<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" 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>BRIDGE OVERSTRESS CRITERIA. FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/422298</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report presents a reliability-based procedure to determine the optimal allowable loads on highway bridges considering both static and dynamic effects.  A truck weight (bridge) formula was developed to provide acceptable levels of safety for bridges designed according to the 15th edition of the AASHTO specifications.  Using the safety index as a measure of safety, the truck weight formula was developed to produce a safety index value of 2.5.  Twelve bridges of different material types, span lengths and configurations were analyzed for truck loads corresponding to the proposed truck weight formula.  The results of the rating evaluation of these bridges showed large variations between the rating values for LFD and WSD procedures and inventory or operating stresses.  Application of the higher truck weight limits to a large sample of bridges from the National Bridge Inventory indicated an increase in the number of deficient bridges if the inventory rating stress is used in the evaluation procedure.  However, very few of the existing bridges would be considered deficient if the operating ratings are used. A fatigue analysis determined the relative fatigue damage caused by various new truck types and traffic scenarios that might result from changes in truck regulations.  The fatigue calculations for actual bridges suggest that many existing bridges would not be affected by the possible truck regulation changes.  Even for bridges with fatigue stresses above the fatigue limit, the reduced fatigue lives with the new regulations may still be sufficient for practical requirements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 28 Jun 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/422298</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRUCK WEIGHT EFFECTS ON BRIDGE COSTS. FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/369129</link>
      <description><![CDATA[States are facing strong pressure to allow heavier truck weights.  Such increases in weight place a heavy burden on the bridge system which already suffers many structural deficiencies.  Ohio is considering increases in weight through a permit system which would allow the collection of funds to maintain the safety and service life of the existing bridge system.  This study has examined the statistics of both the Ohio State and non-State owned bridges under a very large variety of possible changes in truck weight regulations.  Bridge cost models have been derived to cover new bridge construction, rehabilitation of capacities of existing bridges and reduced service life due to fatigue.  For each portion of the bridge cost, the entire population of Ohio's bridges have been surveyed.  Current legal ratings have been analyzed and expected changes due to weight law scenarios have been computed using simple span and continuous span bridge behavior analyses for bending moments.  For each weight scenario, the overall required AASHTO HS design level required was assessed along with added construction cost.  Further, the number of bridges that will need to be strengthened along with these costs was determined. Finally, a fatigue cost was estimated to be assessed for each crossing of a bridge by either a truck using a new weight regulation or falling into the superload class.  Total bridge costs are computed for several hundreds of permit weight types and combined for both State and non-State bridges.  The report also discusses the effects of heavier trucks on bridge design practices, permit fees, truck weight enforcement needs and implementation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2002 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/369129</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT POLICY IN THE MIDCONTINENT CORRIDOR</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/542850</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Truck size and weight (TS&W) policies and regulations have an effect on the types of trucks that move on highways, and underlie the impact of those vehicles on the infrastructure, the economy, the environment, and roadway safety. Understanding trucking activity and freight movement is also necessary for evaluating the effects of policies in a region or along a corridor. This article provides insights regarding the current situation of TS&W regulations in the midcontinent corridor, with a view to assist decisionmakers in addressing policy questions from the perspective of this corridor.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/542850</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IMPACT OF 44 000-KG (97,000-LB) SIX-AXLE SEMITRAILER TRUCKS ON BRIDGES ON RURAL AND URBAN U.S. INTERSTATE SYSTEM</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/540802</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The impact of a 44,000-kg (97,000-lb) tridem semitrailer truck on bridges on the urban and rural U.S. Interstate system is examined.  The impacts are determined using a suite of models developed for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) policy use, and both agency and user costs are estimated.  Bridges on the Interstate system that are already deficient at current loads are excluded from this analysis, which utilizes the National Bridge Inventory database and reports results for the rural and urban Interstate systems.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 1998 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/540802</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MEASUREMENT OF TRUCK LOAD ON BRIDGES IN DETROIT, MICHIGAN, AREA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/469455</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of the study was to determine the actual truck loads on selected bridges in the Detroit, Michigan, area.  