored using 

FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

3.1.2 Record the unique core identifier, and note any damage to the wrapping.

3.1.3 Unwrap the core, removing all four layers of wrapping. Compare the sample number and other 

descriptive information on the wrapping with the similar data on the unwrapped core. 

3.1.4 Weigh and record the weight of the core as-received, uncut sample.

3.1.5 Photograph the sample (top, bottom, and sides at four quadrants), and create a photo log, 

following FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes. 

3.2 Core sampling:

3.2.1 For each core, if conducting both the permeability test and the chloride profile test, use the top 

3 inches of the core for the chloride profile and the remainder of the core for the permeability test.

3.2.2 For each core, if conducting only the permeability test, use the top 2 inches of the core for the 

permeability test.
2 FLD-DC-MS-003

January 2016

3.3 Laboratory testing:

3.3.1 Conduct the test to measure the electrical conductance of the concrete and determine the total 

charge passed over the test period, in accordance with ASTM C1202-12, and record the 

following:

3.3.1.1 Unique core identifier.

3.3.1.2 Location of the core on the bridge.

3.3.1.3 Location of the test specimen for this test within the core.

3.3.1.4 Description of the test specimen, including location and thickness of reinforcing steel, overlays, 

and/or surface treatments.

3.3.1.5 Curing history of the specimen itself immediately prior to the test—moist curing, extended moist 

curing, or accelerated moist curing (as per section 8 of ASTM C1202-12).

3.3.1.6 Any special surface preparation of the test specimen.

3.3.1.7 Plot of current versus time.

3.3.1.8 The total charge passed during the test period, in coulombs (ampere-seconds).

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text Text State Code, e.g., Virginia 

= VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Text Item 8, Structure Number 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

testing activities Text Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date testing was 

performed Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Equipment name Text Text Green

9

Equipment 

manufacturer Text Text Green

10 Equipment model name 

and number Text Text If available Green
3 FLD-DC-MS-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

11 Equipment comments Text Unlimited Orange

12 Unique core identifier Text Blue

13 Weight of uncut sample Number 0.1 pounds Yellow

14 Sampling site Text

Location of core 

extraction on the bridge 

(e.g., span number, lane 

number, right or left 

shoulder, etc.)

Yellow

15

Location of the test 

specimen within the 

core

Text

For example: top 2

inches of the core, 2

inches to 4 inches from 

the top of the core, 

bottom 2 inches of the 

core, etc.

Yellow

16 Description of the test 

specimen Text

Presence, location, and 

thickness of any 

reinforcing steel, overlay, 

or surface treatment

Yellow

17 Curing history of the test 

specimen Text

Moist Curing/Extended 

Moist Curing/Accelerated 

Moist Curing 

[Note: As per section 8 of 

ASTM C1202-12]

Yellow

18

Any special surface 

preparation of the test 

specimen

Text Yellow

19 Plot of current versus 

time BLOB Yellow

20 Total charge passed Number 1 C Yellow

21 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Precision, bias, and repeatability of the individual tests outlined herein are addressed in ASTM

C1202-12.
4 FLD-DC-MS-003

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to assess the quality of the concrete regarding the permeability and 

resistance to chloride ion penetration by lab testing of the concrete cores taken by wet coring 

(FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks) from the bridge.

6.2 If the concrete sample (core) contains distinguishing features about the quality or condition of the 

material, conduct and record a visual condition assessment (include details about paste, aggregate 

type and distribution, defects, deleterious reactions). Take additional photographs as appropriate 

to record these features.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 ASTM C1202-12, Standard Test Method for Electrical Indication of Concrete’s Ability to Resist 

Chloride Ion Penetration, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-MS-004

January 2016

SAMPLING AND TESTING FOR CHLORIDE PROFILES

LTBP PROTOCOL #: FLD-DC-MS-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Testing of concrete cores to estimate the permeability to chloride ingress and the density and 

voids characteristics of the concrete.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Sampling plan with sample locations marked.

2.1.3 Test specimens.

2.1.4 Apparatus specified in AASHTO T 260-97 (2011).

2.1.5 Tape measure.

2.1.6 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Test preparation:

3.1.1 Use a 2.5-inch diameter core that has been properly obtained, prepared, and stored using 

FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

3.1.2 Record the unique core identifier, and note any damage to the wrapping.

3.1.3 Unwrap the core, removing all four layers of wrapping. Compare sample number and other 

descriptive information on the wrapping with the similar data on the unwrapped core. 

3.1.4 Weigh and record the weight of the core as-received uncut sample. 

3.1.5 Photograph the sample (top, bottom, and sides at four quadrants), and create a photo log 

following FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

3.2 Core sampling: For each core, if conducting both the permeability test and the chloride profile 

test, use the top 3 inches of the core for the chloride profile and the remainder of the core for the 

permeability test. 

3.3 Laboratory testing:

3.3.1 To minimize the potential for cross-contamination of titrated samples, specimens should be tested 

in order of anticipated increasing chloride concentration, typically taken from deepest depth 

increment to shallowest increment. Conduct titration of all specimens from a given sample 

location in one group, and calculate and analyze results (as outlined below) before proceeding 

with titration of specimens from the next sample location.
2 FLD-DC-MS-004

January 2016

3.3.2 To determine the profile of chloride concentrations as a function of depth at each sample location, 

determine the diffused chloride contents for depth increments as shown in table 1. The surface 

chloride value is the chloride content determined for the 0.25–0.75-inch depth range for concrete 

bridge decks.

Table 1. Chloride Profile Depth Increments.

Increment #

Base unit (U.S. Customary) Metric Equivalent (S.I.)

Nominal Depth

(in.)

Depth Range

(in.)

Nominal Depth

(mm)

Depth Range

(mm)

1 0.5* 0.25–0.75 13 6–19

2 1.0 0.75–1.25 25 19–32

3 1.5 1.25–1.75 38 32–44

4 2.0 1.75–2.25 51 44–57

5 2.5 2.25–2.75 64 57–70

6 3.0 2.75–3.25 76 70–83

* Concentration at this depth is to be used as driving chloride concentration, Co, for diffusion 

calculations.

3.3.3 Determine and record the chloride concentration of the powdered sample from each depth 

increment following AASHTO T 260-97 (2011), Sampling and Testing for Chloride Ion in 

Concrete and Concrete Raw Materials, procedure A. 

3.4 Retain for reference, but do not report, detailed titration records, to include all of the following: 

the identification and amount of sample, the calibration standards of titrant, the endpoint values of 

required blank samples, the detailed log of incremental titrant addition and resulting reference 

voltage readings, and the calculation of endpoint values using the second derivative analysis for 

each powdered concrete sample. Such information can be captured and stored by automated 

titration systems and should be archived.

3.5 Take photographs to document the core features using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for 

Documentation Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
3 FLD-DC-MS-004

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code (e.g., Virginia = VA) Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3

Structure name (e.g., 

Route 15 SB over I–66) Text Descriptive name for the bridge (e.g., Route 15 SB over I–66) Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month 

and year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data collected Text Exact 

date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Test site Text

Location of data collection on 

the bridge (e.g., span number, 

lane number, right or left 

shoulder, substructure unit, 

etc.)

Green

9 Equipment name Text Green

10 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

11 Equipment model name 

and number Text Include model number if available Green

12 Equipment comments Text Orange

CORE INFORMATION Pink

13 Unique core identifier Text Blue

14 Sample location on 

structure (x-coordinate) Number 1 in. Transverse distance from grid 

origin Yellow

15 Sample location on 

structure (y-coordinate) Number 1 in. Longitudinal distance from grid 

origin Yellow

16 Core length Number 0.1 in. Yellow

17 Core diameter Number 0.1 in. Yellow

18 Presence of 

reinforcement

Predefined 

list

Yes

No Yellow

19 Overlay depth Number 0.1 in. Yellow

20 Weight of core Number 0.1 lb. Yellow

21 Reinforcement depth Number 0.05 in. Yellow

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION RESULTS Pink

22 Nominal depth of 0.5 in. Number 0.05 %

Chloride concentration 

expressed as percent chloride 

per concrete mass

Yellow

23 Nominal depth of 1.0 in. Number 0.05 % Chloride concentration Yellow

24 Nominal depth of 1.5 in. Number 0.05 % Chloride concentration Yellow

25 Nominal depth of 2.0 in. Number 0.05 % Chloride concentration Yellow

26 Nominal depth of 2.5 in. Number 0.05 % Chloride concentration Yellow

27 Nominal depth of 3.0 in. Number 0.05 % Chloride concentration Yellow

28 Comments Text Unlimited Orange
4 FLD-DC-MS-004

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Precision, bias, and repeatability of the individual tests outlined herein are addressed in the 

respective ASTM standards that govern the laboratory tests being conducted.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to describe the laboratory test methods to determine the indication 

of permeability to chloride ingress and density and voids characteristics.

6.2 Corrosion of the reinforcement due to chloride ingress is a primary cause of damage to reinforced 

concrete structures. Sources of chloride in concrete include internal chloride, which refers to 

chloride added to the concrete at the time of mixing (calcium chloride accelerators for rapid 

hardening concrete, salt contaminated aggregates, sea water, or other saline contaminated water) 

and external chloride, which refers to chloride ingress into the concrete from the environment 

(typically deicer salt and marine salt).

6.3 Ions, such as chloride, penetrate into the concrete by various processes, most notably diffusion, 

eventually reaching the reinforcing steel where chloride accumulates to sufficient concentration 

to induce corrosion. At such concentrations, chloride destroys the naturally occurring protective 

film on the reinforcing steel that forms in the highly alkaline environment of concrete. This 

depassivation leads to severe corrosion when sufficient oxygen and moisture are present at the 

steel–concrete interface. 

6.4 Corrosion of mild steel produces oxide products that consume more volume than the original 

reactants, which causes expansive pressures and subsequent cracking of the surrounding concrete. 

Therefore, chloride attack could be very critical for the concrete structure.

6.5 Identification of chloride attack may be conducted via a combination of visual characterization of 

the environment and the concrete element condition, as well as chemical and electrochemical 

testing of the environment and reinforced concrete materials.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.
5 FLD-DC-MS-004

January 2016

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-MS-001, Wet Coring of Concrete Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 AASHTO T 260-97 (2011), Sampling and Testing for Chloride Ion in Concrete and Concrete 

Raw Materials, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 

Washington, DC, 2011.
NONDESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION PROTOCOLS (NDE)

FLD-DC-NDE-001, Electrical Resistivity Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-002, Ground Penetrating Radar Testing for Bridge Decks

FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-004, Impact Echo Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-005, Linear Polarization Resistance Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-006, Dye Penetrant Testing

FLD-DC-NDE-007, Ultrasonic Surface Wave Testing—Concrete

FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking
1 FLD-DC-NDE-001

January 2016

ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Indication of a concrete member’s ability to support corrosion based on electrical resistivity (ER) 

testing.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Four-point Wenner Probe with 50 mm probe spacing, 40 Hz Frequency, and 1 percent to 

5 percent resolution.

2.1.3 Electrical resistivity probe (a machined jig with either wooden dowels or foam contacts wetted 

with surfactant solution), configured to permit sufficient vertical movement of contact points to 

conform to irregular surfaces; some instruments may provide units of resistivity directly based on 

preset probe spacing.

2.1.4 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the global rectangular grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System

for Bridge Decks) to locate test points on the deck.

3.2 Test preparation:

3.2.1 Determine if there are any electrical conduits in the structure producing an electromagnetic field 

that may affect the measurement stability.

3.2.2 Mark the position of the cable in the resistivity map as a sign of possible interference in its 

proximity.

3.2.3 Prewet the bridge deck (FLD-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation) until it is in a saturated-surfacedry (SSD) condition. The electrodes require ionic coupling to the concrete to measure resistivity, 

and uniformly prewetting the deck provides this water evenly, thereby removing variability 

induced by irregular weather and rainfall patterns. Supplemental wetting is necessary 

immediately before measuring, particularly when the weather is hot, windy, and/or the relative 

humidity is low. For both prewetting and supplemental wetting, it is important that no surface 

water or visible film is present during measurements.

3.3 Measurements:
2 FLD-DC-NDE-001

January 2016

3.3.1 Place the four wetted probe points of the Wenner array in contact with the concrete surface, and 

apply current (if required by the particular instrument) between the two outer electrodes. 

To ensure a minimal effect of the reinforcing steel, the probe spacing of the Wenner probe must 

be less than the depth of the concrete cover over the reinforcing steel. Where practical, avoid 

placing probe points on individual, exposed aggregate particles that may inordinately influence 

the reading.

3.3.2 Apply consistent and even pressure to the probe points, because variable contact pressure will 

influence the readings.

3.3.3 Read and record the indicated resistance or resistivity.

3.3.4 Monitor each point for at least 3 seconds before recording to ensure the reading is stable (not 

increasing). If readings are not stable, it may indicate inadequate moisture or interference by an 

external electrical source. To remedy this situation, remove the probe from the test point, rewet 

the probe, and then retake the measurement. If that does not work, pour more water on the deck 

surface, and repeat the test at the test point when it reaches an saturated-surface-dry (SSD) state.

3.3.5 For comparison with other complementary nondestructive evaluation (NDE) test data at selected 

point locations, take additional detailed measurements. To ensure repeatability of the localized 

measurements, repeat the readings five times at each location. For each measurement, remove the 

probe from the test point, rewet it, and place it again on the test point. Take extra care to ensure 

the proper contact between probes and deck surface.

3.4 Traffic in the lanes outside of the work zone is permissible during data collection and does not 

affect data quality.

3.5 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.5.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.5.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.6 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia 

= VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

Green
3 FLD-DC-NDE-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

2015

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green

9 Deck surface temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model name and 

number Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Unlimited Orange

14 Test site Text

Describe the location of 

data collection on the 

bridge (e.g., 

span number, lane 

number, right or left 

shoulder, substructure 

unit, etc.)

Blue

15 Location of test site 

(x-coordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance 

from the local grid origin Blue

16 Location of test site 

(y-coordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance from 

the local grid origin Blue

17 Electrical resistivity reading Number 1 kΩ/m3 Range: 0 to 200 Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Verification and comparison should be made with results obtained from the same concrete 

member using other NDE methods, including acoustic methods, chemical/potential methods, and 

electromagnetic methods.

5.2 If half-cell potential results are available, compare results from the current test to the half-cell 

potential results.
4 FLD-DC-NDE-001

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for determining electrical 

resistivity of the concrete in a reinforced concrete member. ER is one measure of a concrete 

member’s ability to protect reinforcing steel from corrosion. Low ER is indicative of an 

environment that will support corrosion but does not indicate that corrosion is ongoing.

6.2 Applied on a broad scale, ER provides spatial variability of resistivity for the tested concrete 

member; applied at finite locations, it can be compared to corrosion measures, such as half-cell, 

linear polarization, and chloride profiles.

6.3 Electrical resistivity surveys are used to map corrosion activity in tandem with another corrosion 

technique, like half-cell potential (FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing). Concrete 

with a high ER has a greater resistance to the corrosion current passing between anodic and 

cathodic areas of the reinforcing steel. In contrast, damaged and cracked areas with increased 

porosity create preferential paths for fluid and ion flow and have low resistivity. There is a 

relationship between electrical resistivity and corrosion rate for steel in concrete. Resistivity of 

less than 1.97 kΩ/inch supports very rapid corrosion of steel, whereas resistivity greater than 7.88 

kΩ/inch supports very low corrosion rate.

6.4 A common device to measure electrical resistivity is the Wenner array. The Wenner array uses 

four probes arranged linearly with equal spacing. Current is applied between the outer electrodes 

and the resulting potential is measured between the two inner electrodes. The resistivity is 

calculated as ρ=2πaV/I, where “a” is the probe spacing, “V” is the voltage, and “I” is the current.

6.5 Any steel located in the concrete being measured can affect electrical resistivity. To decrease the 

effect, measure the resistivity on a set grid over the whole deck so that any influence from steel is 

statistically removed due to sampling. 

6.6 Overlays can affect the ability to take ER measurements. If the overlay is highly resistive, like 

epoxy or asphalt, ER measurements will be extremely high and will only be an indication of the 

overlay’s resistivity. These measurements will give no indication of the concrete member’s 

environment regarding corrosion. If the overlay is a concrete overlay that has similar electrical 

properties to the concrete substrate, resistivity measurements can be conducted without any issue. 

However, during interpretation of the results, it is important to know that the resistivity values 

measured will be a combination of the overlay and the concrete below.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.
5 FLD-DC-NDE-001

January 2016

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

1 FLD-DC-NDE-002

January 2016

GROUND PENETRATING RADAR TESTING FOR

BRIDGE DECKS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Characterization of broad scale concrete deterioration based on ground penetrating radar (GPR) 

signal attenuation.

1.2 Estimate of broad scale concrete cover (rebar depth) or deck thickness, overlay thickness, etc.

1.3 Localized mapping or locating of rebars, posttensioning, conduits, etc.; verification of 

reinforcement layout shown on drawings and plans.

1.4 Detection and localization of voids, rock pockets, or honeycombs.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ground-coupled GPR instruments, consisting of portable, single channel digital data acquisition 

systems with a dynamic range of 60 dB or greater and 16-bit data acquisition or greater. GPR 

scanning (1.0 to 2.5GHz) must occur with a minimum spatial sampling of 60 scans per foot using 

a distance measuring instrument (DMI). Systems must maintain a stable, steady-state signal and 

must collect at least 512 samples per scan at scan rates of 120 scans per second or greater. GPR 

Ground penetrating radar systems must be able to store at least 2 GB of data on a hard drive or 

flash drive and be capable of rapidly transferring data via Universal Serial Bus (USB), ethernet, 

or other backup media to a computer for storage, processing, and interpretation.

NOTE—Though multichannel GPR arrays, dual-polarization antennas (sensors), air-coupled 

(horn) antenna GPR systems, etc., can be used for bridge deck condition assessment, most 

systems in use are single-channel, ground-coupled GPR instruments. This protocol applies only to 

ground-coupled systems used in the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program because of 

accuracy, portability, and ease of use.

2.1.3 Vehicle or cart; speed is dependent on the system used, the scan rate and signal quality, and the 

spatial sampling along the GPR profile line (path). Normally, walking speed with a cart is 

sufficient for high-resolution data using 1.0 to 2.5 GHz ground-coupled antennas. For other 

systems, refer to the manufacturer’s operations manual.

2.1.4 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.
2 FLD-DC-NDE-002

January 2016

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the GPR equipment’s manufacturer procedures with the following protocol steps to ensure 

proper equipment settings and data collection procedures.

3.2 Use the grid described in FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks, to provide lines along which to collect GPR data.

