NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration

Transcription

1 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration Nenad Gucunski Rutgers University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Center for Advanced Infrastructure and Transportation (CAIT) April 23, Portland, Oregon

2 Bridge Deck Damage

3 Typical Deck Deterioration

4 Roughly 600,000 Nation s bridges with an average age of 44 years. At the same time concrete decks are deteriorating faster than other bridge components. Between 50 and 85% of bridge maintenance funds are spent to repair or replace portions of the Nation s 2.8 billion square feet of bridge decks. Several billion dollars are spent annually to maintain, repair and replace bridge decks.

5 SHRP 2 R06-A NDT for Bridge Decks Traditional Methods of Deck Evaluation

6 NDE Techniques for Bridge Decks GPR Ultrasonics GPR Half- Cell Seismic/Ultrasonic Impact Echo Resistivity Ultrasonics and Impact Echo

7 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration Project Objectives and Scope

8 Project Objectives 1. To identify and characterize rapid NDT technologies for concrete deck deterioration; 2. To evaluate the strengths and limitations of applicable NDT technologies from the perspective of speed, accuracy, precision, and ease of use; to validate the promising technologies; 3. To recommend test procedures and protocols for the most effective application of the bridge deck NDT methods evaluated, and; 4. To develop an NDT repository for practitioners.

9 Outline NDT technology validation objectives Validation testing of NDT technologies Field validation testing Laboratory validation testing Grading and ranking of NDT technologies Electronic repository of NDT technologies NDToolbox Conclusions

10 Selection of Deterioration Types The evaluation of NDT technologies was carried out with respect to the following four deterioration types: Delamination, Corrosion, Cracking, and Concrete degradation.

11 Selection of Performance Measures Five performance measures selected for categorizing and ranking of technologies: Accuracy, Repeatability, Ease of data collection, analysis and interpretation, Speed of data collection and analysis, and Cost of data collection and analysis.

12 Considered NDE Technologies 1. Impact echo 2. Ultrasonic pulse echo (UPE) 3. Ultrasonic surface waves (USW) 4. Impulse response (IR) 5. Ground penetrating radar (GPR) 6. Microwave moisture technique 7. Eddy current 8. Half-cell potential 9. Galvanostatic pulse measurement (GPM) 10.Electrical resistivity (ER) 11. Infrared (IR) thermography 12.Visual inspection 13. Chain drag/hammer sounding 14.Chloride concentration measurement

13 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration NDT Technology Validation Field Validation

14 Field Validation Testing 1. Testing conducted on the LTBP Program bridge in Haymarket, VA, on a section approximately 84 x 12 ft. Testing took place in November, Concentrated on repeatability, speed, ease of use of NDT technologies. 3. Information regarding the cost associated with the testing obtained from the participants.

15 Rt.15 over I-66 Bridge, Haymarket, VA

16 Field Validation Test Area

17 Field Validation Testing F E D C B A F E D C B A Test line for repeatability testing Test lines and points for the result reporting Core locations for corrosion validation Core locations for vertical crack validation Core locations for delamination validation Core locations for concrete deterioration validation

18 Haymarket Bridge Deck Surface

19 SHRP 2 R06-A NDT for Bridge Decks 2013 Bridge Inspectors Conference 2013Pacific PacificNorthwest Northwest Bridge Inspectors Conference Haymarket Bridge Deck Surface

20 Vertical Crack Evaluation

21 Validation Cores

22 GPR Single Antenna System

25 GPR Multi Antenna System

26 GPR Multi Antenna System

27 Impact Echo and Surface Wave Testing

28 Impact Echo Testing

29 Air-Coupled Impact Echo

30 Air-Coupled Impact Echo

31 Impulse Response

32 Surface Wave Testing

33 Air-Coupled Surface Wave Testing

34 Galvano-static Pulse Measurement

35 Chain Drag

36 Hammer Sounding

37 Field Validation of NDT Technologies

38 Sample Impact Echo Results

39 Sample Impact Echo Results

40 Sample GPR Results

41 Sample GPR Results Depth Corrected GPR Condition Longitudinal Distance (ft) SERIOUS POOR FAIR GOOD Signal Attenuation (Normalized db) as Condition Indicator

42 Delamination Detection Results Participant # Technology C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 9 IE 9 Chain Drag/ Hammer Sounding 6 AC IE 7 IE 1 IE 2 Infrared Correct Detection False Detection Approximate Detection No data available: N/A Participant # C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 1 8 N/A N/A N/A 9 4/5 4 Correct Detection False Detection Approximate Detection No data available: N/A Impact Echo GPR

43 Sample Corrosion Assessment Results Longitudinal Distance (ft) Very High H i g h Mod to Low Low Decreasing Corrosion Rate Indication Electrical Resistivity Corrosion Rate Grade Longitudinal Distance (ft) 90% prob. of corrosion transition 90% prob. of no corrosion Half-Cell Potential

44 Sample Results Technology Repeatability

45 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration NDT Technology Validation Laboratory Validation

46 Validation Testing Laboratory component (conducted at UTEP, mid December, 2010 to mid January 2011) a. Testing on a prepared 20x8 ft bare deck slab with a series of defects/deteriorations (delaminations, vertical cracks, corrosion). b. Testing on a section of a real bridge where deterioration and defects were determined after the validation testing through autopsies. c. Concentrated on accuracy and repeatability of NDT technologies.

