Category:756 Seismic Design - Revision history

Hoskir: updated per RR3868

2024-07-19T20:09:27Z

updated per RR3868

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:09, 19 July 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"~~		For bridge seismic design considerations, see [[751.9_Bridge_Seismic_Design\|EPG 751.9 Bridge Seismic Design]].
	\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]\|\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}


	~~==LFD==~~

	~~All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of~~ seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD Bridge Seismic Design Flowchart 13 021 11092018 R1.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, ~~both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.~~
	~~{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"~~
	\|-
	\|[[~~media:756 LFD Bridge Seismic Design Flowchart 13 021 11092018 R1.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]~~
	\|}

	When existing bridges are identified as needing repairs or maintenance, a decision on whether to include seismic retrofitting in the scope of the project shall be determined per the “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”, the extent of the rehabilitation work and the expected life of the bridge after the work. For example, if the bridge needs painting or deck patching, no retrofitting is recommended. However, redecking or widening the bridge indicates that MoDOT is planning to keep the bridge in the state system with an expected life of at least 30 more years. In these instances, the project core team should consider cost effective methods of retrofitting the existing bridge.

	~~==LRFD==~~
	~~{\|style="padding: 0~~.~~3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"~~
	\|-
	\|~~[[media:756_LRFD_Bridge_Seismic_Design_Flowchart_13_021_11092018_R1~~.~~pdf\|LRFD~~ Bridge Seismic Design ~~Process Flowchart]]~~
	\|}

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756_LRFD_Bridge_Seismic_Design_Flowchart_13_021_11092018_R1.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.

Hoskir: updated files and links for LFD and LRFD Seismic Flowcharts

2022-12-29T21:00:17Z

updated files and links for LFD and LRFD Seismic Flowcharts

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 29 December 2022
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==LFD==		==LFD==

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD ~~flow chart 2019~~.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD Bridge Seismic Design Flowchart 13 021 11092018 R1.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[media:756 LFD ~~flow chart 2019~~.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]		\|[[media:756 LFD Bridge Seismic Design Flowchart 13 021 11092018 R1.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	\|}		\|}

Line 18:		Line 18:
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[media:~~756 LRFD flowchart 2019~~.pdf\|LRFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]		\|[[media:756_LRFD_Bridge_Seismic_Design_Flowchart_13_021_11092018_R1.pdf\|LRFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	\|}		\|}

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:~~756 LRFD flowchart 2019~~.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756_LRFD_Bridge_Seismic_Design_Flowchart_13_021_11092018_R1.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.

Smithk: Per BR, updated flowcharts with repaired embedded links

2020-01-03T20:46:14Z

Per BR, updated flowcharts with repaired embedded links

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:46, 3 January 2020
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==LFD==		==LFD==

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD flow chart 2019.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[media:756 LFD flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]		\|[[media:756 LFD flow chart 2019.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	\|}		\|}

Line 18:		Line 18:
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[media:756 LRFD flowchart.pdf\|LRFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]		\|[[media:756 LRFD flowchart 2019.pdf\|LRFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	\|}		\|}

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LRFD flowchart.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LRFD flowchart 2019.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.

Smithk at 19:47, 3 December 2018

2018-12-03T19:47:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:47, 3 December 2018
Line 14:		Line 14:

	When existing bridges are identified as needing repairs or maintenance, a decision on whether to include seismic retrofitting in the scope of the project shall be determined per the “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”, the extent of the rehabilitation work and the expected life of the bridge after the work. For example, if the bridge needs painting or deck patching, no retrofitting is recommended. However, redecking or widening the bridge indicates that MoDOT is planning to keep the bridge in the state system with an expected life of at least 30 more years. In these instances, the project core team should consider cost effective methods of retrofitting the existing bridge.		When existing bridges are identified as needing repairs or maintenance, a decision on whether to include seismic retrofitting in the scope of the project shall be determined per the “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”, the extent of the rehabilitation work and the expected life of the bridge after the work. For example, if the bridge needs painting or deck patching, no retrofitting is recommended. However, redecking or widening the bridge indicates that MoDOT is planning to keep the bridge in the state system with an expected life of at least 30 more years. In these instances, the project core team should consider cost effective methods of retrofitting the existing bridge.


	==LRFD==		==LRFD==

Smithk: Per BR, updated LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart to include, among other changes, new superstructure replacement guidance

2018-08-14T15:22:43Z

Per BR, updated LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart to include, among other changes, new superstructure replacement guidance

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:22, 14 August 2018
Line 7:		Line 7:
	==LFD==		==LFD==

	All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LFD flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[media:756 flow chart ~~2017~~.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]		\|[[media:756 LFD flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	\|}		\|}

EPGsysop at 16:23, 3 April 2018

2018-04-03T16:23:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:23, 3 April 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"		{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]\|\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}		\|}

EPGsysop at 16:21, 3 April 2018

2018-04-03T16:21:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:21, 3 April 2018
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>~~'''~~'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}		\|}

EPGsysop at 16:20, 3 April 2018

2018-04-03T16:20:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:20, 3 April 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"		{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''LFD Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''St. Louis Area'''</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>''''''LFD Seismic Performance Categories for St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}		\|}

EPGsysop at 20:16, 20 March 2018

2018-03-20T20:16:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:16, 20 March 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"		{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|~~left~~\|thumb\|<center>'''Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|~~left~~\|thumb\|<center>'''St. Louis Area'''</center>]]		\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|center\|thumb\|<center>'''St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}		\|}

EPGsysop: Per BR, clarified seismic information.

