<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=PHNlYXJjaD48cGFyYW1zPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJzdWJqZWN0aWQiIHZhbHVlPSIxNzk3IiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJkYXRlaW4iIHZhbHVlPSI3MzAiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9InN1YmplY3Rsb2dpYyIgdmFsdWU9Im9yIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJ0ZXJtc2xvZ2ljIiB2YWx1ZT0ib3IiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9ImxvY2F0aW9uIiB2YWx1ZT0iMTYiIC8+PC9wYXJhbXM+PGZpbHRlcnMgLz48cmFuZ2VzIC8+PHNvcnRzPjxzb3J0IGZpZWxkPSJwdWJsaXNoZWQiIG9yZGVyPSJkZXNjIiAvPjwvc29ydHM+PHBlcnNpc3RzPjxwZXJzaXN0IG5hbWU9InJhbmdldHlwZSIgdmFsdWU9InB1Ymxpc2hlZGRhdGUiIC8+PC9wZXJzaXN0cz48L3NlYXJjaD4=" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>High Load Hit Prevention</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2562331</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many department owned bridges are impacted with over height vehicles every year, however, there are many bridges that
have been struck repeatedly. Bridges being repeatedly struck by over height vehicles leads to structural damage to
department infrastructure as well as impedance to the traveled roadway(s). This damage can cause immediate lane or road
closures while the damage is inspected and repaired, shortened service life of the structure, and potential bridge component or
structure replacement. In order to address this problem, the department seeks to identify methods to locate and inform over
height drivers prior to striking the structure in addition to detecting impacts. Not having these methods will allow over height
vehicles to continue to damage department structures and for damage to go unreported. Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) has interest in identifying
which method(s) of over height vehicle impact prevention is best suitable for structures susceptible to damage. The
department is expecting this research to yield the implementation of technology to reduce damage of bridges caused by over
height vehicles impacts. Additionally, Michigan has dozens of bridges located within navigable waterways and following the
collapse of the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore, MDOT would like to evaluate the inherent risk of damage from vessel
allision at those bridges with substructure units within the waterway.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:22:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2562331</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guidelines and Best Practices for Determining the Life Cycle Cost of Various Superstructure Types</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731917</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The selection of superstructure type during the study phase of a design project is currently made based on the estimated
construction cost and a subjective and inexact assessment of the life cycle cost of the structure. This method of selecting the
preferred alternative has led to the introduction of bias into the decision-making process and tends to lead to the selection of
concrete superstructures more often than steel superstructures. Rarely is this decision tied to objective data based on historic
maintenance records of similar superstructures and has never accounted for 
Michigan Department of Transportation's (MDOT’S) ability to extend the life of steel
superstructures by incorporating bolted and welded repairs, which are not possible on concrete superstructures. Disregarding
this information in the selection of a superstructure type increases the risk of not using the available bridge funding as
efficiently and effectively as possible.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2026 10:05:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731917</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Examination of Light-Based Directed Vehicle to Everything Communications Systems for Bridge Strike Detection (Using ImpLi-Fi)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2727317</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In this proposed project, the ImpLi-Fi team - consisting of the University of Michigan-Dearborn and SpectraLux, LLC - will deploy a reliable and directed light-based wireless infrastructure-to-vehicle communication technology to warn at-risk trucks of imminent bridge strikes. Once shown to be feasible, the same concept can also be extended to flash flood warning, wrong-way driving, etc. Unlike wireless communications using radio-frequency (RF), which are always omni-directional, ImpLi-Fi uses light, allowing transmissions to be focused so that they only target specific impacted vehicles, thereby avoiding the risk of annoying/desensitizing other parallel road users.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 15:22:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2727317</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Load Capacity of Temporary Railcar Bridges in Western North Carolina</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2726549</link>
      <description><![CDATA[As a result of Hurricane Helene in late 2024, the spanning members of nearly three dozen temporary bridges in Western North Carolina (WNC) are (or were recently) comprised fully or partially of repurposed flatbed railroad cars.  Many of these bridges will need to stay in operation for long durations before permanent replacements can be completed, necessitating a detailed study of these temporary structures, especially from the perspective of load rating.  The bulk of published literature on railroad flatcar (RRFC) bridges is generally focused on permanent structures with composite concrete decks, which the temporary structures in WNC do not have.  Additionally, prior work on RRFC bridges with non-composite steel or timber decks and/or non-composite asphalt wearing surfaces is generally focused on RRFCs of a different geometry and/or span than the RRFCs currently in use in WNC.  As such, proposed study of the WNC RRFCs is justified by a goal to develop load rating methods and tools for the current temporary applications (or similar applications in the future).  In addition, a secondary goal involves determining the rated load capacities of existing RRFCs in a variety of potential future use scenarios, as the Department plans to store RRFCs for future use once existing temporary structures are removed from service. A chart of load ratings for different types of flatcars in different conditions supported on different spans would be useful for future deployments.

