Y


 
   





 
j
Y



ë Upgrading of seismic coefficients as a result
of revised seismic zone

ë Updating design criteria due to revision of

code

ë Bridges not designed to seismic force

ë Bridges that damaged in earthquakes

ë Deterioration and aging

¦j
 

Y 


ë jew structure needs large cost.

ë jew alignment necessitates acquisition of land,

property.

ë Large quantity of material required for reconstruction

that has to be obtained from nature by destroying it
and thus a loss of ecological balance.

ë jew routs add to inconvenience of public and other

living beings.

ë The residual utility of old structure goes to waste.

0

Y



ë iuper itructure
Most common retrofit for superstructures is
installation of unseating prevention devices

ë iub itructure
steel jacketing, reinforced concrete
jacketing, FRP jacketing.
 0

Y



ë Bearings.
‡ Replacing steel bearings by base isolation bearings.
‡ Bearing seat extension.
‡ Provision of stoppers and devices to prevent jumping
of girders.

ë Abutment.
A unique retrofit for tilt of abutments in the front
direction is to replace some part of the back-fills with
expanded polystyrene (EPi .
R

Retrofitting of the Bridge
across Vishwaganga River
between Malkapur & jandura
  
 
 
  

[ear of construction 1964
Carriageway 7.5 m
iuperstructure RCC girder deck system
iubstructure CR masonry
Foundation open
jo. Of spans 10 spans of 13.72 m,
Thickness of deck slab 215 mm
  
 
 
  

jumber of girders
3 main girders at 2.25m c/c with size 300mm
and 1400mm deep and 450 x 300 mm bottom
flange and
2 cross girders at 4.40 m c /c

Wearing course
RCC wearing course followed by bituminous
wearing course
]


ë Repairs were carried out twice in 1994
and 2001.
ë In 1994 mostly cement grouting was
done which could not have served the
purpose.
ë In 2001, 3 spans were tackled by epoxy
grouting, but pot holes to slabs were
not treated.
  
 

ë Considerable holes in deck slab with spalling
of concrete and virtually no bond between
concrete and steel. Reinforcement broken at
many places.

ë At number of places in bottom bulb of girders,

concrete had not reached due to congestion of
reinforcement & heavy cracks observed in
girders with porous & spalled concrete. Heavy
vibrations observed with vehicle movement.
  
 

ë In the bottom surface of cantilever portion,
steel was corroded thereby cracking & spalling
of concrete was observed.

ë The wearing course was totally damaged with

heavy leakages in rainy season thereby further
damaging deck slab.

ë Weep holes provided for draining of rain water

over the bridge had been blocked.
  

i
 
 i 
i


  i

   R
]    R

R

 

R  
   
]    R

R

 

R  
  R
 ] 
R

 


  R
 R 
   R

 


  R
  
] 

    !
R 

 " #$
 ] 
%&  
    !
R
 R 

 '  
R

&
%   R

 


 (   %   ] 
%&  R

 


 ) ! R 
   R

 


  * R
 R 
   R

   
 %

 &+


ë To decide exact strength of existing
concrete ultrasonic testing and
rebound hammer testing of girders was
carried out.

ë Concrete found to be porous with

pulse velocity from 2.5 to 3.0 km/sec.

ë Rebound hammer test indicated

average strength of about 14.0 j/mm2.
 

 



ë The quality of concrete was insufficient
in strength to withstand dynamic loads
resulting from movement of very heavy
vehicles. As a matter of fact due to holes
in deck slab, cracks in girders a total
retrofitting was necessary to enhance
the life of structure.
ë the retrofitting work was divided in
several activities member wise.


 



ë Main and cross Girders
Girders were strengthened
by injecting low viscous
epoxy grout (iLV grout .
Holes were drilled at 150 mm
c/c along the cracks by
electric drill and nipples,
then cracks were sealed
with epoxy patching
compound. After grouting,
welded mesh was fixed to
girders & entire girders were
shotcreted.


 



ë Deck ilab
^

  
 


  
  
 


  

   
 
 


 
  







   
 

 



 
   

    
 


 


 



ë Cantilever
u    
 
 

     






 !"#
$! %     
&   
 

 u
&   

 
   
 
 
  

   
'! (  


  u   

& !'    & 
   

 
 
   
 

 



ë Wearing Coat
The Wearing Coat was removed from half
portion i.e. one lane up to deck slab. Holes
were drilled @ 1000 c/c and grouted with
polymer grout. The removed wearing course
was redone with M 35 with superplisizers,
micro silica and polypropelene fibers.
ë The entire lane was relaid with bituminous
concrete.
 R 

ë The girders, which were cracked severely have
shown improvement through out section of
girder. Integrity of girder and strain carrying
capacity has shown significant improvement
with vibrations reduced to great extent.
ë The effectiveness of restoration process was
ascertained by same jDT techniques.
ë The average velocity was 3.75 km/s with
improvement of 25 to 30% and concrete quality
was good.
ë The average compressive strength was 25.0
j/mm2