1998
DOI: 10.15554/pcij.11011998.72.84
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance of Strand Splice Repairs in Prestressed Concrete Bridges

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“… Repaired strands continue to have section loss between 15 and 25% for the 3-sigma population. (15% is based on previous literature recommendations (Harries et al 2012 ; Zobel and Jirsa 1998 ; Gangi et al 2017 ). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“… Repaired strands continue to have section loss between 15 and 25% for the 3-sigma population. (15% is based on previous literature recommendations (Harries et al 2012 ; Zobel and Jirsa 1998 ; Gangi et al 2017 ). …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Connectivity must be ensured for the sacrificial zinc to protect the strands and/or rebar steel. Moreover, this methodology can be sensitive to fatigue due to the repetitive nature of highway and railroad bridge loading, and they are not recommended when more than 15% of the strands are damaged (Harries et al 2012 ; Zobel and Jirsa 1998 ; Gangi et al 2017 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…With reference to traditional repair techniques, laboratory investigations by Zobel, Carrasquillo, and Fowler (1997) were conducted to evaluate application methods and performance characteristics of several prepackaged repair materials combined with pressure epoxy injection as well as strand splice assemblies. Under the repetitive nature of highway loading, repair methods such as internal strand splices and external post-tensioning were found to be only partially satisfactory because they could not restore the ultimate strength of the damaged member (Olson, French, and Leon 1992;Zobel and Jirsa 1998). Other studies were conducted on prestressed and nonprestressed concrete deep beams predamaged in shear and strengthened with steel clamping units that acted as external stirrups (Teng et al 1996).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In "Evaluation and Repair of Impact-Damaged Prestressed Concrete Bridge Girders", Zobel, Jirsa, Fowler and Carrasquillo (1997) report on the repair of a damaged prestressed concrete beam removed from a railroad bridge in Austin, TX. Companion papers include Jones (1996), Feldman et al (1998), Zobel, Carrasquillo and Fowler (1997, and Zobel and Jirsa (1998). The objective of the beam test program was to study a variety of nondestructive damage assessment techniques, investigate the effectiveness of internal strand splices and to evaluate various patching materials and methods.…”
Section: 2 Beam Testing and Repairmentioning
confidence: 99%