Abstract
Fatigue failures in bridges have been extensively studied for decades, and experimental data was applied to create fatigue curves to be used for bridge designs, however, new research questions the validity of these curves with respect to safe bridge design. Specifically, grit blasting for coating adherence creates surface damage in the form of sharp indentations and peaks over entire steel surfaces. These imperfections act as stress raisers that accelerate bridge failures by reducing the number of cycles to failure and the stresses required to cause failure. Strong differences of opinion exist with respect to this complex issue. This author believes that there is a significant threat to bridge safety, while other authors believe that there is no safety threat at all. The goal of this article is to effectively refute opinions which claim that bridge safety is adequate. To do so, a thorough review of earlier publications is combined with new developments on grit blasting fatigue. Bridge safety is questionable since bridge design requirements in the form of fatigue curves are questionable. There is limited information, one way or the other, to prove the full extent of grit blasting effects on steel bridge fatigue failures, and this paper fosters an understanding of this dangerous threat. Available results clearly prove that bridge fatigue properties are reduced by grit blasting, which in turn reduces the safety of design practices for bridges. An open and unknown question exists, what is the complete extent of grit blasting effects on large structures? That is, bridge failure mechanisms are not fully understood, there are uncertain risks with respect to bridge fatigue damages, and a paramount risk concerns grit blasting. Grit blasting safety effects cannot be dismissed. Moreover, evolving facts prove that the inherent dangers in bridge design practices must be addressed and resolved. Specifically, bridge design curves account for repeated loads on bridges caused by traffic, and further research is mandatory to determine the safety errors inherent in these curves, which are shown to be inadequate by this innovative research. A resistance to new ideas serves as an unacceptable reason to curtail technology that will improve bridge safety.
Highlights
Steel bridges are in service that have welded construction or bolted joint constructions, where the predominant number of fatigue cracks occur at either holes or welds, but some cracks occur on the surfaces of components due to the random nature of fatigue crack initiation at defects
Surface defects affect fatigue failures, and to better explain the effects of surface defects, some tests are available in the literature
V-notch tests were performed for steels similar to those used in bridge beams, and a 23% reduction in the fatigue limit was observed
Summary
Steel bridges are in service that have welded construction or bolted joint constructions, where the predominant number of fatigue cracks occur at either holes or welds, but some cracks occur on the surfaces of components due to the random nature of fatigue crack initiation at defects. Fatigue stresses in bolted joints are significantly affected by stress redistributions and a reduction in stresses in the joints, where compression stresses due to bolt tightening reduce the surface fatigue stresses on the bolted plates These important compression effects do not influence the stresses on welds, which occur on free surfaces of welds that are subject to bending stresses rather than the axial stresses evaluated in bolted joint tests. These two types of tests are completely different, and the compressive versus tension stresses that occur for these two different types of tests are fundamentally different during steel bridge component failures. The goal of this paper is to advance technology by comparing different theoretical opinions and resolve those differences through a discourse of new ideas
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Journal of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.