3.3 Collect GPR data along lines perpendicular to the orientation of the upper rebar mat. 

3.4 Record the GPR signal (A-scan), including the entire surface reflection (combination of surface 

reflection and internal, direct coupling) and the “flat-line” (no amplitude/noise only) data 

immediately above the surface reflection. This ensures that all data from the deck are captured.

3.5 Conduct a preliminary scan of at least three 50-ft lines on the bridge deck surface with the A-scan 

visible at all times in order to set up the GPR signal properly. Doing this ensures that the GPR 

signal does not “clip” (saturate measurement window width) during data collection and storage. 

The preliminary scan will find locations of strong signal reflection from the top rebar mat. Then, 

set the gain for the GPR signal waveform at the location with the strongest rebar reflection so that 

the resulting signal does not exceed two-thirds to three-quarters of the measurement window 

width. 

3.6 Keep the gain constant while scanning the entire bridge deck. Avoid automatic gain settings 

except during initial GPR calibration and for fine tuning after the system is first turned on. 

3.7 Most bridge decks can be scanned using the same settings, except for signal gain and position,

which are often site specific. When returning to any bridge for successive, periodic tests, use the 

same system settings, such as gains, filters, samples/scan, scan rate, spatial scan density. The 

following minimum settings for GPR data collection are applicable for most reinforced concrete 

bridge decks and other reinforced concrete structures:

3.7.1 512 samples per scan. 

3.7.2 12 ns signal duration.

3.7.3 16-bit data.

3.7.4 Appropriate vertical filter settings for the antenna frequency used. 

3.8 Correct position of the signal guarantees appropriate sampling of the entire deck without cutting 

out the upper surface or amplifying noise and misinterpreting it as data. To set the signal gain and 

position, the following procedures must be performed:

3.8.1 Since the GPR records waveforms of 10 to 20 ns, representing the entire bridge deck thickness, 

the signal must be positioned after the waveform is recorded on oscilloscopes. 

3.8.2 Locate the first arrival (transmit–receive pulse). 

3.8.3 Place the antenna on the ground, and identify the surface reflection. The surface reflection is a 

merger of the transmit–receive reflection generated internally within the antenna and the 

reflection of the GPR waveform from the surface of the deck. 

3.8.4 Move surface reflection at the beginning of the sample window of interest. 
3 FLD-DC-NDE-002

January 2016

The sample window (10 to 20 ns, two-way travel time) is used to measure GPR reflection energy 

throughout the GPR survey. Reflections from internal, embedded elements, such as rebars, 

conduits, cables, deck bottom, overlays, etc., are captured, stored, then ultimately analyzed and 

interpreted prior to mapping results. 

3.9 Traffic in the lanes outside of the work zone is permissible during GPR data collection and does 

not affect data quality. Take extra safety precautions and coordinate with the traffic control crew 

when GPR lines are oriented across traffic lanes, even if only the closed lane(s) are accessed by 

the GPR operator. In such a field operation, the front end of the equipment/cart must temporarily 

penetrate beyond the lane closure (while no traffic is oncoming). This ensures that a complete 

dataset is obtained when the partial GPR lines are “stitched together” during processing.

3.10 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.10.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage. 

3.10.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.11 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP 

Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Text Item 8, Structure Number from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 oF

Numeric means negative and 

positive integers, range: -50 to 

150

Green

9 Deck surface temperature Number 1 oF

Numeric means negative and 

positive integers, range: -50 to 

150

Green

10 Equipment name Text Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Text Green

12 Equipment model name and 

number Text Text If available Green

13 Data acquisition system 

model Text Green

14 Comments (equipment) Text Unlimited Orange

15 Testing site Text Location and date of the test 

on the bridge (e.g., shoulder Blue
4 FLD-DC-NDE-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

and lane 1)

16 Pulse length Number ns Blue

17 Center frequency Number MHz Blue

18 Bandwidth Number MHz Blue

19 Stress S1 Number Blue

20 Stress S2 Number Blue

21 Longitudinal strain, Ɛ2 Number Blue

22 Transverse strain, Ɛt1 Number Blue

23 Transverse strain, Ɛt2 Number Blue

24 Antenna model Text Blue

25 Gain Number Blue

26 Range Number Blue

27 Longitudinal rebar Yes/No Blue

28 Pulse repetition rate Number Blue

29 Samples/scan Number Blue

30 Scans/second Number Blue

31 Scans/unit Number Blue

32 Vertical filters Text Blue

33 Horizontal filters Text Blue

34 Line location Number 1 ft

Transversal distance from 

origin

Range: 0 to 300

Yellow

35 Data collection direction Predefined 

list

Transversal

Longitudinal Yellow

36 Data BLOB Yellow

37 ASCII file CLOB DZT or DT file Yellow

38 Comments Text Unlimited Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Verification and comparison should be made with results obtained using other NDE methods, 

including acoustic methods and chemical/potential methods, as well as with ground truth data.
5 FLD-DC-NDE-002

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using GPR to detect and 

characterize deterioration in bridge decks. GPR can also serve additional purposes, including the 

following:

6.1.1 Characterizing presence, pattern, depth, and density (layout) of structural steel reinforcement in 

the deck.

6.1.2 Estimating deck thickness.

6.1.3 Identifying anomalies or locating construction elements such as posttensioning conduits. 

6.2 The principle of GPR is the reflection of electromagnetic waves from interfaces of two materials 

that differ in relative dielectric permittivity. Different reflectors within or on the boundary of a 

bridge deck, such as overlays, upper and lower reinforcement mats, deck bottom, etc., are 

identified in the time domain by viewing what is commonly referred to as a B-scan (line scan). 

The image is a recognizable representation of the cross-section of the deck proved by the moving 

GPR antenna. The vertical scale (two-way travel time) can be associated with a physical depth, 

and the horizontal scale (distance) is controlled by a distance measuring instrument (DMI) that 

fixes the scan density (scans per meter or scans per ft). Typical bridge deck surveys use antennae 

ranging in frequency between 1.0 GHz to 2.5 GHz, with those in the 1.5 GHz range most 

common. Testing equipment consists of a digital data acquisition unit that controls signal 

stability, filtering and scan rate; cabling; a DMI; and ground-coupled sensors in the frequency 

range specified. The equipment usually includes a deployment system (pushed or hand-towed 

cart, vehicle, etc.). 

6.3 For the LTBP Program, GPR testing is done using ground-coupled, high-frequency instruments 

to ensure the most accurate results. GPR scan density for the LTBP Program is 60 scans per foot.

This high spatial density aids not only during processing and interpretation but also in activities 

where raw data must be interpreted and used in the field; for example, to validate and update core 

locations.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

1 FLD-DC-NDE-003

January 2016

HALF-CELL POTENTIAL TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Potential for electrochemical corrosion of steel reinforcement in concrete.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Concrete pachometer (cover meter).

2.1.3 Permanent marker.

2.1.4 Temporary chalk marker.

2.1.5 Power source.

2.1.6 Hammer drill.

2.1.7 Depth measuring instrument or drill stop with precision to one-quarter inch or less.

2.1.8 Stainless steel screw of appropriate length and diameter.

2.1.9 Drill bit of appropriate diameter for the stainless steel screw.

2.1.10 Concrete patching compound.

2.1.11 Half-cell electrode; copper–copper sulfate (Cu–CuSO4) [units mV copper sulfate 

electrode (CSE)], silver–silver chloride (Ag–AgCl2) [units mV AgCl], or other. 

2.1.12 High-impedance portable voltmeter. 

2.1.13 Low-resistance lead wire with electrical clamps or plugs. 

2.1.14 Open-celled sponges.

2.1.15 Surfactant (soap) solution.

2.1.16 Cu–CuSO4 CSE reference electrode. 

2.1.17 Ag–AgCl2 reference electrode.

2.1.18 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 For concrete decks, identify the location and position of the test points using the local rectangular 

coordinate system (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge 

Decks). For other concrete elements, identify the location and position of the test points using the 

structure segmentation and element numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation 

and Element Identification System).
2 FLD-DC-NDE-003

January 2016

3.2 Test Preparation:

3.2.1 The half-cell potential test requires a direct connection to the reinforcing steel.

3.2.1.1 Select a location in the shoulder area and use the pachometer (cover meter) to identify the 

location and measure the depth to the upper mat of reinforcing steel. Record the depth of the 

reinforcement detected. Mark the intersection of the longitudinal and transverse steel of the upper 

mat with the temporary chalk marker.

3.2.1.2 Using the hammer drill, remove concrete down to the level of the upper mat of the reinforcing

steel. 

3.2.1.3 Drill a pilot hole into the reinforcing bar and screw in the stainless steel screw.

3.2.2 Ensure the bridge deck is in a saturated-surface-dry condition (PRE-OP-SP-001, Site 

Preparation).

3.2.3 Apply water to the testing points immediately before surveying. 

3.3 Measurements:

3.3.1 Connect the positive terminal of the high-impedance portable voltmeter to the stainless steel 

screw using the low-resistance lead wire with electrical clamps.

3.3.2 Place the half-cell in contact with a wetted sponge on the concrete surface, then read and record 

(automatically if so equipped) the indicated potential. 

3.3.3 Apply consistent pressure to the half-cell as variability in contact pressure may influence the 

readings. 

3.3.4 Do not place the half-cell on individual exposed aggregate particles or other obstructions (e.g., 

asphalt or coating splotches) that may inordinately influence the reading. 

3.3.5 Monitor each point for at least 3 seconds before recording to ensure the reading is stable (not 

increasing). A variation of no more than +/- 5 mV per minute is necessary. If readings are not 

stable, this may indicate inadequate moisture or interference by an external electrical source, 

which should be evaluated and rectified before proceeding. 

3.3.6 In reinforced concrete, half-cell potential values for mild steel reinforcement commonly range 

from +50 to -600 mV CSE. Zinc and zinc coatings, as found on galvanized steel or in galvanic 

anodes for corrosion protection, will indicate more negative potentials in many cases. Regions 

where lack of oxygen restricts the cathode reaction to support corrosion may also produce 

unusually negative half-cell potential values. For valid interpretation, convert values for half-cell 

types other than Cu–CuSO4.

3.3.7 If using a rolling wheel half-cell, the half-cell potential wheel must be rolled back and forth at 

least 3 inches to find the smallest negative number around each point (this generally corresponds 

to the location closest to the steel reinforcement).

3.3.8 For comparison to other complementary test data at selected point locations, take additional 

detailed measurements. Take extra care to ensure proper probe contact and avoid exposed 

aggregate particles or other obstacles that may influence current flow. Select locations based on 

other survey data, including broad scale half-cell and resistivity mapping, as well as visual 

damage survey (for example, at locations showing delaminations, spalls, and repairs). Site 

restoration: When the half-cell potential testing is complete, fill in the hole flush with the surface 

of the surrounding area of the deck with a suitable concrete patching compound (approved by the 

bridge owner).
3 FLD-DC-NDE-003

January 2016

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage. 

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Descriptive name for the bridge; 

e.g., Route 15 SB over I–66 Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green

9 Deck surface temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model name and 

number Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Orange

14

Location of electrical 

connection to the reinforcing 

steel

Text

Descriptive location of the 

connection screw on the bridge 

(e.g., left shoulder 30 feet from

joint 1 and 3 feet from the edge 

of the lane.)

Green

15 Location of connection 

screw (x-coordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance from the 

local grid origin Green

16 Location of connection 

screw (y-coordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance from the 

local grid origin Green

17 Test site Text

Descriptive location of the test on 

the bridge (e.g., shoulder and 

lane 1)

Blue

18 Location of test site (xcoordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance from the 

local grid origin Blue

19 Location of test site (ycoordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance from the 

local grid origin Blue

20 Half-cell potential (HCP) 

reading Number 1 mV Range: -999 to 99 Yellow

21 Comments Text Orange
4 FLD-DC-NDE-003

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Verification and comparison should be made with results obtained from other NDE methods 

including chemical/potential methods, acoustic methods, and electromagnetic methods.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using half-cell potential 

measurements to assess the probability of active steel corrosion in a reinforced concrete member. 

6.2 Traffic in the lanes outside of the work zone is permissible during data collection.

6.3 The stainless steel screw should be of a length that when firmly connected to the reinforcing bar, 

the head of the screw protrudes about 0.5 inches above the top of the core hole. Thus, after the 

core hole is patched, the stainless steel screw will be available for future half-cell potential testing 

and a positive connection to the screw will be possible.

6.4 The half-cell potential test measures the electrical potential between the embedded steel 

reinforcement in the concrete and a reference electrode, typically a copper electrode in a copper 

sulfate solution, electrically coupled to the concrete surface. The electrical potential is measured 

as a voltage using a high-impedance voltmeter. The reference electrode is connected to the 

negative terminal of the voltmeter and a direct connection to the steel reinforcement is connected 

to the positive terminal. The reference electrode is typically coupled to the concrete surface using 

a porous ceramic plug and an open-celled sponge wetted with surfactant solution. Measurements 

are taken at point locations by moving the electrode from one point to another on a grid on the 

concrete.

6.5 Regions with a significantly lower negative potential compared to surrounding areas indicate a 

90 percent probability of corrosion. ASTM C876 gives guidelines for evaluating active corrosion 

probability in concrete structures containing uncoated mild steel reinforcement. 

6.6 HCP measurements do not give quantitative information about the rate of corrosion. The potential 

is influenced by cover depth, permeability and moisture content of concrete, and, therefore, a 

combination of HCP and resistivity measurements may help interpret the collected data. Coatings 

on concrete (isolating layers, asphalt, and paint) or reinforcement may influence or nullify HCP 

measurements.
5 FLD-DC-NDE-003

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 PRE-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: 

7.2.1 ASTM C876-09, Standard Test Method for Corrosion Potentials of Uncoated Reinforcing Steel in 

Concrete, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2009.

1 FLD-DC-NDE-004

January 2016

IMPACT ECHO TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Evidence of concrete delamination and other defects such as overlay debonding.

1.2 Detection of anomalies such as material variation, flaws, and vertical cracks.

1.3 Condition evaluation of grouted ducts.

1.4 Actual deck slab thickness.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Impact echo (IE) equipment/device; either of the following are acceptable:

2.1.2.1 Cart-mounted and semiautomated to control data collection line length and spatial location on 

deck, spacing between individual test measurements, triggering impact/source deployment, ease 

of use, etc.

2.1.2.2 Hand deployed and triggered manually at each test point location.

2.1.3 Data acquisition controller and software capable of sampling and recording at a minimum rate of 

50 kHz.

2.1.4 Data controller/storage device: laptop or data logger.

2.1.5 Data conditioning and analysis software capable of filtering, clipping, segmenting, and discarding 

noise and waveforms unrelated to the IE data.

2.1.6 Impact source capable of generating and a receiver capable of recording signals, with an 

acceptable signal to noise ratio that exists in a range of at least 2 to 25 kHz.

2.1.7 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the local rectangular grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate test points on the deck.

3.2 Test Preparation: Clear any debris from the deck surface. 

3.3 Measurements:

3.3.1 Collect data along any test line, as long as the location of every IE reading is properly recorded. 

3.3.2 Place the impact device and sensor in direct contact with the sampled concrete surface. 
2 FLD-DC-NDE-004

January 2016

3.3.3 Avoid hitting or resting on exposed aggregate, edges, or depressions within surface voids. 

Otherwise, erroneous signals may be generated, collected, and stored.

3.3.4 Conduct IE testing on concrete decks with hot-mix asphalt or similar overlays with the overlay 

surface temperatures lower than 50 °F. Results depend on the temperature at the time of testing 

and should be corrected based on a reference temperature.

3.3.5 During field operations, take care that the collected data in the time and frequency domains are 

consistent with expected signals from the structure being surveyed. For instance, it is expected 

that a frequency corresponding to the deck thickness dominates the frequency response of an 

intact portion of a deck. Other dominant frequency responses include very low resonant 

frequencies consistent with flexural oscillations, corresponding to shallow delaminations—those 

which should be audible during hammer sounding or the chain drag test. Also, there should be 

high-frequency resonant responses from deeper, less extensive delaminations or from incipient 

delaminations, either of which fully or partially blocks incident waveforms from reaching the 

bottom of the deck. Equipment must guarantee visualization of time histories for each collected 

signal, as well as frequency response and/or B-scan display obtained from a continuous set of 

measurements along a test line.

NOTE—There should be no chain drag, hammer sounding, coring, impact or hammer drilling, or 

similar operations producing high-frequency vibration (such as operation of an electric generator) 

in the proximity (within 100 ft) of the IE equipment. Operation of such equipment may produce

frequency responses within the range of interest, which decrease the signal-to-noise ratio and 

makes it either difficult or impossible to collect and interpret data.

3.4 Traffic in the lanes outside of the work zone is permissible during the data collection. 

3.5 Final forms for collected data include time histories and frequency response of measured raw data 

at all x and y test locations from gridded deck. Processed data consists of condition grading based 

on resonant frequency response of IE data (grades 1 to 4), also on x-y coordinate system.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia 

= VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text

Item 8, structure 

number; from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green
3 FLD-DC-NDE-004

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 

SB over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 °F Range: -50 to 150 Green

9 Deck surface temperature Number 1 °F Range: -50 to 150 Green

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model name 

and number Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Orange

14 Overlay material Text Green

15 Overlay thickness Number 0.5 in. Green

16 Bridge deck thickness Number 0.5 in. Green

17 Source type Text Green

18 Sensor type Text Green

19 Source sensor spacing Number 0.1 in. Green

20 Pulse period Number 0.1 μs Green

21 Pulse length Number 1 μs Green

22 Sampling rate Number 1 Green

23 Samples per scan Number 1 Green

24 Number of pretrigger 

samples Number 1 Green

25 Span Text Blue

26 Test site Text

Descriptive location of 

the test on the bridge 

(e.g., shoulder and 

lane 1)

Blue

27 Location of test site (xcoordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance 

from the local grid origin Blue

28 Location of test site (ycoordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance 

from the local grid origin Blue

29 Voltage array Array of 

numbers 0.000000001 V

Voltage array (time 

history) data for the point

The number of elements 

are the same as 

samples per scan 

(item 23) and can be 

different numbers for 

each element

Range: -1 to +1

Yellow

30 Comments Text Orange
4 FLD-DC-NDE-004

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Verification and comparison should be made with results obtained from other NDE methods,

including sounding methods, such as chain drag (FLD-DC-VIC-003, Chain Drag); acoustic 

methods; electromagnetic methods; as well as with ground truth data.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using IE testing to estimate 

deck thickness and detect and characterize the presence of delamination in bridge decks or other 

reinforced concrete elements. IE can serve additional purposes, such as for material evaluation, 

vertical crack characterization, detection of anomalies, concrete overlay debonding, etc. 