Seven representative bridges were selected.  The measurements were taken by using a weigh-in-motion system.  For each measured truck, the record included vehicle speed, axle spacing, and axle loads.  The variation in the accuracy of the gross vehicle weight (GVW) measurement was estimated to be +/-5% and that of the axle weights was estimated to be +/-20% for most types of trucks.  Selected bridges were instrumented, and measurements were taken for 2 or 3 consecutive days.  There was a considerable variation in traffic volumes and the weights of trucks, even within a given geographic area.  The estimated average daily truck traffic varied from 500 to 1,500 in one direction.  The maximum observed truck weights varied from 360 kN (81 kip) to 1100 kN (250 kip).  The maximum observed axle weights varied from 90 kN (20 kip) to 225 kN (50 kip).  The percentage of trucks exceeding the legal limits in Michigan varied depending on the road.  The heaviest GVWs and axle weights were observed on Interstate highways.  The largest percentage of overloaded trucks was observed for 11-axle vehicles.  The maximum lane moments and shears from the trucks varied between 0.6 and 2.0 times AASHTO load and resistance factor design values.  It was found that there are similarities in GVW and lane moment distributions.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/469455</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRUCK OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/474203</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This synthesis will be of interest to engineers and administrators responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of highways and bridges, as well as to engineering design consultants.  It will also provide useful information to the trucking industry, especially to designers, as they consider the highway interface with regard to the design and operation of heavy trucks.  It provides information on the influence of the design and operating characteristics of heavy trucks on highway design, maintenance, and operational performance.  Designers of heavy trucks and of the highway infrastructure that is needed to support them, are faced with changing requirements for both systems to operate effectively and safely.  Because truck designs tend to evolve more rapidly than highways can be rebuilt or redesigned, inefficiencies can result.  This report of the Transportation Research Board describes heavy truck design factors and operating characteristics and their influence on highway planning, design, and performance.  The key truck operating characteristics, such as weights and sizes, mechanical properties, turning requirements, accelerating and braking, crash avoidance, pavement and bridge loadings, and the effects on traffic flow are discussed.  To more clearly illustrate the subject, matrices of truck and roadway characteristics that are associated with each of these elements are presented.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/474203</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EXAMINATION OF BRIDGE LIVE LOAD MODEL IN KOREA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/483078</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently it has been reported in many countries, including Korea, that bridges have been seriously damaged due to the increasing volume of overloaded vehicles.  Since the safety of bridges is highly related to the design load level and extreme effects induced by traffic loads during their lifetime, it is important to determine the design live load to properly represent the load effect of the current truck traffic.  The live load depends on many parameters of truck and traffic characteristics.  The objective of this study was to calculate the maximum effect of truck loadings based on the survey data collected, and to evaluate the current live load model in Korean Bridge Design Code.  Several citation data were collected and two cases were considered: single truck and two trucks on the bridge.  The maximum live load effects for simple span and two equal continuous span bridges were calculated.  As a result of this study, the effect of live load models in the current design code is relatively low at very short spans and medium spans (about 40-50m).  Also, results show similar trends as the new live load model in AASHTO.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/483078</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>LONG COMBINATION VEHICLES IN QUEBEC AND ONTARIO</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/302465</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper investigates the feasibility of allowing extra-long trucks--"long combination vehicles" or "LCVs"--to operate in Quebec and Ontario.  Three specific trucks are contemplated:  the Rocky Mountain double, a double-trailer combination consisting of a 45- or 48-foot semitrailer and a 28-foot pup trailer; the Turnpike double, two 45- or two 48-foot semitrailers and/or trailers; and the Triple, three 28-foot and sometimes 27-foot semitrailers and/or trailers. Currently these LCVs operate on major highways in Quebec at weights of up to 62.5 tons for approximately nine months of the year.  The scenario envisaged here is the year-round operation of these LCVs from Riviere du Loup-to-Windsor along all four- (or more) lane divided highways within this corridor at the current Ontario truck size limit of 63.5 tons.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/302465</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FATIGUE-LOAD MODELS FOR GIRDER BRIDGES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/468196</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The authors of this technical paper develop a fatigue-live-load model for steel girder bridges.  