2018-03-20T20:12:46Z

Per BR, clarified seismic information.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 20 March 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{\|style="~~padding: 0.3em;~~ margin~~-left~~:~~15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px~~" align="right"		{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="right"
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[~~media~~:756 ~~flow chart 2017~~.~~pdf~~\|~~Bridge~~ Seismic ~~Design Process Flowchart]]~~		\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|left\|thumb\|<center>'''Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]
	\|}
	~~All new bridges on the~~ state ~~system shall include some level~~ of ~~seismic design and~~/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 flow chart.pdf\|Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D~~, both design and detailing work~~ is ~~needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “Bridge Seismic Design Process Flow chart”~~.
	~~{\| style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto" align="left"~~
	\|-		\|-
	\|[[Image:756 Figure Seismic Performance Categories.gif\|340px\|left\|thumb\|<center>'''Seismic Performance Categories'''<br/>The entire state of Missouri outside of<br/>Categories B, C and D is Category A.</center>]]\|\|width="5"\| \|\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|left\|thumb\|<center>'''St. Louis Area'''</center>]]~~\|\|width="5"\|~~		\|[[Image:756 Figure St. Louis Area.gif\|280px\|left\|thumb\|<center>'''St. Louis Area'''</center>]]
	\|}		\|}


			==LFD==

	~~&nbsp~~;		All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 flow chart.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a multi span bridge in Seismic Performance Categories B, C or D, both design and detailing work is needed or detailing work only needed shall be determined as per “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”.
			{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
			\|-
			\|[[media:756 flow chart 2017.pdf\|LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
			\|}

	When existing bridges are identified as needing repairs or maintenance, a decision on whether to include seismic retrofitting in the scope of the project shall be determined per the ~~“Bridge~~ Seismic Design Process Flowchart”, the extent of the rehabilitation work and the expected life of the bridge after the work. For example, if the bridge needs painting or deck patching, no retrofitting is recommended. However, redecking or widening the bridge indicates that MoDOT is planning to keep the bridge in the state system with an expected life of at least 30 more years. In these instances, the project core team should consider cost effective methods of retrofitting the existing bridge.		When existing bridges are identified as needing repairs or maintenance, a decision on whether to include seismic retrofitting in the scope of the project shall be determined per the “LFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart”, the extent of the rehabilitation work and the expected life of the bridge after the work. For example, if the bridge needs painting or deck patching, no retrofitting is recommended. However, redecking or widening the bridge indicates that MoDOT is planning to keep the bridge in the state system with an expected life of at least 30 more years. In these instances, the project core team should consider cost effective methods of retrofitting the existing bridge.
	{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-~~left~~:15px; border:~~1px~~ solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#~~ffddcc~~" width="~~210px~~" align="~~right~~"
	\|-
	~~\|'''Bridge Dampers, Seismic'''~~		==LRFD==
	\|-		{\|style="padding: 0.3em; margin-right:15px; border:2px solid #a9a9a9; text-align:center; font-size: 95%; background:#f5f5f5" width="160px" align="left"
	\|~~[http://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri01028/rdt05007.pdf Report 2005]~~		\|-
	\|-		\|[[media:756 LRFD flowchart.pdf\|LRFD Bridge Seismic Design Process Flowchart]]
	~~\|[http://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri01028/rdt05007.pdf Summary 2005]~~
	\|-
	~~\|'''~~[[media:756 ~~cable stayed bridge~~.~~doc~~\|Bridge~~, Cable-Stayed]],~~ Seismic~~'''~~
	\|-
	~~\|[http://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri05023/or08003.pdf Report 2007]~~
	\|-
	~~\|'''Earthquake Hazard Assessment'''~~
	\|-
	~~\|[http://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri98043/RDT01009.pdf Report 2001~~]
	\|-
	~~\|[http://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri98043/Brief.htm Summary 2001]~~
	\|-
	~~\|'''See also:''' [http://www.modot.gov/services/OR/byDate.htm Innovation Library~~]
	\|}		\|}

			All new bridges on the state system shall include some level of seismic design and/or detailing to resist earthquakes per the [[media:756 LRFD flowchart.pdf\|LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart]] and an expected seismic event for a given return period. For example, for a bridge in Seismic Design Categories A, B, C or D, seismic analysis or seismic detailing shall be determined as per “LRFD Seismic Bridge Design Process Flowchart”.