GPR Testing 2010

049.344.
333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
NON-DESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATION REPORT
BRIDGE DECK CONDITION

ASSESSMENT
Prepared by
Selatin Zogjani
MARCH 2010
0 |Page
049.344.333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
1.0 INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Throughout the 1990s, investment in rehabilitating British Columbian roads was substantially reduced. B.C.s
population has grown 21 per cent since then and has seen an increase in traffic by 14 per cent in the last 5
years alone. Over time, through weathering, traffic loading and age, pavement quality has substantially
deteriorated. This has raised serious safety concerns and required prompt attention.
B.C. has almost 42,000 kilometers of provincial roads and 2,750 bridges and tunnels. Therefore it is important
that maintenance and/or rehabilitation options applied at the appropriate time can renew and extend the life
of our bridges and roads.
Today, highway professionals, engineers and transportation departments require a safe, reliable and nondestructive method to assess the condition of concrete bridges and evaluate roads for pavement preservation,
planning and rehabilitation. Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is used to assess the integrity of buildings,
bridges, pavements, and roads. GPR can evaluate base and sub-base layers with data collection densities not
obtainable by traditional labor-intensive methods, such as coring.
A recent project that has required the use of GPR scanning to precisely locate structural steel was the
Granville St. Bridge in Vancouver. The bridge was required to go through shear capacity upgrades (collapse
prevention) on the bridges concrete girder spans and 12 of the concrete bent pier caps.
In conjunction with Canadian Cutting and Coring (CC&C) we were also involved in the removal of the entire old
Pitt Meadows River Bridge in Pitt Meadows, B.C. This bridge had surpassed its life expectancy and had
deteriorated beyond rehabilitation. GPR is used to provide CC&C with accurate pavement layer thickness,
depth and location of steel reinforcement embedded within the concrete structure, and location of supporting
steel beams below deck. This information helped CC&C to remove the entire 936 ft bridge ahead of schedule
and within budget.
1.2 PURPOSE
This report shows the most modern NDT methodology to accurately and efficiently assess the condition of
concrete structured bridges; to evaluate roads for pavement layer thickness; and to collect data that is
consistent, repeatable, and uniform.
1.3 REPORT LAYOUT

This report is laid out as follows:
Section 1.0 gives an introduction to the report;
Section 2.0 discusses the data collection activities and criteria;
Section 3.0 presents the accuracy and reliability of results;
Section 4.0 conclusions.
1 |Page
049.344.333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
1.4 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR (GPR) METHODOLOGY

Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is a real-time, non-destructive testing (NDT) technique that is commonly used
in:
Concrete inspection (rebar, post-tensioning and fiber optic cables, conduits);
Highway inspection (voids, pipes, pavement thickness);
Bridge deck inspection for condition assessment and maintenance decisions;
Utility pipe detection and mapping;
Airport runway inspection etc.
The technique operates on the principle of transmission, reflection and detection of short duration
electromagnetic pulses from a transducer (antenna with transmitting and receiving electronics) that is moved
across the ground surface.
antenna
X = direction of
antenna movement
Asphalt
concrete
interface
Travel
paths of
radar signal
Top layer of rebar
Reflection wave
Signal amplitude
Fig. 2. Reflected (2.6 GHz) signal from bridge deck
Fig. 3. Example of a radargram from from the concrete deck of the

Pitt River Bridge, Pitt Meadows, BC, Canada
The radargram presented in Fig. 3

represents a data set acquired along a line in
the x-direction. The horizontal axis
corresponds to the length in the x-direction
and the vertical axis is the calculated
penetration depth (time axis).
A GPR system consists of one or more transmitting antennas and one or more receiving antennas. The
electromagnetic waves emitted by the transmitting antenna(s) penetrate into the ground, reflect off buried
objects or geological boundaries, and return to the surface, where they are detected by the receiving antenna.
By measuring the travel-time for the electromagnetic energy to penetrate the ground, reflect off the target,
and return to the surface, an estimate of the size, shape and depth of the target may be made.
GPR is the one of the fastest, most cost-effective, and highest-resolution geophysical methods available to
image the near surface, provided suitable ground conditions are present.
The record produced by the GPR is a continuous, cross-sectional picture or profile of subsurface conditions
within the depth of penetration. A major advantage of GPR is this continuity of recorded vertical profile. Data
is also acquired at a relatively high speed. In some applications, work can be accomplished by using a vehicle
or boat to tow the radar antenna.
2 |Page
049.344.333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
2.0 FIELD SURVEYS

When inspecting bridge decks or other large structures, the use of an acquisition system that produces realtime results is advantageous because of both the reduced obstruction to traffic flow and the reduced in time
in data collecting, recording and post-processing time.
The Granville St. Bridge was being retrofitted to improve its
performance during a major earthquake. The work that started in
February 2009 and ended in December 2009, consisted of upgrading
the north and south concrete approach spans by modifications to
the expansion bearings, installation of new bearings, steel jacketing
of some columns, and concrete encasement of pier cap beams.
The goal of this project was to provide accurate depth and location
of reinforced steel embedded in the concrete pier caps.
Fig. 4. Surveying the underside bridge deck of
the Granville St. Bridge
Fig. 5. Reinforced beams of Granville Street Bridge
Given the accelerated time frames for completion of the project