The proposed work will accomplish the goals by first measuring the geometry and documenting the condition of a wide range of existing RRFC bridges in WNC.  An estimated 10-15 bridges will be measured using traditional methods.  These measurements are necessary because railroad flatcar designs are not standardized – many manufacturers have existed over the years that have produced many specific flatcar designs for different railroad specifications.  Thus, while the RRFCs in use in WNC appear to be of one general type (Type FM, F-class, 90’ length), at least two variations are currently in temporary bridge service in the state.

With the likely range of geometry and structural condition of the WNC railcar fleet documented, finite element models will be developed in Abaqus to reflect idealized versions of this geometry for all significant flatcar variants in service.  Rolling loads will be applied numerically to the models, enabling a detailed study of RRFC bridge performance under a variety of conditions. Parameters can then be varied in the models to study the effects of material properties, span lengths, damage levels, adjacent connected flatcars, and other relevant factors.

Critical to developing a finite element model (FEM) will be validating that model with experimental data prior to running the parametric analyses.  Data from limited field testing will be available from recently completed preliminary work, but full-scale experimental tests are proposed as part of this research.  Two full-scale railroad flatcars are proposed to be tested to failure in the structures laboratory at NC State University or at a North Carolina Department of Transportation storage yard.  Data will be collected during each test to include loads, deflections, and strains, enabling validation and benchmarking of the FEM.  Together, the experimental and analytical results will be used to create outputs useful for load rating temporary bridges, including proposed load rating methods and simplified design tools, such as capacity charts, specific to the types of cars in WNC and a variety of possible RRFC bridge configurations. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2026 08:53:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2726549</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Early Warning for Oregon's Aging Post Tensioned Bridges: Proactive Detection, Longer Life, Lower Risk</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2725349</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This research tackles the urgent need to safely manage Oregon's aging post-tensioned (PT) concrete bridges, which rely on high-strength steel tendons but are prone to hidden corrosion from grout voids, water ingress, and outdated grouting methods. Rising risks of tendon failure, cracking, prestress loss, or collapse drive the development of a risk-based, scalable protocol. It includes a vulnerability screening score, a centralized PT bridge database with corrosion-relevant attributes, structural modeling linking observable changes (camber, strains, natural frequencies) to internal damage, proven nondestructive evaluation (NDE) methods (ultrasound, ground penetrating radar (GPR)), and practical inspection/monitoring guidelines demonstrated on a case study bridge. Integration into the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Bridge Inspection Program Manual supports proactive network-level screening, prioritized inspections, service life extension, and risk reduction—enhancing safety and reliability of Oregon transportation infrastructure.
OBJECTIVES 
The project equips ODOT with practical, risk-based tools to proactively manage PT bridge safety and serviceability. Main objectives are to: (1) create a vulnerability screening score that prioritizes bridges by corrosion risk factors (grout quality, duct material, exposure conditions); (2) build a centralized statewide PT bridge database for efficient network assessment; (3) develop a scalable protocol integrating visual inspections, NDE techniques (ultrasound, GPR), and damage-tolerance analysis to detect defects, predict remaining service life, and direct interventions; and (4) field-test the approach on a case study bridge and embed the resulting guidance in the ODOT Bridge Inspection Program Manual. These steps will extend bridge life, reduce hidden corrosion risks, optimize inspection efforts, lower unexpected failure potential, and enable cost-effective statewide maintenance.
This research equips ODOT with risk-based tools for safer, more efficient PT bridge management. Key benefits include early detection of tendon corrosion, extended service life through targeted inspections, improved efficiency via network screening and prioritization, major cost savings by avoiding emergencies and premature replacements, consistent statewide protocols in ODOT manuals, and reduced risks to workers and the public. Overall, it supports safer, more resilient, and cost-effective stewardship of Oregon’s transportation infrastructure.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 16:13:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2725349</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Design Guidelines for Bridge Pile Foundations Subjected to Combined Inertial and Liquefaction-Induced Lateral Spreading Loads</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2724825</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Earthquake induced soil liquefaction can result in significant displacements in sloping ground. This type of displacement is referred to as lateral spreading and is considered a substantial hazard to Oregon bridges. One current challenge facing bridge foundation design is the knowledge gap regarding appropriate selection of load factors for combining lateral spreading loads (kinematic) and superstructure inertial loads (inertia). Unfortunately, there is no consensus in design codes for how to combine inertial and kinematic loads. Failure to address this knowledge gap presents challenges for Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) engineers and designers. If lateral spreading and superstructure inertial loads interact during an earthquake, neglecting their combined effects could lead to inadequate and unsafe designs. Conversely, overconservatively combining these loads may result in costly, non-constructible foundations, particularly for piles passing through stiff, non-liquefiable crusts overlying deep liquefiable soils on sloped grounds. 

