Indian Roads Congress

Special Publication 51

GUIDELINES FOR
LOAD TESTING
OF BRIDGES

Published by
The Indian Roads Congress
Copies can be had from
The Secretary, Indian RoadsCongress
Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road
NEW DELHI 1999

Price Rs. 80/..

(plus packing and
postage)

IRe: SP: 51-1999

First Published
Reprinted

: June, 1999
: September, 2003

GUIDELINES FOR LOAD TESTING OF BRIDGES

CONTENTS
Page
Composition of Bridge
Specifications & Standards Committee
(Rights of Publication and of Translation are Reserved)

Printed at Dee Kay Printers, New Delhi - 110 015

(500 copies)

(i) to (ii)

Background

1.

Introduction

2.

Type of Tests

3.

Scope

4.

Test Procedures

5.

Acceptance Criteria

13

IRC:SP:51 - 1999
MlEMBlERS OJF THlE BRmGlE SlP'lE(]JFKCA 'fKONS
AND STANDARDS COMMlI'fTlElE
(As OH1l 27.9.Jl997)
l.

A.D. Narain
(Convenor)

DG(RD) & Add!. Secretary to the Gov!. of India,

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),
New Delhi

2.

The ChiefEngineer (B) S&R

(Member-Secretary)

Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),

New Delhi

3.

S.S. Chakraborty

4.

Prof. D.N. Trikha

5.

Ninan Koshi

6.

A.G. Borkar

7.

N.K. Sinha

8.

A. Chakrabarti

9.

M.V.B. Rao

1"0. CR. Alimchandani

ll. Dr. S.K. Thakkar
t2. M.K. Bhagwagar
13. P.D. Wani
14. S.A. Reddi
15. Vijay Kumar
16. CV. Kand
17. M.K. Mukherjee
18. Mahesh Tandon

1-9. Dr. T.N. Subba Rao

20. The Director
21. A.K. Harit
22. Shri Prafulla Kumar

Managing Director, Consulting Engg. Services (l) Pv!.

Ltd., 57, Nehru Place, New DelhI-li OO 19
Director, Structural Engg. Res. Centre, Sector-l 9,
Central Gov!. Enclave, Kamla Nehru Nagar,
PB No. 10, Ghaziabad-201002
DG(RD) & Add!. Secy., MOST (Retd.),
56, Nalanda Apartments, Vikaspuri, New Delhi
A-J, Susnehi Plot No. 22, Arun Kumar Vaidya Nagar,
Bandra Reclamation, Mumbai-400050
ChiefEngineer (PIC),
Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wing),
Transport Bhavan, New Delhi-l 1000 I
Chief Engineer,
Central Public Works Department, Nirman Bhavan,
Room No.424, New Delhi-I 1001 I
Head, Bridge Division,
Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi-I 10020
Chairman & Managing Director, STUP Consultants
Ltd., 1004-5 & 7, Raheja Chambers, 213,
Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021
Professor, Dept!. of Earthquake Engg., University of
Roorkee, Roorkee-247667
Consulting Engineer, Engg. Consultants (P) Ltd.,
F-14/15, Connaught Place, New Delhi-l 10001
Secretary (R) to the Gov!. of Maharashtra,
P.W.D., Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032
Dy. Managing Director, Gammon India Ltd.,
Gammon House, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025
General Manager, UP State Bridge Corpn. Ltd., 486,
Hawa Singh Block, Khel Gaon, New Delhi-l 10049
Consultant, E-2/l36, Mahavir Nagar, Bhopal-4620 16
40/182, Chitranjan Park, New Delhi-ll OO 19
Managing Director, Tandon Consultant (P) Ltd.,
17, Link Road, Jangpura Extn., New Delhi-l 10014
Construma Consultancy (P) Ltd., 2nd Floor,
Pinky Plaza, Sth Road, Khar (W), Mumbai-4000S2
Highway Research Station, Guindy, Madras-600025
Executive Director (B&S), Research Designs &
Standards Organisation, Lucknow-226011
Member, National Highway Authority ofIndia, l,
Eastern Avenue, Maharani Bagh, New Delhi-l 10065