6.2 IE is based on the reflection of elastic (compressive) waves from interfaces of two materials that 

have significant contrast in acoustic impedances. Different reflectors, such as the surface of the 

deck bottom delaminations, deck bottom, cavities, ducts, etc., are delineated with different 

dominant frequency peaks in the recorded response spectrum. The frequency range of interest in 

the testing of bridge decks and concrete elements is between 2 and 25 kHz. The testing equipment 

consists of an impact source and a receiver (displacement or velocity transducer, or 

accelerometer).

6.3 The test is also described in ASTM C1383-04 (2010), "Standard Test Method for Measuring the 

P-Wave Speed and the Thickness of Concrete Plates Using the Impact-Echo Method."

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Chain Drag.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.
5 FLD-DC-NDE-004

January 2016

7.2 External:

7.2.1 ASTM C 1383-04(2010), Standard Test Method for Measuring the P-Wave Speed and the 

Thickness of Concrete Plates Using the Impact-Echo Method, ASTM International, West 

Conshohocken, PA, 2010.

1 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

LINEAR POLARIZATION RESISTANCE TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-005

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Rate of corrosion of reinforcement in concrete.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS:

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Linear polarization resistance (LPR) measurement system (manual or computer-operated 

potentiostat), including reference (half-cell) and counter electrode in portable probe 

configuration.

2.1.3 Low-resistance electrical leads with connectors.

2.1.4 Surfactant solution.

2.1.5 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Test preparation: 

3.1.1 LPR testing is conducted at identified point locations, and the data can be used to correlate with 

indications of the presence and rate of corrosion from other test methods, such as resistivity and 

chloride profiles. Select locations based on other survey data, including half-cell and resistivity 

mapping, as well as visual damage survey (delaminations, spalls, and repairs).

3.1.2 Use the local rectangular grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate and document test points on the deck.

3.1.3 Ensure the bridge deck is in a saturated-surface-dry condition (PRE-OP-SP-001, Site 

Preparation). 

3.2 Establishing electrical continuity: 

3.2.1 Provide positive electrical contact to the steel reinforcement to ensure electrical continuity 

between the electrical contact (tap) point and the reinforcement in the concrete surveyed section. 

This can be accomplished by providing multiple contact points at geometrically distributed points 

along the element being investigated. 

3.2.2 Depending upon reinforcement distribution, electrical continuity may not be expected over joints 

between spans, precast or cast-in-place (CIP) segments, and between structural components not 

cast monolithically. Carefully review structural and as-built drawings to determine the number 

and location of contact points to service the surveyed section. 
2 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

3.2.3 Using a high-impedance multimeter, measure the electrical resistance between the distributed 

points. 

3.2.4 Note that nonmetallic coatings, such as epoxy on concrete surfaces or reinforcement, asphalt, or 

polymer membranes may be electrical insulators and should be evaluated before proceeding with 

LPR measurements. Some organic coatings have been noted to uptake moisture over several 

years of service and may no longer preclude the flow of current, permitting measurements to be 

taken. However, interpretation may not be straightforward, since the area of bar polarized may be 

called into question. Results of tests on coated reinforcement should be taken in context with 

other measurements.

3.2.5 If direct resistance between distributed contact points (after subtracting the lead-wire resistance) 

is only a few ohms and stable, then adequate conductivity should exist for LPR measurements.

3.3 Placing the probe:

3.3.1 Placing the half-cell/counter electrode assembly (probe) in contact with the concrete surface 

immediately over a reinforcing steel bar to which electrical continuity has been established. 

Avoid placing the probe on nonconductive obstructions (e.g., asphalt or coating splotches) that 

may influence the reading. 

3.3.2 Prior to executing a polarization test, if possible, observe the open circuit potential with the test 

instrument to ensure that readings are stable. The test should not be run if open circuit potential 

values drift more than 5 mV/min. 

3.3.2.1 If potential moves steadily in one direction, consider whether the concrete is adequately saturated 

or if there is an external source of electrical current that is affecting the reinforcement. 

3.3.2.2 If potential values jump erratically, this generally indicates an incomplete circuit; items to check 

include electrical connections, seating of the probe and reference cells, and electrical continuity 

of reinforcement between tap site and test location. 

3.3.2.3 Values of open circuit potential should be similar to those observed in measurement of half-cell 

potential at the same location, though the magnitude of reading may differ if a different type of 

reference electrode is used (for example copper–copper sulfate (Cu–CuSO4) versus silver–silver 

chloride (Ag-AgCl)).

3.4 Manual testing: For the manual three-electrode polarization resistance (3LP) system, collect 

readings, and polarize the reinforcement through hand-driven operations: 

3.4.1 Monitor the electrical potential until stable. Stability corresponds to variations smaller than 

+/-5 mV per minute. Once stable potential is established and recorded, the system is ready to 

report relative potential versus the open-circuit potential (OCP).

NOTE—If readings are not stable, it may indicate an incomplete electrochemical circuit due to 

loose connections, inadequate moisture content, or interference by an external electrical source. 

Check connections, eliminate extraneous sources of electrical fields, and establish adequate 

moisture content.

3.4.2 Zero the meter by engaging the offset switch and turning the knob until potential value reads 

0 mV. 

3.4.3 Apply electrical current to polarize the reinforcement at a slow, steady rate in increments until the 

offset potential reaches +4, +8, and +12 mV from OCP. Record the current required to achieve 

the offset at the precise moment each noted increment is reached. The complete polarization 

procedure should take no longer than 2 minutes. 
3 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

3.4.4 Once complete, remove the current by rapidly turning the current knob back to zero and allow the 

reinforcement to depolarize. Continue to monitor the potential.

3.4.5 Within 3 minutes, the potential should return to the original OCP (or “0” if offset is still 

engaged). If it does not, retake the measurement because the associated “drift” in OCP will 

influence the estimated corrosion rate. A period of 10 minutes must elapse before repeating the 

readings to ensure adequate depolarization.

3.5 Automated testing: Some field instruments and laboratory potentiostats can be programmed to 

perform the polarization process automatically: 

3.5.1 If possible, program the system to monitor and collect the OCP by recording potential at 1-second 

intervals for at least 1 minute before and after the test.

3.5.2 Program automated systems to conduct a potentiostatic linear polarization resistance procedure, 

which induces a current from the counter electrode that causes the electrical potential of the 

reinforcement to shift from the OCP (i.e., polarize) by at least +12 mV and no more than 

+20 mV, at a rate of 10 mV per minute. 

3.5.3 Some devices are equipped with a “guard ring” electrode that induces a separate current into an 

electrode that surrounds and attempts to contain the primary counter electrode current into a 

specified polarization area. Such instruments are known to give significantly different corrosion 

rate values than the methods outlined above and are believed to underestimate the actual 

corrosion rate. Therefore, if used for the purposes of this program, such test devices must be 

operated with the guard ring electrode disabled.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number, 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green
4 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 °F

Numeric means negative and 

positive integers, range: -50 

to 150

Green

9

Deck surface 

temperature Number 1 °F

Numeric means negative and 

positive integers, range: -50 

to 150

Green

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model name 

and number Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Unlimited Orange

14 Reinforcement locating 

equipment name Text Green

15 Reinforcement locating 

equipment manufacturer Text Green

16

Comments 

(reinforcement locating 

equipment)

Text Unlimited Orange

17 Test site Text

Location of the test on the 

bridge (e.g., shoulder and 

lane 1)

Blue

18 Location of test site (xcoordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance from 

the local grid origin Blue

19 Location of test site (ycoordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance from the 

local grid origin Blue

20 OCP (before test) Number 1 mV Yellow

21 Applied current readings Number 0.0001 mA Yellow

22 Corresponding potential Number 1 mV Yellow

23 Length of probe Number 0.1 in. Yellow

24 Reinforcement size List #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9 Yellow

25 Range of polarization 

(offset) vs. OCP Number 1 mV Yellow

26 Scan rate Number 0.1 mV/sec Yellow

27 Depolarization OCP Number 1 mV Yellow

28 Polarized bar surface Number 0.01 in.2

Yellow

29 Corrosion current density 

(icorr)

Number 0.01 mA/ft2Yellow

30 OCP (after test) Number 1 mV Yellow

31 Metal loss Number 0.000001 in./yr Yellow

32 Comments Text Unlimited Orange
5 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Linear polarization resistance at any given location should correlate to measurements taken with 

the simpler half-cell potential test protocol (FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing). 

Corrosion rates can be calculated as corrosion current density, as total current is applied over the 

length and surface area of a reinforcement bar immediately below the probe, and translated into 

estimated metal loss using Faraday’s Law. Measurements of 0.1 μA/cm2or less indicate 

negligible corrosion rate, whereas measurements greater than 5 μA/cm2indicate very rapid 

corrosion.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using linear polarization 

resistance measurements for evaluating the instantaneous corrosion rate, as compared to other 

methods on which metal loss is measured over a finite period of time. 

6.2 The LPR technique is rapid and relatively nonintrusive; it requires only localized damage to the 

concrete cover to enable an electrical connection to be made to the reinforcing steel. Monitoring 

the relationship between electrochemical potential and the current generated between electrically

charged electrodes allows the estimation of the corrosion rate. The data provide the instantaneous 

corrosion rate of the steel reinforcement at the test location, giving more detailed information 

than a simple half-cell potential (HCP) measurement.

6.3 Reinforcement corrosion is mainly due to chloride ingress, causing depassivation and leading to 

corrosion when oxygen and moisture are present in the steel-concrete interface. Acid attack and 

carbonation could also provoke corrosion. 

6.4 This technique is used for estimating corrosion rates and is sensitive to very low corrosion rates; a 

rate of less than 0.1 millionths of an inch per year (mpy) can be detected. 

6.5 Periodic monitoring allows onset of corrosion and subsequent rate of corrosion to be evaluated.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.
6 FLD-DC-NDE-005

January 2016

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-OP-SP-001, Site Preparation.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-NDE-003, Half-Cell Potential Testing.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.
1 FLD-DC-NDE-006

January 2016

DYE PENETRANT TESTING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-006

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Crack detail in steel bridge members.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Liquid penetrant examination set.

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 Temporary marker.

2.1.5 Digital camera.

2.1.6 Pencil, sketch, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Establishing a local origin:

3.1.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by a unique element 

identifier.

3.1.1.1 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each individual element. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes for each face of each element 

being evaluated.

3.2 Testing:

3.2.1 Perform the dye penetrant in accordance with ASTM E165-02. 

3.2.1.1 Clean the surface with appropriate cleaner.

3.2.1.2 Apply the penetrant, and let it dwell.

3.2.1.3 Remove the excess penetrant from the surface.

3.2.1.4 Apply developer.

3.2.2 Observe and measure crack extent.

3.3 Documenting cracks:

3.3.1 Location:
2 FLD-DC-NDE-006

January 2016

3.3.1.1 Document the unique element identifier of the superstructure element on which the crack is 

located.

3.3.1.2 Follow FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin 

on each element; identify the relevant coordinate axis (such as x, z for a girder web), and 

document the beginning and ending points of the crack using the y, z coordinates.

3.3.1.3 Describe the location of the crack, e.g., adjacent to the connection of diaphragm 1DiAB to girder 

1A.

3.3.2 Size and orientation:

3.3.2.1 Record the length of the crack (from one end to the other in a straight line) in decimal inches 

using the tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or laser measuring device.

3.3.2.2 Measure the maximum crack width (opening) with the crack comparison card (crack gage).

3.3.2.3 Record the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plump bob, or compass (or other anglemeasuring device).

3.3.3 Take photographs (FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes) and/or draw 

sketches illustrating the location and size of the crack.

3.4 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.4.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.4.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.5 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia 

= VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text

Item 8, structure 

number; from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 

SB over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date data were 

collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green

9

Deck surface 

temperature Number 1 oF Range: -50 to 150 Green
3 FLD-DC-NDE-006

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

10

Location of crack: 

element type and 

unique identifier

Text

Example: Girder 1A; 

evaluate and record data 

for each crack identified 

in the individual element

Blue

11 Test site Text

Descriptive location of 

the crack on the bridge 

(e.g., adjacent to the 

connection of diaphragm 

1Di1AB to girder A)

Yellow

12

Pair of axis used to 

locate crack on deck or 

element

Text (x, y), (x, z), or (y, z) Yellow

13 Coordinates of the 

beginning of the crack Number 0.125 In. Example on web (x, z) Yellow

14 Coordinates of the end 

of the crack Number 0.005 In. Example on web (x, z) Yellow

15 Crack length Number 0.1 In. Yellow

16 Crack width Number 0.01 In. Yellow

17 Presence of rust at 

crack List Yes or No Yellow

18 Crack photo BLOB

Take one or more 

photos of each crack 

identified

Yellow

19 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Comparison should be made with crack data and photos from previous inspections as well as with 

crack data and photos from FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking, if 

available.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using dye penetrant 

examination of materials for detecting discontinuities that are open to the surface, such as cracks, 

seams, laps, cold shuts, laminations, through leaks, or lack of fusion.
4 FLD-DC-NDE-006

January 2016

6.2 Dye penetrant testing is applicable to in-process, final, and maintenance examination. It can be 

effectively used in the examination of nonporous, metallic materials, both ferrous and nonferrous. 

6.3 Solvent-removable, visible dye liquid penetrant examination is generally the preferred method for 

field use where surface examinations are required. It has the advantage of easy portability and 

simplicity, and it does not require electricity, black lights and dark rooms, or a water source. 

6.4 The minimum requirements for conducting liquid penetrant examination are specified in 

ASTM E1417-05e1. The nature of the cleaner, the penetrant, and the developer are specified in 

ASTM E165-02.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.2 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.3 FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 ASTM E1417-05e1, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Testing, ASTM International, West 

Conshohocken, PA, 2005.

7.2.2 ASTM E165-02, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Examination, ASTM International, West 

Conshohocken, PA, 2002.
1 FLD-DC-NDE-007

 January 2016

ULTRASONIC SURFACE WAVE TESTING—CONCRETE

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-007

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Elastic modulus variation of concrete throughout tested deck area.

1.2 Indications of concrete degradation. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ultrasonic surface wave (USW) equipment/device with impact source and sensors (cart mounted 

or hand deployed and triggered manually at each test point location); capable of generating and 

accurately recording signals in a range of at least 5 to 30 kHz positioned inline.

2.1.3 Data acquisition system, capable of sampling and recording at a minimum rate of 60 kHz.

2.1.4 Data conditioning and analysis software, capable of filtering, clipping, segmenting, and isolating 

frequency response data; hand deployed and triggered manually at each test point location.

2.1.5 Laptop or data logger.

2.1.6 Hammer.

2.1.7 Small diameter punch.

2.1.8 Digital camera.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the global rectangular grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System

for Bridge Decks) to locate test points on the deck.

3.2 Test preparation:

3.2.1 Ensure the deck surface is clear of any debris. 

3.2.2 Measure the thickness of the asphalt overlay, if any, by driving a small diameter punch through

the overlay until it reaches the concrete deck and record the embedded length of the punch.

3.3 Testing:

3.3.1 Collect data along any test line, as long as the location of every USW reading is properly 

recorded. 

3.3.2 Place the impact source and sensors in direct contact with the sampled concrete surface.
2 FLD-DC-NDE-007

 January 2016

3.3.3 Avoid hitting or resting on exposed aggregate, edges or depressions within surface voids, vugs, or 

surface tining. Otherwise, erroneous signals may be generated, collected, and stored.

3.3.4 During field operations, note that displayed dispersion curves (modulus vs. depth), calculated 

modulus, and other data are consistent with expected results based on the design strength of the 

concrete, overall visible deck condition, and feedback from other nondestructive evaluation 

(NDE) or concrete condition assessment data. For instance, the variation of modulus with depth is 

relatively constant in an intact area of a bridge deck. There would be a drop in modulus in the 

presence of defect within the bridge deck.

NOTE—There should be no chain drag, hammer sounding, coring, impact or hammer drilling, an 

electric generator, or similar operations producing high-frequency vibration in the proximity 

(within 100 ft) of the USW equipment. Operation of such equipment may produce frequency 

responses within the range of interest, which decrease the signal/noise ratio and make it either 

impossible or more difficult to isolate and interpret collected data.

3.4 Traffic in the lanes outside of the work zone is permissible during the data collection. 

3.5 Final forms for collected data include time histories and frequency response of measured raw data 

at all x and y test locations from gridded deck. Processed data consist of condition grading based 

on resonant frequency response of impact-echo data (grades 1 to 4), also on an x-y coordinate 

system.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8 Ambient air temperature Number 1 °F Range: -50 to 150 Green
3 FLD-DC-NDE-007

 January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

9 Deck surface temperature Number 1 °F Range: -50 to 150 Green

10 Equipment name Text Green

11 Equipment manufacturer Text Green

12 Equipment model name 

and number Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Unlimited Orange

14 Overlay material Text Green

15 Overlay thickness Number 0.5 in. Green

16 Bridge deck thickness Number 0.5 in. Range: 0 to 10 Green

17 Source type Text Range: 0 to 60 Green

18 Sensor type Text Green

19 Source sensor spacing Number 0.1 in. Range: 0.1 to 20 Green

20 Sensor 1 

Sensor 2 spacing Number 0.1 in. Range: 0.1 to 20 Green

21 Pulse period Number 0.1 Green

22 Pulse length Number 1 Green

23 Sampling rate Number 1 Green

24 Samples per scan Number 1 Range: 0 to 16,400 Green

25 Number of pretrigger 

samples Number 1 Green

26 Span number Text Span 1, Span 2, Span N (if 

testing on deck surface) Blue

27 Test site Text

Describe the location of the 

test on the bridge (e.g., 

shoulder and lane 1)

Blue

28 Location of test site 

(x-coordinate) Number 1 ft Transverse distance from 

the grid origin Blue

29 Location of test site 

(y-coordinate) Number 1 ft Longitudinal distance from 

the grid origin Blue

30 Hammer voltage array Array of 

numbers

0.00000000

1

V

Voltage array (time history) 

data for the test point;

the number of elements 

are the same as samples 

per scan (item 24) and can 

be different numbers for 

each element

Range: -1 to +1

Yellow

31 Sensor 1 voltage array Array of 

numbers

0.00000000

1

V Yellow

32 Sensor 2 voltage array Array of 

numbers

0.00000000

1

V Yellow

33 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
4 FLD-DC-NDE-007

 January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Verification and comparison should be made with results obtained from other NDE methods,

including sounding methods, such as chain drag (FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and 

Delamination), acoustic methods, electromagnetic methods, as well as with ground truth data.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using USW testing to measure 

the elastic modulus of concrete. Significant changes in the modulus between two periodical 

measurements are an indication of concrete degradation. Changes in the modulus among several 

periodic measurements can be used to map the condition degradation rate of a structure over time. 

