CHAPTER ELEVEN

LOAD RATING

11.1 GENERAL INFORMATION Consider the information in this chapter

The New Mexico Department of Transporta- subject to change.
tion (NMDOT) uses the current edition of The
Manual for Bridge Evaluation (Washington 11.1.1 Purpose
DC: American Association of State Highway Bridge load-ratings provide several useful
and Transportation Officials, AASHTO) as results:
the engineering standards for bridge load Confirm a bridge has adequate design for
rating. Until The Manual for Bridge Evalua- normal operations capacity
tion becomes widely available, use the Identify those bridges that do not have
Manual for Condition Evaluation and Load adequate capacity for normal operations
and Resistance Factor Rating (LRFR) of and consider such bridges for posting
Highway Bridges (AASHTO, 2003 with 2005 Provide bridge capacity information and
interim revisions). Exercise appropriate models for routing overload permit vehicles
engineering judgments to convert this man- Identify unused capacity in existing bridges
uals LRFR bias for use with LFR. Virtis Support examination of Structurally
(available through AASHTOWare) is Deficient bridges
NMDOTs chosen tool for permanently Provide a review on new bridge design
recording bridge structural parameters in
electronic form.
11.1.2 Records Required for Rating
The engineer in charge of a specific bridge
All new bridges and all major bridge rehabili-
load rating is responsible for insuring that
tation projects require a complete bridge load
available documents are adequate to rate the
ratingincluding, when possible, a Virtis
bridge in the current condition and design.
model. Additionally, when any bridge
The minimum records required are:
becomes Structurally Deficient, a qualified
Bridge drawings of superstructure elements
bridge engineer must re-evaluate the bridge
o Original and significant rehabilitations
capacity. This re-evaluation requires a
Bridge Inspection Reports
special-emphasis site inspection to support the
updated bridge load rating. Typically, a bridge
Some circumstances require a special-
becomes Structurally Deficient when the
emphasis site inspection to complete the load
deck, superstructure, or substructure (Items
rating. The most notable circumstances are
58, 59, or 60 in the National Bridge Inventory
bridges classified by routine bridge inspec-
Condition Rating) drop to Condition Rating 4
tions to be Structurally Deficient.
(Poor Condition) or less.

Formal bridge load ratings and rating docu- 11.1.3 Deliverables

mentation are relatively new developments in A typical bridge load rating provides two
New Mexico and several other states. Engi- deliverables: 1) A Virtis bridge model for
neers and technicians involved in NMDOT NMDOTs bridge model database and 2) a
bridge load rating should expect a high completed NMDOT Bridge Load Rating
potential for policy or procedure changes. Form. Load ratings for a Structurally
Deficient bridge also require explanation of

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-1

AND DESIGN GUIDE
how the structural deficiency affects the In bridges that consist of beams supporting a
bridge load capacity. deck, the concrete deck slabs and metal decks
that satisfactorily carry normal traffic need
11.3 RATING METHODS not be routinely evaluated for load capacity.
Routine inspections will identify those metal
The Manual for Bridge Evaluation includes
and concrete bridge decks with unsatisfactory
three rating methods: Load and Resistance
performancewhich will likely result in a
Factored Rating (LRFR, based on Load and
Structurally Deficient bridge classification
Resistance Factored Design, LRFD), Load
and require a special-emphasis inspection. In
Factored Rating (LFR, based on Load
contrast, timber decks should be routinely
Factored Design), and Allowable Stress
evaluated for load capacity.
Rating (ASR, based on Allowable Stress
Design). NMDOT uses BRASS as the
Members of substructures need not be
primary underlying engine for Virtis bridge
routinely checked for load capacity. Substruc-
model analysis.
ture elements such as pier caps and columns
should be checked in situations where the
Use ASR for timber bridges and decks. Use
engineer has reason to believe that their
LFR for all prestress concrete, reinforced
capacity may govern the load capacity of the
concrete (including slab bridges), and steel
entire bridge. Examples of distress that could
bridges.
trigger a substructure load-rating include: a
high degree of corrosion and section loss,
NMDOT plans to move to LRFR ratings.
caps cracked and distorted under torsion with
However, NMDOT has found problems with
inadequate sheer stirrups, changes in column
Virtis, BRASS, or with LRFR itself. There-
end conditions due to deterioration, changes
fore, NMDOT is not yet routinely using
in column unbraced length due to scour, or
LRFR ratings.
columns with impact damage. Such cases will
generally render a bridge Structurally
While NMDOT is not yet rating LRFR, the
Deficient and require a special-emphasis
Virtis models created today for LFR load
inspection.
ratings will later be the same models used for
LRFR. Therefore, data needed by LRFR but
When a bridge exhibits load capacity rating
not by LFR must be included in all Virtis
less than LFR HS20/HS33 Inven-
bridge models.
tory/Operating (see Section 11.5 for HS20
definition) or LRFR Rf < 1.0, the bridge
11.4 RATING NOTES AND VALUES should be re-examined for rating improve-
Virtis inputs require some values that are not ment opportunities. These opportunities
readily apparent from drawings. Instead, these routinely include:
values typically rely on policy values Review the assumptions and model
established through standard assumptions in simplifications that affect bridge rating.
the absence of actual data. NMDOT also Bridge drawings may include allowance for
notes some issues that may be misleading, or future wearing surface, but the bridge might
otherwise unclear, during drawing interpreta- have no wearing surface. If the bridge has
tion for Virtis model. This section covers no wearing surface or a lighter wearing
policies and notes applicable to completing surface, a rater may reflect this in the
New Mexico bridge models. bridge model. In no case should the bridge