Ci)

IRC:SP:51 - 1999
23. Shri S.V.R. Parangllsam
24. Shri P.D. Agarwal
25. Shri B.C. Rao
26. P.e. Bhasin
27. Shri P.K. Sarmah
28. The Chief Engineer (N H),
29. The Secretary to the Govt.
of Gujarat
30. The Chief Engineer (R&B),
31. The Engineer-in-Chicf
32. The Chief Engineer (R) S&R
33. The Director & Head
(Civil Engg.),
34. The Chief Engineer(NH)
35. TheChiefEngineer(NH)
36. President,
Indian Roads Congress

37. Hon. Treasurer

Indian Roads Congress

38. Secretary,
. Indian Roads Congress

Chief Engineer (B) South,

.
Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wmg),
New Delhi-l 10001
Chief Engineer (NH),
U.P. P.W.D., Lucknow-226001
.'
ChiefEngineer, Dy. Director General (Bndges),
West Block-IV, Wing l, R.K. Puram,
New Deihi-I100 66
.
324, Mandakini Enclave, Greater Kmlash-II,
New Delhi-l 10019
Chief Engineer,
.
P.W.D. (Roads) Assam, P.O. Chandman,
Guwahati-78l 003
P.W.D., B&R Branch, Patiala

i~&~ ~~~~;~ent, Block No.

14, Sachivalaya Complex,

Gandhinagar-3820 l O
(D. Sree Rama Murthy)
.
National Highways, Errum ManzlI,
Hyderabad-580482
Haryana P.W.D., B&R, Sector-19 B,
Chandigarh-i600 19
.
Ministry of Surface Transport (Roads Wmg),
New Delhi-l 1000 l
(Vinod Kumar)
Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan,
. .
New Delhi-ll 0002
Public Works DepUltment, Writers' Bluld11lg,
1
Block 'C" Calcutta-70000
'D' Wing, Ist Floor, Bhopal-462004.
PW
M .P . . . .,
- Ex-OfficIO
H.P. Jamdar
.
Secretary to the Gov!. of GUjarat,
R&B Department, Block No. 14,
Sachivalaya Complex,
Gandhinagar-3820 l O
- Ex-Officio
A.D. Narain
DG(RD) & Add!. Secretary to the
Govt. of India, Ministry of Surface
Transpolt (Roads Wing),
New Delhi
- Ex-Officio
S.C. Sharma
Chief Engineer, Ministry of .
Surface Transport (Roads Wll1g),
New Delhi

Corresponding Members
l.
2.

N.V. Merani
Dr. G.P. Saha

3.

Shitala Sharan

4.

Dr. M.G. Tamhankar

A-47/l344, Adarsh Nagar, Worli, Mumbai-400025

Flat No. 4, Kavita, 15th Road, Khar (W),
Mumbai-400052
S .
(I)
Adviser Consultant, Consulting Engg. ervlc~s
PvI. Ltd., 57, Nehru Place, New Delhi-ll 001
Emeritus Scientist,
P k tE
structural Engg. Research Centre, 399, ac e ,
Mayur Vihar Phase Il, Delhi-ll 0091

(ii)

BACKGROUND

Ll. Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee (B-lO) set

up in 1991 had identified and formed a sub-group to prepare the draft Oh
'Guidelines for Load Testing of Bridges'. The newly constituted (B-H)
Committee (1994-96) reviewed the work done by sub-group in its first
meeting held on the 26th April, 1994.
The guidelines drafted by a sub-group comprising ofSarvashri M.V.B.
Rao (Convenor), A.D. Narain, C.V. Kand and M.R. Kachhwaha were
approved by the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee
(B-lO) in its meeting held on the 29th November 1996 at Mumbai. The
personnel of the Bridge Maintenance and Rehabilitation Committee
(B-lO) are given below:
A.G. Borkar
D.K. Kanhere