6.2 USW testing is the measurement of the velocity of surface waves in concrete of a bridge deck or 

other reinforced concrete members. The measured velocity of surface waves is linked to the 

elastic modulus. The frequency range of interest in testing of bridge decks and other concrete 

members is between 5 and 30 kHz. The testing equipment consists of an impact source and two 

receivers, positioned along a line, so that velocity of the surface wave can be determined with the 

distance between two sensors (displacement or velocity transducers, or accelerometers) and the 

travel time of the surface wave as it propagates away from the near receiver to the far receiver. 

The spacing of sensors on the instruments used for USW measurement specifies the penetration 

depth of surface waves. The rule of thumb is that the sensors’ spacing should be half the 

member’s thickness to measure the variation of surface wave velocity over the full depth of the 

concrete member.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks. 

7.1.4 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 S2-R06A-RR-1, Nondestructive Testing to Identify Concrete Bridge Deterioration, 

Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 2013.
1 FLD-DC-NDE-008

January 2016

ULTRASONIC TESTING—STEEL FATIGUE CRACKING

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-NDE-008

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Location and measurements of cracks and discontinuities.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS:

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ultrasonic testing (UT) system.

2.1.3 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.4 Tape measure.

2.1.5 Temporary marker.

2.1.6 Digital camera.

2.1.7 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Establishing a local origin:

3.1.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by a unique element 

identifier.

3.1.1.1 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each individual element. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes for each face of each element 

being evaluated.

3.2 Test preparation:

3.2.1 Use a wire brush to clean the surface of the bridge element in the area where cracking is 

suspected and flaw detection and measurement is desired.

3.2.2 Calibrate the system according to the manufacturer's instructions.

3.3 Testing:

3.3.1 Run the procedure as described in the instruction manual of the ultrasonic testing system to do the 

following:

3.3.1.1 Configure the transducer wavelength/frequency in order to detect voids (generally, a void must be 

larger than half the wavelength to be detected).

3.3.1.2 Create and propagate waves in the material, using couplant and wedges when necessary.
2 FLD-DC-NDE-008

January 2016

3.3.1.3 Determine the thickness of the material.

3.3.1.4 Record reflected waves seeking reflection from defects; convert waveforms into a frequency 

spectrum if necessary.

3.3.1.5 Determine the distance to any defect identified.

3.3.1.6 When a flaw is detected, scan the area, and estimate the length of the crack from beginning point 

to ending point with the ultrasonic testing system and the tape measure. Collect these values and 

note the location in the segment.

3.3.1.7 Mark the beginning and ending points of the crack.

3.4 Documenting cracks:

3.4.1 Location:

3.4.1.1 Document the unique element identifier of the superstructure element on which the crack is 

located.

3.4.1.2 Follow FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin 

on each element; identify the relevant coordinate axis (such as x, z for a girder web), and 

document the beginning and ending points of the crack using the y, z coordinates.

3.4.1.3 Describe the location of the crack, e.g., adjacent to the connection of diaphragm 1Di1AB to 

girder 1A.

3.4.2 Size and orientation:

3.4.2.1 Record the length of the crack (from one end to the other in a straight line) in decimal inches 

using the tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or laser measuring device.

3.4.2.2 Measure the maximum crack width (opening) with the crack comparison card (crack gage).

3.4.2.3 Record the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plump bob, compass, or other anglemeasuring device.

3.4.3 Take photographs (FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes) and/or draw 

sketches that illustrate the location and size of the crack.

3.5 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.5.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.5.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.6 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR 

1 State Text Text State Code, e.g., 

Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Text

Item 8, Structure 

Number from NBI 

Coding Guide

Green
3 FLD-DC-NDE-008

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR 

3 Structure name Text Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 

SB over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 

2015

Green

6

Personnel performing 

data collection activities Text Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7

Date data were 

collected

Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Ambient air 

temperature Number 1 oF

Numeric means 

negative and positive 

integers, range: -50 to 

150

Green

9

Deck surface 

temperature Number 1 oF

Numeric means 

negative and positive 

integers, range: -50 to 

150

Green

10 Equipment name Text Text Green

11 Equipment 

manufacturer Text Text Green

12 Equipment model name 

and number Text Text If available Green

13 Comments (equipment) Text Unlimited Orange

14 Bridge deck thickness Number 0.5 in. Range: 0 to 10 Green

15 Pulse period Number 0.1 Green

16 Pulse length Number 1 Green

17 Pulse voltage Number 0.1 Green

18 Sampling rate Number 1 Green

19 Samples per scan Number 1 Green

20

Location of crack: 

element type and 

unique identifier

Text

Example: Girder 1A; 

evaluate and record 

data for each crack 

identified in the 

individual element

Blue

21 Test site Text

Descriptive location of 

the crack on the bridge 

(e.g., adjacent to the 

connection of 

diaphragm 1DiAB to 

girder A)

Yellow

22 Voltage array Array of 

numbers

0.00000000

1

Volts

Voltage array (time 

history) data for the 

point; the number of 

elements are the same 

as samples per scan 

(item 19) and can be 

different numbers for 

each element

Range: -1 to +1

Yellow

23 Thickness of member Number 0.1 in. Yellow
4 FLD-DC-NDE-008

January 2016

24

Pair of axis used to 

locate crack on deck or 

element

Text

(x, y),

(x, z), or

(y, z)

Yellow

25 Coordinates of the 

beginning of the crack Number 0.125 in. Example on web (x, z) Yellow

26 Coordinates of the end 

of the crack Number 0.005 in. Example on web (x, z) Yellow

28 Crack length Number 0.1 in. Yellow

29 Crack width Number 0.01 in. Yellow

30 Presence of rust at 

crack List Yes or No Yellow

31 Crack photo BLOB

Take one or more 

photos of each crack 

identified

Yellow

32 Comments Text Unlimited Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Comparison should be made with crack data and photos from previous inspections as well as with 

crack data and photos from FLD-DC-NDE-006, Dye Penetrant Testing, if available.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using ultrasonic testing to 

locate and measure cracks or discontinuities in steel members.

6.2 Ultrasonic testing uses high-frequency sound energy used for flaw detection and evaluation. A 

UT system uses a transducer that generates high-frequency ultrasonic energy. The sound energy 

is introduced and propagates through the materials in the form of waves. When there is a 

discontinuity (such as a void) in the wave path, part of the energy is reflected back from the flaw 

surface. The reflected wave signal is transformed into an electrical signal by the transducer and is 

displayed on a screen. Signal travel time can be related to the distance that the signal traveled. 

From the signal, information about the void location and size can be determined. 

6.3 Only single-sided access is needed when the pulse-echo technique is used. However, there are 

some limitations to UT: the surface must be accessible to transmit ultrasound, skill and training is 

more extensive than with other NDE methods, and it requires a coupling medium to promote the 

transfer of sound energy into the test specimen.
5 FLD-DC-NDE-008

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-NDE-006, Dye Penetrant Testing.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.

VISUAL INSPECTION—STEEL ELEMENTS PROTOCOLS (VIS)

FLD-DC-VIS-001, Steel Superstructure Deterioration

FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion

FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss

FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, 

Buckling, Rotation, and Impact Damage

1 FLD-DC-VIS-001

January 2016

STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE DETERIORATION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIS-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This is an instructional protocol for visual inspection of a bridge or span with a steel 

superstructure. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by the 

unique element identifier. 

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each individual element.

3.3 Evaluating and recording characteristics of the superstructure:

3.3.1 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion, for each instance of paint deterioration or 

peeling, visible corrosion, or pitting.

3.3.2 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss, for each instance of loss of section.

3.3.3 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage, for each instance of cracking, deflections, uplift, distortion, 

rotations, and buckling, as well as any damages from strikes by vehicles, vessels, or floating 

debris.

3.4 Evaluating bearings:

3.4.1 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

3.4.2 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document typical defects and supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.
2 FLD-DC-VIS-001

January 2016

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for planning the detailed visual inspection of a bridge 

superstructure that consists of steel members. Use the listed protocols to guide data collection and 

recording.

6.2 A bridge superstructure is the portion of a bridge structure that receives and supports traffic loads 

(distributed by the bridge deck) and, in turn, transfers these loads to the bridge substructure via 

the bridge bearings. A steel superstructure can consist of girders (rolled beams, rolled beams with 

a cover plate, or plate girders), floor beams and stringers (concrete encased, rolled, and welded or 

bolted plates), cross-frames, diaphragms, and vertical and/or horizontal stiffeners. 

6.3 Truss structures may have built-up sections for top and bottom chords, vertical and diagonal 

members, lateral and sway frame bracings, and gusset plates.

6.4 The bearings are considered elements of the superstructure.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System. 

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

7.1.9 FLD-DC-VIS-004, Steel Superstructure—Cracking, Deflection, Uplift, Distortion, Buckling, 

Rotation, and Impact Damage.
3 FLD-DC-VIS-001

January 2016

7.1.10 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.11 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.12 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIS-002

January 2016

STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE—CORROSION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIS-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of corrosion on a steel superstructure.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Scraper.

2.1.6 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.7 Sounding hammer.

2.1.8 Lever pit gage.

2.1.9 Slide caliper.

2.1.10 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.11 Temporary marker.

2.1.12 Digital camera.

2.1.13 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by the 

unique element identifier.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element to be used to locate defects.

3.3 Cleaning:

3.3.1 Use the scraper and wire brush to clean loose, deteriorated protective coating and surface 

corrosion, if any are present.
2 FLD-DC-VIS-002

January 2016

3.3.2 If after cleaning, section loss to the steel is evident, follow FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel 

Superstructure—Section Loss, to record measurements and characteristics of the section loss.

3.4 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of corrosive activity:

3.4.1 Mark the limits of each area with deteriorated coatings on the element with a temporary marker, 

and mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width 

of the corroded area.

3.4.1.1 Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of the four 

corners of the rectangle. 

3.4.1.2 Measure the maximum length and width of the area with deteriorated coatings.

3.4.2 Mark the limits of each corroded area on the element with a temporary marker, and mark the 

corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width of the corroded 

area.

3.4.2.1 Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of the four 

corners of the rectangle. 

3.4.2.2 Measure the maximum length and width of the corrosion.

3.4.3 Determine the extent (depth) and severity of any pitting using a lever pit gage. 

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document section loss and cracking and supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia 

= VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 

SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was Green
3 FLD-DC-VIS-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

published; e.g., May 

2015

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR COATING DETERIORATION Pink

8

Location of deteriorated 

coating: element type and 

unique identifier

Text

Example: Girder, 1A; 

evaluate and record data 

for areas of deteriorated 

coating on each 

individual element

Blue

9

Location of defect on the 

element Text Example: bottom flange of girder 1A Blue

10 Type of defect Text

Chalking

Cracking

Loss of adhesion

Peeling

Other (specify)

Yellow

11 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y,z) coordinates of the 

four corners of a 

rectangle encompassing 

the deteriorated area

Yellow

12 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

15 Maximum length of 

deteriorated coating area

Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the 

x-axis Yellow

16 Maximum width of 

deteriorated coating area

Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the 

z-axis Yellow

17 Defect photos and sketches BLOB BLOB

Document typical areas 

of deteriorated coating

with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

FOR CORROSION Pink

19

Location of corroded area: 

element type and unique 

identifier

Text

Example: Girder, 1A; 

evaluate and record data 

for corroded areas on 

each individual element

Blue

20 Location of defect on the 

element Text Example: web of girder 1A Blue

21 Location of corroded area 

on member – corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the 

four corners of a 

rectangle encompassing 

the deteriorated area

Yellow

22 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

23 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

24 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Maximum length of 

corroded area Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the 

x-axis Yellow

26 Maximum width of corroded 

area

Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the 

z-axis Yellow

27 Depth of pitting Number 0.01 in. Yellow

28 Defect photos and sketches BLOB

Document typical 

corroded areas with 

photos and/or sketches

Yellow

29 Comments Text Orange
4 FLD-DC-VIS-002

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION 

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using the appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on identifying corroded areas on steel superstructure elements 

and documenting their extent and location on the element. Guidance is also provided for 

measuring the extent and depth of any pitting of the steel is present. 

6.2 Steel superstructures, such as trusses (deck, through, and pony), multigirder beams, girder/floor 

beam/stringer systems, box girders, etc., that are not built of weathering steel and are not 

protected by galvanizing or metallizing are usually protected by one or more coats of paint to 

guard against oxidation (rusting) of the steel.

6.3 The most common types of defects in bridge coatings include chalking, cracking, loss of 

adhesion, and peeling. Data collection involves identifying areas where coating defects are 

evident and documenting the location and size of the affected areas.

6.4 The main cause of steel corrosion in coated bridges is the lack and/or breakdown of the protective 

coating. Once this occurs, the exposure to corrosive agents (water, salts, and chemicals) begins a 

disintegration process on the surface metal. Corrosion grows from a few, small starting points, 

and then expands as steel molecules that are directly in contact with the corroded area also 

corrode; eventually, small, medium, and large contiguous areas of corrosion are evident. Data 

collection involves identifying areas where corrosion is evident and documenting the location and 

size of the affected areas. 
5 FLD-DC-VIS-002

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIS-003, Steel Superstructure—Section Loss.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration,

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIS-003

January 2016

STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE—SECTION LOSS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIS-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of steel section loss on a steel superstructure.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Sounding hammer.

2.1.4 Tape measure.

2.1.5 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.6 Scraper.

2.1.7 Crack comparison card.

2.1.8 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.9 Slide calipers.

2.1.10 Web calipers.

2.1.11 Straight edge or ruler.

2.1.12 Ultrasonic thickness gage.

2.1.13 Digital camera.

2.1.14 Temporary marker.

2.1.15 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.16 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by the 

unique element identifier.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element.
2 FLD-DC-VIS-003

January 2016

3.3 Cleaning: 

3.3.1 Use a scraper and/or a hammer to remove exfoliated steel at suspect areas until the base metal is 

uncovered. 

3.3.2 With a wire brush, clear away loose metal and other debris, if necessary, to allow accurate 

measurements and photographs.

3.4 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of section loss:

3.4.1 After removing all loose material from the surface, mark the limits of the section loss. Measure 

the remaining thicknesses of the reduced section with slide calipers or ultrasonic thickness gage. 

Measure the initial thickness of the element cross section, and calculate the percentage of section 

remaining. 

3.4.1.1 Measure flange thickness with slide calipers.

3.4.1.2 Measure web thicknesses with web calipers if feasible. If is not feasible, use an ultrasonic 

thickness gage on the web; as a last alternative, estimate the loss of thickness using a straight 

edge and ruler. 

3.4.2 Sample areas of section loss to determine the maximum value of loss (minimum remaining 

section). To do this, use calipers, or ultrasonic thickness gage. The as-built construction plans can

be used to obtain the original thickness of the member at a location where there is no loss of 

section.

3.4.3 Mark the limits of each area of section loss on the element with a temporary marker and also 

mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width of the 

area of section loss.

3.4.3.1 Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of the four 

corners of the rectangle.

3.4.3.2 Measure the length and width of each area of section loss with a tape measure. 

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document section loss and supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
3 FLD-DC-VIS-003

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text Descriptive name for the bridge; 

e.g., Route 15 SB over I–66 Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

8 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

9

Location of section loss: 

element type and unique 

identifier

Text

Example: Girder, 1A; evaluate 

and record data for areas with 

section loss on each individual 

element

Blue

10 Location of defect on the 

element Text Example: web of girder 1A Blue

11 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y,z) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the deteriorated 

area

Yellow

12 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

15 Maximum length of section 

loss Number 1 in. Yellow

16 Maximum width of section 

loss Number 1 in. Yellow

17 Minimum remaining

thickness Number 0.0625 in. Yellow

18 Original thickness Number 0.0625 in. Yellow

19 Defect photos BLOB

If defects are present, 

document typical defects with 

photos and/or sketches

Yellow

20 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
4 FLD-DC-VIS-003

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol describes the evaluation of steel with section loss, oxidation, or rusting. 

6.2 After a period of exposure to water, salts, and chemical agents, load and/or other factors, 

advanced deterioration of steel may result in material section loss that can ultimately lead to a 

perforated section.

6.3 Data collection involves exposing the areas where section loss has occurred, removing all loose 

materials, and then determining the thickness of the steel and the amount of the original section 

still remaining and documenting the location and size of the affected areas.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

STEEL SUPERSTRUCTURE—

CRACKING, DEFLECTION, UPLIFT, DISTORTION,

BUCKLING, ROTATION, AND IMPACT DAMAGE

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIS-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of each instance of cracking, deflection, distortion, rotation, and 

buckling, as well as any damage from strikes by vehicles, ships, or floating debris. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment.

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Slide caliper.

2.1.6 Crack comparison cards.

2.1.7 Sounding hammer.

2.1.8 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.9 Hand scraper (for paint and rust remover).

2.1.10 Plumb bob.

2.1.11 Hand compass or other angle measuring device.

2.1.12 Level.

2.1.13 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.14 Temporary marker.

2.1.15 Digital camera.

2.1.16 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) to locate and document defects according to the 

unique element identifier.
2 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each individual element. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes for each face of each element 

being evaluated.

3.3 Cleaning:

3.3.1 Use the hammer, scraper, and/or wire brush to clean loose, deteriorated protective coating and 

loose surface corrosion, if any are present.

3.4 After cleaning, if areas of section loss in the steel are evident, follow FLD-DC-VIC-003, Steel 

Superstructure—Section Loss, for the elements where section loss is noted.

3.5 For each element of the steel superstructure, identify and document each instance of the following

defects:

3.5.1 Cracks:

3.5.1.1 Mark the ends of each crack on the superstructure element with a temporary marker, and 

photograph the crack.

3.5.1.2 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the crack is 

located.

3.5.1.3 Record the location of the beginning and the end of each crack by measuring the coordinates from 

the local grid origin. 

3.5.1.4 Measure the length of the crack in a straight line from one end of the crack to the other using the 

tape measure, folding rule, measuring wheel, or laser measuring device.

3.5.1.5 Measure the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plumb bob, compass, or other anglemeasuring device. 

3.5.1.6 Measure the crack width (opening) with the crack comparator (crack gage) at the maximum 

width.

3.5.1.7 Measure or estimate the depth of the crack at the deepest point. 

3.5.1.8 Document any rust present in the crack using FLD-DC-VIC-002, Steel Superstructure—

Corrosion.

3.5.2 Deflections, uplifts, distortions, or buckling:

3.5.2.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the deflection, 

uplift, distortion, or buckling is located. If possible, photograph the defect.

3.5.2.2 Document the location of the deflection, uplift, distortion, or buckling by determining the 

coordinates of the beginning and the end of the affected portion of the element.

