With the adoption of the LRFR Manual, load ratings computed by LRFR methods produce a RF based on HL-93 loading. An HL-93 loading cannot be equated to an MS loading, therefore a direct conversion from RF to MS loading is not possible. A valid code of 3 involves reporting metric tons in terms of MS18 (32.4 metric tons) loading derived from a RF designated HLdesignated HL--93, shall consist of a 93, shall consist of a combination of:combination of: In addition, live load surcharge pressures from AASHTO M 259 and M 273 are much greater than those from LRFD for depths of fill from AASHTO LRFD The HL-93 Notional Live Load Model: What Nature of Truck new model and compared HL-93 with the HS20-44 live load model of the AASHTO Standard Lecture06 - Design loads - INTI lanes loaded, and impact factors as the HL-93 truck. accordance with the CDOT Bridge Rating Manual and the AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation. Figure 3-1: Colorado Permit Vehicle AASHTO 3.6.1.2. SECTION 3: LOADS AND LOAD FACTORS 3-6 218 AASHTO LRFD 4 th Edition suggests the use of a modification f actor to the HL -93 load to provide a more accurate portrayal of the loading effects of heavier LFD design loads such as HS-25. A direct correlation to what was done in LFD would suggest using a modification factor of 1.25. As expected, this increases the HL-93 loading by 25% From the results of the study it is concluded that HL-93 live load model doesn't represent the prevailing traffic in Pakistan and new live load model shall be proposed. 2. The extrapolated load effects from traffic data is 2.0 to 1.5 times of HL-93 for 5m to 50m span respectively. 3. LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL - Louisiana. Section [3.6] of AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications shall be applied for the design vehicular live load. Vehicular live loading on the roadway of bridges or incidental structures shall use the HL-93 live load as per section [3.6.1.2]. The design vehicular live load shall be applied per section [3.6.1.3]. > HL-93 AASHTO Vehicular Live Loading | Truck HL-93 Design Truck AASHTO. Author: CivilEngineeringTutor August 17, 2016. Top Posts & Pages. Subscribe to Blog via Email. Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION —2013 DESIGN MANUAL CHAPTER 403 Load Analysis and Application. Design Memorandum . Revision Date . of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (LRFD). Each bridge shall be designed for the HL-93 vehicular live load described above. In addition, a rated for the HL-93 loading. • For structure where load rating results in a lower rating capacity, LRFR, LFR, Allowable Stress, or Design and Engineering Manual 14-2 January 2019June 2017 AASHTO Notional Rating Load (NRL) for screening all AASHTO Specialized Hauling Vehicles (SHVs). AASHTO more than 10 years ago " Can't be used with New LRFD specs without additional calibration. We can't mix codes. " New and young designers don't even know what LFD ,ASD and HS20-44 are. They don't teach it in college anymore.. " Moving forward " Net Load effect difference between HL-93 and HS20-44 loading is very small. HL93 Truck Loads vs. HS20 Truck Loads. How will the new AASHTO loading specifications affect you? Filed Under: Precast Inc. Magazine, Archive - 2009-2010, Precast Magazines Tagged With: AASHTO, HL93 truck loads, HS20 truck Quality Control Manual for Precast Concrete Plants; Education HL93 Truck Loads vs. HS20 Truck Loads. How will the