Convenor
Member-Secretary
MEMBERS

P.C. Bhasin
S.S. Chakraborty
M.K. Chatterjee
S.G. loglekar
c.v. Kand
P. Y. Manjure
N.V. Merani
O.D. Mohindra
M.V.B. Rao

Dr. T.N. Subba Rao

S.A. Reddi
Dr. N.S. Rengaswamy
K.B. Sarkar
Surjeet Singh
Dr. M.G. Tamhankar
Mahesh Tandon
Director, HRS, Madras
Director B&S, RDSO, Lucknow
EX-OFFICIO

President, IRC
Hon. Treasurer, IRC

Secretary, IRC

Sh. M.S. Guram, Chief Engineer,

Punjab PWD B&R, Pati ala
Sh. A.D. Narain, Director General
(Road Development) &
Add!. Secy., MOST)
Sh. S.C. Sharma, Chief Engineer,
MOST

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

CORRESPONDING MEMBERS

Dr. Y.K. Raina

M.K. Saxena

S.R. Tambe
N.G. Thatte
M.R. Vinayak

Further the Guidelines were considered and approved by Bridge

Specifications & Standards Committee in its meeting held at New Delhi
on 27.9.97, the Executive Committee on 29.11.97 and the Council on
5.1.98.
1.2. This guideline will only give procedure for a ful1-fledged load
testing of bridge superstructure including recommendation for acceptance
criteria. Inspite of the limitation associated with load testing of bridges,
the method complements structural analysis and also facilitate s assessment
of latent (reserve) strength. Such load testing should not be considered as
a routine requirement and should be resorted to only on case specific basis.
The testing is done mainly to assess the flexural capacity, wherein
deformations in superstructures can be measured directly with reasonable
accuracy. Bridges are rarely tested for shear strength evaluation due to
absence of a reliable method of monitoring extremely small strains and
widening of shear cracks.

are measured. This method of ratino- fb

a number of bridges in a road
are

~~::~~lc~ed bridge is

netwo~ko ~~gbe: r~t;;rk~~n~~nient wh~n

to be

~ccepted,

may be

becaus~ its desi:~ ~ noeta~

specified,y~::ra ~~l~~~e~~~~~e~~i~;~:r~:~i~~!S :~pected

to be not as
as an assurance test b a r .
g
as to be resorted to
loads Such load t t y hPP 1catlOn of loads atleast equivalent to the design
d h
.
es mg as also to be em l
.
p oye w en contract conditions
so specify. At times t
y
load or more is resort~d ~~t~~e~fthbndges b t~e application of design live
.
e researc h ObjectIve so dem d N
old bndges are not to be tested in this manner The b . d.n an s. ormally
th~ 10~d testing as envisaged in IRC: SP:
and as IC 1 ere~ce ~etween
gll1delmes is'that the behaviour of the brid e. b the load testmg 1~ th~se
g
. of design live load or load slight! exceedi IS o. ser~ed by the appltcatlOn
period of say 24 h
d h y.
ng desIgn hve load over a longer
ours an t e elast1c perfo
f
.
removal of the test load can be observed. rmance o the bndge deck on

37

2. TYPE OF TESTS

The load tests on b .d

ld
.
n ges cou be claSSIfied under five heads:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

Behaviour Tests
Proof Load Tests
Stress History Tests
Ultimate Load Tests
Diagnostic Tests

1. INTRODUCTION

IRC's Bridge Maintenance & Rehabilitation Committee (B-lO) has

already issued Guidelines for Evaluation of Load Canying Capacity of
Bridges as IRC: SP: 37. These guidelines deal with rating of bridges for
standard IRC live loads as specified in IRC: 6. In these guidelines, analytical
method, load testing method and correlation method are recommended,
but load testing method is recommended only when no construction drawing s
and specifications originally followed are available. The testing loads to
be utilised for rating of bridges are not the IRC's standard bridge loadings,
but will be from amongst those commercially available. Normally, the test
vehicle will be chosen as the next heavier vehicle than the predominantly
heavy vehicle presently plying over the bridge. The application of load
is over a very small duration of time during which the relevant deformations
2