The database for the model is created from weigh-in-motion (WIM) measurements.  Five bridge structures were chosen for testing to establish the site-specific truck parameters and component-specific stress spectrum.  The database includes 22,000 truck files, each consisting of gross vehicle weight (GVW), axle weights, and axle spacing. Measurements of the stress cycles were taken at midspan of all bridge girders and are presented as cumulative distribution functions.  Through the WIM measurements, the authors confirm that truck loads are strongly site-specific.  The findings also reveal a significant variation in stress spectrum between girders.  A three-axle truck is proposed to represent truck traffic; for sites with 10- and 11-axle trucks, an additional four-axle truck is proposed.  The newly developed model is verified using fatigue-damage analysis to compare the model with measured results.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Nov 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/468196</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IMPACT OF ADOPTING CANADIAN INTERPROVINCIAL AND CANAMEX LIMITS ON VEHICLE SIZE AND WEIGHT ON THE MONTANA STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/465283</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The impact on the Montana state highway system of adopting Canadian Interprovincial, Canamex, or Canamex Short limits on vehicle size and weight was determined.  Canadian Interprovincial vehicle configurations were developed based on an investigation of vehicle safety, economy, and damage to the highway system.  Canamex and Canamex Short limits are hybrid size and weight systems that retain existing Montana axle weight limits coupled with Canadian gross vehicle weights.  All scenarios allow vehicles to operate at higher gross weights than are presently allowed in Montana.  The impact of these vehicles on the highway system was determined by a) developing traffic streams that included these vehicles, b) determining the engineering impact these traffic streams would have on existing bridges and pavements and on the future designs required to support these vehicles, and c) assigning a cost to these impacts based on the current cost of equivalent work.  These analyses found that 16 to 20% of the bridges system-wide are deficient to carry Canadian Interprovincial vehicles (above and beyond the bridges already deficient under HS20 loads).  Incremental deficiencies under Canamex and Canamex Short vehicles are between 1 and 3% of the bridges system-wide.  The results were found to be sensitive to the assumed level of bridge capacity and the specific segment of the system being considered (i.e., interstate, primary, etc.).  Long term pavement demands under all scenarios considered increase by less than 5% compared to demands under the existing traffic stream.  Based on these impacts, an increase in equivalent uniform annual cost (EUAC) for bridges and pavements of 12 to 42 million dollars was calculated for Canadian Interprovincial limits.  These costs represent a 11 to 36% increase in cost over that projected for the same activities under the existing traffic stream.  An increase in EUAC of 4 to 7 million dollars was calculated for Canamex limits, which represents a 4 to 6% increase in cost over that projected for the same activities under the existing traffic stream.  Similar but slightly higher costs were determined for the Canamex Short scenario relative to the Canamex scenario.  These costs are for the interstate and primary systems.  These costs represent an increased cost of 0.01 to 0.18, 0.02 to 0.08, and 0.02 to 0.15 dollars per mile driven on the interstate system by the new configurations for Canadian Interprovincial, Canamex, and Canamex Short limits, respectively.  Similar costs per mile driven on the primary system were 1.3 to 10 times higher than these costs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/465283</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MONITORING OF TRUCK LOADS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/464272</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Knowledge of the expected extreme loads is an important element of bridge evaluation.  In general, analytical methods without the actual data cannot provide reliable results.  The paper deals with a procedure for field measurement of truck load and truck load effect in bridge components.  The major truck parameters include gross vehicle weight (GVW), axle weights, and axle configuration (spacing).  These parameters are measured using weigh-in-motion technique, invisible to the drivers (to avoid bias).  Stress spectra are important for prediction of the remaining life for bridge girders and details.  These measurements are performed over longer periods of time and they are carried out using strain transducers.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/464272</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GUIDELINES FOR PERMITTED OVERLOADS. PART 2. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF OVERLOAD VEHICLE EFFECTS ON INDIANA HIGHWAY BRIDGES. FINAL REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/454458</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The report summarizes an analytical investigation carried out to develop a set of guidelines for regulation of overload vehicles in Indiana.  A formula based first phase evaluation of overload permit requests is developed through statistical study of the rating of a representative sample of the highway bridges in Indiana using a representative sample of overload vehicles observed in the state in 1990 and 1991 plus the HS 20 design vehicle and the two Indiana Toll Road loadings.  A sample of 148 bridges is chosen from a total population of 3700 Indiana highway bridges using a proportionate stratified random sampling process.