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-2

AND DESIGN GUIDE
 model contain a wearing surface that is less Copy from Library. Many older NM bridge
than the actual existing wearing surface. drawings will call for Class A Concrete.
Prestress concrete bridge designs before or This is not the same concrete as found in the
shortly after 1979 used a different shear Virtis Standard Library called Class A or
code standard. Virtis currently has no way Class A (US). NMDOT Class A Concrete is
to alter its shear analysis to recognize the 3,000 psi while that listed in the Virtis
pre-1979 code. If the controlling failure Standard library is 4,000 psi concrete. The
mode in a prestress concrete girder is shear, Virtis Standard library has no concrete
use the shear policy outlined under Section matching NMDOT Class A. Virtis Standard
11.4.5 Prestress Concrete to modify the Library Class A matches NMDOT Class AA.
rating. NMDOT Agency library files are available
from the Bridge Bureau, and they include all
Non-routine methods to improve load-rating NMDOT concrete classes.
results include:
Virtis has deck finite element modeling
11.4.2 Impact/Dynamic Load Allowance
capability. In a few rare cases, it is possible
and Factors.
that using a finite element determined
For general ratings without deviations from
distribution factor will be more accurate
standard practice, make no changes to
and allow rating improvements.
Impact/Dynamic Load Allowance or
Use refined Methods of Analysis described
Factors in Virtis.
in AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifi-
cations Article 4.4.
In extraordinary cases, consider Nonde- 11.4.3 Superstructure Definitions
structive Load Testing as described in New Superstructure Definition. Generally,
Section 8 of The Manual for Bridge when selecting New Superstructure Defini-
Evaluation or of the Manual for Condition tion in Virtis, select Girder System
Evaluation Superstructure. However, circumstances may
prevent using a Girder System. For exam-
Insure that deviations used to achieve suffi- ple, the most common circumstance requiring
cient load capacity are documented in Notes, selecting a Girder Line Superstructure over
additional loads, comments or deviation from a Girder System is modeling a slab bridge.
general rating practice in the Bridge Load Virtis has no method to model a complete slab
Rating Form. See Section 11.6. bridge. Instead, it is modeled as a 12-inch
strip analysis in a Girder Line. See Section
11.4.6.
11.4.1 Materials\Concrete
This section covers specific entries in the
Structure Typical Section\Parapet or
Virtis file tree, Materials\Concrete. The reader
Railing. Notice that typical bridge barrier
can launch Virtis and open the specific file
rails in New Mexico are placed 18-inches
folders Material and Concrete. Many
from the bridge edge, but are not a full 18-
other sections that follow also cover specific
inches wide. Therefore, modeling a bridge
entries as identified in bold.
barrier rail as 0 from the bridge edge to the
back of the rail is technically not accurate. A
Density. Typically, use 0.150 kcf density for
better approach is to model the barrier rail
dead loads and 0.145 kcf for modulus of
(parapet) as: Measure To Front; Distance
elasticity.
1.50 feet.