3.5.2.3 Measure the amount of deflection, uplift, distortion, or buckling using a tape measure, folding 

rule, or laser measuring device.

3.5.3 Rotation:

3.5.3.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the rotation is 

located. If possible, photograph the rotation.

3.5.3.2 Document the location of the rotation by determining the coordinates of the beginning and the 

end of the affected portion of the element.
3 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

3.5.3.3 Measure the amount of rotation (degrees) using a plumb bob, compass, angle-measuring device, 

or laser measuring device.

3.5.4 Impact damage:

3.5.4.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the impact 

damage is located and photograph the damage.

3.5.4.2 Mark the extent (length, width, depth) of the impact damage with a temporary marker, and 

photograph the damage.

3.5.4.3 Measure the extent (length, width, and/or depth) of the impact damage.

3.5.4.4 Document the location of the impact damage by determining and recording the coordinates of the 

beginning and the end of the affected portion of the element.

3.6 Documenting defects:

3.6.1 Take photographs to document the defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for 

Documentation Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.6.2 Use sketches to document defects and supplement the photographs.

3.7 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.7.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage. 

3.7.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.8 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number, 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR INDIVIDUAL CRACKS ON A STEEL ELEMENT Pink

8

Location of crack: element 

type and number Text

Example: Girder, 1A; 

evaluate and record data for 

cracks in each individual 

element

Blue
4 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

9

Location of crack on the 

element Text

Examples: in the top flange; 

in the weld at the third 

longitudinal stiffener from the 

bottom

Yellow

10 Location of the start of the 

crack Number 1 in. (x,y,z) coordinates of the 

ends of the crack

Yellow

11 Location of the end of the 

crack Number 1 in. Yellow

12 Crack length Number 0.125 in.

Measured in a straight line 

from the beginning to the end 

of the crack

Yellow

13 Axes used to determine 

crack orientation Text Example: x and y

Yellow

14 Crack orientation Number 1 Degrees

Based on the angle between 

the line of the crack and the 

axis of the local coordinate 

system for the element

Yellow

15 Maximum crack width Number 0.125 in. Yellow

16 Maximum crack depth Number 0.125 in. Yellow

17 Presence of rust at crack List Yes or No Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

FOR DEFLECTION, UPLIFT, DISTORTION, OR BUCKLING ON A STEEL ELEMENT Pink

19 Location of defect: element 

type and number Text

Evaluate and record data for 

deflection, uplift, distortion, or 

buckling in each individual 

element

Blue

20 Type of defect Text

Deflection

Uplift

Distortion 

Buckling

Yellow

21 Amount of deflection, uplift, 

distortion, or buckling Number 0.125 in. Yellow

22 Comments Text Orange

FOR ROTATION ON A STEEL ELEMENT Pink

23 Location of the rotation: 

element type and number Text

Example: Girder, 1A; 

evaluate and record data for 

cracks in each individual 

element

Blue

24 Location on element of 

rotation Text Yellow

25 Amount of rotation Number 1 Degrees Yellow

26 Comments Text Orange

FOR IMPACT DAMAGE ON A STEEL ELEMENT Pink

27 Location of impact damage: 

element type and number Text

Example: Girder, 1A; 

evaluate and record data for 

cracks in each individual 

element

Blue

28

Location of the beginning of 

the impact damage: 

x-coordinate

Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the beginning of 

the impact damage

Yellow

29

Location of the end of the 

impact damage: 

x-coordinate

Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the end of the 

impact damage

Yellow

30 Length of impact damage Number 1 in. Yellow
5 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

31 Width of impact damage Number 1 in. Yellow

32 Depth of impact damage Number 1 in. Yellow

33 Defect photos and sketches BLOB Document all defects with 

photos and/or sketches Yellow

34 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense.

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for identifying different types of defects on steel elements and 

documenting the location and extent of the defect.

6.2 A steel superstructure can consist of girders (rolled beams, rolled beams with a cover plate, or 

plate girders), floor beams and stringers (concrete encased, rolled beams, or rolled beams with 

welded or bolted plates), cross-frames, diaphragms, and vertical and/or horizontal stiffeners. 

6.3 Truss structures may have built-up sections for top and bottom chords, vertical and diagonal 

elements/members, lateral and sway frame bracings, and gusset plates.

6.4 Impact damage can result from strikes by vehicles, ships, trains, or debris.
6 FLD-DC-VIS-004

January 2016

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIS-002, Steel Superstructure—Corrosion.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
VISUAL INSPECTION—CONCRETE ELEMENTS PROTOCOLS (VIC)

FLD-DC-VIC-001, Concrete Deterioration

FLD-DC-VIC-002, Concrete Substructure Condition Assessment

FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination

FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and 

Delamination

FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking

FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion

FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack

1 FLD-DC-VIC-001

January 2016

CONCRETE DETERIORATION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIC-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a list of protocols to guide visual inspection and data recording of a 

bridge with a concrete deck and superstructure.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by the 

unique element identifier.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element.

3.3 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck.

3.4 Use the following protocols for finding defects and recording characteristics:

3.4.1 Deck and superstructure:

3.4.1.1 For potential spalls and delaminations on the deck: FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls 

and Delamination. 

3.4.1.2 For each instance of spalls and delaminations on the superstructure: FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete 

Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

3.4.1.3 For each instance of cracking: FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

3.4.1.4 For each instance of abrasion: FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

3.4.1.5 For each instance of sulfate attack: FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

3.4.2 Bearings:

3.4.2.1 FLD-DC-VIS-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

3.4.2.2 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document defects and supplement the photographs.
2 FLD-DC-VIC-001

January 2016

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for planning the detailed visual inspection of a concrete bridge 

deck and superstructure that consists of reinforced or prestressed concrete members as well as a 

reinforced or prestressed concrete deck.

6.2 A bridge superstructure is that portion of a bridge that receives and supports traffic loads 

(distributed by the bridge deck) and, in turn, transfers these loads to the bridge substructure, via 

the bridge bearings. A concrete superstructure can consist of girders (such as American 

Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standard Type I though 

VI I-girders, AASHTO Pavement Condition Index (PCI) standard bulb tee girders, AASHTO/PCI 

standard pretensioned spread or adjacent box beams, specific State standard pretensioned 

concrete I-girders or bulb-tee girders, pretensioned U-beams, cast-in-place posttensioned box 

girders, and segmental girders), diaphragms, and girder ends made continuous for a live load. 

6.3 Bearings are considered elements of the superstructure.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-001

January 2016

7.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.10 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

7.1.11 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

7.1.12 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

7.1.13 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.14 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.15 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIC-002

January 2016

CONCRETE SUBSTRUCTURE CONDITION ASSESSMENT

LTBP Protocol # FLD-DC-VIC-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides a list of protocols to guide visual inspection and data recording of 

the concrete substructure of a bridge or span.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment: None.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by the 

unique element identifier.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element.

3.3 For concrete pier caps, piers, pile caps, piles (if visible), footings, abutments, and wingwalls, use 

the following protocols for finding defects and recording characteristics:

3.4 For each instance of spalling and delamination on the substructure: FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete 

Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

3.4.1 For each instance of cracking: FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking

3.4.2 For each instance of abrasion: FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

3.4.3 For each instance of sulfate attack: FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes, and 

create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document defects and supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
2 FLD-DC-VIC-002

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 None.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for planning the detailed visual inspection of a concrete bridge 

substructure that consists of reinforced or prestressed concrete members.

6.2 The bridge substructure includes all elements supporting the superstructure and retaining the 

approach roadway backfill. These elements include piles, pile caps, piers, pier caps, footings, 

piles, drilled shafts, abutments (including breastwalls, bridge seats, and backwalls), wingwalls, 

columns, stemwalls, and cap beams. The substructure can be generalized as an abutment or 

pier/pier bent, which can be constructed of concrete, reinforced concrete, masonry, stone, steel, 

timber, or a combination of these materials.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-VIC-004 Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-006, Concrete—Abrasion.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-007, Concrete—Sulfate Attack.

7.1.9 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.10 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.11 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

CONCRETE DECK—

SPALLS AND DELAMINATION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIC-003

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of spalls and delaminations on concrete deck. 

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Chain or a series of medium weight chains attached to a T-shaped handle.

2.1.4 Sounding hammer.

2.1.5 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.6 Tape measure.

2.1.7 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.8 Measuring wheel.

2.1.9 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.10 Temporary marker.

2.1.11 Digital camera.

2.1.12 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck.

3.2 Cleaning: 

3.2.1 Use the wire brush or hand broom to clean the concrete element by brushing away any debris so 

any defects are visible.

3.2.2 Remove, collect, and discard all concrete that is loose enough to move without fracturing 

additional surfaces. 
2 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

3.3 Deck delamination survey:

3.3.1 Using a sweeping motion, pull the chain drag over approximately 3 ft of the concrete deck 

surface at a time, with only the chains dragging on the deck surface. Listen for the sound of 

ringing chains to change to a hollow, dull, popping sound as the chains go over the surface of a 

delamination. 

3.3.2 Once the chain drag has detected a debonded area, determine the size and edges of the 

delamination by using a hand-held sounding hammer. Lightly tap the area where the hollow 

sound is heard, and work in a line.

3.3.3 Using a temporary marker, outline the boundary of each individual area of the deck surface where 

the hollow sound is heard. Add a hatch pattern to the area to clearly show the area on the deck in 

pictures. Mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum 

width of the area of spalling or delamination.

3.3.4 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of delamination or spalling at its maximum 

length and width. 

3.3.5 For each area of delamination or spalling on the deck, determine and record the coordinates of the 

four corners of the rectangle using x and y coordinates from the rectangular grid system 

(FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks).

3.4 For each instance of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands:

3.4.1 Using a temporary marker, outline the boundary of each individual area of the deck surface where 

the steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands are exposed. Also, mark the corners of a 

rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width of the area of spalling or 

delamination.

3.4.2 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or 

strands at its maximum length and width.

3.4.3 For each area of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands on the deck, determine 

and record the coordinates of the four corners of the rectangle using x and y coordinates from the 

rectangular grid system (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks).

3.4.4 Clean with a wire brush, and measure and record the amount of section loss in the exposed steel 

reinforcement and tendons or strands (if applicable). If necessary, obtain the original 

cross-section from the existing documentation for the bridge (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and 

Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction).

3.5 Documenting defects:

3.5.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.5.2 Use sketches as needed to document spall and/or delamination and supplement the photographs.

3.6 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.6.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.6.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

3.7 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge 

Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, Structure Number 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR DELAMINATIONS AND SPALLS ON THE DECK Pink

8

Location of defect: span 

number Text

Example: Span 1; evaluate 

each span individually, and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

9

Location of defect on the 

deck Text

Describe the location of 

defect on the deck e.g., lane 

number, right or left shoulder

Yellow

10 Type of defect Text Delamination or

Spall Yellow

11 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

12 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

15 Maximum length defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the xaxis Yellow

16 Maximum width of defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the yaxis Yellow

17 Maximum depth of defect Number 0.125 in. Yellow

18 Defect photos and sketches Number 0.125 in.

Document typical abraded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

19 Comments Text Orange

FOR EXPOSED STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND/OR TENDONS/STRANDS Pink

20 Location of defect: span 

number Text

Example: Span 1; evaluate 

each span individually, and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

21 Location of defect on the 

deck Text

Describe the location of 

defect on the deck e.g., lane 

number, right or left shoulder

Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

22

Condition of reinforcement 

and/or prestressing strands 

or tendons

Text

Steel reinforcement and/or 

prestressing strands or 

tendons not exposed,

Visible corroded section, 

Loss of section, and/or 

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

23 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

24 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

26 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

27 Maximum length defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the xaxis Yellow

28 Maximum width of defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the yaxis Yellow

29 Maximum depth of defect Number 0.125 in. Yellow

30 Defect photos and sketches Number 0.125 in.

Document typical abraded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

31 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.
5 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on locating and measuring the extent of spalls and delaminations 

on concrete decks and for conducting a chain drag survey in which the sounds from chains 

dragged over a concrete surface are used to detect delaminations. A dull or hollow sound of the 

chain links indicates delaminated areas, and a clear ringing sound indicates nondelaminated 

concrete. 

NOTE—Sounding may be more difficult in areas of significant traffic or other noises.

6.2 The chain drag is an easy and inexpensive method of locating delaminations on bridge decks. 

This procedure can require multiple technicians if the structure is long and/or has multiple lanes. 

Refer to ASTM D4580/D4580M-12, Standard Practice for Measuring Delaminations in Concrete 

Bridge Decks by Sounding, for further guidance on proper chain types and configurations.

6.3 A spall is a depression in concrete caused by a separation of a portion of the surface concrete, 

revealing a fracture parallel with or slightly inclined to the surface. A delamination is a surface 

separation of concrete into layers. Spalls and delaminations may have numerous and distinct 

causes on a structure, including the following:

6.3.1 Collisions.

6.3.2 Earthquakes.

6.3.3 Overstresses.

6.3.4 Alkali-silica reaction (ASR).

6.3.5 Reinforcement/prestressing corrosion.

6.3.6 Formation of ettringite.

6.3.7 Freeze-thaw cycling.

6.4 Spalls are identified by a loss of concrete material from the surface and may be several inches 

deep. A delamination might eventually result in a loss of material (i.e., become a spall). Both 

defects may change the structural performance of the component or expose reinforcement or 

prestressing tendons or strands to corrosive agents.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.
6 FLD-DC-VIC-003

January 2016

7.2 External:

7.2.1 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, 

Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, 2012.

7.2.2 ASTM D4580/D4580M-12, Standard Practice for Measuring Delaminations in Concrete Bridge 

Decks by Sounding, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-VIC-004

January 2016

CONCRETE SUPERSTRUCTURE AND 

SUBSTRUCTURE—SPALLS AND DELAMINATIONS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIC-004

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of spalls and delaminations on concrete superstructures and 

substructures.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Sounding hammer.

2.1.4 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.5 Tape measure.

2.1.6 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.7 Caliper.

2.1.8 Waders or a boat (if necessary).

2.1.9 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.10 Temporary marker.

2.1.11 Digital camera.

2.1.12 Pencil, sketch pad, clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) to locate and document defects by the unique element identifier.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element of the superstructure and substructure. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes 

for each face of each element being evaluated.

3.3 Cleaning: Use the wire brush or hand broom to clean the concrete element by brushing away any 

debris so any defects are visible.
2 FLD-DC-VIC-004

January 2016

3.4 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of spalls and delaminations:

3.4.1 For any suspected defect area, strike the concrete surface with a sounding hammer, and listen for 

any hollow sounding areas in concrete; remove any loose concrete.

3.4.2 Mark the limits of each area of delamination or spalling on the element with a temporary marker, 

and mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width 

of the area of delamination or spalling. 

3.4.3 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of delamination or spalling at its maximum 

length and width.

3.4.4 For each area of delamination or spalling on the element, document on which superstructure or 

substructure element (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification 

System) and on what area of the element the delamination or spalling is located. Using the 

element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of the four corners of 

the rectangle.

3.5 For each instance of exposed steel reinforcement and tendons or strands:

3.5.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the element where the steel reinforcement and/or 

tendons or strands are exposed.

3.5.2 Mark the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands with a temporary 

marker, and photograph the damage.

3.5.3 Measure the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands.

3.5.4 Document the location of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands by determining 

and recording the coordinates of the beginning and the end of the affected portion of the element.

3.5.5 Clean with a wire brush, and measure and record the amount of section loss in the exposed steel 

reinforcement and/or tendons or strands (if applicable). If necessary, obtain the original 

cross-section from the existing documentation for the bridge (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and 

Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction).

3.6 Documenting defects:

3.6.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.6.2 Use sketches to document spalls and delaminations and supplement the photographs.

3.7 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.7.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.7.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.8 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-004

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR SPALLS AND DELAMINATIONS Pink

8

Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Pier P1; evaluate 

each element individually and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

9

Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: top of pier cap Yellow

10 Type of defect Text Delamination

Spall Yellow

11

Pair of coordinates used to 

locate the defect on 

element

Text (x,y), (x,z), or (y,z) Yellow

12 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

13 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

15 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

16 Maximum length of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow

17 Maximum width of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow

18 Maximum depth of the 

defect Number 0.125 in. Yellow

19 Defect photos and/or 

sketches BLOB Document typical defects with photos and/or sketches Yellow

20 Comments Text Orange

FOR EXPOSED STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND/OR TENDONS/STRANDS Pink

21 Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Girder 1A; evaluate 

each element individually and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

22 Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: bottom flange of girder Yellow

23

Condition of reinforcement 

and/or prestressing 

strands or tendons

Text

Visible corroded section, 

Loss of section, and/or 

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIC-004

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

24 Location of the beginning of 

the defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the beginning 

of the defect Yellow

25 Location of the end of the 

defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the end of the 

defect

Yellow

26 Length of defect Number 1 in. Yellow

27 Defect photos BLOB Document typical defects 

with photos and/or sketches Yellow

28 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on locating and measuring the extent of spalls and delaminations 

on concrete superstructure and substructure elements.

6.2 A spall is a depression in concrete caused by a separation of a portion of the surface concrete, 

revealing a fracture parallel with or slightly inclined to the surface. A delamination is a surface 

separation of concrete into layers. Spalls and delaminations may have numerous and distinct 

causes, including the following:

6.2.1 Collisions.
5 FLD-DC-VIC-004

January 2016

6.2.2 Earthquakes.

6.2.3 Overstresses.

6.2.4 Alkali-silica reaction (ASR).

6.2.5 Reinforcement/prestressing corrosion.

6.2.6 Formation of ettringite.

6.2.7 Freeze-thaw cycling.

6.3 Spalls are identified by a loss of concrete material from the surface and may be several inches 

deep. A delamination might eventually result in a loss of material (i.e., become a spall). Both 

defects may change the structural performance of the component or expose reinforcement or 

prestressing tendons/strands to corrosive agents.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

CONCRETE—CRACKING

LTBP Protocol # FLD-DC-VIC-005

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of cracking of concrete bridge elements, including the deck, 

superstructure, and substructure.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Sounding hammer.

2.1.4 Crack comparison cards (gage).

2.1.5 Tape measure.

2.1.6 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.7 Measuring wheel.

2.1.8 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.9 Plumb bob.

2.1.10 Slide caliper.

2.1.11 Hand compass or other angle-measuring device.

2.1.12 Level.

2.1.13 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.14 Waders.

2.1.15 Small boat.

2.1.16 Temporary marker.

2.1.17 Digital camera.

2.1.18 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck.
2 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

3.2 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) to locate and document defects by unique element identifier.

3.3 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element on the superstructure and substructure. 

3.4 Cleaning: Use the wire brush or hand broom to clean the concrete element by brushing away any

debris so any cracks are visible.