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/454458</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ARE ROAD-FRIENDLY SUSPENSIONS BRIDGE-FRIENDLY? OECD DIVINE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/450938</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper presents the results of an investigation aimed at developing an understanding of the influence of truck suspensions on the dynamic response of short span bridges.  The work forms part of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Dynamic Interaction between Vehicle and Infrastructure Experiment (DIVINE).  The hypothesis is based on the assumption that soft, so-called "road friendly" suspensions induce less damage in pavements than stiff suspensions.  This paper concentrates on the extension of this hypothesis by discussing its application to short span bridges.  Three bridges were instrumented and their dynamic response to the air- or steel-suspended test vehicles was recorded.  For two of these bridges, the dynamic wheel forces and the bridge response were acquired simultaneously.  The bridges chosen were to have natural frequencies in the range of axle hop frequencies in order to investigate possible resonance effects.  The paper details both the vehicle and the bridge responses and the interaction between them.  Dynamic increments in excess of 100% were recorded.  Dynamic coupling between axle hop vibrations and the bridge resulted in up to 10 damage cycles during the passage of a vehicle.  The bridge response is shown to be sensitive to the natural frequency of the bridge, the suspension of the vehicle, its speed, and the road roughness.  The bridge-friendliness of road-friendly suspensions is discussed in the light of experimental evidence.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 1995 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/450938</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRUCK LOADS ON SELECTED BRIDGES IN THE DETROIT AREA. RESEARCH REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/421354</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The project is focused on structures that showed signs of deck deterioration, in particular spalling concrete.  The selection criteria included location, accessibility for testing equipment, span length, truck traffic volume, and presence of stop lights. The results of measurements are available for seven bridges.  In general, live load on bridges is strongly site specific.  There is a considerable variation in traffic volume and weight of trucks.  The estimated average daily truck traffic (ADTT) varies from 500 to 1,500 (in one direction).  The maximum observed truck weight varies from 80 kips to 250 kips.  The maximum observed axle weights vary from 20 kips to almost 50 kips.  The largest GVW and axle weights were observed on I-94 and M-39. These roads also have the largest observed traffic volume with the estimated ADTT up to 1,500 in one direction.  The observed truck weights are compared with estimated Michigan legal limits. Most of the overloaded trucks were observed on high-volume highways (I-94 and M-39).  The actual percentage varies depending on the number of axles, from 0 to 40%.  The largest percentage of overloaded trucks was observed for 11-axle vehicles.  For each bridge, the results are shown for all truck types together, and then separately for each truck type (by number of axles).  The presented data include histograms and cumulative distribution functions (CDFs) of the gross vehicle weight (GVW) and axle weight.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 1995 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/421354</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>COMPUTERIZED OVERLOAD PERMITTING PROCEDURE FOR INDIANA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/415074</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Truck weight regulations are used to control the rate of damage accumulation for pavements and bridges.  Permitting heavier loads can increase the rate at which pavement damage and bridge deterioration accumulate and the costs of maintenance.  Truck weight limits have always been controversial.  Each state has legal truck weight limits.  In many cases, trucks carrying weights higher than legal limits need to use the highway system and a special overload permit is required.  A study conducted at Purdue University and funded by the Indiana Department of Transportation and FHWA developed an enhanced procedure for permitting overloaded trucks in Indiana.  The procedure evaluates damage effects of overloaded trucks for pavements and bridges.  Both pavement and bridge analyses use statistical models developed especially for this study.  The pavement statistical models are based on a three-dimensional, nonlinear dynamic finite-element analysis of rigid, flexible, and composite pavements.  Repeated axle loads moving at different speeds are considered, and realistic material models, such as viscoelastic and elastic-plastic models, are used for pavement materials and subgrades.  The bridge statistical models are based on analysis using the AASHTO Bridge Analysis and Rating System and selected samples of bridges and overloaded trucks. User-friendly computer software was developed to implement this enhanced procedure, which allows the user to run damage analysis for overloaded trucks at the network level (e.g., route-independent analysis) as well as at the project level for specific pavement or bridge structures.  Three options are available at both project levels:  to check for pavements only, to check for bridges only, or to check for both, the default option.  At the project level, the user is permitted to enter all cross-section and load parameters.  Typical default values are provided for material properties.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 1995 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/415074</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>