.
The Behaviour Tests are carried
method of analysis or design. The test loa~u:o~~dv;nfY thle results of any
the design load.
e equa to or lower than
l
The Proof Load Tests are more co
rating of bridges The tests are d
mmon yadopted for operational
.
one on new structures whi h h d d .
or construction problem or for the f f . .
c
a eSIgn
ra mg o an eX1stmg bridge.
.
The Stress History Test is carried out
of stress ranges in fatigue pro ne
f.d to estabhsh the distribution
areas o )[1 ges The data obt df
passage of regular traffic is us d t
. .
ame rom
e o assess the fatIgue life.
The Ultimate Load Te t
s s are performed to understand the global
3

I~

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRe: SP: 51 - 1999

behaviour when sufficient theoretical knowledge is not available to predi ct

the structural performance. The tests provide valuable infOlmation regarding
the sequence and mode of failure.
The Diagnostic Tests are meant to monitor the behavi~ur of a
component of a bridge either to establish the cause of .da~age or Its share
in transfer of loads when sufficient theoretical analysIs IS not developed.
The type, magnitude, application and duration of different tests is
decided on the basis of objective and evaluation procedure. Each
methodology depends on exigencies and site conditio~s. T!1US, until and
unless specified, the term "load test" used without quahficatlOn commonly
denotes Proof L021d Teslt only.
3. SCOPE

These guidelines deal with Proof Load Test. Th~y cover testing. of
superstructures, excluding arches for evaluation ~f thetf. flexur~l capacIty.
Testing for shear capacity is not considered. ThIS test lS not mtended to
assess ultimate load carrying capacity of bridge superstructure.
4. TEST PlROCEJl)URlES

4.1. SeRediolU\

I(}~'

SpaJl1l

In case of new multispan bridges, minimum one out of 15 spans

could be chosen for load testing, the maximum chosen being two when
the total number of spans exceeds 15
4.2. Meth.od of Loading

4.2.1. The method of loading should be such as to either simulate

the specific class of vehicle or induce in the member(s) the calculated
forces, viz., the bending moments at critical sections.
The test loads may be in the form of:

static loads on wheel/track imprints of the specific class of vehicle

for which the bridge is to bc rated;
static loads on a configuration which produces the calculated force
in the member(s) under test.
4.2.2. Test Vehicles: The usage of commercial vehicles has been
recommended in para 6 of IRC: SP: 37. The vehicles and/or their trailers
are uniformly loaded with preweighed units like concrete cubes or sand
soil containers and the axle loads determined on weigh bridges. However,
the commercial vehicles do not produce the expected load effects of standard
loadings. Use of special test vehicles would be ideal. The advantage of
special test vehicles is that they can be moved on and off the structure
quickly.
'
4.2.3. Static Loads
4.2.3.1. Siml.llatiollloHhe specific IRe vehicle: The load effect on
a span can be produced by building up preweighed units on loading imprints
spaced as per codal provisions. The imprints are built either with brick
masonry or concrete and rolled steel sections placed across pairs of imprints,
so that platforms could be buHt on a group of four imprints for placement
of preweighed units. The area of each platform depends on the magnitude
of the load and unit weight of individual unit. A preweighed unit normally
comprises sand or soil filled gunny bags, concrete cubes, bricks etc., which
can be carried manu ally. Otherwise, large concrete blocks, containers of
water or (stone) ballast or steel ingots could be used if mechanical handling
facilities are available to load and unload them from test vehicles. Fig. 1
shows a scheme for building up 2 lanes of IRC Class A loading on the
carriageway of a bridge. The loads are placed eccentrically on the
carriageway of a bridge in such a way that maximum. bending moment
is produced in any longitudinal.
4.2.3.2. Other types of static loadts: Any configuration which
produces the design forces (load effects) in the member(s) could be adopted,
for instance uniformly distributed load. Any of the appropriate methods
of load distribution between the girders can be adopted in arriving at the
test load and its configuration on the span. But the method of distribution

- mobile test vehicles;

4

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

...lQO
JODa

4300

condition of a bridge and the load carrying capacity theoretically assessed.