47 Test Slab with Simulated Deterioration 20 ft DL9 8 ft C1 C2 DL8 C3 C Shallow Delamination Shallow Severe Delamination Vertical Cracking Test Lines and Points Shallow Very Thin Delamination Deep Delamination Rebar Corrosion Core Location

48 Laboratory Validation Fabricated Slab

49 Cores from the Validation Slab C1 C2 C3 Delamination Thick Delamination Very Thin Delamination Delamination Polyester fabric and foam mm thick C4 Corroded Rebar in Core: Black Corrosion (Fe 3 O 4 )

50 Seismic/Ultrasonic and GPR Testing

51 Galvanostatic Pulse Measurement and GPR

52 Contact and Air-Coupled Impact Echo and Surface Wave Testing

53 Chain Drag and Hammer Sounding

54 Delamination Detection from Impact Echo Shallow Delamination Shallow Very Thin Delamination Shallow Severe Delamination Deep Delamination Vertical Cracking Rebar Corrosion Test Lines and Points # of Row 7 G SC=Shallow delamination F E D C A B in. 3~6 in. SC SC SC SC # of Column SC 4 in. Frequency [khz] Lateral Distance Longitudinal Distance

55 Delamination Detection Results GPR Shallow Delamination Shallow Very Thin Delamination Shallow Severe Delamination Deep Delamination Vertical Cracking Rebar Corrosion Test Lines and Points

56 Infrared Thermography Result `

57 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration NDT Technology Grading and Ranking

58 NDT Performance Measures and Parameters Performance Measure Performance Parameter Weight Factor Detectability Extent 0.3 Accuracy Detectability Threshold 0.3 Severity of Deterioration 0.4 Speed Data Collection 0.6 Data Analysis 0.4 Data Collection 0.45 Ease of Use Data Analysis 0.4 Potential for Automation 0.15 Cost of Data Collection 0.5 Cost Cost of Data Analysis 0.3 Cost of Equipment 0.2

59 Grading of NDT Technologies - Accuracy Defect Delamination Rebar Corrosion Crack Depth Performance Parameters for Accuracy Technology Participant Device Detectability Detectability Severity of Average Max. Point Extent Threshold Deterioration Point Point (weight =0.3) (weight = 0.3) (weight = 0.4) 8 Air-Couplded Ground Coupled GPR 1 Ground-Coupled Ground-Coupled Ground-Coupled Scanning System Air-Coupled Impact Echo 7 Air-Coupled Scanning System Scanning System IE-USW 9 Stationary Infrared 2 Handheld Camera Chain Drag GPM-HCP 4 Stationary GPR 1 Ground-Coupled Ground-Coupled HCP 9 Stationary SASW 1 Stationary Stationary SWT 7 Stationary TOFD 7 Stationary Concrete Degradation USW 9 Stationary

60 Grading of NDT Technologies - Speed

61 Grading of NDT Technologies - Speed Technology # of Participants Max Grade Average Grade Infrared GPR ER HCP Impulse R Chain Drag GPM USW impact Echo

62 Grading of NDT Technologies- Ease of Use Technology Participant Data Collection Data Analysis Potential for Automation WF = 0.45 WF = 0.4 WF = 0.15 Overall Index for Ease of Use Infrared Chain drag/hammer sounding Infrared Resistivity Half Cell Impulse Response Galvanostatic Pulse Meas Impact echo GPR GPR GPR GPR IE SASW(Surface Waves)

63 Grading of NDT Technologies - Cost Cost between $0.15 and $0.7 per square foot

64 Summary Grades

65 Summary Grades - Delamination

66 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration NDToolbox - NDT Technology Electronic Repository

67 Content of Electronic NDT Repository 1. Summarized information on all recommended methods for bridge deck evaluation, to obtain: a. Information about a particular NDT technique, and b. A prioritized list of NDT techniques for different types of deterioration detection.

68 Content of Electronic NDT Repository 2. Documentation for recommended test procedures, protocols, and available standards and guidelines, 3. Samples of data output, results presentation and interpretation, 4. Equipment features, including cost, availability and specifications,

69 Expanded NDT Toolbox for Transportation Infrastructure Assets Incorporated additional SHRP 2 projects: 1. R06B: Evaluating Applications of Field Spectroscopy Devices to Fingerprint Commonly Used Construction Materials 2. R06C: Using Both Infrared and High-Speed Ground Penetrating Radar for Uniformity Measurement on New HMA Layers 3. R06D: Nondestructive Testing to Identify Delaminations between HMA Layers 4. R06E: Real-Time Smoothness Measurements on Portland Cement Concrete Pavements During Construction 5. R06F: Development of Continuous Deflection Device 6. R06G: Mapping Voids, Debonding, Delaminations, Moisture, and Other Defects Behind or Within Tunnel Linings

70

71 NDT to Identify Concrete Bridge Deck Deterioration Conclusions

72 Conclusions A number of NDE technologies can provide detailed and accurate information only about a certain type of deterioration or defect. Comprehensive condition assessment of bridge decks, at this stage, can be achieved only through a complementary use of multiple technologies. The NDT technology selection should be guided by the deterioration type and performance measures of the highest interest. Complete conclusions and recommendations can be found in the final report

73 Anticipated Contributions and Impacts The final product, the electronic repository NDToolbox, is: Complete in the subject matter (detailed in descriptions and discussions, fully illustrated, etc.) Practical in the manner it conveys guidance to engineers and maintenance managers.

74 Acknowledgements Research team: Rutgers University, UTEP, BAM-Berlin, and Radar Systems Intl. Participants in the validation testing: NDT Corporation Germann Instruments Olson Engineering 3D Radar (V-Metro), Norway IDS, Italy FHWA, Turner-Fairbank s NDE Center University of Texas at Austin University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Rutgers University University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP)

75 Thank You!