1996
DOI: 10.1061/(asce)0887-3801(1996)10:2(97)
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

System for Bridge Management in a Rural Environment

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is referred to as the isotonicity principle. Table 1 shows the list of possible variables that can be considered for the analysis (Gralund and Puckett, 1996;Woodward et al, 2001;Chassiakos et al, 2005;Hai, 2008;Valenzuela et al, 2010). The reasons for exclusion of a particular variable are given under the 'remarks' column of Table 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This is referred to as the isotonicity principle. Table 1 shows the list of possible variables that can be considered for the analysis (Gralund and Puckett, 1996;Woodward et al, 2001;Chassiakos et al, 2005;Hai, 2008;Valenzuela et al, 2010). The reasons for exclusion of a particular variable are given under the 'remarks' column of Table 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the bridge health index, the other criteria used for deciding the maintenance priority are: importance of the bridge, deck area of the bridge, the maintenance cost required, traffic volume, age of the bridge, etc. (Gralund and Puckett, 1996;Woodward et al, 2001;Chassiakos et al, 2005;Hai, 2008;Valenzuela et al, 2010). The maintenance priority of bridges is determined on the basis of the availability of information about the aforementioned factors along with the bridge health index.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Some systems were also developed at the state and regional levels like those in Texas and Indiana. There were also specific systems developed for bridge management in a rural environment and other situations as described by Gralund and Puckett (1996).…”
Section: Damage Typementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bridges or projects are then ranked according to the values of these indices, which determines the priority of each project [5]. The FHWA sufficiency rating is computed using the structural-condition rating from the inspection reports of bridge components and other related information [6]. The sufficiency rating procedure is a method of evaluating highway bridge condition data by calculating four separate factors − structural adequacy and safety, serviceability and functional obsolescence, essentiality for public use, and special reductions − to obtain a numeric value which is indicative of bridge sufficiency to remain in the service.…”
Section: Performance Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%