It is advisable to monitor the appearance and widening of flexural cracks

at every stage of loading, so as to decide about placement of next incremental

load. It is expected that the load-deflection characteristics at every increment
are linear and any abnormal behaviour is reflected in the load v/s deflection
data. If the deflection observed exceeds the limit prescribed in the code
the further loading shall be stopped. Subsequent actions shall be taken in
consultation with appropriate authorities. Occasionally, crackling sounds
at the locations of expansion joints are heard when the rotation capacity
is exceeded, particularly, in balanced cantilever bridges. Spalling of
delaminated concrete is also possible during load tests.

LOADING

OFQCAAING

Fig. 1. Placement of 2-l:mes of lORC Class-A loading and footpath loading on

carriageway

4.4. Preparatory Work

of loads should be the same as adopted in the approved design. However,

where the approved designs are not available the owner of the bridge
should specify the appropriate method of load distribution. In the case of
multiple girders, it is possible that the design moments are simultaneously
induced in more than one girder. It may well happen that the magnitude
of the test load on the span is greater than that of the design IRe vehicle,
but the forces induced in any member should be always equal to the
specified design force of the load test.

- All visual defects should be measured, mapped and plotted.

- It should be ensured that bearings are functional.
- Expansion gaps, joints should be cleared of all debris.
- It will be useful to give the surface of the superstructure a coat
of white wash, so that appearance of cracks becomes immediately
perceptible.
4.5. Precautions

4.3. Loading and Unloading Sequence

- Staging should be stable and safe
4.3.1. The test load shall be applied in stages so that timely action,
such as stopping the test, can be taken if any untoward distress is observed
at any stage. In most cases, the design live load effect would be equal to
or less than that due to dead load. The dead load is already acting and
the test load is some specified multiple of live load more than one. The
suggested stages of test load placement are 30 per cent, 50 per cent, 70
per cent, 80 per cent, 90 per cent and 100 per cent. Unloading should also
be in the same stages. The next incrementalloading should be added only
after the deflections under the previous load have stabilised and all the
stipulated observations are completed.
4.3.2. The selection of first stage of loading depends on the general
6

- Staging for instruments and that for observers should be quite

independent.
- Staging for instruments should be rigid.
- Due to temperature change, the superstructure may tend to hog
or sag; therefore, it should be ensured that when this occurs, contact
with the spindle of the dial gauge is not lost. Spindle extensions
should be fixed to take care of this.
During the 24 hour retention period of built up load, care shall be
taken to cover the preweighed units with tarpaulin, so that rain or strong
winds do not affect the stacking on the platforms.
7

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

IRC: SP: 51 - 1999

4.6. Observations
The following should be observed, measured and recorded at regular
intervals of one hour over a period of 24 hours:
- deflections at critical sections (for instance for simply supported
spans at mid-span and at quarter-span. In box girders, it will be
useful to record deflections under each of the external ribs).
- appearance of crack s and their development, length, width, location,
orientation correlated with load.
USING DIAL GAUGE

USING SCALE AND CURSOR

- deformation of bearings. _
- ambient temperature and related temperature in the body of the
structure.

Fig. 2. Suspension wire method for deflection measurement using dia! gauge or scale
and cursor

4.7. Measurement of Defledions

Delfections could be measured with the following devices:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

Dial gauges
Ruler and cursor
Deflectometers
Precision level
Water level

of least count 0.01 mm are clamped to them. The spindies of the dial
gauges are connected by a pair of adapters in plumb line with a Gl or Invar
wire. The wire is made taut by attaching a weight at the end. The method
could be partly modified by using a (steel) scale and cursor instead of dial
gauge, when the order of anticipated deflection exceeds 100 mm. Fig. 2
also shows the scale and cursor method for measurement of large
deflections.