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-3

AND DESIGN GUIDE
Structure Typical Section\Wearing Sur- method to LRFR so that each model is set to
face. NMDOT current policy is to design for a rating bridges with LRFR when Rating
30 psf future wearing surface. Previous design Method selected is Member Alternative.
policy included a 15 psf wearing surface. If a This sets the Virtis bridge database for
bridge does not currently have a wearing compliance with future LRFR ratings.
surface, The Manual for Bridge Evaluation
and the Manual for Condition Evaluation Deck Profile\Structural Thickness. Past
allow rating without the design future wearing NMDOT policy provided a sacrificial
surface included. One should always rate the thickness in concrete decks. This is no longer
bridge with the actual wearing surface if it is NMDOT policy. A rating for older bridges
equal to, or greater than, the designed wearing with drawings that specify this sacrificial
surface. However, if a bridge has a wearing surface may, instead, include the full deck
surface less than design wearing surface, first thickness without section reduction for
rate the bridge with the assumed design sacrificial surface. Typically enter the full
surface (typically 30 psf or 15 psf). If the deck thickness for Structural Thickness.
bridge rates at least an HS20 Inventory and
HS33 Operating, retain the model with the
11.4.5 Prestress Concrete
future wearing surface included. If the bridge
Note that prestress concrete bridges that are
rates less than HS20/33, then remove or
simple spans for both dead and live load but
reduce the wearing surface in the model to
have jointless decks are not uncommonboth
match actual bridge condition. Model and rate
in bridge conversions to jointless decks and in
the bridge with this reduced wearing surface.
new bridges. (See Section 5.6.2 Eliminating
Deck Joints in this NMDOT Bridge Proce-
11.4.4 Member Alternatives dures and Design Guide). Caution: it is easy
New Member Alternative Description\ to misinterpret such bridges as being continu-
Girder property input method. When ous for live loads. If it is possible that a
provided a choice between Schedule based continuous deck bridge is not continuous for
and Cross-section based in Member live load, check details for breaks in continu-
Alternative Description, always select ity over the piers. One should model such
Schedule based. Cross-section based does jointless-deck simple-span bridge girders as
not provide the same valuable schematics. simple span, not continuous.

New Member Alternative Description\ Many prestress concrete bridges designed

Crack Control Parameter (Z) and Expo- before or shortly after 1979 have served
sure factor. Use Z = 170 kip/in for the normal operations and overload permit loads
concrete crack control parameter. Use well. These same bridges may theoretically
Exposure factor = 1.0. fail in shear when analyzed with current shear
design models. Virtis does not have an option
New Member Alternative Description\ to use the pre-1979 code, therefore use the
Default rating method. Each Member procedure shown in Figure 11.4A.
Alternative in Virtis has an input for De-
fault rating method. Timber can only be Beam Shapes\Prestress Beam Shapes\I
rated using ASD. Virtis defaults to ASD on Beams. Prestress I-beam strand patterns in
timber girders and decks. For all other Virtis default to vertical distances from
Member Alternatives set the Default rating bottom on 2-inch spacing. NMDOT typically

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-4

AND DESIGN GUIDE
 Figure 11.4A
NMDOT Bridge Load Rating Shear Policy for Prestress Concrete
specifies strand patterns placed as 2-inch Transfer time, use 15.0 hours
spacing from the bottom, but also as 2-inch Age at deck placement, use 270 days
spacing from the top for draped stands. The Final age, use 3650 days
result is that strand patterns in New Mexico
may not match the Virtis defaults for Deck Profile\Reinforcement. Prestress
AASHTO beams with an odd number of concrete bridge superstructures have steel
inches for overall height. These are the Type reinforcing bars in the deck. However, the
45 (AASHTO III), Type 63 (AASHTO V), composite decks in simple spans are always
and Type BT-63. Modify strand patterns as modeled in compression for longitudinal
needed in these beams to match NMDOT capacity. Therefore, the deck rebar for simple
prestress beam strand patterns accurately. spans (simple for dead and for live loads) is
immaterial for load rating capacity and can be
Prestress Properties. LRFR ratings require ignored. In contrast, the deck rebar is critical
inputs that are not required by LFR. Since in prestress continuous bridges (simple for
NMDOT will convert to LRFR rating, these dead but continuous for live load).
inputs must be included in all Virtis models.
Under Superstructure Definitions and
Prestress Properties, they are:

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-5

AND DESIGN GUIDE
11.4.6 Concrete Slab Two or more lanes loaded
Superstructure Definitions. Unlike most
12 in 1 ft N L
bridges, a concrete slab bridge cannot be DF =
Virtis-modeled as a Girder System. Instead, 84 in + 1.44 L W 2
in
ft
W
one must rate a concrete slab bridge using a
Girder Line. Virtis Girder Line modeling DF = Live Load Distribution Factor
does not allow Virtis to calculate several NL = Number of design lanes
bridge aspects. Instead, the user must calcu- Not applicable if w < 20 ft (only
late these by hand. Calculated values available one lane loaded)
in a Girder System but not available for a 2 if 20 ft w < 24 ft
Girder Line include: Integer part of (w/12ft) otherwise
Live load distribution factors L = Modified span length; the lesser of
Dead load distribution S or 60 ft
o Wearing surface S = Longitudinal Span length
o Bridge barrier rail (parapet, railing) W = Edge-to-edge bridge width
o Medians and curbs W1 = Modified edge-to-edge width, one-
o Utilities lane loaded; lesser of W or 30 ft.
W2 = Modified edge-to-edge width, two
Member\Member Location. Users may rate or more lanes loaded; lesser of W or
concrete slab bridges using only Interior for 60 ft.
Member Location. This assumes that the w = Clear roadway width between curbs
original designer correctly designed the or barriers
exterior (or edge) of the slab bridge. Alterna-
tively, it recognizes that, although not Girder Profile\Section. Use a 12-inch Girder
modeled in design, a bridge barrier rail Line Equivalent Slab strip to model slab
provides edge stiffness. Modeling only an bridges. This is the selected NMDOT policy
interior equivalent slab assumes that the width calculation for equivalent slab width.
interior controls the slab bridge rating. Using a different width complicates model
comparisons for quality control.
Live Load Distribution. The Live Load
Distribution Factors for LFR using a 1-ft
equivalent interior strip are: 11.4.7 Steel
Moment Deck Profile\Reinforcement. BRASS LFR
load rating does not consider minimum
1 ft 1
DF = negative flexure concrete deck reinforcement.
4 ft + 0.06 S 7 However, BRASS LRFR rating does. LRFD
Deflection 6.10.1.7 covers Minimum Negative Flexure
Concrete Deck Reinforcement. If the deck
1
DF = reinforcing steel is not included in a continu-
6 ous steel bridge model, Virtis/BRASS LRFR
For LRFR ratings, use the following distribu- will fail the bridge under Service II over the
tion factors for moment, shear, and deflection: piers. Therefore, all Virtis continuous steel
bridges must include the deck reinforcement
One-lane loaded in the model for future use in LRFR rating.

12 in
DF =
10 in + 5 inft L W1
December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-6
AND DESIGN GUIDE
Lateral Support. A steel girder with a Southern Yellow Pine Dense. In some old
concrete deck poured in direct contact timber bridge drawings, the species and grade
develops an affinity for concrete. Therefore, a specified for the bridge is Southern Yellow
continuous hardened concrete deck provides Pine Dense Longleaf and Shortleaf. This is a
continuous lateral support to the top flange of dated specification. If a timber bridge uses
a girder. Note that the lateral support applied this specification for girders, select Southern
in the Lateral Support window applies only Pine (Dry or Wet), Dense Select Structural,
to the top flange. Virtis picks up the discrete 5x5 & larger. For the deck, the drawings
locations of lateral support on the bottom will call for Southern Yellow Pine Dense.
flange from the Framing Plan Detail, However, unless otherwise known, assume
Diaphragms. the deck has been replaced. Since the re-
placement deck species is probably unknown,
see below.
11.4.8 Timber
Use Allowable Stress Rating (ASR) for
Deck unknown species and grade. Decks will
timber girders and timber decks. Timber
typically be lumber. Lumber reads as 2" 4"
decks often control the rating in more primi-
thick 2" and wider, or similar description in
tively designed bridges found in New
the Virtis/Opis library. Choose Hem-Fir No.2
Mexicos inventory. Timber decks must be
unless more is known from records or reports.
routinely evaluated for a bridge load rating.