3.5 On reinforced concrete elements, including decks, for individual cracks with a width equal to or 

greater than 0.025 inches at the point of the widest opening:

3.5.1 Mark the ends of the cracks on the bridge component with a temporary marker, and photograph.

3.5.2 If the crack is on the deck, record the location of the beginning and the end of each crack using 

(x,y) coordinates from the rectangular grid system following FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection 

Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks. The database calculates the orientation of each 

crack using the (x,y) coordinates. 

3.5.3 For cracks on other concrete components (other than round pier columns), document the unique 

element identifier of the superstructure or substructure element on which the crack is located. Use 

FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element, and document the beginning and ending points of the crack using the (x,y,z) 

coordinates.

3.5.3.1 If the crack is on a round concrete pier column, using the local element origin as point (0,0), 

determine and record the (z,c) coordinates of the beginning and ending points of the crack.

3.5.4 Record the length of the crack (from one end to the other in a straight line) in decimal inches 

using the tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or laser measuring device.

3.5.5 Record the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plump bob, compass, or other anglemeasuring device.

3.5.6 Measure the maximum crack width (opening) with the crack comparison card (crack gage).

3.5.7 If possible, measure or estimate the maximum depth of the crack. 

3.5.8 Identify and record other crack characteristics (if any), such as presence of moisture, 

efflorescence, rust, or exposed rebar.

3.5.9 In prestressed concrete bridge structural elements, if the crack exceeds the width of 0.005 inches, 

then the team leader should notify the bridge owner and Federal Highway Administration 

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

3.6 On prestressed concrete elements, for individual cracks with a width equal to or greater than 

0.005 inches at the point of the widest opening:

3.6.1 Mark the ends of the cracks on the bridge component with a temporary marker, and photograph.

3.6.2 Document the unique element identifier of the element on which the crack is located. Use FLDOP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on each 

element and document the beginning and ending points of the crack using the (x,y,z) coordinates.

3.6.3 Record the length of the crack (from one end to the other in a straight line) in decimal inches 

using the tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or laser measuring device.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

3.6.4 Record the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plump bob, compass, or other anglemeasuring device.

3.6.5 Measure the maximum crack width (opening) with the crack comparison card (crack gage).

3.6.6 If possible, measure or estimate the maximum depth of the crack. 

3.6.7 Identify and record other crack characteristics (if any), such as presence of moisture, 

efflorescence, rust, or exposed rebar.

3.6.8 In prestressed concrete bridge structural elements, if the crack exceeds the width of 0.006 inches, 

then the team leader should notify the bridge owner and FHWA LTBP.

3.7 For crack networks (also known as alligator cracking, area cracking, map cracking, or crazing):

3.7.1 Treat the area of cracking as a single defect in the same manner as area defects, such as scaling, 

delamination, etc.

3.7.2 Outline the boundaries of the network cracking on the concrete surface with a temporary marker 

and photograph it. Document all visible cracks with sketches and/or photographs (FLD-DCPH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes) that capture the entire area. Also, mark the 

corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width of the area of 

network cracking.

3.7.3 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of network cracking at its maximum length and 

width. 

3.7.3.1 If the area of network cracking is on the deck, determine and record the coordinates of the four 

corners of the rectangle using (x,y) coordinates from the rectangular grid system created using 

FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

3.7.3.2 For each area of network cracking on other concrete elements (other than round pier columns), 

document on which superstructure or substructure element and on what area of the element the 

area of network cracking is located. Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and 

record the (x,y,z) coordinates of the four corners of the rectangle.

3.7.3.3 If the area of network cracking is on a round concrete pier column, using the local element origin 

as point (0,0), determine and record the (z,c) coordinates of the four corners of the rectangle.

3.7.4 If possible, measure or estimate the maximum depth of the cracks.

3.7.5 Identify and record other crack characteristics (if any), such as presence of moisture, 

efflorescence, rust, or exposed rebar.

3.8 For areas that show signs of moisture or efflorescence:

3.8.1 Treat the area of moisture or efflorescence as a single defect in the same manner as area defects,

such as scaling, delamination, etc.

3.8.2 Outline the boundaries of the moisture or efflorescence on the concrete surface with a temporary 

marker, and photograph it. Also, mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum 

length and maximum width of the area of moisture or efflorescence.

3.8.3 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of moisture or efflorescence at its maximum 

length and width.

3.8.3.1 If the area of moisture or efflorescence is on the deck, determine and record the coordinates of the 

four corners of the rectangle using (x,y) coordinates from the rectangular grid system created 

using FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.
4 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

3.8.3.2 For each area of moisture or efflorescence on other concrete elements (other than round pier 

columns), document which superstructure or substructure element and on what area of the 

element the area of network cracking is located. Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0),

determine and record the (x,y,z) coordinates of the four corners of the rectangle.

3.8.3.3 If the area of moisture or efflorescence is on a round concrete pier column, using the local 

element origin as point (0,0), determine and record the (z,c) coordinates of the four corners of the 

rectangle.

3.9 Documenting defects:

3.9.1 Take photographs of cracking using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.9.2 Use sketches as needed to document cracking and supplement the photographs.

3.10 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.10.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.10.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.11 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to FHWA, and/or upload all 

metadata, data, documents, and images into the LTBP Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, Structure Number 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR INDIVIDUAL CRACKS ON THE CONCRETE DECK OR OTHER CONCRETE ELEMENT Pink

8

Location of crack: span 

number Text

Evaluate each span 

individually and record data 

on each individual crack

Blue

9

Location of crack: element 

type and unique identifier Text

Record the bridge element 

containing the crack (for 

example, deck, abutment, 

girder)

Blue

10 Location of crack on the 

deck or element Text

Describe the location of 

crack on the bridge 

element (for example, lane 

number, right or left 

shoulder, substructure unit, 

Blue
5 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

backwall of abutment, web 

of prestressed concrete 

girder, etc.)

11 Location of the beginning of 

the crack Number 1 in. On the deck: (x,y) coordinates of the ends of 

the crack

On other concrete 

elements: (x,y,z) 

coordinates of the ends of 

the crack

Yellow

12 Location of the end of the 

crack Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Maximum crack depth Number 0.125 in. If measurable Yellow

14 Maximum crack width 

(opening) Number See note in.

Note: required accuracy 

depends on the maximum 

crack width; see section 

6.4.3

Yellow

15 Crack length Number 1 in.

Measured in a straight line 

from the beginning to the 

end of crack

Yellow

16 Crack orientation Number 1 Degrees Yellow

17 Other crack characteristics Text

Indicate presence of 

moisture, efflorescence, 

rust, exposed rebar, or

other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

18 Photos or sketches of 

individual cracks BLOB Document each crack with photo(s) or sketch(es) Yellow

19 Comments Text Orange

FOR CRACK NETWORKS ON THE CONCRETE DECK OR OTHER CONCRETE ELEMENT Pink

20 Location of crack network: 

span number Text

Evaluate each span 

individually and record data 

on each individual crack 

network

Blue

21

Location of crack network: 

element type and unique 

identifier

Text

Record the bridge element 

containing the crack 

network (for example, deck, 

abutment, girder)

Blue

22 Location of crack network 

on the deck or element Text

Describe the location of 

crack network on the bridge 

element (e.g., lane number, 

right or left shoulder, 

substructure unit, backwall 

of abutment, web of 

prestressed concrete 

girder, etc.)

Blue

23 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y,z) coordinates of the 

four corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

24 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

26 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

27 Maximum crack depth Number 0.125 in. If measurable Yellow

28 Maximum crack width 

(opening) Number See note in.

Note: required accuracy 

depends on the maximum 

crack width; see section 

6.4.3

Yellow

29 Crack length Number 1 in.

Maximum length (opening) 

of the longest continuous 

crack

Yellow
6 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

# FIELD NAME

DATA 

TYPE

ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

30 Other crack characteristics Text

Indicate presence of 

moisture, efflorescence, 

rust, or other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

31 Photos or sketches of 

typical crack networks BLOB

Document typical crack 

networks with photos or 

sketches

Yellow

32 Comments Text Orange

FOR AREAS OF MOISTURE OR EFFLORESCENCE ON THE CONCRETE DECK OR OTHER CONCRETE ELEMENT Pink

33 Location of moisture or 

efflorescence: span number Text

Evaluate each span 

individually and record data 

on each individual area of 

moisture or efflorescence

Blue

34

Location of moisture or 

efflorescence: element 

type and unique identifier

Text

Record the bridge element 

containing the moisture or 

efflorescence (for example 

deck, abutment, girder)

Blue

35

Location of moisture or 

efflorescence on the deck 

or element

Text

Describe the location of 

moisture or efflorescence 

on the bridge element (e.g., 

lane number, right or left 

shoulder, substructure unit, 

backwall of abutment, web 

of prestressed concrete 

girder, etc.)

Blue

36 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

37 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

38 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

39 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

40 Photos or sketches of 

typical crack networks BLOB

Document typical crack 

networks with photos or 

sketches

Yellow

41 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 
7 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on locating individual cracks as well as areas of map cracking on 

concrete elements. Instructions are provided for documenting the location, orientation, width, and 

depth (if possible) of individual cracks and the location and extent of areas of map cracking.

6.2 Cracks may be due to the following:

6.2.1 Chemical: alkali-silica reaction (ASR); internal or external sulphate attack.

6.2.2 Structural (live or dead loads).

6.2.3 Steel reinforcement or prestressing corrosion.

6.2.4 Creep or shrinkage.

6.2.5 Ground motion.

6.2.6 Collisions, earthquakes, or other sudden and external solicitations.

6.3 Cracks resulting from any of the conditions in section 6.2 may lead to significant damage and are 

important to the performance of the element that has cracked. 

6.4 This protocol contains two different values for crack width—one value for reinforced concrete 

bridge members and a different value for prestressed concrete bridge members. Some States do 

not allow any tension in prestressed concrete bridge members (pretensioned and posttensioned). 

Therefore, even a small crack width in a prestressed concrete bridge member is important. States 

do allow some cracking in reinforced concrete bridge members, and designers assume that the 

rebars will carry the load in the areas of the member where tension cracks and rebars are present. 

Therefore, a somewhat larger crack width may be used for reinforced concrete bridge members.

6.4.1 For reinforced concrete elements, including decks, all cracks where the maximum width of the 

crack is 0.025 inches or greater will be measured and recorded.

6.4.2 For prestressed concrete bridge elements (pretensioned and posttensioned), all cracks where the 

maximum width of the crack is 0.005 inches or greater will be measured and recorded.

6.4.3 The required accuracy of the crack width measurement will vary according to the maximum 

width of the crack. This measurement is to be made with a typical crack gage card as follows:
8 FLD-DC-VIC-005

January 2016

6.4.3.1 Crack widths less than 0.020 inches – required accuracy is to the nearest 0.002 inches.

6.4.3.2 Crack widths above 0.020 inches but below 0.040 inches – required accuracy is to the nearest

0.005 inches.

6.4.3.3 Crack widths above 0.040 inches but below 1.00 inches – required accuracy is to the nearest

0.01 inches.

6.5 The LTBP Program is trying to better understand why bridges deteriorate over time, and the 

accurate measurement of crack widths is important for research purposes. Because of this, it is 

important to measure and track the locations, orientations (angles), and widths of cracks over time 

with sufficient scale to assist in evaluating the performance of concrete elements.

6.6 The presence of moisture in a concrete component is typically the result of cracks in the concrete 

wide enough to allow water to follow a path for the full thickness of the component. 

Efflorescence is the result of moisture passing through concrete that leaves light-colored or brown 

deposits on the concrete surface where the moisture exits. The deposits are formed by a 

combination of the calcium carbonate leaching out of the cement and the recrystallization of 

carbonate and chloride compounds. The following are typical locations to look for signs of water 

infiltration with efflorescence:

6.6.1 Bare deck undersides.

6.6.2 Superstructure: headwalls and spandrel walls.

6.6.3 Substructure: abutment breastwalls, backwalls, and wingwalls.

6.7 This evaluation requires that the inspector has arm’s-length access to every part of the structure 

(arm’s-length access is the generally admitted distance from which cracks of this size are 

detectable).

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Segmentation and Element System.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.6 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
1 FLD-DC-VIC-006

January 2016

CONCRETE—ABRASION

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIC-006

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of abrasion damage on concrete bridge elements.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Waders or a boat (if necessary).

2.1.4 Sounding hammer.

2.1.5 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.6 Tape measure.

2.1.7 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.8 Measuring wheel.

2.1.9 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.10 Slide caliper.

2.1.11 Temporary marker.

2.1.12 Digital camera.

2.1.13 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck.

3.2 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) to locate and document defects by the unique element identifier. 

3.3 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element of the superstructure and substructure. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes 

for each face of each element being evaluated.
2 FLD-DC-VIC-006

January 2016

3.4 Cleaning: Use the wire brush or hand broom to clean the concrete element by brushing away any 

debris so any defects are visible.

3.5 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of abraded areas of the concrete

3.5.1 Mark the limits of each abraded area on the element with a temporary marker, and mark the 

corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width of the area of 

the abraded area. 

3.5.2 Measure and record the dimensions of each abraded area at its maximum length and width. 

3.5.2.1 If the abraded area is on the deck, determine and record the coordinates of the four corners of the 

rectangle using x-, y-, and z-coordinates from the rectangular grid system created using 

FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

3.5.2.2 For each abraded area on other concrete elements, document which superstructure or substructure 

element and on what area of the element the sulfate attack is located. Using the element local 

origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of the four corners of the rectangle.

3.5.3 For each instance of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands:

3.5.3.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the steel 

reinforcement and/or tendons or strands are exposed.

3.5.3.2 Mark the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and tendons or strands with a temporary 

marker and photograph the damage.

3.5.3.3 Measure the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands.

3.5.4 Document the location of exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands by determining 

and recording the coordinates of the beginning and the end of the affected portion of the element.

3.5.5 Clean with a wire brush, and measure and record the amount of section loss in the exposed steel 

reinforcement and/or tendons or strands (if applicable). If necessary, the original cross-section 

can be obtained from the existing documentation for the bridge (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and 

Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction).

3.6 Documenting defects:

3.6.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.6.2 Use sketches as needed to document abrasion and supplement the photographs.

3.7 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.7.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.7.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.8 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-006

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table: 

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR ABRADED AREAS ON THE DECK Pink

8

Location of defect: span 

number Text

Example: Span 1; evaluate 

each span individually and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

9

Location of defect on the 

deck Text

Describe the location of 

defect on the deck e.g., lane 

number, right or left shoulder

Yellow

10 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

11 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

12 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Maximum length defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the xaxis Yellow

15 Maximum width of defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the yaxis Yellow

16 Maximum depth of defect Number 0.125 in. Yellow

17 Defect photos and sketches Number 0.125 in.

Document typical abraded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

FOR ABRADED AREAS ON A SUPERSTRUCTURE OR SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT Pink

19 Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Pier column P1A; 

evaluate each element 

individually and record data 

on each individual defect

Blue

20 Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: upstream face of the column Yellow

21 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y,z) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

22 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

23 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

24 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Maximum length of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow

26 Maximum width of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIC-006

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

27 Maximum depth of the 

defect Number 0.125 in. Yellow

28 Defect photos and sketches BLOB

Document typical corroded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

29 Comments Text Orange

FOR EXPOSED STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND/OR TENDONS/STRANDS Pink

30 Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Girder 1A: evaluate 

each element individually and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

31 Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: bottom flange of the girder Yellow

32

Condition of reinforcement 

and/or prestressing 

strands/tendons

Text

Steel reinforcement and/or 

prestressing strands or 

tendons not exposed,

Visible corroded section, 

Loss of section, and/or 

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

33 Location of the beginning of 

the defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the beginning 

of the defect

Yellow

34 Location of the end of the 

defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the end of the 

defect

Yellow

35 Length of defect Number 1 in. Yellow

36 Defect photos and sketches BLOB Document typical defects 

with photos and/or sketches Yellow

37 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.
5 FLD-DC-VIC-006

January 2016

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol guides visual inspection of the damage caused by abrasion.

6.2 Abrasions are often found on substructure elements in the waterway within the wet zone. This 

abrasion is due to debris, transported by the flow of water, striking or grinding against the 

concrete surface. Concrete superstructures may see abrasion in cases where low freeboard exists 

over tidal waterways.

6.3 Concrete surfaces abraded by waterborne debris are typically rough and may contain localized 

depressions that sometimes expose the reinforcing steel.

6.4 Mechanical abrasion consists of a progressive removal of aggregates and matrix on concrete 

surfaces, caused by debris or rolling and grinding against a concrete surface.

6.5 During the visual inspection, if reinforcing steel is visible, observe and notate corrosion and 

section loss. A visual inspection of concrete substructure elements below the waterline may be 

needed.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.6 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.8 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.9 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration,

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

CONCRETE—SULFATE ATTACK

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIC-007

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Description and location of areas affected by sulfate attack on concrete bridge elements.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Sounding hammer.

2.1.6 Wire brush or hand brush.

2.1.7 Crack comparison card (gage).

2.1.8 Measuring wheel.

2.1.9 Waders or a boat (if necessary).

2.1.10 Slide caliper.

2.1.11 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.12 Temporary marker.

2.1.13 Digital camera.

2.1.14 Pencil, pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck.

3.2 Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and 

Element Identification System) to locate and document defects by the unique element identifier. 

Establish the two relevant coordinate axes for each face of each element being evaluated.

3.3 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on 

each element of the superstructure and substructure. 
2 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

3.4 Cleaning: Use the wire brush or hand broom to clean the concrete element by brushing away any 

debris so that any defects are visible.

3.5 Identification: Identify probable sulfate attack through visual inspection.

3.6 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of areas of the concrete exhibiting signs of 

sulfate attack:

3.6.1 For each area of suspected sulfate attack, strike the concrete surface with a sounding hammer and 

remove any concrete that is loose. Measure and record each spall and/or delamination following 

FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination, or FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete 

Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

3.6.2 Mark the limits of each area of suspected sulfate attack on the element with a temporary marker 

and mark the corners of a rectangle that encompasses the maximum length and maximum width 

of the area of suspected sulfate attack. 

3.6.3 Measure and record the dimensions of each area of suspected sulfate attack at its maximum 

length and width. 

3.6.3.1 If the area of suspected sulfate attack is on the deck, determine and record the coordinates of the 

four corners of the rectangle using x and y coordinates from the rectangular grid system created 

using FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

3.6.3.2 For each area of suspected sulfate attack on other concrete elements, document on which 

superstructure or substructure element and on what area of the element the sulfate attack is 

located. Using the element local origin as point (0,0,0), determine and record the coordinates of 

the four corners of the rectangle.