4.8. Procedure for Temperature CorrectionThe methods (a) to (c) could be used wherever dry bed is available
under the span. Otherwise, methods (d) and (e) can be used by using a
reference station at the nearby abutment. When girder bridges are subjected
to load tests, it is essential to clear debris in the expansion gaps and
lubricate steel bearings to permit free translation and rotational movements
of the spans.
The deflection measurement can be done by suspension wire method
at the required locations using dial gauges (Fig. 2). In this method trestles
or posts 1.5 m tall would be embedded in firm ground and dial gauges
8

A set of thermocouples are to be fixed at different locations of

deflection measurement for monitoring temperature of the bridge deck. In
absence of thermocouples, hand held instruments could be used wherein
a probe could be inserted in a preformed hole in concrete surface, for
recording temperature. As a last resort, thermometers could also be
suspended from trestles used for deflection measurement to measure the
shade temperature. The number of thermocouples/thermometers/probes
used could be about half the total number of locations for deflection
measurement.
9

IRe: SP: 51-1999

IRC: SP: 51-1999

The superstructure tends to hog or sag due to variation in ambient

temperature and it is necessary to apply correction to the deflection data
during static load test. This is so since the duration of loading or unloading
operation in static load test could be for 4-5 hours.
For this purpose, the platforms on masonry imprints meant for
building up static loads should be placed in respective positions for observing
thermal response of the bridge deck prior to load test. The deflection
values and ambient temperature data are generally collected from dawn
to dusk for two or three consecutive days at l hour intervals. The temperature
vs. deflection data are collected on these days and a curve drawn for each
station (dial gauge location), which is taken as basic curve for temperature
correction. Usually the temperature-deflection characteristic would be a
best fit obtained from a cluster of readings. The deflection reading at any
location and temperature during load test, is super-imposed on the basic
curve. The difference between the two values give the true deflection for
the location under reference, corresponding to the same temperature.
Fig. 3 shows typical characteristic of thermal response, super imposed on
load vs. deflection data during a proof test.

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE 'C

15

17

19

21

23

25

27

29

31

BASIC TEMP. CURVE

/-

SO

9AM
12AM

70

80

I
I

-i

lPM

2PM

14PM'r-. 3PM

I
I

I
I

I
I
I

I
I

90

I
I
I

5?

I
'1
I
I
I

~ 100

;:::
ow

110

...J

Lc
W

ft

120

I
I

75:1:
!UO

75'l
120-70-(50)

OO-(TO).(CO)

130

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

LEGEND:-

oo

-06SERVED DEFLECTION
TD -TEMPERATURE DEFLECTIDN
CD -CORRECTED DEFLECTION
o -LOADING STAGE
-UNLOADING STAGE

-CREEP OEFLECTION

I
I

Precaution

140

The bridge dec k temperature gets affected due to vanatIOn in

humidity and strong winds on the day. Also, the data gathered on sunny
and doudy days would be different, although the ambient temperature is
same.
Therefore, to avoid inconsistencies in the data, it is preferable to
choose two identical spans, one for load test and the other for temperaturedeflection data and should be monitored simultaneously. This approach
reduces the total period of load testing by at least two days.

4.9. Correction for Rotation of Pier

150
ISO

170
lBD

NOTES:-

l. THE Loo,DING OPERATION IS CO~PlETED BEFORE

90~

2P).4 AND UNLOADING OPERATION COMMENCES .

76.5
90~
24 HOUR AFTER COMPlETION OF LOADING.
70.15
2. THE READING ON TEMPERATURE CORRECTION
CUIM: CORRESPOND TO DIFFERENT HOURS OF
100:1:
89.65
DAY1lME. THEREFORE, THE O!FUECTION OATA IS
TO BE CORRECTED AS PER TIME AND TEMPERATURE
100"
80.75
OF RECORDING FOR LOAOING/UNUOADING CYCLES.
120:1:
3. LOADING .t UNLOADING IS DONE IN THE ~E
97.5
INCREMENTS/OECREMENTS BUT THE VAlUE OF
TEMPERATURE CORRECTION WOULO BE OIFFERENT.
120:1:
4. THE CORRECTEO DEFUECTION VAlUES INDICATED
, 09.25 CREEP DEFLECTION
IN PMENTHESIS CORRESPOND TO UNLOADING
AfTER
24 HOURS
CYCLE.

