Russian Federation
Russian Federation
UDC 693.5
Objective: to perform an extended comparative analysis of the modern regulatory framework governing the design of reinforced concrete bridges considering environmental impact, including EN 206 and Eurocode 2, AASHTO LRFD, national standards of Russia and Uzbekistan, as well as regulatory documents of the Asia-Pacific region (Japan, China, India, Australia, and New Zealand). The study aims to identify the specific features of methodological approaches to ensuring bridge durability and to determine directions for improving regulatory requirements under the transition to service life design and life-cycle management of structures. Methods: a comparative analysis of international and national regulatory documents was conducted based on criteria including environmental exposure consideration, design service life specification, application of degradation models, probabilistic reliability assessment, and integration of Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) and Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA) methods. A systematic analysis of regulatory approaches in Europe, North America, and the Asia-Pacific region was carried out from the perspective of sustainable design. Results: it was established that international regulatory systems provide for quantitative durability design using mathematical models of carbonation and chloride diffusion, probabilistic reliability methods, and digital technologies for bridge life-cycle management. Regulatory documents of the Asia-Pacific region demonstrate an active transition toward performance-based design and the integration of environmental indicators into design procedures. It was found that the current Russian standard SP 35.13330.2011 and the Uzbek standard SHNK 2.05.03-22 ensure normative durability of structures; however, they do not include formalized service life prediction models or quantitative environmental performance assessment. Directions for improving the national regulatory framework are substantiated based on the principles of Service Life Design and Life-Cycle Design. Practical significance: the obtained results may be applied in updating national regulatory documents, developing durability assessment methodologies for reinforced concrete bridges, and implementing sustainable design solutions. The proposed approaches improve the reliability of service life prediction, optimize life-cycle costs, and reduce the environmental impact of bridge structures.
reinforced concrete bridges, regulatory framework, durability, service life design, Service Life Design, Life-Cycle Design, carbonation, chloride corrosion, residual service life, environmental efficiency, AASHTO, EN 206, JSCE, GB 50010, AS 5100, sustainable design
1. EN 206:2023. Concrete — Specification, performance, production and conformity. Brussels: European Committee for Standardization (CEN), 2023. 128 p.
2. EN 1992-1-1:2004+A1:2014. Eurocode 2: Design of Concrete Structures. Part 1-1: General Rules and Rules for Buildings. Brussels: CEN, 2014. 225 p.
3. ISO 15686-1:2022. Buildings and Constructed Assets. Service Life Planning. Part 1: General Principles. Geneva: ISO, 2022. 40 p.
4. ISO 2394:2015. General Principles on Reliability for Structures. Geneva: ISO, 2015. 111 p.
5. ISO 13823:2008. General Principles on the Design of Structures for Durability. Geneva: ISO, 2008. 22 p.
6. ISO 14040:2006. Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Principles and Framework. Geneva: ISO, 2006. 20 p.
7. ISO 14044:2006. Environmental Management — Life Cycle Assessment — Requirements and Guidelines. Geneva: ISO, 2006. 46 p.
8. ISO 19650-1:2018. Organization and Digitization of Information About Buildings and Civil Engineering Works — Information Management Using BIM. Geneva: ISO, 2018. 44 p.
9. FIB Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010. Lausanne: Fédération Internationale du Béton (FIB), 2013. 434 p.
10. AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications. 9th ed. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2020. 1800 p.
11. FHWA. Bridge Preservation Guide. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, 2018. 220 p.
12. Stewart M. G. Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Corrosion Damage in Reinforced Concrete Bridges // Engineering Structures. 2004. Vol. 26. Pp. 963–973.
13. JSCE. Standard Specifications for Concrete Structures, 2017. Tokyo: Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 2017. 356 p.
14. Nishida T. Durability design of concrete structures in Japan // Structural Concrete. 2018. Vol. 19. Pp. 1253–1262.
15. GB 50010-2010. Code for Design of Concrete Structures. Beijing: Ministry of Housing and Urban- Rural Development of PRC, 2010. 398 p.
16. GB/T 50476-2019. Code for Durability Design' of Concrete Structures. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2019. 215 p.