before the 2010 Winter Olympic Games, the survey was
sectioned to relative small areas (Fig. 5) approximately 1ft by 1ft
(300 x 300mm) at every 3 ft (1m). The girders and the top of the
pier caps were surveyed in over 400 separate locations. In all
locations, surveys were conducted using GSSI system with 1.6
GHz antenna. The accuracy of the information and the real-time
results provided, enabled the client to make daily decisions while
continuing with coring and installations.
Determining the degree of degradation of a bridge can be one of the most difficult problems that infrastructure
inspectors face. Traditional methods of deck condition assessment, such as chain drag, chloride content
measurements, or resistivity methods are slow and labor intensive. Moreover, these methods are unable to
adequately detect early stages of deterioration.
In contrast, nondestructive techniques such as ground
penetrating radar (GPR) and infrared thermography are
non-contact and rapid, i.e., they can test (scan) large
portions of decks in a relatively short time. GPR has been
successful in void and delamination detection.
Fig. 6 shows the radar inspection on the old Pitt Meadows
Bridge (South) designated for demolition. Results were laid
open before the bridge was taken down. During and after
demolition radar results were verified with the help of the
bridge parts where parameters such as the concrete cover
of re-bar were measured manually with a ruler. The radar
inspection was conducted with GSSI (1.6 GHz antenna)
system in reflection profiling mode.
Fig. 6. Manual data acquisition on the Pitt Meadows River

Bridge
3 |Page
049.344.333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
3.0 ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF RESULTS

Visual inspection, chain drag, and hammer sounding methods are still considered valuable tools for assessing
the condition of concrete bridge decks. However, these methods depend on inspectors intuition, which might
lead to inaccurate evaluation and repair decisions. According to a recent study by FHWA, more than 50% of the
inspections performed on bridges using visual inspection led to incorrect results.
Although ground penetrating radar (GPR) is relatively new, it is gaining
acceptance for bridge assessment. The assessment results presented
in this paper show that the GPR technique has the potential to be a
practical and economically viable means for bridge assessment.
To validate the ability of the GPR in measuring the depth of pavement
thickness and the depth and location of rebar, few segments (Fig. 7) of
a demolished bridge were taken as samples for analysis. The slabs are
4ft by 6ft (1.22m by 1.83m) with 13 inches (330 mm) thickness. The
superstructure of the bridge was constructed using cast-in-place
reinforced concrete and was supported by a steel beam system that
was common at that time in highway bridges.
Fig. 7. Specimens of a concrete bridge

deck
Figure 8 shows a GPR line profile (slice) of bridge deck in 2D view. The results shown in Table 1 are a
comparison between the interpreted GPR data and the physical measurements recorded from the bridge deck
specimen. The results show that the GPR has the capability of detecting depth and position of buried objects or
geological boundaries with accuracy greater than 95%.
Distance in meters
Top of Deck
Asphalt
concrete
interface
Rebar layer
GPR method is also proven to determine depth of deterioration with accuracy greater than 80%. In this study
case the GPR data acquisition from the uncontrolled demolished bridge could not be used as accurate
measurements. This is due to too many unknown factors during demolition that could have affected the bridge
deck condition and that results were no longer accurate representation.
Table 1: Comparison of results
Asphalt layer (thickness)

Rebar layer
(depth)
Rebar spacing
(horizontal separation)
Physical Measurement
(in)
(mm)
4 3/4
121
6 1/2
165
10
254
GPR Measurement
(mm)
125
168
256
Accuracy
(%)
96.8
98.2
99.2
4 |Page
049.344.333
044.573.827
info@geoscan.info
www.geoscan.info
3.1 3-D SURVEYS

3D surveys on concrete structures have the potential to
reveal a detailed picture from the interior of concrete
structures. In order to demonstrate this, a 3-D survey
was carried out on a concrete bridge deck that had been
demolished. Data were acquired in a grid format both
along horizontal and vertical lines.
The red horizontal and vertical lines in Fig. 9 represent
the top steel reinforcement layer embedded 6 (165
mm) in the concrete deck.
In the absence of as built drawings of older bridge
decks, 3D imaging of the interior concrete structure is
the most reliable and detailed source of information.
Fig. 9. 3D view of GPR data after processing
4.0 CONCLUSIONS
The pavement layer thickness and the concrete cover of the top layer of rebar were determined with accuracy
greater than 95%. The key difference between radar results and reality was less than 10 mm. In addition the
spacing between single bars was also determined with accuracy above 95%. In addition, the location of the
supporting steel beams below deck were considered relatively accurate to within +/- 2 inches (50mm).
In addition, the data acquired from GPR surveys can be kept on file for a sustained period of time. This data will
play an essential role in future bridge surveys for the application of mapping and monitoring bridge
deterioration over time.
Although GPR offers many advantages over other technologies, but there always be some cases where there
are more appropriate solutions. One of the most important things to note is that GPR may not work effectively
finding deep targets in new concrete. Fresh concrete absorbs the GPR signals and limits penetration. The use of
GPR in the early stages after concrete pouring requires caution and experimentation. GPR becomes more
effective as concrete cures.
GPR resolution limits the estimate of target diameter; however its relative size can often be inferred from the
intensity of the signal. GPR cannot uniquely determine object composition, but responses from metallic or
nonmetallic targets can be differentiated.
5 |Page

GPR Testing 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GPR Testing 2010

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GPR Testing 2010

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

049.344.

NON-DESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATION REPORT

BRIDGE DECK CONDITION

1.3 REPORT LAYOUT

1.4 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR (GPR) METHODOLOGY

Top layer of rebar

Fig. 2. Reflected (2.6 GHz) signal from bridge deck

Fig. 3. Example of a radargram from from the concrete deck of the

The radargram presented in Fig. 3

2.0 FIELD SURVEYS

Fig. 5. Reinforced beams of Granville Street Bridge

Given the accelerated time frames for completion of the project

Fig. 6. Manual data acquisition on the Pitt Meadows River

3.0 ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF RESULTS

Fig. 7. Specimens of a concrete bridge

Table 1: Comparison of results

Asphalt layer (thickness)

3.1 3-D SURVEYS

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.