3.6.4 Measure and record any cracks following FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

3.7 For each instance of exposed steel reinforcement and tendons or strands:

3.7.1 Record the type and unique element identifier of the superstructure element where the steel 

reinforcement and/or tendons or strands are exposed.

3.7.2 Mark the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and tendons or strands with a temporary 

marker and photograph the damage.

3.7.3 Measure the length of the exposed steel reinforcement and/or tendons or strands.

3.7.4 Document the location of exposed steel reinforcement and tendons or strands by determining and 

recording the coordinates of the beginning and the end of the affected portion of the element.

3.7.5 Clean with a wire brush, and measure and record the amount of section loss in the exposed steel 

reinforcement and/or tendons or strands (if applicable). If necessary, obtain the original 

cross-section from the existing documentation for the bridge (PRE-ED-BD-001, Plans and 

Specifications for Bridge Design and Construction).

3.8 Documenting defects:

3.8.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.8.2 Use sketches as needed to document spalls and delaminations and supplement the photographs.
3 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

3.9 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.9.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.9.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.10 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = 

VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; 

from NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB 

over I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the 

protocol version was 

published; e.g., May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

FOR SULFATE ATTACK ON THE DECK Pink

8

Location of defect: span 

number Text

Example: Span 1; evaluate 

each span individually and 

record data on each 

individual defect

Blue

9

Location of defect on the 

deck Text

Describe the location of 

defect on the deck (e.g., 

lane number, right or left 

shoulder)

Yellow

10 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

11 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

12 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

13 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

14 Maximum length defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the xaxis Yellow

15 Maximum width of defect Number 1 in. Measured parallel to the yaxis Yellow

16 Defect characteristics List

Spalls

Concrete crazing

Microcracking

Concrete swelling

Efflorescence

Concrete friability

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

17 Defect photos and sketches BLOB

Document typical corroded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

FOR SULFATE ATTACK ON A SUPERSTRUCTURE OR SUBSTRUCTURE ELEMENT Pink

19 Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Girder 1A; 

evaluate each element 

individually and record data 

on each individual defect 

data on each individual 

defect

Blue

20 Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: bottom flange of girder Yellow

21

Pair of coordinates used to 

locate the defect on 

element

Text (x,y), (x,z), or (y,z) Yellow

22 Location of corner 1 Number 1 in. (x,y) coordinates of the four 

corners of a rectangle 

encompassing the 

deteriorated area

Yellow

23 Location of corner 2 Number 1 in. Yellow

24 Location of corner 3 Number 1 in. Yellow

25 Location of corner 4 Number 1 in. Yellow

26 Maximum length of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow

27 Maximum width of the 

defect Number 1 in. Yellow

28 Defect characteristics List

Spalls

Concrete crazing

Microcracking

Concrete swelling

Efflorescence

Concrete friability

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

29 Defect photos and sketches BLOB

Document typical corroded 

areas with photos and/or 

sketches

Yellow

30 Comments Text Orange

FOR EXPOSED STEEL REINFORCEMENT AND/OR TENDONS/STRANDS Pink

31 Location of the defect: 

element type and identifier Text

Example: Girder 1A; 

evaluate each element 

individually and record data 

on each individual defect 

data on each individual 

defect

Blue

32 Location of the defect on 

the element Text Example: bottom flange of girder Blue

33

Condition of reinforcement 

and/or prestressing 

strands/tendons

Text

Reinforcement and/or 

prestressing strands or 

tendons not exposed

Visibly corroded section

Loss of section

Other (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

34 Location of the beginning of 

the defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the beginning 

of the defect

Yellow
5 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION

ROW 

COLOR

35

Location of the end of the 

defect: x-coordinate Number 1 in.

Measured from the element 

local origin to the end of the 

defect Yellow

36 Length of impact damage Number 1 in. Yellow

37 Defect photos and sketches BLOB Document typical defects 

with photos and/or sketches Yellow

38 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for identifying, locating, and measuring the extent of sulfate 

attack.

6.2 External sulfate attack is the most common type of distress and typically occurs where water 

containing dissolved sulfate penetrates the concrete. Consequences include extensive cracking, 

expansion of concrete, loss of bond between the cement paste and aggregate, alteration of paste 

composition with ettringite formation, and, in later stages, gypsum formation. The effect of these 

changes is an overall loss of concrete strength. 

External sources of sulfate that can cause sulfate attack include seawater, oxidation of sulfide 

minerals in clay adjacent to the concrete (sulfuric acid formation), and bacterial action in sewers 

(sulfur dioxide then sulfuric acid formation).
6 FLD-DC-VIC-007

January 2016

6.3 Internal sulfate attack occurs when a source of sulfate is incorporated into the concrete mix. 

Examples include using sulfate-rich aggregate, an excess of gypsum in the cement, or 

contamination. External sulfate attack can come from sulfates present in the soil or in the water. 

See PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records, for mix design properties.

6.4 Delayed ettringite formation (DEF) is a special case of internal sulfate attack and occurs in 

concrete that has been cured at elevated temperatures. DEF requires wet conditions to occur, 

causes expansion of the concrete due to ettringite formation within the paste, and can cause 

serious damage. If DEF is suspected, check curing records to see if the internal curing 

temperature of the concrete member ever exceeded 150 °F (PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge 

Construction Records).

6.5 Thaumasite sulfate attack (TSA) can form in concrete and in mortar. The cement hydration 

products normally present are decomposed as a result of both sulfate attack and of carbonation. 

Thaumasite typically forms at temperatures between 39 °F and 50 °F and results in severe 

weakening. As it forms, the concrete or mortar converts to a friable material often described as a 

“mush.” Concrete severely affected by thaumasite formation is easily broken with the fingers, and 

the coarse aggregate can be lifted out.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 PRE-ED-BD-002, Bridge Construction Records.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.5 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.6 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.7 FLD-DC-VIC-003, Concrete Deck—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.8 FLD-DC-VIC-004, Concrete Superstructure and Substructure—Spalls and Delamination.

7.1.9 FLD-DC-VIC-005, Concrete—Cracking.

7.1.10 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.11 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.12 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration,

Washington, DC, 2012.
VISUAL INSPECTION—BEARINGS PROTOCOLS (VIB)

FLD-DC-VIB-001, Elastomeric Bearings

FLD-DC-VIB-002, Rocker Bearings

1 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

ELASTOMERIC BEARINGS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIB-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 General condition of elastomeric bearings and surrounding components, including:

1.1.1 Bulging, splitting, and/or tearing of the neoprene pad.

1.1.2 Condition of the steel reinforcing plates (if visible) if the bearing is a laminated neoprene pad.

1.1.3 Longitudinal/lateral displacements and rotation of the neoprene pad.

1.1.4 Excessive strain due to growth in the lengths and widths of unlaminated (plain) neoprene pads.

1.1.5 Connections between the neoprene pad and the sole plate and masonry plate, between the sole 

plate and the beam bottom flange, and between the masonry plate and the pier or abutment.

1.1.6 Cracking, spalls, or delaminations in the abutment seat or pier cap.

1.1.7 Condition of the anchor bolts.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.4 Tape measure.

2.1.5 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.6 Crack gage.

2.1.7 Slide caliper.

2.1.8 Digital level.

2.1.9 Plumb bob.

2.1.10 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.11 Hand compass or other angle-measuring device.

2.1.12 Thermometer.

2.1.13 Mirror.

2.1.14 Temporary marker.

2.1.15 Digital camera.

2.1.16 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.
2 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) to identify the bearings being evaluated.

3.2 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of bearings:

3.2.1 Record the ambient temperatures above the deck and at the location of the bearing at the time of 

visual inspection.

3.2.2 Record if the bearing is a fixed or a moveable bearing. Examine the bearing. If it is a moveable 

bearing, does it still allow movement?

3.2.3 Record if the bearing is still in its proper alignment.

3.3 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of neoprene:

3.3.1 Use a wire brush or hand broom to clean the bearing area to allow close visual inspection. 

3.3.2 Record if the elastomeric bearing is a plain neoprene pad or a laminated neoprene pad.

3.3.3 Measure bearing thickness, length and width, and any longitudinal and lateral displacements or 

rotations.

3.3.4 Examine the neoprene pad (plain or laminated) for defects on contact surfaces, bulging and split

or torn surfaces, and excessive longitudinal and/or lateral displacements and rotations.

3.3.4.1 If there are splits or tears in the neoprene, check for steel shim exposure and condition, if 

exposed.

3.3.4.2 If there are splits in the neoprene, measure the length, width, and depth of each split. 

3.3.4.3 If there is bulging, measure the amount of bulge using the slide caliper. 

3.3.4.4 To determine rotation, measure the displacement of the top of the bearing face versus the bottom 

of the bearing face.

3.3.4.5 Use a mirror, if necessary, to examine the vertical surface of the bearing closest to the abutment 

backwall.

3.3.5 Is there a restraining device to keep the neoprene pad from moving horizontally from its original 

position? If so, record it and take a photograph of a typical restraining device. 

3.4 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of the sole plate:

3.4.1 Examine the connection of the sole plate to the girder. Record any loss of bond and connection 

between the sole plate and the girder.

3.4.2 Examine the sole plate, and record any cracks, corrosion, and/or section loss of the sole plate.

3.5 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of the masonry plate:

3.5.1 Examine the connection of the masonry plate to the bearing device and the masonry plate to the 

abutment or pier. Record any loss of connection.

3.5.2 Examine the masonry plate, and record any cracks, corrosion, and/or loss of section.

3.6 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of the anchor bolt:

3.6.1 Examine the anchor bolts connecting the masonry plate to the pier or abutment. Record the 

diameter of the bolts.
3 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

3.6.2 Record any missing bolts, nuts, or washers.

3.6.3 Record any rust or corrosion of the bolts.

3.6.4 Examine the concrete around the anchor bolt and record if any part of the main body (shank) of 

the anchor bolt is exposed.

3.7 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of concrete surface (under and next to the 

bearing):

3.7.1 Check the condition of the concrete surfaces under and next to the bearing and record any defects.

3.7.2 Check for spalls and/or cracks in the pier or abutment top surface.

3.8 Documenting defects:

3.8.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.8.2 Use sketches to document spalls and cracking and supplement the photographs.

3.9 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.9.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.9.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.10 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, Structure Number from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact Date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Ambient temperature above 

deck Number 1 °F Green

9 Bearing number Text Evaluate and record data for 

each individual bearing Blue

10 Ambient temperature at 

bearing location Number 1 °F Yellow

11 Is the bearing fixed or 

moveable?

Predefined 

list Fixed or Movable Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

12

If it is a moveable bearing, 

does it still allow 

movement?

Predefined 

list Yes, No, or Not Applicable Yellow

13 Is the bearing still in its 

proper alignment?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

14

Is bearing plain neoprene 

pad or a laminated 

neoprene pad?

Predefined 

list Plain or laminated Yellow

15 Neoprene condition Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

splits or tears, bulging, steel 

shim (plate) exposure, 

corroded shims (steel plates), 

presence of oxidation, and/or 

other defect (specify under 

comments)

Yellow

16

Sole plate connection to 

girder—surface bond 

condition

Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

bond or no bond, movement of 

sole plate, and/or other defect 

(specify under comments)

Yellow

17 Sole plate condition Text Record any corrosion or 

section loss Yellow

18 Masonry plate connection 

to the abutment or pier Text Record any loss of connection Yellow

19 Masonry plate condition Text Record any corrosion or 

section loss Yellow

20 Diameter of anchor bolts Number 0.125 in. Yellow

21 Condition of the anchor 

bolts Text

Record any missing bolts, nuts, 

or washers; any rust or 

corrosion of the bolts; if the 

anchor bolt is partially exposed

Yellow

22

Condition of the concrete 

under and next to the 

bearing

Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

shear cracks, spalling, on 

abutment seat or pier cap, 

and/or other defect (specify 

under comments)

Yellow

23 Rotation of neoprene pad Number 1 Degrees Yellow

24 Longitudinal displacement 

of neoprene pad Number 0.125 in. Yellow

25 Lateral displacement of 

neoprene pad Number 0.125 in. Yellow

26 Length of neoprene pad Number 0.125 in. Yellow

27 Width of neoprene pad Number 0.125 in. Yellow

28 Height (thickness) 

measurement of pad Number 0.125 in. Yellow

29 Defect photos BLOB Yellow

30 Comments Text Orange
5 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense.

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on evaluating the condition of elastomeric bearings and for 

collecting data that help determine if the bearing is functioning as intended.

6.2 Elastomeric bearings are either reinforced (laminated) or nonreinforced (unlaminated). Steel 

plates (shims) are used as the reinforcing material in the rubber (neoprene) pad.

6.3 Sole plates are attached to the underside of bridge girders and transfer the force from the bridge 

girder to the bearing device.

6.4 The bearing device sits on top of a masonry plate. Masonry plates are attached to piers and 

abutments and transfer the force from the bearing device to the pier or abutment. 

6.5 Anchor bolts are used to attach the masonry plate to the pier or abutment. The body of an anchor 

bolt (shank) should not be visible. Only the head of the anchor bolt, a nut, and a washer should be 

visible. If the body (shank) of the anchor bolt is visible, then the anchor bolts are said to be 

exposed.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.
6 FLD-DC-VIB-001

January 2016

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA. (2012). Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual – Report No. FHWA-NHI-12-053, Federal 

Highway Administration, Washington, DC.
1 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

ROCKER BEARINGS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIB-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 General condition of rocker bearings and surrounding components, including:

1.1.1 Longitudinal/lateral shift of rockers. 

1.1.2 Excessive rotation of rockers.

1.1.3 Proper seating and uplifting of rockers and girders.

1.1.4 Exposed pintles.

1.1.5 Missing nuts.

1.1.6 Condition of the anchor bolts.

1.1.7 Corrosion and pack rust between rockers and masonry plates; corrosion of other bearing parts.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Wire brush or hand broom.

2.1.4 Tape measure.

2.1.5 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.6 Crack gage.

2.1.7 Digital level.

2.1.8 Thermometer.

2.1.9 Mirror.

2.1.10 Plumb bob.

2.1.11 Laser measuring device (optional).

2.1.12 Hand compass or other angle-measuring device.

2.1.13 Temporary marker.

2.1.14 Digital camera.

2.1.15 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.
2 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the segmentation and numbering system for the superstructure (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure 

Segmentation and Element Identification System) to identify the bearing being evaluated.

3.2 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of bearings:

3.2.1 Record the ambient temperatures above the deck and at the location of the bearing at the time of 

evaluation.

3.2.2 Record if the bearing is a fixed or a moveable (expansion) bearing.

3.2.3 Record if the bearing is still in its proper alignment. 

3.3 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of rocker assembly:

3.3.1 Clean the bearing area by removing any debris or excessive corrosion products.

3.3.2 Record the conditions of the rocker and pin, noting if there is any corrosion or loss of section. 

3.3.3 Does the bearing still rock (still allow movement), or is it “frozen?” 

3.3.4 Measure the longitudinal and lateral shift and displacement (movements), as well as rotation (tilt 

angle).

3.3.5 Note any exposed, loose, cracked, broken pintles.

3.3.6 Look for vertical movement and uplifting of girders under a live load.

3.3.7 Use a mirror, if necessary, to examine the bearing area closest to the abutment backwall. 

3.4 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of sole plate assembly:

3.4.1 Examine the connection of the sole plate to the girder. Record any loss of bond or connection 

between the sole plate and the girder.

3.4.2 Examine the sole plate, and record any cracks, corrosion, or section loss of the sole plate.

3.5 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of the masonry plate:

3.5.1 Examine the connection of the masonry plate to the bearing device and the masonry plate to the 

abutment or pier. Record any loss of connection.

3.5.2 Examine the masonry plate and record any cracks, corrosion, or section loss.

3.6 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of anchor bolts:

3.6.1 Examine the anchor bolts connecting the masonry plate to the pier or abutment. Record the 

diameter of the bolts.

3.6.2 Record any missing bolts, nuts, or washers.

3.6.3 Record any rust or corrosion of the bolts.

3.6.4 Examine the concrete around the anchor bolt and record if any part of the main body (shank) of 

the anchor bolt is exposed.
3 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

3.7 Measuring, recording, and evaluating characteristics of concrete surface (under and next to the 

bearing):

3.7.1 Check the condition of the concrete surfaces under and next to the bearing and record any defects.

3.7.2 Check for spalls, section loss, or cracks in the pier or abutment top surface.

3.8 Documenting defects:

3.8.1 Take photographs of any defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.8.2 Use sketches as needed to document defects and supplement the photographs.

3.9 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.9.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.9.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.10 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code, e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, Structure Number from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge, e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Ambient temperature above 

deck Number 1 °F Green

9 Bearing number Text Evaluate and record data for 

each individual bearing Blue

10 Ambient temperature at 

bearing location Number 1 °F Yellow

11

Is the bearing fixed or 

moveable (allows for 

expansion)?

Predefined 

list Fixed or movable Yellow

12

If it is a moveable bearing, 

does it still allow for 

expansion?

Predefined 

list Yes, No, or Not Applicable Yellow

13 Is the bearing still in its 

proper alignment?

Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

14 Condition of the rocker Predefined 

list

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

cracks, corrosion, and/or 

section loss

Yellow

15 Condition of the pin Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

cracks, corrosion, and/or 

section loss

Yellow

16 Longitudinal 

shift/displacement Number 0.125 in. Yellow

17 Lateral shift/displacement Number 0.125 in. Yellow

18 Rotation/tilt Number 1 Degrees Yellow

19 Condition of pintles Text

Indicate no visible defects, or 

document any exposed, loose, 

or cracked pintles.

Yellow

20 Uplift Text Describe any uplift under live 

load Yellow

21

Sole plate connection to 

girder—Surface bond 

condition

Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

bond or no bond, movement of 

sole plate, and other defect 

(specify under comments)

Yellow

22 Sole plate condition Text Record any corrosion or 

section loss Yellow

23 Masonry plate connection 

to the abutment or pier Text Record any loss of connection Yellow

24 Masonry plate condition Text Record any corrosion or 

section loss Yellow

25 Diameter of anchor bolts Number 0.125 in. Yellow

26 Condition of the anchor 

bolts Text

Record any missing bolts, nuts, 

washers, or loose bolts; any 

rust or corrosion of the bolts; or 

if the anchor bolt is partially 

exposed

Yellow

27

Condition of the concrete 

under and next to the 

bearing

Text

Indicate no visible defects or 

document the presence of 

shear cracks, spalling, on 

abutment seat or pier cap, 

and/or other defects (specify 

under comments)

Yellow

28 Defect photos BLOB Document typical defects with 

photos Yellow

29 Comments Text Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
5 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense.

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on evaluating the condition of rocker bearings and for collecting 

data that help determine if the bearing is functioning as intended.