The primary objective of this research is to solidify ODOT’s design guidelines for combining superstructure inertial and lateral spreading loads in a pseudo-static analysis. The inertial and kinematic load interaction factors will be characterized by accounting for differences in seismicity in Eastern and Western Oregon, foundation types, and the complexity levels of design methods utilized in various ODOT projects. The proposed methodology for combining superstructure inertial and lateral spreading loads in a pseudo-static analysis will be detailed in a practice-ready recommended amendment to the ODOT Geotechnical Design Manual (GDM) and ODOT Bridge Design Manual (BDM).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 14:50:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2724825</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Efficacy, Advancement, and Monitoring of Carbon Fiber Composite Cable (CFCC)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2724770</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Carbon Fiber Composite Cable (CFCC), and the Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) materials are being used for prestressing
applications in Michigan bridge rehabilitation and replacement projects with the most recent generation of CFCC is a 0.7-inch strand
configuration. The quantity of stands is similar to conventional strands, and concomitant updated design criteria. Determining the
efficacy of the new 0.7-inch CFCC strand long-term behavior is essential for future design and construction considerations.
Monitoring the CFCC elements in newly constructed bridges (with 0.7-inch strands) and some prior construction (from OR14-039)
will provide an understanding of the long-term behavior and realizations of recommendations on future designs, and continued
considerations of field deployment.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2026 10:05:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2724770</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Automated QA/QC and Guidance for Inspecting Robotically-Welded Steel Structures
</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2719306</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this research is to develop a quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) process for inspecting welded steel structures using infrared thermography (IRT), automate the front-end (i.e., data collection) and back-end (i.e., data analysis and decision-making) of the QA/QC process, and create publicly accessible resources and guidance on implementing IRT-based assessment.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 09:25:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2719306</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Cracks of Low-P Rapid Set Concrete in Deck Repairs: Analysis, Prevention, and Alternatives</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2714454</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The occurrence of full-depth transverse cracks in Low-P rapid-set concrete highlights the need to investigate the cracking mechanisms in repaired bridge decks, as well as to develop prevention strategies and alternative materials.

OBJECTIVE: The overall objective of this project is to analyze the correlations between cracks in Low-P rapid set concrete and factors including concrete mix design, construction practices, curing conditions, and the service environment/weather conditions of bridge decks. This analysis aims to deepen the understanding of cracking mechanisms and to develop strategies for preventing crack formation in this special concrete. The outcomes will guide the treatment of deck repair materials for Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) projects, ultimately enhancing the durability and longevity of repaired bridge decks.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:19:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2714454</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Risk-Based and Cost-Effective Agency Verification of Contractor-Collected Pavement and Bridge Profiles</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712193</link>
      <description><![CDATA[State departments of transportation (DOTs) recognize that pavement and bridge smoothness is a key indicator of performance and public satisfaction. As state DOT staffing levels have declined, contractors have become increasingly responsible for collecting profile data, calculating smoothness indices, and sometimes determining pay factors. While federal regulations require independent verification of contractor data used for acceptance decisions, agencies remain uncertain about the level of verification needed to ensure accuracy and judicious allocation of public funds.

Current practices for validation and verification vary widely across state DOTs. Some agencies collect independent profiles on a subset of projects, while others rely on partial sampling, comparisons with contractor data, or limited review processes. The statistical reliability and risk implications of these approaches are not well understood. Additionally, advances in data collection technologies, such as high-speed profilers, have increased the volume of data, challenging traditional verification approaches. There is a need for research that helps state DOTs accurately determine pavement life through the potential use of emerging technologies and improved verification of contractor-collected pavement and bridge profile data.

