Editorial

Guido Morgenthal Dr., Dipl.-Ing., MPhil, MSc, DIC, CEng, MICE

Professor, Institute of Structural Engineering, Bauhaus University Weimar,
Germany
It is with great pleasure that I write my first editorial for Bridge
Engineering. The journal has been very successful over the
years and goes from strength to strength. The recent
achievements of the journal are in no small part due to the
stewardship of my predecessor as Chairman of the Editorial
Advisory Panel, Professor Bob Lark. Bobs vision and strategic
thinking will continue to guide us going forward and we all
thank him for his invaluable contributions.
The journal is deeply rooted in the principles and aims of the
ICE, a society of professional engineers. As such, the papers we
publish cover all aspects of bridge engineering, from funda-
mental research to design and construction. In our quest to
remain interesting and highly relevant to the readership we will
continue to cover things like significant technological advances,
important construction projects, forward looking research
ideas, changes in regulatory frameworks and indeed anything
that relates to shaping the future of bridge engineering. Besides
building the next big bridge there are very pressing issues that
society expects us to deal with as engineers. The notion seems to
be that we cannot continue to apply the same principles and
technologies but need to think forward and question the way
things have been done in the past. However, bridge engineering
is built on past experience and we use past projects to guide us
along when tackling new challenges. In this regard many of you
will agree that it is invaluable to even have an understanding of
the history of construction. As always, there is truth in both. On
one hand we need to remain true to our values, be humble
towards nature and not push the boundaries further than our
understanding of physics allows us to do. On the other hand we
need to be open to new concepts, methods and challenges. How
we deal with the energy issue in terms of design, construction
and operation will continue to be a central issue. One may think
that in the framework of lifecycle analysis the assessment of all
risks associated with assumptions and methods will require
more attention. As we live in a world of uncertainty, the
stochastics associated with all our assumptions from parameters
to models applied will have to be dealt with more rigorously.
Now, how do we address such issues in our journal? This is a
journal written by bridge engineers for bridge engineers. The
dissemination of knowledge is key for the success of our
profession as a whole. Any reader can become an author.
Submitted articles undergo a stringent review process to ensure
the high quality of the content, but anyone is encouraged to
present their latest achievements, ideas or critiques and discuss
them in a compelling article. You are welcome to contact me
with proposals for possible papers, or even topics for special
issues of the journal.
This issue of the journal contains a diverse range of papers from
five different countries (three continents). In the opening article
(Virlogeux, 2013) the pressures that external constraints put on
the current bridge design practice in France are discussed. This
timely and somewhat worrying argument about the negative
impact that these constraints may have on the resulting bridge
design could well be of relevance to many other countries.
The second article (Nimse et al., 2013) discusses how
experimental tests may validate and calibrate a numerical
model used for structural analysis. The structural member
investigated is a post-tensioned concrete delta frame stay cable
anchorage. The critical modelling assumptions for developing
the finite element model are discussed as well as the data
collection on a relatively focussed field testing programme.
The monitoring and repair of a bridge damaged by impact is the
subject of Pakrashi et al. (2013). The data collection and analysis
was performed using strain gauges during execution of the repair
works in order to verify the structural response and quantify
various physical effects such as temperature and shrinkage of the
repair material. Also presented are correlation-based methods
for quickly detecting malfunctioning strain gauges.
Some important structural aspects of the deck slab and cross
girders of ladder deck composite bridges are discussed by
Hendy et al. (2013). Specifically, the stability of the concrete
slab in the regions of sagging moments relies on the
contribution by the cross girders. Design guidance on the
basis of Eurocode specifications is derived.
The fifth paper (Liu et al., 2013) looks at structural aspects on
the special bridge type of a bascule bridge. The rehabilitation
of an 80-year-old rolling lift bridge in China presented a
number of challenges for analysis and structural verification,
which are presented in a very interesting fashion. This includes
the analysis of various stages of the opening process and of the
dynamic effects arising from a sudden stop. Global analyses
are complemented by local studies to optimise the deck
configuration.
Bridge Engineering
Volume 166 Issue BE1
Editorial
Morgenthal
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Bridge Engineering 166 March 2013 Issue BE1
Pages 12 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/bren.2013.166.1.1
ice
|
proceedings ICE Publishing: All rights reserved
1
In the last paper, Harvey (2013) looks at the flow of forces in
masonry bridges. He discusses the structural complexity
inherent in such bridges and presents a model for interpreting
the three-dimensional flow of forces. The paper relies on
damage patterns to support the assumptions made. Several
specific bridges are presented to make an argument for load
testing as a means of validating the model assumptions.
I would like to thank all the authors for their papers and
remind the readers that any paper is open for discussion. You
may send a response to the journal; details on the procedure
can be found at the end of each paper.
Finally, I would like to draw your attention to the award
winning paper of this journal in 2012. The paper on the Samuel
Beckett Bridge in Dublin by Cutter et al. (2011) was awarded
the ICE John Henry Garrood King Medal and is available to
download for free from the journal website.
REFERENCES
Cutter J, Flanagan JW, Brown P, Rando M, Mo G (2011) Samuel
Beckett Bridge, Dublin, Ireland. Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers Bridge Engineering, 164(3):
133144, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/bren.2011.164.3.133.
Harvey B (2013) A spatial view of the flow of force in masonry
bridges. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Bridge Engineering 166(1): 5158, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/
bren.11.00026.
Hendy CR, Sandberg J and Iles D (2013) Design of cross-girders
and slabs in ladder deck bridges. Proceedings of the
Institution of Civil Engineers Bridge Engineering 166(1):
3035, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/bren.11.00005.
Liu X, Macdonald JHG, and Chen W-z (2013) Kinetic analysis
and rehabilitation of old bascule bridge in Tianjin, China.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Bridge
Engineering 166(1): 3650, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/bren.
10.00007.
Nimse PS, Nims DK, Helmicki A and Hunt VJ (2013) Experimental
verification of a stay cable delta frame model. Proceedings
of the Institution of Civil Engineers Bridge Engineering
166(1): 515, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/bren.10.00023.
Pakrashi V, Harkin J, Kelly J, Farrell A and Nanukuttan S (2013)
Monitoring and repair of an impact damaged prestressed
bridge. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Bridge Engineering 166(1): 1629, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/
bren.10.00057.
Virlogeux M (2013) Briefing: French bridge elegance and the
future. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
Bridge Engineering 166(1): 34, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/
bren.12.00007.
Bridge Engineering
Volume 166 Issue BE1
Editorial
Morgenthal
2