6.1.1 Sole plates are attached to the underside of bridge girders and transfer the force from the bridge 

girder to the bearing device.

6.1.2 The bearing device sits on top of a masonry plate. Masonry plates are attached to piers and 

abutments and transfer the force from the bearing device to the pier or abutment. 

6.1.3 Anchor bolts are used to attach the masonry plate to the pier or abutment. The body of an anchor 

bolt (shank) should not be visible. Only the head of the anchor bolt, a nut, and a washer should be 

visible. If the body (shank) of the anchor bolt is visible, then the anchor bolts are said to be 

exposed.

6.1.4 The rotation or tilt of the rocker can be determined by measuring the vertical height from the 

masonry plate to the bottom horizontal edge of the rockers at the front and back sides and the 

length of the rocker horizontal surface.

6.1.5 Measure the longitudinal shift, if any, by measuring the distance from the center line of the rocker 

to the center line of the masonry plate.

6.1.6 Determine the lateral shift by noting any lateral shift of the rockers with respect to keeper plates.

6.1.7 A pintle is a pin set into the masonry plate to prevent the rocker from sliding off the masonry 

plate while allowing rotation to occur.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.
6 FLD-DC-VIB-002

January 2016

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.
VISUAL INSPECTION—JOINTS PROTOCOLS (VIJ)

FLD-DC-VIJ-001, Drainage System on Bridge Decks and Approach Slabs

FLD-DC-VIJ-002, Expansion Joints

1 FLD-DC-VIJ-001

January 2016

DRAINAGE SYSTEM ON 

BRIDGE DECKS AND APPROACH SLABS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIJ-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Ponding and drainage locations and data from visual inspection of drainage systems for bridge 

decks and approaches for functionality and evidence of ponding.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment (if 

necessary).

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Mirror.

2.1.6 Broom or shovel.

2.1.7 Temporary marker.

2.1.8 Digital camera.

2.1.9 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Use the data collection grid (FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for 

Bridge Decks) to locate defects on the deck and on both approach slabs.

3.2 If possible, perform the visual inspection of the drainage system during a rain event.

3.3 Check for ponding and signs of water staining on the deck and approach slabs to determine 

possible limits of water ponding.

3.4 Record the type and location of visible defects: ponding or signs of water staining.

3.5 Examine the inlets, outlet pipes, and downspout pipe (if any) in each span for collecting debris or 

signs of blockage. Record instances of debris or blockage.

3.6 Look underneath deck for signs of drainage leakage.
2 FLD-DC-VIJ-001

January 2016

3.7 Check connections and supports to the outlet pipes and downspout pipes attached to the 

superstructure and substructure. Record locations of any loose connections or missing supports. 

Record any instance of water from drains falling directly onto a bridge member, such as girders, 

bearings, and pile and pier caps.

3.8 Documenting defects:

3.8.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.8.2 Use sketches as needed to document ponding, debris-laden inlets, or signs of blockages, and 

supplement the photographs.

3.9 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.9.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.9.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.10 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data was collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

PONDING OR WATER STAINS Pink

8 Defect type List Presence of ponded water

Presence of water stains Blue

9

Location of defect 

(x-coordinate) Number 1 in. Transverse distance from 

origin Yellow

10 Location of defect 

(y-coordinate) Number 1 in. Longitudinal distance from 

origin Yellow

11 Defect site Text

Describe the location of data 

collection on the bridge (e.g., 

span number, lane number, 

right or left shoulder, 

substructure unit, etc.)

Yellow

12 Defect photos and sketches BLOB Document all separate defects 

with photos and/or sketches Yellow

13 Comments Text Orange
3 FLD-DC-VIJ-001

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

DAMAGED OR BLOCKED DRAINAGE INLETS Pink

14 Defect type List

Fully blocked inlet

Partially blocked inlet

Damaged inlet

Blue

15

Location of defect: 

(x-coordinate of center of

the drainage inlet)

Number 1 in. Transverse distance from 

origin Yellow

16

Location of defect: 

(y-coordinate of center of 

the drainage inlet)

Number 1 in. Longitudinal distance from 

origin Yellow

17 Defect photos and sketches BLOB Document typical defects with 

photos and/or sketches Yellow

18 Comments Text Orange

DAMAGED OR BLOCKED DRAINAGE DOWNSPOUT OUTLETS Pink

19 Defect description List

Select all that apply:

 Full blockage of outlet 

 Partial blockage of outlet 

 Loose connections and 

supports for pipes

 Missing connections and 

supports for pipes

 Drainage water falling 

directly onto bridge member 

below

Blue

20

Location of defect on 

superstructure or 

substructure

Text e.g., pier column 1A, 5 ft above 

ground elevation Yellow

21 Defect photos and sketches BLOB

If defects are present, 

document typical defects with 

photos and/or sketches

Yellow

22 Comments Text

If drainage water is falling 

directly onto a bridge member, 

please note onto which bridge 

member the water is falling.

Put other comments in this 

field.

Orange

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered
4 FLD-DC-VIJ-001

January 2016

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure that values make sense. 

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance for identifying, locating, and measuring the extent of defects in 

the bridge drainage system as well as evidence of water ponding on the deck or the approach slab.

6.2 The proper functioning of the bridge’s drainage system is crucial for directing storm water and 

snow melt off the bridge deck and approach slabs. The basic elements of a bridge drainage 

system consist of the following:

6.2.1 Deck cross slope.

6.2.2 Deck drains or inlets.

6.2.3 Downspout pipes.

6.2.4 Outlet pipes

6.3 The primary reason for drainage failure is debris clogging the deck drain (scupper) and/or 

downspouts. When drainage pipes and inlets become clogged, the water from the deck collects 

along the gutter line and ponding of water occurs.

6.4 Ponding can have the following consequences:

6.4.1 Increased risk of water infiltration and chemical attacks on the decks and safety barriers at the 

interface with the deck.

6.4.2 Hazards to the motoring public.

6.4.3 Erosion of embankment slopes.

6.4.4 Possible settlement of the bridge approach slabs. 

6.4.5 Water falling from the bridge’s drainage system directly onto other bridge members below (such 

as girders, girder ends, bearings, and pile/pier caps) can cause premature deterioration of these 

bridge members and/or exacerbate existing corrosion.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.
5 FLD-DC-VIJ-001

January 2016

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-001, Data Collection Grid and Coordinate System for Bridge Decks.

7.1.4 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.5 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

1 FLD-DC-VIJ-002

January 2016

EXPANSION JOINTS

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DC-VIJ-002

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 Condition and functioning of expansion joints and adjacent elements.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

2.1.2 Ladder, access platform, snooper, bucket truck, man lift, and/or high-reach equipment.

2.1.3 Tape measure.

2.1.4 6-ft folding rule.

2.1.5 Measuring wheel.

2.1.6 Thermometer.

2.1.7 Digital camera.

2.1.8 Temporary marker.

2.1.9 Pencil, sketch pad, and clipboard.

2.2 Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Measure the ambient air temperature at the top surface of the deck joint at the same time the joint 

openings are measured. Record the ambient temperature and the time of day when the 

temperature was measured.

3.2 Use FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System, to identify the 

expansion joint being evaluated.

3.3 Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish the local origin 

for each joint on the bridge.

3.4 Identify and record if the joint is open or sealed. Record if the joint is armored or not.

3.5 Measuring joint openings:

3.5.1 Measure the joint opening at both ends and at midlength of the joint. Record the joint opening 

width and the y-coordinates of the points where the opening width is measured. 

3.5.2 Measure any horizontal misalignment at the ends of the joint. Record the amount of horizontal 

misalignment and the y-coordinates of the points where the horizontal misalignment is measured.
2 FLD-DC-VIJ-002

January 2016

3.5.3 Measure any vertical misalignments between the two sides of the joint. Record the amount of 

vertical misalignment and the y-coordinates of the points where the vertical misalignment is 

measured. 

3.6 Measuring vertical misalignment at the beginning of the bridge:

3.6.1 Examine the vertical alignment between the top of each abutment backwall and the end of the 

approach slab at the end of the bridge where traffic enters. Measure any vertical misalignments 

between the abutment backwall and the end of the approach slab. Record the amount of vertical 

misalignment and the y-coordinates of the points where the vertical misalignment is measured.

3.6.2 Record the difference in elevation, if any.

3.7 Evaluation of elements adjacent to joints:

3.7.1 Examine the concrete deck adjacent to the edge of the open joint (or adjacent to the joint armor, 

if any) for cracks, delaminations, and spalling of the adjacent concrete.

3.7.2 If the open joint is armored, examine the metal armor for cracks, corrosion, pitting, loss of 

section, and/or misaligned plates.

3.7.3 Examine the drainage trough (if any) under the joint, and describe the type and extent of debris as 

well as any defects in the trough that result in leakage on the superstructure or substructure 

elements. 

3.7.4 Examine the abutment seat and walls, the bearings, and the beam ends below the joint opening for 

evidence of damage from leakage or water staining.

3.7.5 Measure the total length of the joint where the abutment seat, backwall, bearings, and/or the beam 

ends below the joint show evidence of active water leakage or water stains.

3.8 Evaluation of joint sealing material:

3.8.1 Identify the specific type of joint seal, such as asphalt plug, compression seal, modular joint, etc. 

3.8.2 Record the type and amount of debris (if any) in the joint.

3.8.3 Clear joint of all debris, if necessary, and examine the joint sealing material for cracks, splits, or 

gouges in the elastomeric material or the asphalt plug. Make note of any joint material that has 

separated from the joint sidewall or joint material that is loose and sticking above the top deck

surface.

3.9 Documenting defects:

3.9.1 Take photographs of defects using FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation 

Purposes, and create a photo log.

3.9.2 Use sketches to document section loss and cracking and supplement the photographs.

3.10 Storing data, documents, and images:

3.10.1 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage.

3.10.2 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage.

3.11 Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the LongTerm Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal.
3 FLD-DC-VIJ-002

January 2016

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 Table:

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

1 State Text State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA Green

2 NBI structure number Text Item 8, structure number; from 

NBI Coding Guide Green

3 Structure name Text

Descriptive name for the 

bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over 

I–66

Green

4 Protocol name Text Title of the protocol Green

5 Protocol version Text Month and 

year 

Month and year the protocol 

version was published; e.g., 

May 2015

Green

6

Personnel performing data 

collection activities Text First name(s) Last name(s) Green

7 Date data were collected Text Exact date mm/dd/yyyy Green

8

Ambient air temperature at 

deck level Number 1 oF

Record the temperature at the 

time that the joint openings are 

measured

Green

OPEN JOINTS AND SEALED JOINTS Pink

9 Joint number Text Evaluate and record data for 

each individual joint Blue

10 Type of joint Predefined 

list

Open joint

Sealed joint Yellow

11 Is the joint armored? Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

12 Joint openings Number 0.125 in.

Take three readings at each 

end and in the middle; record 

the opening and the

y-coordinates.

Yellow

13 Horizontal misalignment Number 0.125 in.

Take readings at each end of 

the joint; record the reading 

and the y-coordinates.

Yellow

14 Vertical misalignment of 

joint Number 0.125 in.

Take multiple readings, if 

necessary; record the amount 

of vertical misalignment and 

the y-coordinate.

Yellow

15

Vertical misalignment of 

abutment and approach 

slab/pavement

Number 0.125 in.

Take multiple readings, if 

necessary; record the amount 

of vertical misalignment and 

the y-coordinate(s).

Yellow

16 Damage to adjacent deck 

slab

Predefined 

list

Select all that apply:

 Cracks

 Delamination

 Spalling

 Other (please specify in 

comments)

Yellow

17

Length of joint with 

evidence of damage to the 

deck

Number 1 ft Sum of the individual lengths if 

more than one distinct length Yellow

18 Damage to joint armoring (if 

any)

Predefined 

list

Select all that apply:

 Cracks

 Corrosion

 Pitting

 Loss of section

 Misaligned plates

Yellow
4 FLD-DC-VIJ-002

January 2016

# FIELD NAME DATA TYPE ACCURACY UNIT FIELD DESCRIPTION ROW COLOR

 Other (please specify in 

comments)

19

Length of joint with 

evidence of damage to the 

joint armoring

Number 1 ft Sum of the individual lengths if 

more than one distinct length Yellow

20 Condition of drainage 

trough (if any)

Predefined 

list

No visible defects

Dirt and/or debris

Cracks, tears, etc.

Other (please specify in 

comments)

Yellow

21

Length of joint with 

evidence of damage to the 

drainage trough

Sum of the individual lengths if 

more than one distinct length Yellow

22 Evidence of joint leakage Predefined 

list

Select that apply:

 Deterioration of beam ends

 Corrosion/deterioration of 

bearings

 Damage to abutment cap or 

backwall

 Water/water stains on 

abutment elements

 Other (please specify in 

comments)

Yellow

23 Length of joint with 

evidence of leakage Number 1 ft Sum of the individual lengths if more than one distinct length Yellow

24 Defect photos BLOB Document typical defects with 

photos Yellow

25 Comments Text Orange

SEALED JOINTS ONLY Pink

26 Type of joint seal Predefined 

list

Asphalt plug

Compression seal

Reinforced elastomeric

Modular joint

Other

Yellow

27 Debris in the joint? Predefined 

list Yes or No Yellow

28 Length of joint with debris Number 1 ft Sum of the individual lengths if 

more than one distinct length Yellow

29 Condition of anchor bolts (if 

any)

Predefined 

list

No visible defects

Corrosion present

Pitting rust

Loss of section

Cracking

Missing anchor bolts

Other (such as misaligned 

parts; specify under 

comments)

Yellow

30 Condition of joint seal 

material

Predefined 

list

No visible defects

Cracks, splits, or gouges

Joint material debonded from 

sides of joints

Joint material

Yellow

31 Location of defect in seal Number 1 in. y-coordinates at the beginning 

and ending of the defect Yellow

32 Defect photos BLOB Document typical defects with 

photos Yellow

33 Comments Text Orange
5 FLD-DC-VIJ-002

January 2016

4.2 Table Key:

Column Descriptions

# Sequential number of data item

Field Name Data field name

Data Type Type of data, such as text, number, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file

Accuracy Accuracy to which the data are recorded

Unit Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded

Field Description Commentary on the data

Row Color Key

Green Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied

Pink Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used)

Blue Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified

Yellow LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified

Orange Comments on the data collection or data entered

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Compare measurements with measurements from previous inspections of the same structure to 

make sure values make sense.

5.2 Compare measurements with photo documentation to make sure results shown in photos are 

consistent with items measured.

5.3 If an element’s condition is improved when compared to the condition documented in a previous 

inspection, check with the State department of transportation to determine if any maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions have occurred. If so, document these maintenance, 

repair, and/or bridge preservation actions using appropriate protocols.

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 This protocol provides guidance on evaluating the condition of expansion joints and for collecting 

data that help determine if the joint is functioning as intended.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols:

7.1.1 PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan.

7.1.2 PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications.

7.1.3 FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System.

7.1.4 FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements.

7.1.5 FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes.

7.1.6 FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.1.7 FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External:

7.2.1 FHWA-NHI-12-053, Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual, Federal Highway Administration, 

Washington, DC, 2012.

LOCAL STORAGE PROTOCOLS (LS)

FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local

1 FLD-DS-LS-001

January 2016

DATA, DOCUMENT, AND IMAGE STORAGE—LOCAL

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DS-LS-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides the requirements for local data, document, and image storage during 

field assessment.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 External hard drive with appropriate space for backups.

2.1.2 Laptop computer.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Ensure that all data, documents, and images are stored on several devices.

3.2 When possible, use the data storage within the data collection device itself. 

3.3 Back up data to a laptop internal hard drive every hour or at a reasonable breaking point in the 

assessment technique, whichever is more frequent.

3.4 Back up the laptop internal hard drive to an external hard drive every 4 hours.

3.5 Further backup requirements are discussed in FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image 

Storage—Remote.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Identify a team member responsible for validating that data are stored appropriately. 

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 Local storage occurs for all data collection techniques at three distinct physical locations (data 

collection device, laptop, and external hard drive) as described herein. The goal is to maximize 

redundancy in data storage without slowing or otherwise adversely affecting field data collection 

operations.
2 FLD-DS-LS-001

January 2016

6.2 Cameras, data acquisition systems, and NDE equipment all typically provide local data storage on 

the equipment. These devices are augmented with both an internal laptop hard drive and an 

external hard drive. 

6.3 The frequency of backup from device to computer depends on the data collection assessment 

technique. For the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Program, the desired frequency is the 

most frequent between the following intervals: every hour or a reasonable breaking point in the 

assessment technique (e.g., between load stages or between application techniques). Certain data 

(video) may require constant writing on the laptop internal drive. Avoid duplicate data. When 

backing up the laptop, make a full backup (not a differential backup) of the laptop to an external 

drive, and encrypt the hard drive to protect data in the event of loss of the physical hardware. 

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols: FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote.

7.2 External: None.
REMOTE STORAGE PROTOCOLS (RS)

FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote

1 FLD-DS-RS-001

January 2016

DATA, DOCUMENT, AND IMAGE STORAGE—REMOTE

LTBP Protocol #: FLD-DS-RS-001

1. DATA COLLECTED

1.1 None. This protocol provides requirements for remote storage of data, documents, and images 

during field assessment.

2. ONSITE EQUIPMENT AND PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

2.1 Equipment:

2.1.1 Laptop computer.

2.1.2 Network connection or wireless hotspot.

2.1.3 Data storage space on a secure network or cloud-based location.

2.2 Personnel: None.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Ensure that all data, documents, and images are stored and backed up remotely on a daily basis in 

a secure network or cloud-based storage location until integration into the Long-Term Bridge 

Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal is complete. 

3.2 If data are stored on a network server, the server must reside behind the corporate firewall of the 

data collection contractor. This network server must have standard daily backup regiments, 

mirroring, and other protections typically provided to corporate servers.

4. DATA COLLECTION TABLE

4.1 None.

5. CRITERIA FOR DATA VALIDATION

5.1 Identify a team member responsible for validating that data are stored appropriately. 

6. COMMENTARY/BACKGROUND

6.1 The goal is to maximize redundancy in data storage without creating unnecessary overhead or 

otherwise adversely affecting data collection operations. This effort starts during field data 

collection and continues after leaving the bridge.

6.2 Corporate cloud-based storage is preferred over commercial services but is not required. Remote 

network access allows periodic backups of collected field data to a cloud service while still on the 

bridge. Consider the following important factors when selecting a cloud service:
2 FLD-DS-RS-001

January 2016

6.2.1 Cost.

6.2.2 Sync speed.

6.2.3 Security specifications.

7. REFERENCES

7.1 LTBP Protocols: FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local.

7.2 External: None.