The objective of this research is to develop a guide and supporting tool to assist state DOTs in conducting cost-effective, risk-based verification of contractor-collected pavement and bridge profiles.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 17:10:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712193</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Control of Cracking in Concrete Bridge Decks</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712183</link>
      <description><![CDATA[According to AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (LRFD BDS), there are two main methods of bridge deck design. The more analytical “Strip Method” tends to place a limit on rebar spacing. The limit is based on crack width limitations developed for building beams and adapted in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) for flexural reinforcement in deck slabs several decades ago. The implied maximum crack width, according to the provisions of AASHTO, Article 5.6.7, for moderate exposure to corrosion is 0.017 in. Such limitation has been shown in practice to be prohibitive when high-strength rebars, whether corrosion resistant or not, are used. In the meantime, there does not appear to be adequate evidence that longitudinal cracks across the main transverse reinforcement are as dominant as transverse cracks across the secondary longitudinal bars. The second method is the “Empirical Design Method” in Chapter 9 of AASHTO LRFD BDS. This method gives prescriptive reinforcement based on full-scale testing performed in Ontario, Canada, in the 1970s. Interestingly, the Empirical Design Method results in lower rebar quantities than the more rigorous Strip Method. Further, the Empirical Design Method has no requirement for flexural crack control equations. Thus, it appears that the mechanics of load transfer in deck slabs need to be fundamentally examined.

The objectives of this research, limited to reinforced concrete bridge decks supported on structural steel or concrete girders, are: (1) To develop a comprehensive understanding of the causes of cracking in cast-in-place concrete bridge decks that are placed on girders. This may include full-depth precast concrete bridge decks. (2) To develop methods of controlling cracks by the identified causes. Such methods shall include concrete material properties, rebar types and properties, chemical admixtures, and curing methods. (3)        To review and modify the current AASHTO provisions relative to crack control. This would include the provisions of Article 5.6.7—Control of Cracking by Distribution of Reinforcement. Such revisions should be based on a rational interpretation of the available body of knowledge in addition to actual field demonstrations. (4) To examine the serviceability requirements for the Strip Method (Article 5.6.7) and the Empirical Design Method (Article 9.7.2).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 16:01:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712183</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Risk Mitigation and Update of Highway Bridge Design Guidance for Vessel Collisions</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712182</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 1991, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) adopted the Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridges (GSVCD) as a result of the 1980 collapse of the Sunshine Skyway Bridge and following a research project sponsored by 11 states and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The GSVCD requires that bridge structures be designed to minimize the risk of collapse after being struck by a ship. The second edition of the GSVCD (2009/current) was developed to incorporate lessons learned from the use of the 1991 GSVCD, incorporate the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) methodology, clarify the risk procedure, and highlight evaluation of existing bridges using the revised GSVCD.

On March 18, 2025, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued the report Safeguarding Bridges from Vessel Strikes: Need for Vulnerability Assessment and Risk Reduction Strategies in the wake of the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse by ship collision. The report recommended evaluation of 68 bridges for risk of catastrophic collapse from vessel strikes and potential development of risk reduction plans.

A recent workshop on “Large Ship Impacts on Bridge Piers” was organized by the City College of New York and the University of Michigan and attended by more than 700 engineers and researchers from around the world. The workshop provided extensive feedback from leading experts and engineers on needs and gaps in this area.

Since the AASHTO GSVCD publication, a lot of research studies have been carried out nationally and internationally.

The objective of the research is to identify needs and gaps for risk mitigation of large vessel or ship collisions and update the AASHTO GSVCD and the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (LRFD BDS). The research will be based on the evolving state of practice, the growth of the shipping industry and data collection, the feedback from applying the existing Guide Specs and the LRFD BDS, and recent advancement of national and international research. The updated guidance will build on the existing design guidance and apply to new bridge design and existing bridge evaluation, risk assessment, bridge protection, and/or countermeasures and retrofit associated with risk of highway bridge vessel collision.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 15:51:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712182</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Rewrite and Modernize the Manual for Bridge Evaluation for Compliance with the Revised National Bridge Inspection Standards</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712177</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Manual for Bridge Evaluation (MBE) is the primary manual for load rating of bridges and also includes important information regarding inspection and asset management. Bridge owners rely on the manual to remain compliant with the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS), but also to maintain safety of the traveling public without unnecessarily restricting commerce by overconservative load ratings. The MBE has been revised multiple times to attempt to keep up with research, but due to the size and complexity of the manual, these updates have been limited to individual sections of the manual, leading to inconsistencies. Addressing these inconsistencies will help bridge owners maintain the safety of their bridges without unnecessarily restricting commerce. The MBE needs to be comprehensively updated to incorporate changes in federal legislation and regulations, including (1) element-level bridge inspection on the National Highway System, (2) bridge management system as part of Transportation Asset Management Plan, (3) NBIS, and (4) the Specification for the National Bridge Inventory (SNBI).