Timber Beam Shapes\Rectangular\ Proper-

Materials\Timber. Girder unknown species
ties. The Compute button will fill in all
and grade. In selecting timber materials,
areas except Nominal load, Nominal
Virtis has a Copy from Library option. For
width, and Nominal depth. Use 50 lb/cf
completely unknown species and grade, but
and actual dimensions to calculate Nominal
reasonably typical New Mexico timber
load. Nominal width or Nominal depth
bridge, choose Douglas Fir-Larch, No. 1 for
is the next highest whole number for the
Beams and Stringers or for Posts and Tim-
actual dimension. 9.25 10
bers. If the rater knows that the girders in a
particular bridge are free of notable weather-
Superstructure Definitions. A rater should
ing and without checks or splits, the rater may
be sure to select Deck type as timber the
choose Douglas Fir-Larch, Dense No.1.
first time Girder System Superstructure
Definitions comes up in the bridge model
Beams and Stringers are rectangular timber
inputs. Failure to note the correct Deck type
members whose nominal dimensions are
will require restarting the Superstructure
greater than 5 in both directions, but one
Definition. Virtis does not allow returning
dimension is more than 2 greater than the
and correcting the Deck type after initial
other is. E.g., 9x14, 8x12.
entry.
Posts and Timbers are rectangular timber
Deck. The Deck LL distribution width is
members whose nominal dimensions are
15-inches plus the Total deck thickness.
greater than 5 in both directions and the
dimensions are the same or no more than 2
Deck\Factors. Always exercise the
difference. E.g., 12x12, 8x10.
Deck\Factors input page. For all three
moisture conditions, leave the default, Wet,
selected. Use the Compute button to supply

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-7

AND DESIGN GUIDE
the various modification factors for the deck software, OVLOAD, and its Method of
timber. Unless one is familiar with judging Equivalent Loading. NMDOT requires this
Shear factor by visual inspection or if the fixed-rear-axle truck be the basis for Inven-
rater has not had an opportunity to inspect the tory and Operationing rating. One should note
deck lumber, enter 1.0 for the Shear factor. that the fixed axle yields slightly better ratings
in some bridge geometries than would the
Structure Typical Section\Wearing Sur- unmodified HS20. Use this modified HS20
face. Many timber bridges have excessive Truck. This truck is available in NMDOTs
asphalt wearing surfaces. A timber bridges Virtis Agency File, titled HS20 Rating
load rating is sensitive to this dead load. The Truck. A Rf = 1 using this NMDOT Rating
rater must examine the bridge documents, or Truck results in a bridge capacity rating of
examine the bridge itself, to ascertain an HS20.
estimate of the existing overlay thickness.
NMDOT is aware that the HS20 Rating Truck
Beam Details\Adjustment Factors. As with without the variable axle from 14-ft to 30 ft
the Deck Factors, always exercise the Beam does not conform to national standards. The
Details\Adjustment Factors input page. use of this HS20 Rating (Fixed 14-ft axles) in
Moisture conditions should all remain Wet. New Mexico dates back to 1982 when New
The Compute button will supply all factors Mexico State University first authored
except the Shear factor. Enter 1.0 for Shear OVLOAD. Subsequently this became
factor unless otherwise familiar with a girder NMDOTs standard practice. New Mexico
visual inspection and what to look for to allow does report load ratings to the Federal
an improved Shear factor. National Bridge Inventory (NBI) using this
fixed-axle truck. However, NMDOT will
ignore this minor non-conformity and,
11.4.9 Library Explorer
instead, concentrate load-rating policy
NMDOT Bridge Bureau maintains an
changes on bringing future NMDOT Bridge
Agency File for addition to the Virtis
rating into conformance with LRFR rating
Library. This Agency File contains materials,
approachboth for NBI reporting and for
vehicles, and appurtenances encountered
OVLOAD input.
repeatedly in New Mexico. Consultants
should insure they have the latest NMDOT
Agency Files when appropriate. Figure 11.5A
NMDOT HS20 Modified Truck for Rating

11.5 RATING VEHICLES

Figure 11.5A through 11.5F illustrate rating
vehicles used in New Mexico.

11.5.1 NMDOT Rating Truck

Figure 11.5A shows a modified HS20 Truck.
The modification from the standard AASHTO
HS20 is that the rear axle is fixed at 14-feet
rather than varying from 14 to 30-feet. This
modified HS20 Truck is the basis for
NMDOTs Permit Load bridge evaluation