Fig.3. Typical basic temperature correction curve with load-deflection data in a load
test

The deflection data of cantilever span bridges and those with tall
piers (of effective length to radius of gyration ratio 50 and above) need
further correction due to rotation of the piers. The rotation could be
measured with a clinometer mounted on the hammer head portion for
10

33

50

11

IRC: SP: 51 -1999

IRC: SP: 51 -1999

cantilever bridges directly over the piers. The clinometer is initially set to
'no load' condition and rotation s at incremental loads can be measured
directly.
The rotation of the piers could also be measured with a column of
dial gauges placed across the depth of pier at fixed distances. More than
one column of dial gauges would be required to measure rotation of
circular piers in the longitudinal and transverse direction. The method
needs erection of a mounting system to fix the dial gauges and also an
independent scaffolding or ladder for personnel to record the dial gauge
data.
An indirect method to determine rotation of pier can be adopted
when the pier and superstructure are monolithic, as in cantilever bridges.
ln this case, the load free arm could be instrumented for def1ection
measurement (at different cross sections) along the span length and the
ratio of difference in def1ection values and distance between cross sections
yields rotation of load free arm. The rotation of pier would be equal to
the rotation of load free arm, due to monolithic action.
Fig. 4 shows the schematic arrangement adopted to determine rotation
of piers by the indirect method.
lOADED ARM

lOAD FREE ARM

4.10. Percentage Recovery of Deflection

The percentage recovery could be calculated for values of def1ection.
The percentage recovery is calculated at 24 hours after removal of load.
The calculation is done as follows after effecting temperature and!
or rotation correction to def1ection data:
Initial value (on dial gauge)

Rl

Final value after placement of test load

[Thereafter, measurements are to be
taken at regular intervals of one hour,
as per Clause 4.5].
Value at 24 hours after placement of test load..

R2

R3

Value immediately after removal of test load

[Thereafter, measurement are to be taken at
regular intervals of one hour,
as per Clause 4.5].

R4

Value at 24 hours after removal of test load

R5

Total def1ection

R3-Rl

Total recovery 24 hrs after removal of

test load

R3-R5

Percentage of recovery of def1ection

24 hrs after removal of test load.

R3-R5 x 100
R3-Rl

ABUTMENT
DG-l DG-2 DG-3 DG-4

SC-I

SC-2

. 5. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

O.573l
DG- DIAl GAUGE lOCATION
SC- SCALE-CURSOR lOCATION

O.865l

O.765l

5.1. The criterion of acceptance is based on recovery of def1ection

after removal of test load. It is necessary to specify the quantum of applied
load, the duration of the load on the span and the percentage recovery of
def1ection on removal of load.

O.95Jl
OF PIER

Fig. 4. Scheme for determination of rotation of deflection in a cantilever bridge

12

13

IRC: SP: 51 -- 1999

5.2. For bridges designed for IRe Standard loadings, criteria for
load testing of steel, PSC and RCC superstructures are given in Table
below.
TABLE. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

Type of Bridges

Live Load
Intensity for
Testing

Duration of
Retention of
Test Load
(Hrs.)

Minimum percentage
recovery of Deflection
at 24 hrs after
removal of Test Load

l.

Reinforced
concrete

24

75

2.

Prcstressed
concrete

:1:

24

85

3.

Steel

24

85

Composite

"

24

75

4.

(* l.OL plus corresponding impact as per IRC Codes)

A general acceptance criterion for the behaviour of a structure under

test load is that it shall not show "visible evidence of failure" which
include appearance of crack s of width more than 0.3 mm, spalling or
deflections which are excessive and incompatible with safety requirements.

14