Additionally, the MBE updates have not kept pace with innovations, research, and best practices, such as nondestructive evaluation techniques, underwater imaging, uncrewed inspection systems, bridge asset management systems, oversize/overweight permitting, posting, nonredundant steel tension members, and risk-based inspection intervals. Past updates lacked a holistic approach, which led to inconsistencies throughout the MBE. Some MBE topics may benefit from consolidating existing documents into the MBE, relocating existing MBE topics to other AASHTO documents, or creating independent manuals to streamline the user experience. NCHRP Project 20-123(21) is developing a plan to systematically update the AASHTO MBE. This project would implement the findings of that roadmap.

The objective of this research is to implement the Roadmap for the Rewrite of the Manual for Bridge Evaluation based on the recommendations from NCHRP Project 20-123(21). ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 14:57:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712177</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Establishment of Personnel Certification and Quality Control and Quality Assurance Processes for Nondestructive Testing of Concrete and Steel Bridge Elements</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712174</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The certification of personnel performing nondestructive testing (NDT) of steel and concrete bridges in field inspections is fragmented between certification bodies and is inconsistent from one owner to the next. However, the knowledge, training, and experience of technicians performing NDT is paramount in obtaining consistent and accurate data on the condition of the structure so that key asset management decisions can be made. Studies have shown that even technicians certified and practicing in other sectors, such as nuclear or oil and gas, underperform when placed on a bridge field inspection project. While some literature exists on the effects of this resulting gap in knowledge and experience, no process exists for personnel certification of engineers or technicians performing NDT for bridges. Additionally, there is no framework for quality controls or quality assurance (QA) processes that could be used or specified by owners to establish a minimum standard of care for NDT protocols.

Comparative studies quantifying how different certification schemes affect field measurement repeatability are limited, and there is little published evidence on cost-benefit tradeoffs for implementing bridge-specific certification and QA programs at state or national scales. Overall, the literature highlights the need for a national or regulatory framework that adapts ISO 9712 and SNT-TC-1A principles to bridge environments—incorporating field performance testing, bridge-specific competencies, continuing education, and systematic QA oversight—to ensure uniform NDT practices across transportation agencies.

The objective of this research is to study industry certification and qualification practices for bridge inspection and evaluation, assessing their effectiveness through a national and international literature review and a survey of bridge owners worldwide. The study will also examine certification protocols used in other industries, such as energy, aviation, and manufacturing, that employ NDT in construction, in-service inspections, and maintenance. The findings will inform the development of guidelines for a consistent, reliable certification program for NDT technicians.

The project should establish minimum personnel certification requirements and QA processes for transportation agencies to ensure uniform results across technicians applying NDT to concrete and steel bridge members. Recommendations will cover common NDT methods, including ground penetrating radar, ultrasonic and advanced ultrasonic testing, impact echo, infrared imaging, laser crack detection, and automated sounding. A framework will also be developed to help owners implement certification and QA for other NDT methods.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 12:57:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712174</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Implementing Displacement-Based Seismic Design and Streamlining Low Seismic Zone Design Requirements in the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712168</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Seismic design for roadway bridges has evolved over the past several decades, moving away from traditional force-based approaches toward displacement-based and performance-based methodologies. The current force-based provisions in the AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications (BDS) rely on approximate relationships between force reduction factors and expected structural performance, which have been shown to be conservative in some cases but not others. In contrast, displacement-based seismic design provides a more direct and reliable relationship between design methods and expected bridge performance.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) allows both force-based and displacement-based approaches, potentially resulting in different design outcomes depending on the method selected. Additionally, recent advancements in performance-based seismic design and seismic isolation have not been fully integrated into the BDS. For example, current performance-based guidelines reference outdated ground motion models, while the Seismic Guide Specifications lack sufficient detail in areas such as steel substructures and emerging design approaches for bridge pier walls. Additionally, the seismic provisions are distributed across multiple sections of the BDS and related guide specifications, making it difficult for practitioners to identify pertinent requirements. There is a need for research to develop a streamlined framework for seismic bridge design for all seismic regions that reflects current research and practice, and to update current guidance.

The objectives of this research are to (1) develop a guide suitable for practitioners in all seismic regions that synthesizes recent advances in seismic analysis and design, and consolidates seismic design requirements; (2) provide a streamlined framework for a performance-based approach to seismic bridge design and seismic isolation; and (3) prepare a standalone memorandum with language suitable for AASHTO’s consideration in evaluating potential updates to the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design and a new seismic design section within the BDS.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 12:36:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2712168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>