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-8

AND DESIGN GUIDE
 Figure 11.5B
NM Legal 2-Axle

11.5.2 HL-93
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
defines the Design Vehicular Live Load
known as HL-93 in Article 3.6.1.2. HL-93
will become integral to NMDOTs bridge
load rating when NMDOT transitions to
LRFR.
11.5.3 Legal Loads
New Mexico uses a family of nine trucks as
legal load model trucks. Three of these trucks
are AASHTO Legal Loads. Six are trucks
derived from New Mexico Law to capture a
range of likely load-effects from trucks
meeting the legislative definition for legal
trucks in New Mexico. Figure 11.5B illus-
trates the two-axle legal load truck. Figure
11.5C illustrates the three trucks with differ-
ent axle spacing and weights intended to
capture three-axle truck effects. Likewise,
Figure 11.5C
11.5D shows a four-axle, and 11.5E shows
NM Legal 3-Axle
three five-axle trucks. Figure 11.5F illustrates
the AASHTO six-axle vehicle. HS17 (Rating Factor < 0.85 for HS 20 Rating
Truck) require rating the bridge with this
11.5.4 Bridge Posting Analysis
family of nine trucks.
NMDOT uses legal load trucks from Section
11.5.3 to establish bridge load posting.
Engineering load rating is only one factor of
Bridges with an Operating Rating less than
many in the basis for decisions related to

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-9

AND DESIGN GUIDE
 Figure 11.5E
NM Legal 5-Axle

Figure 11.5D For each axle class, two-axle through five-

NM Legal 4-Axle axle, the resulting lowest Safe Posting Load
becomes the engineering posting load analysis
bridge posting. Posting is a policy decision for that bridge and axle numberwith the
made by the bridge owner. In New Mexico, exception that in no case will fewer axle
the bridge owner is one of the NMDOT Figure 11.5F
Districts. Posting is not a purely engineering NM Legal 6-Axle
activity. Other issues involved in a Districts
decision regarding bridge posting are:
Bridge structure redundancy
Bridge condition or visible distress
Character of traffic
Likelihood of overweight vehicles
History of abuse
Posting enforceability

For the engineering side of posting, as a

bridges capacity becomes further below
standard design standards, there is increased
uncertainty in the specific effects and in
public compliance with load postings.

This increased uncertainty calls for an

increased safety factor. Use the following
equation from The Manual for Bridge
Evaluation to produce such increased safety
factor:
W
Safe_Posting_Load ( RF 0.3)
0.7
RF = Legal load rating factor
W = Weight of rating vehicle

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-10

AND DESIGN GUIDE
posted load be greater. For example, a three- NMDOTs Quality Control process has two
axle posting cannot be greater than a four-axle engineers create independent Virtis Models.
posting. The senior of the two engineers, or a third
11.6 BRIDGE LOAD RATING FORM engineer, uses both models to rate the bridge
girders and compares the outcome. Significant
A current version of the bridge load rating
differences require reviewing the two models,
form is available from the State Bridge Rating
identifying where they differ, and making
Engineer. Figure 11.6 shows an example
changes to models to correct the mismatch.
NMDOT Bridge Rating Form. This is the
The process continues until both bridges rate
version current at time of this writing;
within 2% for each girder in both bridge
however, form details may be subject to
girder systems.
change. Bridge Inspection Reports contain the
information needed for the Bridge Informa-
Consultants may adopt NMDOTs Quality
tion section. These Bridge Inspection
Control process or they may propose one of
Reports also provide the information for
their own. NMDOTs State Bridge Engineer
Structure Conditions under the Rating
or State Bridge Load Rating Engineer must
Approach Summary.
approve a proposed consultant Quality
Control process that differs from the NMDOT
Notes, additional loads, comments or devia-
Quality Control approach.
tion from general rating practice: This section
under Rating Approach Summary should
NMDOT will also sample consultants ratings
never be ignored. Many bridges require some
to check results quality. NMDOT will report
commentary not covered in other Rating
any errors, even minor ones, back to the
Approach Summary items. The standard
consultant. A pattern of errors will lead to a
items and this Notes section should
request for discussion regarding rating
provide enough detail so that another engi-
procedures that might address and correct
neer, using the same drawings and same tools,
inaccurate modeling.
would be readily able to replicate the rating.
NMDOTs quality review will not be com-
11.7 QUALITY ASSURANCE prehensive and will not reliably catch all
Virtis software demands are high. It always errors. NMDOT reviews are samplings and
requires accuracy and detail. Sometimes it spot checks only. Consultant Quality Assur-
requires elevated engineering judgment. To ance remains primarily the consultants
improve the assurance NMDOT receives a responsibility.
quality product, NMDOT requires a Quality
Control process.

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-11

AND DESIGN GUIDE
 Figure 11.6
NMDOT Bridge Rating Form

December 2008 NMDOT BRIDGE PROCEDURES 11-12

AND DESIGN GUIDE