17. Zhang Y., Li C. Service Life Prediction of Concrete Bridges in China // Engineering Structures. 2021. Vol. 232. R. 111845.
18. IRC 112:2011. Code of Practice for Concrete Road Bridges. New Delhi: Indian Roads Congress, 2011. 214 p.
19. Mehta P. K., Monteiro P. J. M. Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014. 704 p.
20. AS 5100-2017. Bridge Design. Sydney: Standards Australia, 2017. 950 p.
21. Austroads. Guide to Bridge Technology. Sydney: Austroads Ltd., 2018. 310 p.
22. NZTA Bridge Manual. Wellington: New Zealand Transport Agency, 2020. 420 p.
23. New Zealand Transport Agency. Durability Planning Guidelines for Bridges. Wellington, 2019. 150 p.
24. SP 35.13330.2011. Mosty i truby. Aktualizirovannaya redakciya SNiP 2.05.03-84. M.: Minregion Rossii, 2011. 178 s.
25. SP 63.13330.2018. Betonnye i zhelezobetonnye konstrukcii. Osnovnye polozheniya. M.: Minstroy Rossii, 2018. 168 s.
26. GOST 31384-2017. Zaschita betonnyh i zhelezobetonnyh konstrukciy ot korrozii. M.: Standartinform, 2017. 48 s.
27. Vasil'ev V. Yu., Kiselev A. A. Dolgovechnost' zhelezobetonnyh konstrukciy transportnyh sooruzheniy: monografiya. M.: Transport, 2018. 312 s.
28. Solov'ev K. N., Agafonov S. I. Raschet zhelezobetonnyh mostov po kriteriyu sroka sluzhby // Mosty i tonneli. 2022. № 2. S. 21–29.
29. ShNK 2.05.03-22. Mosty i truby. Normy proektirovaniya. Tashkent: Goskomarhstroy RUz, 2022. 96 s.
30. Karapetov E. S., Shestovickiy D. A. Prognoz sroka sluzhby zhelezobetonnyh mostov na osnove modeli processa karbonizacii zaschitnogo sloya // Izvestiya Peterburgskogo universiteta putey soobscheniya. 2016. № 1 (46). S. 52–60.
31. Karapetov E. S., Belyy A. A. Ekspluatacionnaya nadezhnost' mostovyh sooruzheniy v surovyh klimaticheskih usloviyah // Putevoy Navigator. 2020. № 43 (69). S. 54–59.
32. Salihanov S. S. Raschetnye modeli i uravneniya vzaimodeystviya zhelezobetonnyh mostovyh konstrukciy s okruzhayuschey sredoy // Zheleznodorozhnyy transport: aktual'nye zadachi i innovacii. 2025. № 4. S. 113–120.
33. Salihanov S. S. Vliyanie faktorov okruzhayuschey sredy na rabotu zhelezobetonnyh mostovyh konstrukciy // Zheleznodorozhnyy transport: aktual'nye zadachi i innovacii. 2025. № 4. S. 127–130.
34. Tuutti K. Corrosion of Steel in Concrete. Stockholm: Swedish Cement and Concrete Research Institute, 1982. 469 p.
35. Papadakis V. G. Effect of Carbonation on Concrete Durability // Cement and Concrete Research. 2000. Vol. 30. Pp. 291–299.
36. Andrade C., Alonso C. Corrosion Rate Monitoring in Concrete Structures // Construction and Building Materials. 2004. Vol. 18. Pp. 567–573.
37. Bastidas-Arteaga E., Stewart M. G. Reliability of Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Chloride Ingress // Structural Safety. 2015. Vol. 56. Pp. 13–22.
38. Biondini F., Frangopol D. M. Life-Cycle Performance of Reinforced Concrete Bridges // Journal of Structural Engineering. 2014. Vol. 140 (3). R. 04013060.
39. Tang L., Nilsson L. O. Chloride Diffusion Modelling of Concrete // Cement and Concrete Research. 1992. Vol. 22. Pp. 673–684.
40. DuraCrete. Probabilistic Performance-based Durability Design of Concrete Structures. Brussels: EU Brite-Euram Project Report, 2000. 350 p.
